DOCSLIB.ORG

Download (1620Kb)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download (1620Kb) Original citation: Sridhar, Seetharaman and Li, Zushu. (2016) Can there be a sunrise in steel town? Ironmaking & Steelmaking . 10.1080/03019233.2016.1211150 Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/80953 Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher’s statement: “This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Ironmaking & Steelmaking on 9 August 2016 , available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03019233.2016.1211150 ” A note on versions: The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the ‘permanent WRAP url’ above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications Can there be a sunrise in steel town? Seetharaman Sridhar and Zushu Li WMG, University of Warwick, Coventry ABSTRACT A sustainable UK steel industry is vitally important to the UK’s future growth prospects. This article first analyses the grand trends and challenges that the UK steel industry is facing. Then alternative iron making processes are briefly reviewed with regard to its flexibility in raw material and energy and its reduction in CO2 emissions. It is concluded that in the long-term, the scrap- based EAF route can be considered as a viable process route for the UK steel industry. For the current integrated process, its sustainability can be achieved by substantially improving its energy / material efficiency and by focusing on the creation of value-added steel products. It also points out that ensuring the sustainability of the UK steel industry requires a clear strategy, substantial capital expenses and support from the government and the industry itself. The UK has to invest in / re-shape steel-related research creating new competences for the viability of the industry. Key words UK steel industry, ironmaking, steelmaking, CO2, process and product innovation INTRODUCTION The last 12 months have been tumultuous if not cataclysmic for the UK steel industry. Key innovations in the integrated process for making steel were made in the UK but the industry is now struggling to survive amidst high raw- material prices, high energy costs and falling prices for commodity steel products amidst cheap foreign imports. 1 UK steel production is through two process routes, the integrated route (10.165 Mt in 2014) and EAF route (1.955 Mt in 2014) [1]. The integrated route (e.g. Scunthorpe and Port Talbot steelworks) is based on the production of iron from iron ore and coke, and steel from BOF (basic oxygen furnace) steelmaking, while the EAF (electric arc furnace) route (e.g. Tata Steel Speciality at Rotherham and Stockbridge, and Celsa Steel and Liberty in South Wales) uses scrap as the main raw material. The energy consumption through the integrated process was estimated to be 10.5 to 11.5 GJ/tls (tonne liquid steel), which is ~80% higher than that by EAF route (2.1 to 2.4 GJ/tls) [2]. Energy costs and materials costs account for 36% and 40% of the total production costs of hot rolled coils through the integrated route. Future demand for steel in the UK is estimated to be about 300 kg of steel per person per year; which is about 20 Mtpa for the whole UK [3]. Domestic production of steel is vitally important to the UK’s future growth prospects, and to the UK’s aspirations for the manufacturing and construction sectors - it is the critical part of UK materials supply chain. There is a clear case to protect steelmaking capacity in the UK. This article first analyses the trends and challenges that the UK steel industry is facing, and then examines possible solutions for the viability of this industry from a technical point of view. TRENDS AND CHALLENGES AFFECTING THE UK STEEL INDUSTRY Faced with little/no natural resources nor a national energy strategy the UK steel industry is being affected by grand trends and challenges, for example, in strict environmental regulation, new energy/materials sources, global over- capacity, and ever increasing customer requirements for high quality steel products. In other words, improvements in productivity to maximize yield, and reduce process costs are dwarfed by the changes in raw material prices and energy costs and fluctuations in the market for steel products (Figures 1 to 3 [4,5]). Thus, it can be argued that when the steel industry `does well` in modern times this is caused by a temporary trend in e.g. iron ore cost or some large infrastructural efforts in some part of the world (and not due to innovative 2 transformations in the steel plants). The question then becomes, how does one enable steel manufacturing to become resilient towards trends? Logically the solution would entail (I) flexibility in raw material and energy to manufacture iron at the front end, and (II) a viable strategy with regards to the products that are produced. The former may become ever more important as the UK exits the EU and, as a result of the fallout, economic imports of any kind may become challenging. The latter, i.e. a viable product strategy can be realised by new product development and more