Heat Transfer Ladle Steel
Heat Transfer Ladle Steel
Heat Transfer Ladle Steel
SCANDINAVIAN
JOURNAL OF METALLURGY
ISSN 0371-0459
Review Article
Introduction
The word ladle has been used in the English language since the 12th century to denote a deep-bowled, long-handled spoon designed to convey liquids,
or a resembling instrument [1]. Although this type of
device has been present in metallurgical operations
since the discovery of iron, functioning as a means of
transporting molten metal in the casting procedure, it
is only recently that attention has turned towards the
loss of heat from the molten contents of the ladle. This
is due to the rapid development of contemporary
steelmaking and new ladle designs.
The purpose of this paper is to review some of the
literature dealing with heat transfer in steelmaking
ladle refractories and mathematical models thereof.
The reviewed works are classified into experimentallyand theoretically-focused investigations. Related
topics, e.g., measurement and modeling of steel temperature in the ladle or tundish and temperature control in casting, are included. Most contributions to the
field are conference papers and plant-specific studies,
although there are a small number of refereed journal
papers and some scientific theses and course material.
In most steelmaking facilities, the temperature evolution of the heat during casting is determined by the
tapping temperature of the converter. Therefore, in or* e-mail: tfredman/abo.fi
232
233
Fredman
234
Reviewed investigations
Samways & Dancy [17] measured steel temperature
during normal operation of a 285 t open hearth and
an 84 t basic oxygen furnace in an ingot casting process. These measurements were done with Pt-Pt 10%
Rh thermocouples, calibrated against the melting
point of pure iron. Tap temperatures were recorded
within 1 min of tap and teeming (casting) temperatures were taken by immersing a silica sheath slowly
into the teeming stream as close to the nozzle as possible. Ladle temperatures were monitored with a contact chromel-alumel thermocouple to give an indication of ladle brick temperature. Ladle additions,
tapping, holding and teeming times were also recorded in an effort to formulate a statistical model for
the overall drop in steel temperature between tapping
and teeming. The tapping time and temperature, steel
235
Fredman
236
237
Fredman
238
fore the model could become reliable enough for online operation.
Thermal behavior of the refractories of the 300 t
andalusite-schamotte ladles in the Rheinhausen
works of Krupp Stahl AG was studied by Hoppmann
et al. [9]. The usual observation method, with thermocouple measurements over a campaign consisting of
several ladle cycles, was employed. The safety lining
and shell reached quasi steady state in four ladle
cycles after a newly lined ladle was taken from preheating into operation. As the working lining wore
down toward the end of the campaign, the heat loss
from the steel increased. Shell temperature never exceeded 250C when ladle lids were used periodically
during waiting times. Theoretical results for the refractory thermal state prior to tapping were obtained
by solution of the dynamic heat conduction equation.
Radiation losses from the slag surface of the steel were
calculated and partial solidification of the slag as well
as re-melting on stirring of the heat were considered.
The greatest discrepancy between theoretical estimates and measurements was observed at the thermocouple positions in the vicinity of the hot face, i.e.,
where the dynamics are most important, and the error
was estimated to be equivalent to a temperature difference in the steel of 0.8C. For preheating, it was
found that only 23% of the input energy to the gas
burner increased the energy content of the refractory,
0.3% was stored in the ladle lid, 6% was conducted
through the refractory walls and 70.5% was lost with
the combustion exhaust gases. Thermal behavior of
the andalusite-lined ladles was compared with the results from a similar study of 100 t dolomite lined
ladles. In a 60 min waiting period, when the steel in
the larger ladle cooled 72C (0.65C/min), the steel cooled 95C (0.85C/min) in the smaller one.
Christensen [23] assessed heat losses for two different ladle configurations, a tapping ladle lined with
carbon paste and fireclay brick and one lined solely
with fireclay brick. The distribution of the heat loss to
the surroundings between the slag surface (and cover
when in use), ladle bottom and sidewall is outlined
for these two systems, as well as losses at tapping,
refining, pouring and while the ladles stood empty.
