4.4 Article

Effect of High Reactivity Coke for Mixed Charge in Ore Layer on Reaction Behavior of Each Particle in Blast Furnace

期刊

ISIJ INTERNATIONAL
卷 53, 期 10, 页码 1770-1778

出版社

IRON STEEL INST JAPAN KEIDANREN KAIKAN
DOI: 10.2355/isijinternational.53.1770

关键词

ironmaking; blast furnace; low coke rate; reducing agent; mixed coke charge; nut coke; reactivity; Euler-Lagrange method

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [13J07763] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A low coke rate operation in blast furnace is desired to decrease the carbon input and mitigate global warming problem. However, low coke rate operation tends to cause the gas permeability to deteriorate. The mixing of small-size coke (nut coke) including high reactivity coke in ore layer is considered to be a promising way to improve permeability and increase reaction efficiency in a blast furnace. Although adding a nut coke mixing to an ore layer is predicted to be empirically effective in low coke rate operation, there is little actual data on microscopic phenomena of each particle in the packed bed. In the present study, an Euler-Lagrange approach was introduced to precisely understand the influence of the packed bed structure on the reaction behavior of each particle in the three-dimensional particle arrangement. It was observed that the heterogeneity on the reaction rate and temperature distribution was influenced by the particle arrangement. When high-reactivity coke was used at approximately 1 273 K, although CO gas fraction increased, the gaseous phase temperature decreased due to the active solution loss reaction rate of the nut coke in the mixed layer. As a result, the ore reduction rate decreased. The contribution of high-reactivity coke to the ore reduction rate depends on the particle arrangement through the heat transfer and reaction heat. Accordingly, in the case of the mixed charge of the high reactivity nut coke in the ore layer, the design of the packed bed structure is important.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据