importantly flexibility of so called late stage differentiation in product (see the section “PRODUCT DIVERSIFICATION”). With the technology available today we are, in the UK, limited to strategically targeting products where we would have a competitive advantage due to local supply chain needs. This could be for example, strip for construction applications utilising advanced coating processes, products for the domestic automotive industry (electric steels for electric vehicles, light weight steels and steel/polymer hybrids etc) and specialty steel for aerospace and automotive drive train applications. A need for a domestic supply chain for such high value products may become essential for sustaining the sectors that depend on steel as UK exits the EU and imports may become more expensive. Although the steel industry is pretty lean and efficient, steel production is still energy-intensive, consuming fuel (mainly coal and coke) and electricity and accounting for 6.7% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions globally. In order to keep global warming to well below 2 °C by the middle of the 21st century compared to pre-industrial levels, the participating 195 countries in the `Paris Agreement`, by consensus, agreed to reduce emissions and carbon output as part of the method for reducing greenhouse gas `as soon as possible`. The EU Commission’s climate change target, summarised in their roadmap for Moving to a Low Carbon Economy in 2050 is a reduction in emissions of 80- 95% by 2050 compared to 1990 for European industry. This is far beyond the reach of the steel sector as the actual energy consumption (and also the CO2 emission) is only 25 to 30% higher than the theoretical minimum for the integrated process. This target of emission reduction can only be achieved by 3 transformative processes and in combination with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). CCS is widely viewed as a crucial approach to meeting global and national climate change targets, although large-scale CCS is still in its infancy. It involves capturing CO2 emitted from high-producing sources, transporting it and storing it in secure geological formations deep underground. While some of these have been operated successfully for decades, progress in applying large-scale CCS to carbon-intensive industry both in the UK and globally has been slow. Initial projects require large upfront investments, although the expectation is that costs will rapidly fall for second generation projects once the primary infrastructure is in place. CCS projects in the EU have been significantly delayed due to various reasons such as public awareness and acceptance, infrastructure, lack of business case, lack of a legal framework etc. There may be a long way for the CCS technology to be practically in use in the UK. The reduction of carbon footprint can also be achieved by using clean/renewable energy to replace the fossil-based energy in the steel manufacturing. The clean/renewable energy can be wind power, hydropower, solar energy, geothermal energy, bioenergy, nuclear power, shale gas etc. US steelmakers have, in recent years, reaped the benefits of the shale gas revolution, which substantially reduced the gas price there. UK energy is becoming cleaner and greener with wind, solar and other renewables generating more electricity as UK energy from coal hit zero for several times in May 2016. Although it is early days for shale gas in the UK, work has started to extract abundant shale gas from previously unproductive rocks as the first fracking operation in the UK was just approved on 23rd May 2016. In the foreseeable future, cheap electricity from renewable energy or non-fossil energy (e.g. shale gas) is likely to be available, helping create a cleaner/brighter UK steel industry.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ironmaking Process Alternatives Screening Study, Volume I
    Ironmaking Process Alternatives Screening Study Volume I: Summary Report ORE TO CONCENTRATOR IRON ORE MINE SLURRY ORE BENEFICIATION PIPELINE CONCENTRATOR CONCENTRATE SLURRY ELECTRIC PELLET RECEIVING, PELLET POWER STOCKPILE DEWATERING PLANT (50% FROM COAL, 50% FROM N.G.) DIRECT REDUCTION PLANTS NATURAL GAS EAF MELTING NATURAL GAS DRI PRODUCTION STEEL TO PORT SLABS SLAB LMFs CASTER SLAB VACUUM SHIPPING DEGASSING October 2000 LG Job No. 010529.01 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Contents Volume I: Ironmaking Alternative Study Executive Summary...............................................................................1 Study Scope and Methodology............................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Model Study on Burden Distribution in COREX Melter Gasifier