Here, heat radiating from the top of the ladle
amounted to most of the overall heat loss. The temperature drop of the molten metal arising from conduction to the lining is not indicated. Only shell temperatures were measured and, from these, experimental correlations yielded estimates of the heat flux to
the ambient. Radiation losses were studied using an
interesting measurement setup consisting of a small
copper plate water-cooled on one side. Maintaining
state could be determined. Formally, this can be explained by considering the boundary condition at the
hot face; the heat flux is proportional to the surface
temperature. Hence, the temperature and its time derivative determine the heat flux and its rate of change,
characterizing the thermal state of the dynamic part
of the lining. The internal profiles of the refractory
were simulated for a set of disjoint classes made up
of different temperature and time derivative values
for the hot face. The simulations were verified by the
thermocouple measurements. For each class, an empirical model for the steel temperature drop was
formed on the basis of campaign data.
The main topic of Grip [19] is radiation pyrometer
measurement of ladle hot face temperature on transfer
from continuous casting and during preheating. Brief
summaries are also given of thermal stratification
studies with thermocouple lance, impact of gas stirring on stratification, development of a thermal model
for molten steel in the ladle cycle and preheat burner
control. Interpretation of measurement data was similar to [15] and the main objective was to control converter tapping temperature so as to minimize scrap
cooling and deviation from aim casting temperature.
The positions of the pyrometers were at the sanding
station in ladle maintenance, at the ladle track before
the converter and at the ladle burners. Hot face physical properties could vary substantially within the
same ladle. This was due to slag residue, sculls, wear,
refractory cracks etc., and could give a dispersion of
up to 50C in the measurements. The sanding procedure resulted in sand clouds interfering optically
with pyrometer operation, which could be avoided by
extending the period of measurement beyond the
sanding time and retaining the maximum temperature value. Problems with pyrometer overheating at
the ladle burners also occurred. Ladle sculling was estimated by monitoring the tare weights of the ladles.
However, inconsistent results were obtained due to
calibration differences between the overhead cranes.
It was decided to use the same overhead crane every
time when weighing a specific ladle, if possible.
Ettwig [18] discusses non-contact measurement of
temperatures on hot surfaces using a polarization pyrometer for wavelengths shorter than 700 nm (visible
light lies between 390 nm and 770 nm). Temperature
measurement with this method is possible to an accuracy of 10 K above 800 K. The greatest error source is
background (reflected) radiation from the examined
surface. There are a number of methods to suppress
the reflected radiation, such as water cooled deflection
devices or polarization of the measurement beam.
Water cooling has some drawbacks: energy is needed
239
Fredman
ized component goes through a minimum at an incidence angle (measured from the surface normal vector) of approximately 1.2 rad. This result of Ettwig
[18] will be derived here by considering the Maxwell
equations for the electromagnetic field, [24], from
which the reflectances for the polarization components of the incident radiation on the surface can be
obtained. Expressed as functions of incident and
transmitted angles (qi, qt), real (nR) and imaginary (nI)
parts of the index of refraction (n), it is seen that
R (qi, qt)
(1)
(2)
(3)
to sustain the cooling, measurement errors are introduced due to cooling of the studied surface, reflection from the water cooling equipment onto the surface and lower reliability of the measurement. For reflection and absorption of incident radiation at a metallic surface, the reflectances for the parallelly and
perpendicularly polarized components behave differently. In fact, the reflectance of the parallelly polar-
240
(4)
Samways [17]
Hlinka [20]
Measurements
thermocouples
hot face
Ameling [8]
lining
Kitamura [10]
Saunders [16]
lining
lining
Rieche [14]
lining
Minion [11]
lining
Perkins [12]
lining
Hoppmann [9]
lining
Christensen [23]
shell
Petegnief [13]
lining
Rutqvist [15]
Grip [19]
lining
Ettwig [18]
pyrometer
Features
steel temp.
special
techniques
supporting
theor. model
remark
yes
phys. mod.,
scale-up
calc. of tap temp.,
from meas.
