P. 1 

# OAR Box 1500 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 54 ) ll-C-8 0 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 8/5/2008 1:51:29 PM

Sheet 54 of 343P. 2

From : MADELEIN E STRU M To : Internet."blacovara@aol.com " Date : 11/19/9 7 4:10p m Subject : comment s o n VS R tes t outlin e <W P Attachmen t Enclosed > Bob — M y comment s ar e i n bold . Candac e Sorrell , th e Emissio n Measuremen t Cente r lead fo r thi s test , ha s no t gotte n a chanc e t o loo k a t thi s yet . Sh e ma y hav e mor e comment s o n th e laboratory tes t procedures , repeatabilit y issues , etc . Thank s fo r thi s earl y draft . Le t m e kno w i f you' d rathe r d o a conferenc e cal l o r mee t i n perso n o n Dec^j i 2 an d you r preferre d times . Madelein e

CC : RTP6.RTPEML.SORRELL-CANDAC EP. 3

DRAF T - WOR K I N PROGRES S Proposa l Date : 11/14/9 7 From : Bo b Lacovara- CF

A To : MACT Summi

t Grou p Madeleine Stru

m- EP A Resi n Supplier s Suppressan

t Supplier s
Re : Developmen

t o f Standar d Styrene Suppressan

t Effectivenes s Tes t

I . Backgroun d Recen t testin g ha s documented th e effectivenes s an d benefits o f

styren e suppressant s i

n reducin g emissions . However , i

t ha s bee n recognize d tha

t suppressan

t efficienc y ma y b e variabl e ove

r th e rang e o f possibl e suppressan

t an d resin syste

mcombinations . Becaus e ofth e potentia l arra y o f combinations , astandardize d tes t metho d mus t

b e developed t o documen

t th e performanc e o f suppressant s unde

r specific conditions . Durin g th e cours e ofth e CF A Ope n Moldin g Tes t

Project , attempt s wer

e mad e t o correlat

e th e Californi aSCAQM

D Rul e 1162 "Pie Pan " tes t t o th e result s ofth e large-scal e emission s testin g being conducted . I t

wa s foun d tha t th e 116 2 pi e pa

n tes t exhibited littl e o r

n o correlatio n t o emission s developed i

n laminat e samples . Therefore , i

t ha s bee n determine d tha

t ane w tes t metho d i s require d t o accuratel y determine th e effectivenes s o f suppressan

t additives . Thi s propose d tes t

metho d incorporate s alaminat e an d mechanica

l commen t

b y M . Strum : mayb e th e wor d "manual " shoul d b e use d instea d sinc e th e roll-ou t i s don e b y han d roll-out metho d t o mor

e closel y approximat

e th e condition s foun

d i n actua l moldin g operations .

tOP. 4

Thi s tes t i s designe d t o b e adirec t

compariso n between aspecifi c resi n wit h an d withou t a suppressan t additive . I t

i s no t designe d t o determin e actua l emission s fro

mth e moldin

g process . I t i s anticipate d tha

t th e dat agenerate d fromthi s tes t commen tb y M . Strum : add th e word s "wil l b e entere d int

o a mode l t o estimat

e th e performanc

e of a particula r suppressant/as applie d resi n combinatio n whic h will the n b e entered.... " wil l b e entere d int

o th e CF A emission s mode

l a s asuppressan

t modifie r factor . Thi s facto

r i s par t o f amor e comprehensiv e formul at o determine overal l proces s emission s commen tb y M . Stru m delete "overal

l proces s emissions " an

d replac e wit h " a MAC T point-valu e syste m typ e mode

l which reflect

s accurat e emissio n reductio n credit s t o th e variou s emission reductio n technique s whic h a facilit y coul d choos e t

o mee tMACT" .
II . Point s o f

Genera l Consensu s 1 ) Th e effects o f

suppressant s ca

n b e variabl e wit

h specifi c resin system s an

d specific suppressants . Commen

tb y M . Strum : Ad d "For example , i tha s bee n demonstrate d that suppressant