    processes Article Model Study on Burden Distribution in COREX Melter Gasifier Haifeng Li 1,2,3,* , Zongshu Zou 1,2,3,*, Zhiguo Luo 1,3, Lei Shao 1,3 and Wenhui Liu 1,3 1 Key Laboratory for Ecological Metallurgy of Multi-metallic Mineral (Ministry of Education), Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, Liaoning, China; [email protected] (Z.L.); [email protected] (L.S.); [email protected] (W.L.) 2 State Key Laboratory of Rolling and Automation, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, Liaoning, China 3 School of Metallurgy, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, Liaoning, China * Correspondence: [email protected] (H.L.); [email protected] (Z.Z.) Received: 21 October 2019; Accepted: 26 November 2019; Published: 1 December 2019 Abstract: COREX is one of the commercialized smelting reduction ironmaking processes. It mainly includes two reactors, i.e., a (reduction) shaft furnace (SF) and a melter gasifier (MG). In comparison with the conventional blast furnace (BF), the COREX MG is not only equipped with a more complicated top charging system consisting of one gimbal distributor for coal and eight flap distributors for direct reduction iron (DRI), but also the growth mechanism of its burden pile is in a developing phase, rather than that in a fully-developed phase in a BF. Since the distribution of charged burden plays a crucial role in determining the gas flow and thus in achieving a stable operation, it is of considerable importance to investigate the burden distribution influenced by the charging system of COREX MG. In the present work, a mathematical model is developed for predicting the burden distribution in terms of burden layer structure and radial ore/coal ratio within the COREX MG.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Magnetite Ore in Advanced Ironmaking
    The University of New South Wales Faculty of Science School of Materials Science and Engineering The Use of Magnetite Ore in Advanced Ironmaking Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Yury Kapelyushin October 2017 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT ‘I hereby grant the University of New South Wales or its agents the right to archive and to make available my thesis or dissertation in whole or part in the University libraries in all forms of media, now or here after known, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. I retain all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation. I also authorise University Microfilms to use the 350 word abstract of my thesis in Dissertation Abstract International (this is applicable to doctoral theses only). I have either used no substantial portions of copyright material in my thesis or I have obtained permission to use copyright material; where permission has not been granted I have applied/will apply for a partial restriction of the digital copy of my thesis or dissertation.' AUTHENTICITY STATEMENT ‘I certify that the Library deposit digital copy is a direct equivalent of the final officially approved version of my thesis. No emendation of content has occurred and if there are any minor variations in formatting, they are the result of the conversion to digital format.’ i ORIGINALITY STATEMENT ‘I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and to the best of my knowledge it contains no materials previously published or written by another person, or substantial proportions of material which have been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma at UNSW or any other educational institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Techno-Economic Assessment and Comparison of CO2 Capture Technologies for Industrial Processes: Preliminary Results for the Iron and Steel Sector
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 1981–1988 Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/XXX GHGT-10 Techno-economic assessment and comparison of CO2 capture technologies for industrial processes: preliminary results for the iron and steel sector Takeshi Kuramochi*, Andrea Ramírez , Wim Turkenburg, André Faaij 1 Group Science, Technology and Society, Copernicus Institute, Utrecht University,Heidelberglaan 2, 3584CS Utrecht, the Netherlands Elsevier use only: Received date here; revised date here; accepted date here Abstract This paper presents the methodology and the preliminary results of a techno-economic assessment of CCS implementation on the iron and steel sector. The results show that for the short-mid term, a CO2 avoidance cost of less than 50 €/tonne at a CO2 avoidance rate of around 50% are possible by converting the conventional blast furnace (BF) to Top Gas Recycling Blast Furnace (TGRBF). However, large additional power consumption for CO2 removal and oxygen generation, and reduction in BF gas export, makes the economic performance of the technology very sensitive to energy prices. Add-on CO2 capture for conventional BF may achieve similar costs (40 – 50 €/tCO2 avoided), but the CO2 avoidance rate will be only about 15% of the specific CO2 emissions. For the long term future, although there are large uncertainties, advanced CO2 capture technologies do not seem to have significant economic advantages over conventional technologies. The results also indicate that in a carbon-constrained society, when considering new plants, smelting reduction technologies such as the COREX process, may become a strong competitor to conventional blast furnace based steel making process when equipped with CO2 capture.
