The five EPA capture configurations, pre- vs post-baghouse placement, and why acid and dust pull the wheel spec in opposite directions.
Before you spec a fume extraction fan, look at how the fume is captured. The hood, hole or enclosure that pulls gas off the process sets the volume, the dilution and the dust-and-acid load the fan will carry for its whole life. Get the capture architecture wrong and the fan is mis-specified from day one — no impeller trim recovers a fan sized against the wrong gas.
The US EPA (AP-42, Section 12.5) catalogues five named capture configurations for electric-arc-furnace fume — the hottest, dirtiest fume duty in common industry, and a clean worked example for any fume fan. An arc furnace runs on 100 percent scrap in batch heats: iron oxide dominates during melting, and calcium oxide from the slag joins in during refining. Each capture method hands the fan a different gas volume.
| Configuration | What it draws | Dilution / gas volume | Captures the roof-off charge? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fourth hole (direct shell) | Fume straight from the furnace interior | Lowest volume, highest concentration | No — blind while the roof is swung away |
| Side-draft hood | Off-gas around the electrodes and work doors | Moderate | Yes, across the cycle |
| Combination hood | Fourth-hole + side-draft merged, with an air gap to burn off CO | Moderate–high | Partly |
| Canopy hood | Everything rising above the furnace and charge bay | High — most dilution air of the four direct systems | Yes |
| Full enclosure | The furnace fully surrounded, drawn from the top | Largest design volume of all | Yes — complete capture |
The pattern is the point. The same process can hand the fan anything from a lean, high-concentration stream (fourth hole) to the largest diluted volume in the plant (full enclosure) — which is why most new furnaces pair a canopy for the roof-off charge with one of the more efficient systems. “A fume fan” is not a spec. Which configuration, at what gas volume, is. This is the same discipline as specifying the duty point: the number has to trace to a real operating case.
Where the fan sits relative to the filter matters more than almost anything else on the datasheet.
Our standing wear treatment on those radial families is chromium-carbide hardfacing laid down by FCAW at roughly 55–60 HRC on the blade leading edges, ranked by the ASTM G65 abrasion-test method rather than by a bare hardness number. More on that trade in fan wear protection & hardfacing.
Dust wears; acid corrodes — and the fixes point in opposite directions. We were called to a chemical-fume customer whose impeller had been eaten alive by highly concentrated acidic fume. The blades had thinned to rust-and-verdigris-stained flags and torn clean through; the wheel was scrap and had to be replaced outright. The replacement was not simply a harder wheel. For an acidic stream the answer is corrosion allowance — a thicker-gauge wheel, or SS316 construction — because the failure mode is chemical attack, not abrasion.
That is the trap worth stating plainly: stainless steel (304/316) sits around 124–147 HBW, barely harder than mild steel. Against abrasion it buys almost nothing. Stainless solves corrosion; hardfacing and AR plate solve wear. An acidic-fume duty and a dusty duty pull the wheel spec two different ways — and a stream that is hot, dirty and acidic needs both decisions made on purpose, not one bundled into the other.
State the capture system, the fan’s position around the filter, and the nature of the gas, and the wheel almost specifies itself. Leave them out and everyone is guessing. We work backwards from the stated configuration and duty — sized and tested to the IS 4894 / ISO 5801 method — not from a generic “fume fan” number. For the wider list of ways this goes wrong, see seven mistakes buying an industrial fan.
Talk to us about fume extraction →
Jitamitra Electro Engineering · Fan-engineering notes, written for the engineer.
Sources & basis. Grounded in Jitamitra's internal EAF fume application note (referencing US EPA AP-42 Section 12.5: the five named capture configurations and the >99.9% controlled-emission reduction figure) and its hardfacing / wear-protection selection guide (chromium-carbide FCAW at 55–60 HRC, the ASTM G65 ranking method, and the 304/316 stainless hardness of ~124–147 HBW). The acidic-fume failure is a real, anonymised field case in which a chemical-fume customer's backward-curved impeller was corroded through by highly concentrated acidic fume and replaced. Customer names, job numbers and internal codes removed; figures cited as served-range and standards named as test methods, not certifications.
Flow, static, gas temperature, application — or attach a spec, GA drawing or a multi-fan schedule. Engineer to engineer.
ISO 9001:2015 quality system · performance-tested to IS 4894 / ISO 5801 / AMCA 210 method · witnessed FAT on request, at no cost.
*For our standard range, additional days required for special projects