s ar e les s efTectiv

e whe n the y are used wit

h filled resin s a

s compared t

o unfille d resins. " 2 ) Th e SCAQM

D Rul e 1162 typ e "pi e pan " tes t doe s no t correlat e wel l wit h actua l laminat e tes t results . 3 ) Ther e are distinc t

stage s o f emission s generatio n durin g th e laminatin

g process .
a . Spray-u p o r flo w chopping : commen

tb y M . Strum : ma

y nee d t o includ e pressur

e fe d rollin g and flow (no n chopping ) her e sinc e tha ti s th e wa

y th e industr

y proposed th e proces s grouping s t

o be . O n th e othe r hand , i f

w e wan tt o mode l flo w chopping , versu s flow no n cho p versu s pressur e fe d rolle r differently , i twoul d still b e o

k withi n th e mechanica

l proces s groupin g sinc e I envisio n spra y choppin g would b e differen tfro m flow chopping . Ma

y jus twantt

o chang e t

o "a . Mechanica

l application " Stag e 1 - Spra

y o r flo w coate r commen tb y M . Strum : "Mechanical " applicatio n o f resin t o mol d surface . Stag e 2 - Roll-out

o r mechanica

l manipulation o f

laminat e surface . Stag e 3 - Pos t

roll-out curin g stag e b. Han d Lay-u p (manua l application):Comment : ma y notwan tt o distinguis h betwee

n manua l (bucketand brush ) an

d othe r non-spra

y mechanica

l mean s o f applicatio n (suc

h a s flow coater , pressure fe

d roller , etc) . Stag e 1 - Manua

l transfe r o f resin fromcontaine

r t o mol d surface . 

# 3P. 5

Stag e 2 - Roll-ou t

o r mechanica

l manipulation o f

laminat e surface . Stag e 3 - Pos t

roll-ou t curing stag e Wantt o addres s filamentwindin g her e a s well ? I sugges tthi s sectio n b e re-written t o b e kep tver y general , suc

h tha tth e thre e stage s are : Stag e 1 - Applicatio n of

resin t o mol d surface . Stag e 2 - Roll-ou to r mechanica l manipulatio n of

laminat e surface . Stag e 3 - Pos troll-outcurin g stag e Woul d thes e thre e stage s addres s filamentwindin g a s wel l ( I don' tthin k s o sinc e resin i s applie d t o filaments whic

h ar e the n applie d t o resi n ~ woul d w e wan tt o combin e thes e in definin g applicatio n o

f resin t o mol d surface) ? 4 ) Th e effec

t o f suppressio n i s negligibl

e during th e resin application portio n ofth e proces s (i.e . during th e spra

y transfe r o r manua l transfe r o f resin t o th e mol

d surface) . 5 ) Suppressin g actio n i s effecte d b y th e roll-out , o r

mechanica

l manipulation , portio n ofth e laminatin g process , whe

n th e laminat

e surfac e i s bein g disturbe d b y FR P rollers , brushing , etc . Comment : I ti s believe d tha tther e will b e som e effectivenes s of th e suppressan ta tthi s stage , buti tma

y no tb e a s grea ta s th e effectivenes s i

n th e curin g stage . Note : th e reason fo r assumin g som e effectivenes s a tth e stag e whe n th e resin i s bein g worke d i s tha tprevious testin g has show

n a maximu

m overal l suppressantefTectivenes s of 40 % whil e onl y 25 % o

f th e tota l emission s were released durin g curin g a s indicate d b

y emissio n profiles . Thus some ofth e emissio n reductio n mustals o com e fro m th e othe r tw o stages . 6 ) Onc e th e roll-ou t

(mechanica

l manipulation) ofth e laminat e i s concluded th e effects o f suppressant s becom

e significant . III . Curren

t Premis e fo

r Tes t Developmen

t 1 ) Onl y emission s stage s 2 an

d 3 nee d t o b e encompasse d b

y th e tes t method . Comment : Only emission s stage s 2 an d 3 wil l b e encompassed b y th e laborator y par tof th e tes tmethod . A VS R effectivenes s mode l will the n us e th e laborator y tes tmetho d result

s t o provid e th e input ; fo r th e MAC T model . 2 ) Fibe r reinforcemen

t shoul d b e incorporate d int

o th e tes t sampl e t o provid e laminat

e surfac e effects . 

