Influence of different central nozzle diameters and powder injection rates on carbon powder mixed injection with shrouding supersonic oxygen jet (CMISSO) lance
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2022
Influence of different central nozzle diameters and powder injection rates on carbon powder mixed injection with shrouding supersonic oxygen jet (CMISSO) lance
In order to improve the carbon powder utilization efficiency in electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking process, the carbon powder mixed injection with shrouding supersonic oxygen jet (CMISSO) lance was designed. In this study, the effects of different central nozzle diameters and powder injection rates on the dynamic characteristics of CMISSO lance are studied by numerical simulation, and the reliability of numerical simulation is verified by cold test. The results show that when the diameter of the central nozzle is 10, 15 and 20 mm, the mixing distance is 0.18, 0.28 and 0.30 m. Depicting that 10 mm centre nozzle diameter is the easiest to merge the central jet and the shrouding jet. The application of CMISSO injection lance can effectively make the powder get together. In addition, the larger the powder flow, the larger the powder distribution range and the lower the utilization efficiency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DemusTReichelTSchultenMet al.Increasing the sustainability of steel production in the electric arc furnace by substituting fossil coal with biochar agglomerates. Ironmaking Steelmaking. 2016;43(8):564–570.
2.
Vargas RamirezMRomero SerranoAMoralesRet al.Hot metal pretreatment by powder injection of lime-based reagents. Steel Res. 2001;72(5–6):173–181.
3.
WeiJ.-HS.J.ZhuYuN.-W, Kinetic model of desulphurisation by powder injection and blowing in RH refining of molten steel.Ironmaking Steelmaking. 2000;27(2):129–137.
4.
EissaM.Effect of slag foaming and lime injection in electric arc furnace on steel quality. 54 th Electric Furnace Conference; 1996. p. 123–128.
5.
WuXZhuRWeiGet al.Influence of the carrier gas species on CaO-gas mixed injection in the EAF steelmaking process. Metall Mater Trans B. 2019;50(5):2389–2402.
6.
HuangXANgKWGirouxLet al.Carbonaceous material properties and their interactions with slag during electric arc furnace steelmaking. Metall Mater Trans B. 2019;50(3):1387–1398.
7.
ToulouevskiYNZinurovIY.Innovation in electric arc furnaces. London: Springer; 2010. p. 1–23.
8.
WeiGZhuRYangSet al.Carbon powder mixed injection with a shrouding supersonic oxygen jet in electric arc furnace steelmaking. Metall Mater Trans B. 2020;51(5):2298–2308.
9.
TripathiPKumarDSSahRet al.An improved lance design for hot metal de-sulphurisation. Ironmaking Steelmaking. 2017;44(6):421–429.
10.
LiMLiLZhangBet al.Numerical analysis of the particle-induced effect on gas flow in a supersonic powder-laden oxygen jet. Metall Mater Trans B. 2020;51(4):1718–1730.
11.
OkunoTUddinMAKatoYet al.Effect of particle penetration depth on solid/liquid mass transfer rate by particle blowing technique. ISIJ Int. 2017;57(11):1902–1910.
12.
LiuFSunDZhuRet al.Effect of side-blowing arrangement on flow field and vanadium extraction Rrate in converter steelmaking Process. ISIJ Int. 2018;58(5):852–859.
13.
LouWZhuM.A mathematical model for the multiphase transport and reaction kinetics in a ladle with bottom powder injection. Metall Mater Trans B. 2017;48(6):3196–3212.
14.
MiyataMHiguchiY.Fluid dynamics analysis of gas jet with particles. ISIJ Int. 2017;57(10):1742–1750.
15.
WeiGZhuRFengCet al.Effect of powder injection rate on the flow field of coherent lime powder injection (C-LPI) for EAF steelmaking. Ironmaking Steelmaking. 2021;48(5):534–546.
16.
WangZJShangXF.Gas-solid two-phase flow simulation of coaxial powder delivery nozzle in rapid prototyping. Appl Mech Mater. 2010;Trans Tech Publ 29:1663–1667.
17.
MardaniATabejamaatSGhamariM.Numerical study of influence of molecular diffusion in the mild combustion regime. Combust Theory Modell. 2010;14(5):747–774.
18.
ChristoFCDallyBB.Modeling turbulent reacting jets issuing into a hot and diluted coflow. Combust Flame. 2005;142(1–2):117–129.
19.
ShenYYuAZulliP.CFD modelling and analysis of pulverized coal injection in blast furnace: an overview. Steel Res Int. 2011;82(5):532–542.
20.
BartosiewiczYMercadierYProulxP.Numerical investigations on dynamics and heat transfer in a turbulent underexpanded jet. AIAA J. 2002;40(11):2257–2265.
21.
IshiiRUmedaYYuhiM.Numerical analysis of gas-particle two-phase flows. J Fluid Mech. 1989;203:475–515.
22.
LuBWangWLiJ.Eulerian simulation of gas–solid flows with particles of geldart groups A, B and D using EMMS-based meso-scale model. Chem Eng Sci. 2011;66(20):4624–4635.
WijayantaATAlamMSNakasoKet al.Combustibility of biochar injected into the raceway of a blast furnace. Fuel Process Technol. 2014;117:53–59.
25.
LeeKde HoyosMAhnSet al.Gas-assisted powder injection molding: a study on the effect of processing variables on gas penetration. Powder Technol. 2010;200(3):128–135.
26.
AlamMNaserJBrooksGet al.Computational fluid dynamics modeling of supersonic coherent jets for electric arc furnace steelmaking process. Metall Mater Trans B. 2010;41(6):1354–1367.
27.
ZhangBLWeiGSLiuRZet al.Simulation and analysis of O2–CaO jet behavior with different shrouding fuel mediums in electric arc furnace steelmaking. J Iron Steel Res Int. 2020;27(11):1259–1269.
28.
LangbergDEAverySNilmaniM.The separation of the solids from the carrier gas during submerged powder injection. Metall Mater Trans B. 1996;27(5):773–779.
