SYNOPSIS OF

MODELLING OF PULVERIZED COAL INJECTION

IN MODERN BLAST FURNACE

A Project Report

submitted by

ANKIT KUMAR

in partial fulfilment of the requirements

for the award of the degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS.
May 2019
Contents

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Blast furnace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1.1 Schematics of blast furnace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 Pulverized Coal Injection (PCI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.3 Modelling and Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.3.1 Mathematical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.3.2 Discretization methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.3.3 Accuracy of Numerical Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3.4 Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3.5 Multi-phase flow and Reaction Models . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 Literature Review, Objective and Scope 12

2.1 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.2 Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3 Summary of the work 15

3.1 Discretization of computational domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.2 Boundary Conditions and Initial Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.3 Incorporated equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

4 Results 20

4.1 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4.2 Iteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4.3 Contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

i
 4.4 Lagrangian particle tracking of coal particles . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.5 Model Error Uncertainties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.5.1 Understanding Modelling errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

5 Conclusion 29

ii
List of Figures

1 Schematic diagram of an iron blast furnace . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 Schematic of various injections and combustion . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3 a.) circumferential PCI system used in blast furnace b.) PC injectors,

with their components attached . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

4 Schematic of computational domain of injection system . . . . . . . 6

5 a.) Front b.) back view c.) cross-sectional view with dimensions of the
injection system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

6 Velocity profile of the turbulent boundary layer; velocity normal to the

wall as function of the distance normal to the wall. The solid line repre-
sents experimental data and the dashed line represents a mathematical
representation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

7 A Rosin-Rammier curve-fit (solid line) and the actual particle diameter

distribution (squares). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

8 Overview of the discretized computational domain . . . . . . . . . . 15

9 a.) Meshing distribution at symmetric cross-section b.) Wire-frame view

of the the domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

10 Statistics table for the meshed domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

11 Statistics table for the meshed domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

12 Governing equations for the gas and particle phases . . . . . . . . 19

13 Computational specifications of system for the simulation . . . . . . 20

14 Graphical specifications of system for the simulation . . . . . . . . 21

15 Residual vs Iterations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

16 a.) Gas velocity contour lines along the from inlet of blowhole till outlet
of tuyere b.) Volume fraction of coal volatiles . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

17 a.) Heat flux contour lines b.)Inner wall temperature contour . . . . 23

iii
18 a.) Coal particles velocity contour lines b.) Eddy viscosity contour lines 24

19 Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particles in- Lance . . . . . . . . 25

20 Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particles inside Tuyere . . . . . . 26

21 Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particle - when at Tuyere outlet . 27

0
1 Introduction

1.1 Blast furnace

Blast furnace is a large structure about 30 metres region high primarily a made up of
Steel. Inner surface is lined with refractory fire bricks that can withstand temperatures
up to 2000 degree Celsius. The furnace get its name from the method that is used to
heat it. Preheated air at about 1000 degree Celsius along with pulverized coal is injected
through nozzles near its base.

1.1.1 Schematics of blast furnace

Blast furnace is a vertical shaft like structure. It has circular cross section. It has five
integral parts. They are as:

1. Hearth -a crucible shape structure which is present at the bottom of the furnace;

2. Stack- a vertical shaft that extends from stock line to mantle level;

3. Belly - the cylindrical portion below the stack;

4. Bosh - an intermediate zone between hearth and the belly;

5. Tuyeres - a series of pipes located around circumference through which hot air
blast along with pulverized coal is blown into the furnace.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of an iron blast furnace

1
1.2 Pulverized Coal Injection (PCI)

Pulverized coal injection(PCI) is the process of injecting large volumes of fine coal par-
ticles into the raceway of the blast furnace to speed up the kinetics of iron ore reduction,
and also reduces the name of metallurgical coke for reactions in the blast furnace.[1]