# 1P. 6

3 ) Mechanica

l roll-ou t i s neede d t o encompas s th e stag e 2 effects . 4 ) Tes t metho d shoul d b e a s simpl e a s possible . 5 ) Testin g shoul d b e abl e t o b e duplicated an d use d o n abroad scale . Commen tb y M . Strum : Add : "I

f possible , th e tes tmetho d shoul d b e abl e t o b e conducte d b y resin manufacturer

s o r suppressan

tmanufacturer

s o n th e "as-applied " resins (ma y nee d definitionfo

f as-applied ) s o tha tthes e materia l suppliers (i f

aske d b y th e composite s manufacturer

) coul d suppl

y th e dat a t o th e composit

e manufacturers . However , i ti s th e composit e manufacturer

s thatar e ultimately responsibl e fo r th e resul tofth e test . Woul d resi n manufacturer

s b e willin g t

o d o thi s on a ge

l tim e specifi c basis , sinc e ge l tim e i s a ver

y composite-manufacture r specifi c parameter ? Woul d tes tmethod ge l tim e b e th e cu p ge

l tim e a ta specifi c temperatur

e o r th e actua

l ge l time ? I tappear

s par to f thi s tes twoul d requir e determinatio n of

th e ge l tim e o f th e resin s o tha tth e tes twoul d b e specifi c fo r a specifi c ge

l tim e and result

s coul d onl

y b e used fo r tha tspecifi c ge l tim e tested . IV . Tes t Developmen

t Issue s 1 ) Determining weigh

t los s b y agravimetri c metho d i s simple . * Th e us e off ala b balanc e a s th e primar

y measuremen

t metho d would b e appropriate , if repeatabilit y ca n b e established . 2 ) Appropriat

e glas s fiber

reinforcemen

t an d resi n t o glas s rati o mus t

b e selected . * 11/ 2 oz./ft 2 Choppe d Strand Ma

t (CSM ) Fiberglas s Reinforcemen t @ arati o o f

25 % glas s t o 75 % resin by weigh

t wil l b e selecte d fo

r initia l trials . Commen

tb y M . Stru m : coul d a fe

w ratio s b e looke

d a tan d compare

d wit h thi s selectio n s o tha tth e effec to f thi s paramete r i s known ? 3 ) Tes t laminat e siz e mus t

b e determined . * Th e tes t laminat e siz e wil l b e 12 " x 12 " fo

r th e initia l trials . Thi s siz e provide s aconvenien t enclosur e siz e an d sample resin quantity . Commen tb y M . Strum : Th e thicknes s ofth e laminat e need s t o b e determine d (th e surface are a ofth e laminat

e shoul d noteffec

tth e effectivenes s ofth e suppressant , bu twoul d i t affect th e repeatibility/accuracy?) . 4 ) A metho d o f

distributin g th e resi

n acros s glas s fiber

reinforcemen

t mus t b e devised . * Initia l trial s wil l b e carrie d ou t

b y manuall y pourin g resin acros s th e CS M surface . Thi s metho d wil l b e evaluated fb

r repeatability.iW e nee

d t o bette r define ho

w th e laminat

e sampl e i s prepared . Ar

e thes e followin g step s t

o prepar e th e laminat

e sampl e correct ? (1 ) Th e 

# 5P. 7

reinforcemen

ti s place d in th e tes tpan , (2 ) a specified amoun tof resin i s poure

d ove r th e reinforcement, an

d (3 ) th e resin i s rolle

d outfo r a specifie d amoun tof time . 5 ) A metho d o f

controllin g th e actio n ofth e FR P rolle r ma y b e required . * Initia l trial s wil l b e carrie d ou t