hot face
lining
thermal state
thermal
steady state
yes
ladle,
tundish
phys. mod.,
tracer exp.
ladle,
tundish
hot face
hot face
ladle
general
hot surface
fluid-flow
study
radiation loss
measurement
coupled heat
mass transfer
monitor ladle
tare weight
measurement
focusing
aid design,
preheat eval.
thermal state,
scheduling
lining
thermal state
1-D thermal,
flow field
optics
aid decisionmaking
steel temp.
model
minimize
meas. errors
241
Fredman
Reviewed investigations
Paschkis [26] and Paschkis & Hlinka [27] investigated
temperature drop of steel in ladles between tapping
and pouring with the simulation model The Heat
and Mass Flow Analyzer implemented on an analog
computer. Two ladle sizes, of capacities roughly
equivalent to 70 kg and 7300 kg with thicknesses of
the firebrick lining of 2.5 or 7.5 cm and 15 or 25 cm,
respectively, were investigated. In the first study [26],
the metal in the ladle was assumed completely stagnant and only conduction of heat occurred in the bulk.
In the second [27], the molten steel was perfectly
mixed. It is argued that these two constitute limiting
cases for the temperature drop of the steel as the former gives an underestimate and the latter an overestimate of the cooling of the steel. For the completely
stagnant model case, part of the steel solidifies on the
hot face of the ladle, releasing its heat of fusion to the
refractory. This would imply that if ladle sculling
takes place, it is favorable to wait longer before casting, a conclusion that would be deemed absurd in any
steel shop. Consequently, the limit model results have
242
hibited by a semi-infinite solid with prescribed surface temperature equal to one and uniform initial temperature equal to zero:
T(x,t)
exp (h2) dh ,
(5)
x/(2at
where the thermal diffusivity, a k/rcp, was introduced. The integral in (5) is customarily termed the
complementary error function at the position indicated
by the lower integration limit. Taking the spatial derivative to calculate the heat flux across the hot face,
yields
q(x0,t) k
T(x,t)
x
x x0
p at
exp
x20
.
4at
(6)
dTsteel (t)
q(x0,t)S0Qconv 0 ,
dt
(7)
(8)
This equation, with empirically determined coefficients A, B, has frequently been used in the industry
for statistical modeling of temperature drop of steel
in the ladle cycle, and is occasionally referred to as the
Yngve Sundberg equation.
Alberny & Leclercq [37] introduced the difference
between the mean steel temperature and that of the
pouring stream exiting the ladle in order to describe
stratification. Consideration of the convection currents
in the ladle in combination with tests gave an estimate
of the rate of decrease of the stratification temperature
difference. A number of simulations were carried out
with the model to set guidelines for good temperature
control. Here, the importance of preheating and suppressing stratification was illustrated.
Chone & Teyssier [38] outline a mathematical
model for ladle heat loss estimation developed at IRSID, Maizieres-les-Metz in France. The main objective
of the model is to aid evaluation of lining design alternatives and changes to practice, such as adding insulation layers to the refractory or the effect of prolonged holding times between consecutive heats. The
core of the model is the energy balance equation for
243
Fredman
(9)
(10)
equations were solved numerically by the Euler difference scheme. Two ladle designs with no stirring
and different slag thickness were compared, one had
the conventional cylindrical shape and the other had
a conical upper section, making the ladle narrower at
the lid than in the middle. The design alternatives did
not differ much in performance whereas a thicker slag
layer could reduce temperature drop by more than
10C for an 80 t ladle. On the other hand, when stirring with argon or nitrogen, use of a lid may be impossible, making the difference in thermal performance more significant. It was found that the largest
reduction of temperature drop is obtained with conical ladle head in combination with a lid, when possible. The steel temperature drop as a function of time
for the conventional and conical ladle heads are depicted in Fig. 7, from which a final difference of over
10C in favor of the conical form can be observed. In
comparison with a conventional ladle, the conical concept reduced heat loss from the steel by 16%. Especially with prolonged gas stirring and ladles of
smaller capacity, the conical ladle head was found
beneficial for thermal control.