In the past, reactions within the blast furnace was simulated by injecting heavy oil
as auxiliary fuel along with the blasts and oxygen. The heavy oil was replaced by
pulverized coal after the oil crisis This made it possible to use cheap coal, such as non-
coking coal. Furthermore, the amount of coke used can be reduced if huge amount of
pulverized coal is injected. Therefore, in recent years, Pulverized Coal Injection(PCI)
systems are used in order to lower production costs as well as to extend the life cycle
of coke ovens. But due to the rise in price of coal it is very important to improve
the cost effective pulverized coal injection system. Injection system contains a tuyere,
blowpipe and fuel injection lances. Injection lances are coaxial or annular pipes used
for injection of pulverized coal along with carrier air. Blowpipe is cylindrical large
diameter pipe, where hot blasts are blown from one end react with coal coming from
lance and travel towards, tuyere is a tube, nozzle or pipe through which mixture is
blown into a furnace or hearth. Figure 2., is real image of a blast furnace injection
system.

Figure 2: Schematic of various injections and combustion

2
Figure 3: a.) circumferential PCI system used in blast furnace b.) PC injectors, with
their components attached

1.3 Modelling and Simulations

All operations in process metallurgy involve complex phenomena comprising momen-

tum, heat and/or mass transport; iron making in steel making is not an exception. Trans-
port phenomena, fluid flows heat transfer and mass transfer plays a dominant role in
process metallurgy since their respective laws govern the kinetics of various physical
phenomena occurring and iron making and its steel making. The evolution in our tech-
niques and abilities to model single and multiphase flows has contributed significantly
to understanding and effectively operating these processes, improving design and to
developing new processes.

Computational fluid dynamics(CFD) has been a very effective tool over the last
three decades, for modelling iron and steel making process, starting from blast furnace
up to continuous casting and beyond. ANSYS CFD allows us to predict the impact of
fluid flows on our test systems by simulating in a virtual environment. The software’s
unparalleled fluid flow analysis capabilities can be used to design and optimize new
equipment and to troubleshoot already existing problems. ANSYS CFD solutions are
fully integrated into the ANSYS Workbench platform. This environment delivers high
productivity and easy-to-use work flows. Workbench integrates all our work flow needs
as well as multi-physics functionality. It has broadly physical modelling capabilities
such as to model: a) Flow behaviour, b) Turbulence, c) Heat transfer etc.

3
1.3.1 Mathematical Model

∂ρ ∂(ρui )
+ =0 (1)
∂t ∂xi

∂(ρui ) ∂[ρui uj ] ∂p ∂τij

+ =− + + ρfi (2)
∂t ∂xj ∂xi ∂xj

∂(ρe) ∂ui ∂(τij uj ) ∂(q˙i )

+ (ρe + p) = + ρfi ui + +r (3)
∂t ∂xi ∂xi ∂xi

The three equations combined form the core of fluid mechanics. By applying these
equations at every point in the domain in the flow field enables us to model the flow
in the domain. Depending on the physics acting in the domain the number of equa-
tion can be increased, equations for turbulence, energy, species transport and discrete
phase transport etc. For complex geometries the equations are non-linear, coupled,
second-order, partial differential equations that cannot be solved analytically, instead a
numerical method can be applied, which requires a discretization of the domain.

1.3.2 Discretization methods

Most commonly used discretization methods are-

• Finite Volume Method- in this method the governing partial differential equa-
tions are converted to conservative/integral form, and this is solved over some
discrete control volumes. The finite volume equation is as follows:
RRR Z Z
∂ QdV
+ F dA = 0 (4)
∂x
where Q is the vector of conserved variables, F is the vector of fluxes (see Equa-
tion. 2,3), V is the volume of the control volume element, and A is the surface
area of the control volume element.