    [Show full text]
  • CO2 Capture in the Steel Industry Review of the Current State of Art
    CO2 Capture in the Steel Industry Review of the Current State of Art Stanley Santos IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme Cheltenham, UK Industry CCS Workshop Vienna, Austria 28th April 2014 IEAGHG Activities on CCS for the Iron & Steel Industry • Reports • Total Cost of the Study: • 2013-04 – “Understanding the Economics of ~ £ 440,000 • IEA GHG Contribution: Deploying CO2 Capture Technologies in an ~ £ 120,000 Integrated Steel Mill” • 2013-TR3 – “Overview of the Current State and Development CO2 Capture Technologies in the Ironmaking Process” • Stakeholders Engagement • 1st Workshop (Nov. 2011) Dusseldorf, Germany in collaboration with VDeH, Swerea MEFOS • 2nd Workshop (Nov. 2013) Tokyo, Japan in collaboration with IETS, World Steel, Swerea MEFOS 2 Presentation Overview • Brief Introduction • Global Steel Industry • Overview to the Steel Production • Capture of CO2 from Blast Furnace Gas • ULCOS Programme – Oxygen Blown BF with TGR • COURSE50 Programme – Chemical Absorption & Physical Adsorption • POSCO / RIST Programme – Chemical Absorption • Capture of CO2 from Alternative Ironmaking Process • Direct Reduction Ironmaking o MIDREX, ENERGIRON (HYL), ULCORED • Smelting Reduction Ironmaking o COREX, FINEX, HISARNA • Summary / Concluding Remarks 3 World Crude Steel Production (Data and Figure from World Steel) • Total Crude Steel Production has reached 1.545 Billion Tonnes of crude steel in 2012. • As compared to 2002 (905.2 million tonnes), crude steel production has increased by ~70%. • Global CO2 Emissions from the steel industry is roughly
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Energy-Efficiency and Carbon Dioxide Emissions-Reduction Technologies for the Iron and Steel Industry
    LBNL-6106E ERNEST ORLANDO LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY Emerging Energy-efficiency and Carbon Dioxide Emissions-reduction Technologies for the Iron and Steel Industry Ali Hasanbeigi, Lynn Price China Energy Group Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Department Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Marlene Arens Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI) January 2013 This work was supported by the China Sustainable Energy Program of the Energy Foundation and Dow Chemical Company (through a charitable contribution) through the Department of Energy under contract No.DE- AC02-05CH11231. i Disclaimer This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is an equal opportunity employer.