using manua

l rolling fo r aspecifie d perio d o f

time . Thi s metho d wil l b e evaluate d fo

r repeatability . I f

repeatabilit

y cannot b e establishe d usin

g thi s method , a mechanica l rolling devic e wil

l b e devised . 6 ) Lengt h o f tes t mus t b e established . * Becaus e thi s tes t

i s focused o n stag e 2 & 3 emissions , i t i s importan

t tha t th e tes t ru n b e o f duratio n tha

t ther e i s a reasonabl e certaint y tha t styrene emission s hav e reached a baselin e level . I n th e absenc e ofth e mor

e comple x requirement s t o establis h abaseline , th e followin g i s proposed :

- Ther e i s arelationshi

p between ge

l tim e an d overal l cur e tim e wit h avas t majorit y o f resin an d initiator systems . Therefore , usin g ge l tim e multiplie d by afactor

ca n establis h aperio d i

n which th e laminat

e ca n b e expecte d t o hav e achieve d baseline emissions .

- I t i s propose d tha

t th e initia l testin g us e th e formul ao f

ge l tim e (min. ) x 6 t o establis h th e tes t duration .

- Using th e example s o f

tw o commo

n ge l time s o f 1 5 an d 3 0 minutes , th e tota

l tes t tim e woul d b e 9 0 minute s an

d 18 0 minute s respectively . Previou s testin g ha s show n thes e time s adequat

e fo r emission s t o declin e t o baseline levels . Commen tb y M . Strum : whataboutwaitin g fo r weigh t los s t o achiev e a constan tvalue . Doe s a tim e nee

d t o b e specified . 7 ) Tes t procedur e mus t b e developed . * A n initia l tes t procedure i s propose d i

n thi s draft . Commen tb y M . Strum . Shoul d Suppresse d an d nonsuppressed resin s b e don e a tsam e tim e in same enclosure ? I f th e sample

s ar e teste d sid e b y side , i tneed s t o b e assure d tha t bot h samples ar

e expose d t o th e sam

e ai r flow in th e enclosure . However , i twoul d need s t o b e assured thaton e sampl e does no taffec tth e emissions , released b y th e othe r sample . Shoul d tes tinclud e 3 set

s o f suppressed an

d no n suppressed resins ? V . Initia l Experimenta

l Proposa l 1 ) Tes t Set-up : a . Tes t t o b e conducte d i

n atemperatur

e stabl e environment , a

t 770F (40 F (250 C (1.20C ) Commen tb y M . Stru m (nee d t o delet e degre e sign sinc e th e translatio n o f th e emai l message made i timpossibl e t o rea d th e temperature(s? ) thatar e bein g proposed . Shoul d a fe

w temperature s b e initiall y tried t o se e i f there i s a n effect ? I

f no effec tw e migh tb e abl e t o giv e a range of temperatures . If

bi g effec twe migh tnee

d t o wor k harde r t o com e up wit h a realistic/representative / bes to r wors tcas e temperature . I s th e 

# 6P. 8

temperature ofth e wate r bat h i n whic h th e resi n sampl e temperature i s stabilize d th e sam e a s th e ai r temperature ? b. Th e tes t i s conducte d i

n a n enclosur e o f ( ) " x ( ) " x ( )" , whic h incorporate s airflow o f ( ) fp mthroug h th e enclosure . Commen tb y M . Strum : whe

n enclosur

e i s open , ai r flow i s n o longe r a constant( ) fp m throug h th e enclosure . c . A shallo w tes t

pa n (__) " x ( ) " i s positione d o n adigita l balance . Commen

tb y M . Strum : d o w e need t

o specif y dept h of tes tpa n a s wel l a s lengt h an d width ? D o w

e nee d t o specif

y th e material s ofth e tes tpa n a s wel l ( a to o heav

y a pa n will giv e a larg e erro r du e t o smal l weigh tdifferences) ? d . Balanc e wil

l b e accurat

e withi n ( ( ) g 2 ) Require d Equipment : a . Tes t enclosur e w / fan , baffles , NDO's , an