• Finite Element Method - mainly used for structural analysis of solid structure,
but can also be used for fluid flow. However, the FEM formulation requires
special care to ensure a conservative solution. The FEM formulation has been
adapted for use with fluid dynamics governing equations.Although FEM must be
carefully formulated to be conservative, it is much more stable than the finite vol-
ume approach. However, FEM can require more memory and has slower solution
times than the FVM. In this method, a weighted residual equation is formed:
Z Z Z
Ri = Qi dV e (5)

4
 where Ri is the equation residual at an element vertex i, Q is the conservation
equation expressed on an element basis, Wi is the weight factor, and V e is the
volume of the element.

• Finite difference method- this method (FDM) has historical importance and is
simple to program. It is currently only used in few specialized codes, which
handle complex geometry with high accuracy and efficiency by using embedded
boundaries or overlapping grids (with the solution interpolated across each grid).
∂Q ∂F ∂G ∂H
+ + + =0 (6)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z
where Q is the vector of conserved variables, and F, G, and H are the fluxes in the
x, y, and z directions respectively.[3]

1.3.3 Accuracy of Numerical Solutions

Inaccuracy in CFD-models can be related to a wide range of errors and are more or
less unavoidable. Errors corresponding to numerical solutions always indicate three
different sources of errors categorized as:

• Modeling errors, defined as the difference between the real flow and the exact
solution of the equations of the mathematical model.

• Discretization errors, defined as the difference between the exact solution of the
modeled equations and the exact solution of the algebraic system of equations,
i.e. the discretized approximation

• Iteration errors, defined as the difference between the iterative solutions and the
exact solutions of the algebraic equations systems.

1.3.4 Geometry

Figure 4 shows a schematic of a computational domain. The injection system includes

a blowpipe, a tuyere and a lance where pulverized coal is transported to the blowpipe.
In some applications, natural gas co-injection may be included. A comprehensive 3-D
CFD model needs to include turbulent gas flow in the blowpipe, heat transfer between
the hot blast, the lance wall, and the flows inside the lance, coal particle flow carried by
air inside the lance, coal devolatilization in the lance and tuyere, coal combustion in the
tuyere, as well as natural gas combustion.

5
 Figure 4: Schematic of computational domain of injection system

Figure 5: a.) Front b.) back view c.) cross-sectional view with dimensions of the injec-
tion system

6
1.3.5 Multi-phase flow and Reaction Models

Turbulence models
To the fluid flow various models of multiphase flow has been considered Depending on
the physics acting on the domain mostly the flows fluid flows in blast furnace a turbu-
lent. The best known turbulence model is Reynolds averaged method. The models are
based or ideas presented by Osborne Reynolds, as the name suggests average we try to
average out all the unsteadiness in the flow. In steady flow one can write every variable
as sum of time average fluctuations above that values such as

′
σ(xi , t) = σ(xi ) + σ (xi , t) (7)

Equation 7 can be incorporated in Naviers Stokes, by doing this one can end up with
Reynolds Averaged Naviers Stokes equation.

∂uj ∂ ∂ui ∂uj

(8)
′ ′
ρuj = ρfi + [−pδij + µ( + ) − ρui uj ]
∂xj ∂xj ∂xj ∂xi

where ρui uj is Reynold’s stress tensor.

′ ′

Two-equation turbulence models determine both a length scale and a time scale of the
turbulence by solving two separate transport equations. The standard κ−ǫ model solves
the transport equations for the kinetic energy, κ and the dissipation rate, ǫ The kinetic
energy is derived from the exact equation whereas the dissipation rate is obtained using
physical reasoning. Due to the assumption that the flow is fully turbulent the κ − ǫ
model is only valid for fully turbulent flows. The strength of the standard κ − ǫ model
is the robustness, the computational economy and the reasonable accuracy for a lot of
different turbulent flows. Walls significantly affect turbulent flows, meaning that the no-
slip condition needs to be satisfied when using a turbulence model. Many experiments
have clarified that the boundary layer can be divided into three parts. In the viscous sub-
layer, nearest to the wall, the flow is almost laminar and the viscosity strongly affects
the momentum and mass transfer in this region. The outer layer is the fully turbulent
layer; turbulence plays a dominant role here. The region between those two layers is
called the buffer layer. The velocity profile of a turbulent boundary layer is shown in
Figure 6.