In [32] Pfeifer et al. combined the model in [31]
with thermal models for the tapping stream, alloying
additions and transient conduction through the sidewall and bottom of the ladle in order to estimate casting stream temperature. The thermal model of the
tapping stream consists of an energy balance equation
for an infinitesimal length element of the stream, together with simple expressions for the average mass
flow and velocity of the steel exiting the ladle. Irregu-
Tsteel(t)
244
245
Fredman
246
area on the bottom and sidewall. The slab concept involves multiple layers, consisting of all refractory material layers, the ladle shell and the liquid steel. On
teeming, the ladle is drained layer by layer from the
bottom. This is modeled by reducing the thermal
diffusivity of the slab according to a scheme developed from experiments. If desired, stratification in
the liquid steel can be considered for by altering the
conductivity of the corresponding liquid steel layer
of the slab. Material properties were chosen according
to the various events in the ladle cycle. For instance,
tapping was simulated by introducing real coefficient
values in place of the infinite thermal conductivity
and zero specific heat used for the empty ladle. On
surfaces exposed to the ambient, the heat transfer coefficient included both radiation and convection, the
emissivity was 0.8 throughout and a view factor of
unity was used for the ladle shell and cover/slag surface. Integration of elemental view factors for the inside of the empty ladle yielded the average 0.5. In
each heat, the model is updated with the liquidus and
solidus temperatures, from which sculling is estimated. For the slag, the heat conductivity was manipulated in order to simulate heat transport across
the slag layer. No heat of solidification is liberated to
the system on freezing of the upper slag layer. Refractory lining materials are handled using their commercial trade names and relevant temperature dependent
properties are imported from a data base incorporated
into the model. The same applies to ladle geometry,
referenced through plant names. Cover use can also
be modeled and the initial temperature profile of the
cover can be saved for future use. A number of events
in the ladle cycle can be simulated after initialization
of the temperature field, including preheat/reconditioning, tapping with possible additions (considered
through their entalphies), stirring, teeming and slag
removal. Stirring is considered by increasing the internodal thermal diffusivity within the steel as a function of stirring time and intensity. The model was
used to investigate when quasi steady state is reached
after introduction of a cold ladle into the cycle and
what preheat level this state corresponds to. The outcome was that three cycles were sufficient to establish
steady conditions in most of the lining and that the
same state would be reached with 6 h of preheat with
a 980C gas flame. In addition, the benefits of slag versus ladle cover use were studied and company policy
was changed to use of both ladle covers and surface
insulation to improve temperature control.
Tomazin et al. [25] investigated alternative ladle refractories and cycle practice. In two plants of LTV
Steel in Aliquippa, PA and East Chicago, IN, ingot
casting processes were revamped to continuous casting. As a result, the conventional firebrick ladle
linings could not withstand the higher temperatures,
more aggressive slags, ladle metallurgy and prolonged holding times. Steel cleanliness and desulphurization also suffered when firebrick was in use.
Thus, it was decided to phase out the firebrick linings
in favor of 70% Al2O3 linings with MgO slag lines for
both plants. Considering the higher thermal conductivity and specific heat as compared with firebrick, it
was necessary to study the thermal behavior of the
ladle and its impact on temperature control. Preheating facilities were installed at both works. One
ladle at Aliquippa was monitored during preheating
and cycle with 30 thermocouples, yielding data for the
development of a preheating practice and tuning of a
mathematical model. The mathematical model was a
numerical solution of the heat conduction through the
ladle wall based on an explicit finite difference procedure with temperature dependent refractory thermal properties. Steel temperature was assumed uniform throughout the melt and axial heat transfer in
the refractory was disregarded. Radial temperature
profiles were calculated at a number of heights in the
wall in order to consider the steel surface position at
each point of the ladle cycle. The bottom and slag
layer temperature variations were assumed to be
purely axial. Above the steel surface, view factors for
all surfaces were calculated for the radiative heat
transfer. The model was also used to evaluate measurement variables for observation of the heat content.
