Closed Loop Fumigation of a Small Rural Concrete Elevator in a Growing Urban Setting

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Closed Loop Fumigation of a Small Rural Concrete Elevator in a Growing Urban Setting"

Tyler Cunningham
6 years ago
Views:

Closed Loop Fumigation of a Small Rural Concrete Elevator in a Growing Urban Setting Dr. Carol Jones Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Oklahoma State University Edmond Bonjour, Dr.

1 Closed Loop Fumigation of a Small Rural Concrete Elevator in a Growing Urban Setting Dr. Carol Jones Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Oklahoma State University Edmond Bonjour, Dr. Tom Phillips and Randy Beeby Stored Products Research and Education Center Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Oklahoma State University Mark Fultz Hansen Mueller Co. Dr. Ron Noyes Grain Storage Engineering, LLC

2 Oklahoma Geography Broken Arrow

3 Urbanization around Rural Elevator

4 Challenges Urbanization makes elevator managers more aware of safety measures Fumigation safety is a concern to neighbors and to employees Conventional methods of phosphine fumigation put workers and people in close proximity in danger

5 Goals of this Project Seek a method to improve safety of fumigating with phosphine Seek a method to decrease the amount of fumigant required Seek a method to increase the concentration distribution throughout the grain bins

6 Common Fumigation Methods and Negative Effects Probe and Tarp: exposure during tarping Automatic Dispenser: pellets spill from buckets and release gas in unwanted areas, shrinkage caused from turning and moving grain Gravity Fumigation: little control of where gas may go Each method offers increased risk of exposure during insertion of fumigant into the grain.

7 Proposed Method for Study Closed Loop Fumigation System in a concrete silo Example of a J-System patented by James Cook in Consists of: Sealing air leaks in storage structure Installing low pressure low volume centrifugal blower recirculating air-gas mixture from headspace of grain into base of silo Installing pipes from fan to blower and back into silos

8 Proposed Method for Study Pressured base ducts force gas mixture upward through grain bulk providing better gas distribution through grain. Headspace Grain Bulk Blower

9 Proposed Method for Study Bin Diagram of Elevator Facility

10 A closed loop system was installed in one half of the elevator while the other half remained unchanged for a conventional method fumigant application CLF Conventional 8660 MT capacity (120,000 bu)

11 Proposed Method for Study First Step: Seal silos as completely as possible inner vents

12 Proposed Method for Study First Step: Seal silos as completely as possible outer vents

13 Proposed Method for Study First Step: Seal silos as completely as possible...access openings

14 Proposed Method for Study Blower mounted outside on top of one bin adjacent to the head house. 249 W (1/3 HP) supplying 0.15 m 3 /s (320 cfm)

15 Proposed Method for Study Installing pipes from fan to blower and back into silos

16 Proposed Method for Study Installing pipes from fan to blower and back into silos

17 Proposed Method for Study Monitoring fumigation: top, bottom, and middle of bin

18 Proposed Method for Study Dosage: Manager chose his normal dosage rate of 17 pellets/m 3 which is his normal dosage rate. Both sides of the elevator were treated the same. CLF side: pellets distributed on top of the grain. Conventional side: pellets were inserted into the grain as it was loaded into the bin

19 Proposed Method for Study Electronic gas meters were used to measure phosphine concentration every 4 hours for the first 32 hours and every 10 hours for the next 88 hours.

20 Results CLF versus Conventional Fumigation CLF BIN 1500 ppm CONVENTIONAL BIN 200 PPM Hour from Treatment

21 After Fumigation Blower discharge piping was disconnected and the blower was used to evacuate the fumigant from the CLF system and bins. Evacuation can be accomplished when the danger to workers or to residents around the elevator is the least. Gas can be discharged 35 meters above ground level reducing danger

22 Economic Comparison Closed Loop Fumigation Installation costs Less fumigant Less labor Less worker exposure and health costs Conventional Fumigation Turning costs and product shrinkage More fumigant More labor More bin entry required of workers causing health risk and higher insurance rates

23 Economic Comparison ($4/bu wheat)

24 Economic Comparison ($8/bu wheat)

25 Conclusion Closed loop fumigation was more successful since it reached the desired 200 ppm for 100 hours. Conventional fumigation did not reach this level. ¾ of the fumigant could have been saved in this elevator Closed loop fumigation is ultimately cheaper Closed loop fumigation is safer than conventional fumigation when carried out properly

26 Closed Loop Fumigation of a Small Rural Concrete Elevator in a Growing Urban Setting Dr. Carol Jones Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Oklahoma State University Edmond Bonjour, Dr. Tom Phillips and Randy Beeby Stored Products Research and Education Center Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Oklahoma State University Dr. Ron Noyes Grain Storage Engineering, LLC

Improving Fumigation with Closed Loop Systems. Carol Jones Oklahoma State University

Improving Fumigation with Closed Loop Systems Carol Jones Oklahoma State University CLF Mission: Seal bins contain as much fumigant as possible Circulate fumigant through grain bulk improved distribution