7
Figure 6: Velocity profile of the turbulent boundary layer; velocity normal to the wall as
function of the distance normal to the wall. The solid line represents experi-
mental data and the dashed line represents a mathematical representation.

Models for Particle Injection

Euler-Euler and Euler-Lagrange approach are two known ways to simulate dynamics.
We will discuss Euler-Lagrange approach in detail, as this model is used for multiphase
flows which has discrete secondary phase. This is often termed as Discrete Phase
Model (DPM). For this method the fluid phase is treated as a continuum, therefore
solved by the Navier-Stokes equations. The discrete phase is solved by tracking a cer-
tain number of discrete particles (or droplets or bubbles) throughout the computational
domain. If the discrete phase occupies a low volume fraction of the total phases, the ap-
proach is made simpler by neglecting the particle-particle interactions. Discrete phase
can exchange mass, momentum and energy with the continuous phase. The path of the
discrete phase calculated individually during the continuous phase calculations. The
intervals of discrete phase calculations can be specified depending on the nature of the
problem.

To calculate the path for the discrete phase the force balance is applied. The force
balance equates the inertia of the particles with the force acting on them. In Cartesian
coordinates the force balance in the x-direction can be expressed as:

8
 dup g(ρp − ρ)
= FD (u − up ) + +F (9)
dx ρ

where the term FD (u − up ) the drag force per particle mass, where u is the fluid
velocity and up is the particle velocity, and F is the additional acceleration. Depending
on the characteristics of the flow the additional acceleration can be either zero or defined
by an equation, e.g. for Saffman lift force and virtual mass. FD is defined as:

3µCD Rer
FD = (10)
4ρp d2p

where CD is the drag coefficient, dp the particle diameter and is Rer the relative Reynolds
number expressed as:
ρdp |up − u|
Rer = (11)
µ

Particle Diameter Distribution

Injection of pulverized coal paritlces are of different sizes, which can influence the flow
characteristics. Then it is must to take this into account. By using the Rosin-Rammier
diameter distribution method, the assumption of an exponential relationship between the
particle diameter d and the mass fraction of particles greater than the particle diameter
d, is made and it is defined as:
d n
Yd = e−( d ) (12)

where d is defined as the mean diameter and n is the spread parameter. By finding a
value on those parameters and specifying the smallest and the greatest diameter a Rosin-
Rammier curve-fit can be made. An example of how the curve-fit can correspond to the
actual diameter distribution is shown in Figure 7.

The defined mean diameter is found at

d = d(Yd = e−1 ) (13)

9
Figure 7: A Rosin-Rammier curve-fit (solid line) and the actual particle diameter dis-
tribution (squares).

As it can be seen that in above equation mean diameter is not the regular definition
of a mean value, which is often found at Yd =0,5. As the d value is known, spread
parameter n can be defined as:

ln(−lnYd )
n= (14)
ln dd

Combustion Models
The main aim for injection of pulverized coal along with hot blast air and natural gas is
to speed up the reduction of iron ore and generate heat in the raceway zone to increase
the overall productivity of the furnace.

This model of the injection system accounts for two heterogeneous coal reactions.
Devolatilization is modelled according to an Arrhenius reaction rate with rate constant
given by:
1 −5,000K
kDevol = (20, 000 )e Tparticle (15)
s

10
 where the pre-exponential and the activation energy are derived from the paper by
Badzioch and Hawskley (1970) and the rate is zero below an onset temperature of 773
K. The char oxidation rate, in which C + 21 O2 −−→ CO, is determined by a combination
of O2 diffusion to the particle surface and a chemical Arrhenius rate with rate constant
given by
−6,831K
kchar = (0.09962kg/m2 s.P a)e Tparticle (16)

where the pre-exponential and the activation energy are derived from the paper by
Lockwood et al. (1984) and the rate is zero below an onset temperature of 773 K.