Apart from hot and cold face temperatures, the waiting time between heats was important for determining required corrections at tapping. Covers were
judged most important during casting and empty
waiting time, when the radiative heat loss is most significant. In some simulations worn ladles, when moderately preheated from cold, actually reduced heat
loss due to smaller heat storage. However, a worn
ladle in cycle (at thermal quasi steady state) had
larger heat loss than a freshly lined one.
Hoppmann et al. [41] present a process model for
calculation of the converter tapping temperature
when considering estimated heat losses in the ladle
and tundish as well as initial thermal state of the vessels and thermal efficiency of the previous heat.
Model input can be divided into two categories; the
precharge and the postcharge data. As precharge variables were considered the waiting and preheat times
before tapping, lid use, sculling extent and duration
of the previous heat as well as the age of the lining
(from which the remaining thickness was estimated).
Postcharge input consisted of the planned stirring
a exp (b t),
i
(11)
dt
c exp (b t) ,
i
(12)
247
Fredman
b [exp (b t)1] .
ci
(13)
248
249
Fredman
250
Fig. 10. Temperature profiles in the ladle lining for different preheating
and empty times. By Austin et al. [28]. Courtesy of the Iron & Steel
Society.
251
Fredman
Fig. 11. Ladle thermal tracking model display of Zoryk & Reid [48].
Courtesy of the Iron & Steel Society.
Fig. 12. Display for the steel temperature flight path model of Zoryk &
Reid [48]. Courtesy of the Iron & Steel Society.
252
proach is that it is not necessary to know the temperature profile in the ladle refractory.
Zoryk & Reid [48] describe an integrated system
for on-line estimation of liquid steel temperature in
the ladle and tundish, developed at the Scunthorpe
Works of British Steel plc. The system consists of two
separate models, one for uninterrupted calculation of
refractory lining temperatures for all operational
ladles and one for calculation and visualization of
liquid steel temperature in the ladle and tundish (the
temperature flight path). The former is called The
Ladle Thermal Tracking Model and the latter The Flight
Path Model. An example display of the Ladle Thermal
Tracking Model is depicted in Fig. 11 and an example
of the Flight Path Model display in Fig. 12. Both
models are based on finite difference methods to solve
the one-dimensional heat conduction equation and
liquid steel energy balance, respectively. Temperature
profiles in the lining are computed at two positions,
at the center of the ladle bottom and halfway up the
ladle wall. Boundary conditions for the lining temperature profile model during periods of cooling, drying, preheating and casting were studied by thermocouple monitoring of 3 different depths within the lining at the bottom and in the sidewall. The performance of the simulations with regard to matching measured thermocouple temperatures is demonstrated,
showing an average difference between measured
and calculated temperatures of approximately 25C.
In the calculation of the steel temperature trajectory,
the heat balance includes conduction to refractories,
convection and radiation from lining and slag surface,
tapping and teeming losses as well as chilling due to
alloying. When using the ladle arc furnace, the model
is fed with data on power inputs, heating times and
induction stirring.
The ladle thermal tracking model calculates the
thermal states of all ladles in use, considering the current status of the ladle, i.e., cooling, preheating, drying or in cycle. For the two profile positions, refractory types and thicknesses are kept in a data base and
refractory wear is modeled with an average wear rate
obtained from the current campaign lining life and
inspections. Model output is available in a variety of
ways, as history of ladle use in the plant, as temperature profiles for a specific ladle and as a table ranking
the operational ladles with respect to thermal state.
Additional features are prediction of thermal state for
a number of ladles based on planned process routes,
access to data bases containing ladle fleet parameters
and initialization of thermal state.