    [Show full text]
  • HISARNA with CCS Date of Factsheet 7-9-2020 Author Kira West Sector Industry: Iron and Steel
    TECHNOLOGY FACTSHEET HISARNA WITH CCS Date of factsheet 7-9-2020 Author Kira West Sector Industry: Iron and steel ETS / Non-ETS ETS Type of Technology CCS Description HIsarna is an ironmaking technology based on a smelting reduction process, which reduces energy use and CO2 emissions by eliminating several pre-processing steps which are applied in the conventional primary steelmaking process. The name is based on a mix of "Hismelt" (the name of the melting vessel) and "Isarna" (the ancient celtic word for iron). Smelting reduction combines elements of the smelting process (extraction of metal from its ore using heat and a reductant) and direct reduction. Iron ore is input without pelletizing or sintering, and is smelted into liquid pig iron within the same reactor. At the top of the reactor (called the CCF cyclone), iron ore is injected directly as a powder. The temperature is increased by the addition of oxygen which reacts with carbon monoxide. The turbulent environment in the cyclone allows greater contact time between the hot gases and the iron ore. This leads to melting and partial reduction of iron ore in the cyclone, typically in the range of 10-20% (Junjie, 2018). The molten and partially reduced iron ore then falls to the bottom of the vessel (the smelting bath) and comes into contact with coal powder which is injected at the bottom of the reactor. The reaction of carbon from the powder coal with the molten iron ore completes the reduction and creates liquid iron (and CO2 emissions). The resulting CO2 emissions are a relatively pure stream (~85-95% CO2), which facilitates capture.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Current State and Development of CO2 Capture Technologies in Ironmaking Process
    OVERVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATE AND DEVELOPMENT OF CO2 CAPTURE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE IRONMAKING PROCESS Report: 2013/TR3 April 2013 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY The International Energy Agency (IEA) was established in 1974 within the framework of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to implement an international energy programme. The IEA fosters co-operation amongst its 28 member countries and the European Commission, and with the other countries, in order to increase energy security by improved efficiency of energy use, development of alternative energy sources and research, development and demonstration on matters of energy supply and use. This is achieved through a series of collaborative activities, organised under more than 40 Implementing Agreements. These agreements cover more than 200 individual items of research, development and demonstration. IEAGHG is one of these Implementing Agreements. DISCLAIMER The views and opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the IEAGHG, its members, the International Energy Agency, the organisations listed below, nor any employee or persons acting on behalf of any of them. In addition, none of these make any warranty, express or implied, assumes any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product of process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights, including any parties intellectual property rights. Reference herein to any commercial product, process, service or trade name, trade mark or manufacturer does not necessarily constitute or imply any endorsement, recommendation or any favouring of such products. COPYRIGHT Copyright © IEA Environmental Projects Ltd. (IEAGHG) 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Corex® Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Smelting Reduction
    COREX® EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY SMELTING REDUCTION primetals.com ECONOMICALLY AND ECOLOGICALLY HOT ADVANTAGES OF COREX METAL PRODUCTION • Product quality – hot metal quality suitable for all steel applications • Economic benefit – low investment and operational costs due to the elimination of coking and sinter plants • Ecologic benefit – lowest process-related emission rates YOUR CHALLENGE OUR SOLUTION • Resource preserving – use of The conventional blast furnace route Corex is besides FINEX® the only a wide variety of iron ores and is too costly and energy-intensive reliable alternative to the conventional especially non-coking coals to keep pace with dynamic market blast furnace route. It frees from changes, where even short- and the need to invest in the erection, • Beneficial by-products – medium-term fluctuations show their operation and maintenance of generation of a highly valuable dramatic impact on iron production. coking and sinter plants because export gas for various purposes The need to use coke and sinter makes these additional facilities are not (electric power generation, it much more difficult to fulfill ever needed at all. Because it combines DRI production, or natural gas stricter environmental regulations and two decisive advantages, adaptable substitution) achieve economical competitiveness energy management/production and based on long-term sustainable outstanding ecological compatibility, growth. Rising energy demand, Corex provides you with the key continuous price increases for natural technology for producing hot metal gas and raw materials, and steadily in an economically and ecologically decreasing quality of iron ore due sustainable manner. The ability to use to the global resource depletion are a wider spectrum of raw materials with formidable challenges today.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Energy Consumption and CO2 Emission for Three Steel Production Routes—Integrated Steel Plant Equipped with Blast Furnace, Oxygen Blast Furnace Or COREX