Gas-phase chemical reactions are accounted for using the slower of the mixing-
limited and reaction-limited rates. For mixing-limited, the Eddy Dissipation Model
(EDM) is used, with the rate given by

ǫ [oxidant]
REDM = AEDM ( )min([f uel], ) (17)
κ CStoich

In the gas phase, there is one reaction accounting for the partial oxidation of coal
volatiles, where volatiles + 0.36 O2 −−→ 0.4 CO + H2 0. This reaction is assumed to be
controlled by the rate of turbulent mixing and the EDM model is used withAEDM =1.5.
Methane oxidation is assumed to occur via the four reactions,

• CH4 (g) + 21 O2 (g) −−→ CO (g) + 2 H2 (g)

• CH4 (g) + H2 O (g) −−→ CO (g) + 3 H2 (g)

• H2 (g) + 12 O2 (g) −−→ H2 O (g)

• 2 CO (g) + H2 O (g) −−→ 2 CO2 (g) + H2 (g)

The rate is controlled by the slower of the EDM and FRC rates, where AEDM =4.0
and AF RC , Ea , b, c, and d are from the paper by Jones and Lindstedt (1988).

11
2 Literature Review, Objective and Scope

2.1 Literature Review

Hellberg, P Jonsson, Lage and D.Y. Sheng, P.JÃűnsson. (2005). A Model of Gas Injec-
tion into a Blast Furnace Tuyere. In this paper combustion is studied the when a reduc-
ing gas this injected using lance. The fluid flow is solved based on fundamental trans-
port equations in combination with the standard k-ǫ turbulence model.The chemical
reactions are modeled using Eddy-break-up model (EBU). A two-step reaction scheme
with three possible reactions that can occur which as follows

• 2 CH4 (g) + O2 (g) −−→ 2 CO (g) + 4 H2 (g)

• 2 CO (g) + O2 (g) −−→ 2 CO2 (g)

• 4 H2 (g) + O2 (g) −−→ 4 H2 O (g)

The reactions are preceded in one direction. The primary reaction, equation (1), is
the combustion of CH4 with H2 and CO as intermediate products. Equation (2) and (3)
are the two secondary reactions, i.e. the combustion of the intermediate products to the
final products CO2 and H2 O.

Martin [11], used Discrete particle Model which follows Euler-Lagrange approach
to simulate flow of injected gas in lance. For this method the fluid phase is treated
as a continuum, therefore solved by the Navier-Stokes equations. The discrete phase
is solved by tracking a certain number of discrete particles (or droplets or bubbles)
throughout the computational domain. The result from this work consists of two CFD-
models, where main errors corresponding to numerical methods have been investigated
and discussed. Further, this work has generated a model validation method based on
analyzing the luminosity dispersion in images. He found that numerical model error for
coaxial lance model is more than the swirl lance model.

12
 Chen-Yan [10], simulated tuyere cooling system using CFD. The possible reason of
tuyere failure is discussed. Through parametric study, the sensitivity of some significant
variables would be investigated, including cooling water temperature, cooling water
velocity, coating material emissivity, blast pressure and mass flow rate, etc. Increasing
hard facing thickness will raise the temperature of hard facing only. The two effective
ways of reducing tuyere temperature are decreasing absorptivity of tuyere by polishing
the surface, and reducing the tuyere tip thickness of copper. The radiation absorption is
the greatest heat source of the entire cooling system.

Ari Vuokila [12], studied the heavy oil lance positioning to improve tuyere combus-
tion.The work in this study focused on the development of a numerical model for the
gas phase combustion for extra heavy oil. The effect of lance positioning on the heavy
oil combustion in the blast furnace tuyere-raceway area was studied. Three different
cases were modelled, where the lance position was varied between 0 and 20 units from
the tuyere tip. These cases have been used to determine the best injection position for
the extra heavy oil in the tuyere. Combustion is modelled with the Eddy-dissipation
Concept (EDC) model, which includes detailed chemical reaction mechanisms. Based
on the results the combustion model produces realistic maximum temperature. It also
produces results similar to those obtained in industrial experiments. The most effective
lance position was found to be 10 units inside the tuyere.