The flight path calculations start right after tapping, an initial steel temperature trajectory prediction
convection coefficient,
[h]W/(m2K)
view factor, ( )
gas temperature (C)
Ladle cooling
Ladle preheating
wall
bottom
12.6
8.4
0.12
0.06
12.0
0.0
1900
253
Fredman
254
Model structure
Features
independent
variables, solution
method
steel temp.
included
tundish
included
Paschkis [26]
(,t)
no
Paschkis [27]
(,t)
type of
measurement
Alberny [37]
(r,t),FDE
yes, stagnant
melt
yes, stirred
melt
stirred
Chone [38]
(r,t)
stirred
yes, steel
temperature
no
Omotani [39]
(r,t)
stirred
no
Pfeifer [31]
(r,t),FDE
stirred
no
Pfeifer [32]
(r,t),FDE
no
lining
Pfeifer [40]
(r,t)
yes,also
tap stream
stirred
no
lining
Morrow [30]
(r,t),FDE
stirred
no
lining
Hlinka [29]
(r,t),FDE
no
Tomazin [25]
(r,t),FDE
variable
stirring
yes
lining
Hoppmann [41]
(,t)
yes
yes
Hoppmann [35]
(,t)
yes
no
Chapellier [42]
(,t)
yes
no
Koo [43]
(,t)
no
lining
Gaston [44]
(r,t)
yes,
stratified
yes
yes
steel
temperature
Shklyar [45]
(r,t)
yes
no
Mucciardi [46]
(r,t),FDE
no
no
Saha [33]
(r,t),FDE
no
no
lining
Austin [28]
(r,z,t),ADI
yes
no
lining
Gaston [47]
(r,t)
no
yes
lining
steel temp.
scheduling
data
lining, hot
face, steel temp.
lining
no
Zoryk [48]
(r,t),FDE
yes, also
tap stream
yes
Sistilli [49]
(,)
no
no
Olika [36]
(r,t)
yes
no
(r,t),FDE
yes
yes
Grip [50]
(r,t)
yes
no
Fredman [51]
(r,t)
no
no
Fredman [52]
(r,z,t),FEM
yes
no
Barber [34]
steel
temperature
steel
temperature
steel
temperature
lining,
steel temp.
lining,
steel temp.
lining
steel temp.
purpose
of model
remark
estimate steel
temp. drop
estimate steel
temp. drop
improve
temp. control
aid design,
decisions
decision
support
design of
ladle head
improve
temp. control
simulate
preheating
lining
design
decision
support
design,
therm. practice
calc. converter
tap. temp.
calc. casting
temperature
calc. converter
tap. temp.
study eff.
of stirring
estim. strat.
in tundish
simulate
preheating
lining
design
simulate
preheating
improve
temp. control
est. tapping
temp. drop
on-line est. of
steel temp. in
ladle, tundish
analyze
scheduling
calc. casting
temperature
aid redesign
of ladle fleet
develop simple
temp. models
rapid est. of
th. state
aid design,
decisions
analog comp.
implementation
analog comp.
implementation
stratification
considered
whole cycle
considered
steel heat
balance
stirring,
slag th. inv.
mod. tuning
described
preh. strat.
investigated
variable
therm. props.
whole cycle
considered
variable
therm. props
part. statist.
model
part. analyt.
model
statistical
model
CFD-calc. of
stirring
steel heat
balance
steel heat
balance
used avail.
software
studied
recuperative preh.
used adaptive
time step
ladle load
linear in t
th. state of
ladle fleet
statistical
investigation
part. statist.
model
inv. various
heat losses
studied regularity,
preheating
rapid
computation
dynamics after
preheating
255
Fredman
256
ture in the tundish. Assumptions pertaining to the degree of agitation in the steel are indicated for some
works. For the set of independent variables, (r, z, t)
denotes a two-dimensional, dynamic model where r
is the radial coordinate, z is the height coordinate and
t is time. When the height is omitted, the model is
essentially one-dimensional, although temperature
profiles may have been computed both at several positions on the ladle sidewall as well as on the bottom.
In cases where all of the variables have been omitted
it was not possible to establish the exact structure of
the model on basis of the text. The same applies to
the solution method used. Where indicated, the abbreviations FDE, FEM and ADI have been used for
finite difference equations, finite element method and
alternating direction implicit, respectively. These are
explained in the numerical mathematics literature, see
[53]. As features are considered supporting measurements (in some cases used for validation and tuning
of the model) as well as the purpose of the model and
special methods or details indicated under remark.