    metals Article Comparison of Energy Consumption and CO2 Emission for Three Steel Production Routes—Integrated Steel Plant Equipped with Blast Furnace, Oxygen Blast Furnace or COREX Jiayuan Song 1, Zeyi Jiang 1,*, Cheng Bao 1 and Anjun Xu 2 1 School of Energy and Environmental Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China; [email protected] (J.S.); [email protected] (C.B.) 2 School of Metallurgical and Ecological Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-6233-2741; Fax: +86-10-6233-2741 Received: 31 December 2018; Accepted: 20 March 2019; Published: 21 March 2019 Abstract: High CO2 emissions and energy consumption have greatly restricted the development of China’s iron and steel industry. Two alternative ironmaking processes, top gas recycling-oxygen blast ® furnace (TGR-OBF) and COREX , can reduce CO2 emissions and coking coal consumption in the steel industry when compared with a conventional blast furnace (BF). To obtain parameters on the material flow of these processes, two static process models for TGR-OBF and COREX were established. Combining the operating data from the Jingtang steel plant with established static process models, this research presents a detailed analysis of the material flows, metallurgical gas generation and consumption, electricity consumption and generation, comprehensive energy consumption, and CO2 emissions of three integrated steel plants (ISP) equipped with the BF, TGR-OBF, and COREX, respectively. The results indicated that the energy consumption of an ISP with the TGR-OBF was 16% and 16.5% lower than that of a conventional ISP and an ISP with the COREX.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes on Iron Making Subject Code: Pcmt 4307
    LECTURE NOTES ON IRON MAKING SUBJECT CODE: PCMT 4307 Compiled by Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sahoo Assistant Professor Metallurgical & Materials Engineering Department Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Sarang AND Mr.Jayanta Kumar Sahoo Assistant Professor MME.Dept. IGIT Sarang INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, SARANG (An Autonomous Institute of Govt. of Odisha) Subject Code PCMT 4307 Branch: Metallurgical and Materials Engineering Semester: 5th Semester B.Tech Compiled by: Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sahoo Mr. Jayanta Kumar Sahoo DEPARTMENT OF METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, SARANG Disclaimer: This document does not claim any originality and cannot be used as a substitute for prescribed textbooks. The information presented here is merely a collection by the committee faculty members for their respective teaching assignments as an additional tool for the teaching-learning process. Various sources as mentioned at the reference of the document as well as freely available material from internet were consulted for preparing this document. The ownership of the information lies with the respective authors or institutions. Further, this document is not intended to be used for commercial purpose and the committee faculty members are not accountable for any issues, legal or otherwise, arising out of use of this document. The committee faculty members make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this document and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose PCMT4307 Iron Making 3-0-0 Credits 3 Objectives of the course 1. This course introduces the principles and practices of iron making.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 BACKGROUND “The Value of Iron Ores and Agglomerates Is Determined by the Cost of Converting It to a Desired Product
    DETERMINATION OF FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DEGREE OF REDUCTION DISINTEGRATION IN NORTHERN CAPE LUMP ORE AND THE ROLE OF GANGUE MINERALS IN THE PROPAGATION OF CRACKS 1 BACKGROUND “The value of iron ores and agglomerates is determined by the cost of converting it to a desired product. This includes the coke consumption in the blast furnace, the throughput which can be attained, the proportion of charge which leaves the blast furnace in the form of flue dust and the cost of dephosphorization and desulphurization.”i New ironmaking processes have been extensively explored with a view to saving resources and energy, as well as reducing environmental pollution. Since the turn of the previous century, many efforts have been made to find an economical alternative to the well established integrated rout of blast furnace ironmaking followed by the oxygen steelmaking route. Although various direct reduction processes were developed, there was no alternative method for production of hot metal. In 1970s, however, a process for the production of liquid iron without using coke – or using low-grade coke and coal – was patented. The possibility that a smelting-reduction process could be based on the use of coal alone was first investigated by Korf Stahl in 1977.ii This was the origin of the Corex Process. In the next section, the blast furnace and Corex processes are discussed. The main difference between the Corex and the blast furnace are that the Corex uses coal rather than coke, cold oxygen rather than heated blast air and that the Corex separates the melting and solid-state reduction processes between two different reactors.
    [Show full text]