Shen Y.S and Maldonado [6], studied the combustion characteristics of pulverized
coal injection (PCI) in the blow pipe tuyere assembly using different injection patterns,
to improve the practical performance of the blast furnace. The model was capable
of handling steady state, three dimensional multi phase flow of pulverized coal injec-
tion using k-epsilon model. The model was applied to simulate the flow pattern of the
pulverized coal inside the tuyere lance design for the pci system. The model is vali-
dated against the measurements under different conditions. The model provides a cost-
effective tool for understanding and optimizing the in furnace flow-thermo-chemical
characteristics of the PCI operation in full-scale blast furnaces.

13
2.2 Objective

The objective of the master thesis is to create a numerical model for particle injection
through an injection lance, and to study the multi-phase flow of coal, oxygen and natural
gases and their interaction with each other inside the tuyere. Its also incorporates the
temperature distribution along tuyere walls.

The results of the study is planned to work as the initial step in creating a model
for the PCI process in the BF; including acting temperatures, mass flows, particles and
species. In long term the aim is to create a model that can optimize the efficiency of the
BF in terms of combustion and material efficiency.

2.3 Scope

This model can be further extended to study various dynamics of injection system in
blast furnace. Such as:

• Varieties of lances can be used for injection of pulverized coal in tuyere, such as
annular, coaxial and swirl induced lances. These different lances can be used to
study the flow and dispersion of coal.

• Flow can be studied for different PCI lance angle. Angle determines the motion
related behaviour of discrete particles of coal inside the tuyere, which can be
further extended to determine the material selection and longevity of tuyere.

• Different reducing agents except pulverized coal, like heavy oil, coke oven gas
can be used to study the combustion inside tuyere, which can further take its effect
on raceway in account.

14
3 Summary of the work

3.1 Discretization of computational domain

A structured grid that consists of tetragonal elements was chosen for the model to reduce
the calculation time compared to an unstructured grid. Refinement of the grid was
assumed to be necessary in the near-wall region, in the lance and in the particle plume.
The complexity of the domain together with the assumed refinement demand made the
structured grid difficult to apply. Instead an unstructured grid with prism layers in the
near-wall region and locally refinement in the lance and in the particle plume was used.
The software ANSYS Fluent Mesher 19.2 was used to create the discretization of the
domain, an overview is shown in Figure 8. The meshing distribution across the cross-
section is depicted in Figure 9.

The general element size in the injection system is around 5.4mm was used in the
whole domain. Meshing statistics can be viewed in Fig 10.

Figure 8: Overview of the discretized computational domain

15
Figure 9: a.) Meshing distribution at symmetric cross-section b.) Wire-frame view of
the the domain

16
 Figure 10: Statistics table for the meshed domain

Histogram for percent mesh volume vs element metrics for Tet 4 is shown in Figure
11.

Figure 11: Statistics table for the meshed domain

17
3.2 Boundary Conditions and Initial Values

One of the key factors for the success of any simulation is the initial boundary condi-
tions and the convergence criteria.

Wall Temperature and its properties

• The inner surface of the tuyere has a temperature of 1172 K and an emissivity of
0.95.

• The blowpipe inner surface is adiabatic and has an emissivity of 0.95.

• The outlet at the end of the tuyere nozzle has an absolute pressure of 350 kPa
and a radiation temperature a hot black surface representing radiation from the
raceway, of 2116 K.

• The PCI lance inner surface, which is exposed to the coal/air flow, has a temper-
ature of 311 K and an emissivity of 0.90.

• The outer surface of the PCI lance, which is exposed to the blast air, has a tem-
perature of 1311 K and an emissivity of 0.90.

• The NG lance, which participates in heat transfer between the flows of blast air
and natural gas, has an emissivity of 0.90 and a thermal conductivity of 14.2
W/(m.K).