d door s b. Laborator

y balance(s ) c . Tes t Pa n (dimension s t o b e specified ) d . Constant

temperatur

e water bat h e . Ge l time r f . FR P roller , disposabl e (siz e & typ e t o b e specified ) g . Plasti c beaker s - 200m

l h . Glas s stirrin g rod s 3 ) Require d Material s a . 11/ 2 oz./ft 2 Choppe d Strand Ma

t (CSM ) Fiberglas s Reinforcemen t (12 " x 12" ) b. Resi n c . Initiato r d . Suppressan

t additiv e 4 ) Tes t Procedure : a . Stabiliz e resin sample temperatur e i n water bat h a t 770 F ( 40F (250 C (1.20C ) [Toleranc e TBD ] b . Measur e resi n ge l tim e wit h identica l initiator percentag e t o b e use d i

n pa n tes t [Us e standar

d G T procedure ] c . Establis h lengt

h o f pa n tes t - Ge l Tim e (min. ) x 6 = Tes t

Tim e Spa n [*appropriat

e multiplie r TBD ] d . Prepare tes t

pa n wit h releas e agen

t if require d (Whic

h releas e agen ti s proposed fo r thi s test ? Unles s thi s releas e agenti s typicall y use d b y al l facilitie s durin g actua

l production , i t shoul d notb e use

d durin g testin g becaus e i tcoul d affec temissions. ) e . Plac e tes t

pa n o n balanc e i n enclosur e f . Prepare CS M sample . 1 . Cu t t o 12 " x 12 " squar

e 2 . Weig h sampl e (Targe t weigh t 42.5 g (4.2g ) [*acceptable toleranc e TBD ] commen tb y M . Strum : don' tunderstand parenthetica l remar k —mus tb e a n emai l transmissio n error . 

# nP. 9

g . Plac e CS M sampl

e i n tes t pa n h . Plac e FR

P rolle r o n tes t pa n I . Tare balanc e j . Measur e 130 g ( 2 g resin int

o 200m l plasti c beake

r [*exac t quantit y & acceptabl e toleranc e TBD ] Pleas e explain thi s in mor e detail . Doe

s thi s mea n yo u measur

e 130 g of resin wit h a n acceptabl e measuremen

ttolerance of

2 g ? k . Measure appropriat

e quantit y o f initiator (an d suppressan

t additive ) int

o resin sampl

e 1 . Mix resi n sample fo

r 1 minut e wit h glas s stirrin g ro d m . Remov e stirrin g ro d an

d se t asid e n . Star t time o . Pou r resi n mixtur

e int o pan , distributin g uniforml

y acros s CS M - se

t plasti c beake

r asid e p . Recor d initia l weigh t (Iw ) - resin applied t o laminat e i n pa n (sampl e weight ) q . Usin g th e FR

P roller , roll th e laminat

e surfac e fo

r 1 minute , using unifor

mstroke s an

d speed [*tim e TBD ] r . Plac e FRP rolle

r i n pa n s . Clos e enclosur

e door s commen

tb y M . Strum : wher

e ar e enclosur e door s open ? Ho

w t o mak e sur e ai r flow i s a

tconstant/identica

l rat e during rollin g fo r differen ttests ? t . Sto p time - Tes t

Tim e Spa n (G T x 6 = TTS ) u . Record final weigh

t (Fw) . v . Calculat

e weigh t los s an d emission s percen

t

a . Initia l weigh t - Fina l weigh t = Styrene los s I w - F w = S I Styren e los s /

Initia l weigh t x 10 0 = % Styren e emission s pe r resin weigh

t SI / I w x 10 0 = % Styren

e Emission s (RW

) Commen tb y M . Strum : result

s shoul d b e % reduction fro m no n suppresse d resin : { % Styren e Emissions (RW) of nonsuppressed - % Styrene Emissions (RW ) o f suppresse d } divide d b y % Styrene Emission s (RW ) of nonsuppressed

DRAF T - Developmen

t o f Suppressan

t Effectivenes s Test.. . 

# i