From Table 3, it is seen that the objectives of the
investigations have been quite varying. Nevertheless,
the basis of the works is in many cases a one-dimensional model for the temperature profile across the lining of the ladle and/or the tundish. In most cases, the
straightforward and simple finite difference scheme
was chosen for a method of solution. Only a few
models, [28] and [52], were 2-dimensional and used
special solution methods. Austin et al. [28] used the
ADI-method, based on finite differences, and Fredman et al. [52] used FEM. One work, [48], was primarily concerned with on-line simulation. Thus, in most
cases, except [48] and [51], the computation time was
probably not critical for the choice of model. It also
appears that the one-dimensional approach has become a commonly accepted method among the
workers in the field. Another reason for its popularity
is perhaps the increased complexity in boundary conditions for two-dimensional models, resulting in more
parameters open to assumption and more difficult
tuning of the model. A fact, however, is that none of
the reviewed one-dimensional studies address the
issue of axial (in the z-direction) heat transfer in the
lining quantitatively. On the other hand, for the molten steel, thermal uniformity is a reasonable assumption in light of the measurements and CFD (computational fluid dynamics) studies included in a number
of the reviewed works. As was noted in the summary
of the experimental investigations, the slight thermal
stratification occurring in the ladle evens out the temperature of the steel exiting the tundish. Hence, assuming the melt to be perfectly stirred causes the heat
Conclusions
A literature review dealing with topics related to
monitoring and modeling the heat loss from ladles in
steel production has been presented. A wide range of
works were covered, including issues from process
scheduling in continuous casting to optics and physical modeling. Scheduling and process control have a
direct impact on the heat loss from the steel-ladle system and can be combined with design of process
equipment to reduce heat loss. Studying these systems experimentally is fundamental not only for
understanding the involved mechanisms of heat and
mass transfer but also for formulation of theoretical
models describing the thermal state of the system. In
the part dealing with theoretical modeling, focus has
not been as strongly on results in the form of agreement with measurements as on model structure and
central ideas implemented in the model formulation.
The reason was that comparison of different models
describing different plants and validated against experimental data obtained under different circumstances was difficult. Looking back at the reviewed
works awakes some thoughts on modeling this type
of system. Design evaluation and on-line simulation
seem so require completely different model structures
in order to address key issues, such as model realism
and computation speed. Therefore, a more complex,
Acknowledgements
Permissions to reproduce previously published figures, granted by The Association of Iron and Steel
Engineers, The Iron & Steel Society and The Institute of Materials are gratefully acknowledged. The
author also wishes to express his gratitude for the
financial support received from Liikesivistysrahasto,
Finland.
References
1. Mish FC. Websters 9th New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam-Webster Inc., Springfield, Mass. USA, 1988.
2. Fruehan R. Iron & Steelmaker 1996: July: 2533.
3. Kivela E, Sipola M. Teraksen lampotilahallinta senkkakasittelyjen ja jatkuvavalun aikana. Technical course print, in Finnish, Jun. 1994. Taydennyskoulutuskurssi Tulenkestavat Terasteollisuudessa, PohTo, Oulu Finland.
4. Sillanpaa M. Model for predicting the evolution of steel temperature in a continuous casting tundish on the basis of expert knowledge. Report 91-1, bo Akademi University, Heat
Engineering Laboratory, Biskopsgatan 8, FIN-20500 bo
Finland, 1991.
5. Cramb AW. Trends in caster operation, part 1. Iron & Steelmaker Sep. 1989: 45.
6. Cramb AW. Trends in caster operation, part 2. Iron & Steelmaker Oct. 1989: 56.
7. Cramb AW. Trends in caster operation, part 3. Iron & Steelmaker Nov. 1989: 4748.
8. Ameling D, Walden K, Wethkamp H. Stahl und Eisen 1981:
101 (15): 3539.