Initial flow values

• The blast air has a temperature of 1372 K and flow rate of 2.99 kg/s. Enriched
with oxygen, it consists of 28.5% O2 by volume and 3% H2 O, with the balance
being N2 .

• The natural gas enters at a temperature of 311 K and its simplified composition
consists of 97.7% CH4 by volume and 0.685% CO2 , with the balance being N2 .

• The pulverized coal carrier is air with a temperature of 311 K and flow rate of
0.0689 kg/s.

• The coal has a temperature of 311 K and a flow rate of 0.296 kg/s.

18
3.3 Incorporated equations

Figure 12: Governing equations for the gas and particle phases

19
4 Results

4.1 Methods

After meshing and setup we are now ready to run the simulation. It is run on a SIMPLE
Pressure-Velocity coupling. Spatial Discretization given below:

• Gradient - Least Squares Cell Based

• Pressure - Standard
• Momentum - First Order Upwind
• Volume Fraction - First Order Upwind
• Turbulent Kinetic Energy - First Order Upwind
• Turbulent Dissipation Energy - First Order Upwind
• Energy - First Order Upwind

4.2 Iteration

The program was run on a modern computer with computational specifications and
graphical specifications below in Figure 13 and 14 respectively. It took about 600s to
complete the calculation of 500 iterations, with convergence criterion of 10−6 for all
parameters except energy. Residual variation along with iterations is given in Figure
15.

Figure 13: Computational specifications of system for the simulation

20
Figure 14: Graphical specifications of system for the simulation

Figure 15: Residual vs Iterations

21
4.3 Contours

Figure 16: a.) Gas velocity contour lines along the from inlet of blowhole till outlet of
tuyere b.) Volume fraction of coal volatiles

22
Figure 17: a.) Heat flux contour lines b.)Inner wall temperature contour

23
Figure 18: a.) Coal particles velocity contour lines b.) Eddy viscosity contour lines

24
4.4 Lagrangian particle tracking of coal particles

Euler-Lagrange model allows us to track discrete phase particle. We tracked 20 particles

from lance inlet to tuyere outlet. Here is the snapshot of six phases of flow.

Figure 19: Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particles in- Lance

25
Figure 20: Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particles inside Tuyere

26
Figure 21: Particle tracks of 20 injected coal particle - when at Tuyere outlet

27
4.5 Model Error Uncertainties

The possible reasons for the model error will be pointed out. The model error can
depend on either the model itself or the model validation method.

Model settings that can generate the model error:

• The simplification in the flow domain as described earlier

• Applying incorrect equations to represent the real flow

• Incorrect measured boundary conditions from the experiments

• Inadequate turbulence model used

4.5.1 Understanding Modelling errors

Modelling error

Modeling errors are defined as the difference between the real flow and the exact
solution of the mathematical model equations. This error occurs due to the fact
that a simplified model of reality is solved and not the exact governing flow equa-
tions. Errors corresponding to turbulence model are most discussed and therefore
most known. Representing a real gas by an ideal gas and neglecting the compress-
ibility effect in low Mach-number flows are two examples of the simplifications
of the real flow that often are made. Even if the equations are representing the
real flow, errors often occur due to uncertainties for the boundaries, e.g. assump-
tions of the flow often have to be made for the inlet and the outlet. Shortly, one
can describe the modeling errors as the uncertainties that arise because incorrect
equations are solved.

28
Discretization error

Every numerical method produces approximated solutions of the governing equa-

tions. An error is connected to the approximations made in order to obtain an
algebraic equation system from the differential equations. In general, the greater
the number of grid cells are, the closer to the exact solution of the modeled equa-
tion the results will be. It is not completely true though; the finesse of distri-
bution of grid points, locally refinements, affects the accuracy of the solution.
Discretization errors are defined as the difference between the exact solutions of
the defined differential equations for the mathematical model, and the discrete
approximation.