9. Hoppmann W, Pfeifer H, Fett FN, Fiege L. Stahl und Eisen
1987: 107 (1): 4954.
10. Kitamura M, Kawasaki S, Kawai S, Kawai K, Miyake K.
Transactions ISIJ 1983: 23: B165.
11. Minion RL, Leckie CF. Steel temperature control in the ladle
in a high productivity BOF shop. In: 5th International Iron
and Steel Congress. Proc the 69th Steelmaking Conf. Iron &
Steel Society 1986: 69: 335343.
12. Perkins A, Robertson T, Smith D. Fachberichte Huttenpraxis
Metallweiterverarbeitung 1986: 24 (8): 649656.
13. Petegnief J, Birat JP, Larrecq M, Bobrie M, Lemiere F, Fautrelle Y. Revue de Metallurgie CIT 1989: Jan: 4754.
257
Fredman
14. Rieche K, Kohn W, Wunnenberg K. Stahl und Eisen 1985:
105 (19): 4146.
15. Rutqvist S, Bergman D, Olika B. Scandinavian Journal of
Metallurgy 1990: 19: 146152.
16. Saunders LM. Preheating and controlled thermal cycling of
steel handling ladles. In: 66th Steelmaking Conf Proc. Iron &
Steel Society 1983: 66: 6975.
17. Samways NL, Dancy TE. Journal of Metals 1960: 331337.
18. Ettwig HH. Stahl und Eisen 1995: 115 (6): 6770.
19. Grip C-E. Measurement of ladle wall temperature to improve control of steel temperature in BOF plant. In: 77th
Steelmaking Conference Proceedings, Iron & Steel Society
1994: 77: March.
20. Hlinka JW, Miller TW. Temperature loss in liquid steel-refractory systems. Iron and Steel Engineer, Aug. 1970.
21. Widdowson R. Ironmaking and Steelmaking 1981: 8 (5): 195
200.
22. Cardouat JM. Revue de Metallurgie CIT 1986: 203210.
23. Christensen KW. Heat losses and scull formation in Fe-Si
and Si-metal ladles. In: Electric Furnace Conference Proc.
Iron & Steel Society 1988: 195199.
24. Hecht E. Optics, 4. Addison-Wesley, 2nd edition, 1987.
25. Tomazin CE, Upton EA, Wallis RA. The effect of ladle refractories and practices on steel temperature control. Iron &
Steelmaker 1986: Jun. 2834.
26. Paschkis V. Temperature drop in pouring ladles. AFS Transactions 1956: 64: 565576.
27. Paschkis V, Hlinka JW. Temperature drop in pouring ladles,
part two. AFS Transactions 1957: 65: 276281.
28. Austin PR, ORourke SL, He QL, Rex AJ. Thermal modelling
of steel ladles. In: 75th Steelmaking Conference Proceedings,
vol. 75, pp. 317323. Iron & Steel Society, 1992.
29. Hlinka JW, Cramb AW, Bright DH. A model for predicting
the thermal history of a ladle of steel. In: 68th Steelmaking
Conference Proc. Iron & Steel Society 1985: 68: 3546.
30. Morrow GD, Russell RO. Thermal modeling in melt shop
applications. Am Ceram Soc Bull 1985: 64 (7): 10071012.
31. Pfeifer H, Fett FN, Schafer H, Heinen K-H. Stahl und Eisen
1983: 103 (2526): 13211326.
32. Pfeifer H, Fett FN, Schafer H, Heinen K-H. Modell zur thermischen Simulation von Stahlgiesspfannen. Stahl und Eisen
1984: 104 (24): 12791287.
33. Saha JK, Ajmani SK, Chatterjee A. Ironmaking and Steelmaking 1991: 18 (6): 417422.
34. Barber B, Watson G, Bowden L. Ironmaking and Steelmaking 1994: 21: 150153.
35. Hoppmann W, Fett FN, Hsu G, Fiege L. Stahl und Eisen
1989: 109 (23): 11771186.
258