Iteration error

Iteration errors, also called convergence errors, are the difference between the
exact solution and the iterative solution of the discretized approximation. The
iterative process starts from an initial approximation of the flow solution. Ideally,
the iterative process will reach a solution where the boundary conditions and the
discrete equations are satisfied. Iteration errors arise from short iteration process
or inaccurate boundary conditions, which do not allow the solution algorithm to
reach a final, converged, solution.

5 Conclusion
Invention of PCI system is most essential development in the iron making indus-
try. In order to have a better understanding of the complex phenomena in the PCI
process as well as to determine the impact of key parameters for the design and
optimization of the system, efforts have been made to develop comprehensive 3-
D multiphase CFD models for the PCI process simulations. To get more efficient
and accurate flow different model are used in conjunction. The main features
CFD methodology for PCI are summarized below:
– Complete geometry of blowpipe, lance and tuyere
– Simulation of 3-D, turbulent, multiphase multispecies reacting flows
– Lagrangian tracking of particles
– Pulverized coal injection
– Natural gas co-injection
– Combustion of coke, coal, and natural gas

29
 As we can see in Figure 17 that coal particles are hitting the tuyere wall and
temperature of inner wall can go up to 1470K, which is under the operable limit.
Natural gas co-injection can be the reason for this.

REFERENCES

1. Ispat Guru, Satyendra Kumar Sarna, metallurgist [webpage]. [2014-06-11] Avail-

able:http://ispatguru.com

2. Shen Y.S et al. A three-dimensional study of the combustion of coal blends in

blast furnace. Fuel 88 (2009), p.255-263.

3. Majeski A et al. The effects of lance positioning and design on the co-injection
of pulverized coal and natural gas into blast furnaces. Ninth International Confer-
ence on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries, 2012. Melbourne, CSIRO.

4. MATHIESON, J.G., TRUELOVE, J.S., ROGERS, H., (2005), Toward an under-

standing of coal combustion in blast furnace tuyere injection, Fuel, 84, 1229-
1237.

5. NOGAMI, H., CHU, M., YAGI, J., (2005), Multi-dimensional transient mathe-
matical simulator of blast furnace process based on multi-fluid and kinetic theo-
riesâĂŰ, Computers Chemical Engineering, 29, 2438-2448.

6. SHEN, Y.S., MALDONADO, D., GUO, B.Y., YU, A.B., AUSTIN, P., ZULLI, P.,
(2009b), Computational Fluid Dynamics Study of Pulverized Coal Combustion
in Blast Furnace Raceway , Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 48, 1031410323.

7. SHEN, Y.S., YU, A., AUSTIN, P., ZULLI, P., (2012), Modelling in-furnace phe-
nomena of pulverized coal injection in ironmaking blast furnace: Effect of coke
bed porositiesâĂŰ, Minerals Engineering, 33, 54 − 65.

8. YEH, C.P., DU, S.W., TSAI, C.H., YANG, R.J., (2012), Numerical analysis of
flow and combustion behavior in tuyere and raceway of blast furnace fueled with
pulverized coal and recycled top gasâĂŰ, Energy, 42, 233 − 240.

9. Ching-Wen Chen. Numerical analysis for the multi-phase flow of pul-verized

coal injection inside blast furnace tuyere. In:Applied Mathemat-ical Modelling29.9
(2005), pp. 871884.issn: 0307-904X.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2004.11.004

10. Yan Chen et al. Heat Transfer Analysis of Blast Furnace Tuyere throughCFD
Simulation. In: Jan. 2014.doi:10.1615/IHTC15.eef.009767.

11. Martin ÃŰlund.Numerical Simulation and Validation of an Injection LanceModel.

Validerat; 20140619 (globalstudentprojectsubmitter). 2014.

12. Ari Vuokila et al. CFD Study on the Heavy Oil Lance Positioning inthe Blast
Furnace Tuyere to Improve Combustion. In:ISIJ Internationaladvpub 2017)

30