International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

Minimization of Dross Formation During the Continuous

Galvanizing Process in the Steel Industry
1
Pranay Sawaitul, 2S.A. Chowriwar, 3I.P. Lade
1,2,3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur 40010, India
1
pranaay.vnit@gmail.com
2
sandeepchowriwar@gmail.com
3
kavya98.ipl@gmail.com

Abstract— During the study of continuous galvanizing line,
large amount of waste material is observed near the surface of
bath. Dross is formed due to reaction between aluminum, iron
and zinc in the zinc bath. The coupled phenomena of
aluminum, strip temperature and iron dissolution were
simulated in order to predict and to better understand the
generation and movement of inter metallic dross particles
within certain regions of a typical galvanizing bath. Solutions
for the temperature and aluminum concentration can be
correlated with the solubility limits of aluminum (Al) and iron
(Fe) to determine the amount of precipitated aluminum in the
form of Fe2Al5Znx dross. MATLAB software is used to
develop a simulation program to find the optimum percentage
of the parameters in order to reduce the total dross. The
developed program is flexible to calculate the optimum
parameters for per coil and per shift data. The information
worked out in this paper is of major significance in the
prediction of the formation of dross particles, which can cause
defects on the coated product. Mathematical model is
developed and parameters are optimized with the help of
simulation technique. Also the dross formation is reduced and
the process parameters are improved.
Keywords— Dross minimization, galvanizing line, Al content,
Zinc bath, MATLAB, steel sheets.
I. INTRODUCTION
During the hot dip galvanizing, the steel strip enters into
the bath at a temperature of 465°C. At this temperature, the
mobility of iron atoms within the strip enables them to
escape and enter into the zinc bath. In turn, this can lead to
the formation of inter metallic’s within the bath known as
dross particles, which can have detrimental effects upon the
finished products and bath hardware. [1] Dross can be
defined as ―scum on molten metal‖ with the implication
that it has no value and it an undesirable material. [2] Dross
can be of two types, mainly top dross and bottom dross.
Top dross is composed of suspended masses of long
intermetallics spikes that are usually interwoven together in
45
clumps. This top dross is formed at the surface of molten
zinc due to reaction between iron and aluminium, it forms
oxides at the surface due to its greater affinity towards iron
and as it the lighter metal. This top dross is removed at
regular intervals, often known as skimming. Bottom dross
that is floating in the galvanizing bath, due to temperature
inversions,adhere to surface of parts being galvanized [2].
This dross becomes encapsulated in the free zinc layers
during withdrawal, causing excess coating thickness and
surface irregularity. The formation of floating dross results
iron is rejected from the solution. Iron has a limited
solubility in molten zinc. At the temperature of 465°C, iron
solubility is about 0.05 %. Above this value, iron reacts
with molten zinc and falls to the bottom as dross [3].In
continuous galvanizing, aluminium in the bath plays an
important role in product quality control and the economics
of operation. However, maintaining the bath aluminium
content at an optimum level for a specified product is a
challenging task, mainly due to enrichment of aluminium in
the coating[5].Adequate control of aluminium (Al) content
in the galvanizing bath is critical to the coating quality,
especially for galvanneal (GA) coatings. When the bath Al
is too high, coating becomes more difficult to anneal
resulting in silver edges, powdering, flakes and other
defects. GA coatings are also more susceptible to streaking
defects at high bath Al contents. When the bath Al is too
low, an excessive amount of bottom dross will form during
GA production, leading to a prolonged upward product
transition with a bath loaded with numerous floating dross
particles, low bath Al also causes more severe dross build
up on sink rolls and more intensive corrosion to submerged
hardware. [6]In general, GA production is rather
unforgiving to bath Al fluctuations.
The situation becomes even more complicated if sheet
steels consists of different grades, with some containing
significant amount of P and other alloying elements. [6].
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

To achieve excellent product quality, the bath Al II. SIMULATION OF GALVANIZING PROCESS PARAMETERS
content should change to accommodate the changes in steel
grades. This can be an impossible task as bath assays are The overall expression for iron dissolution is [1]
taken once every few hours to analyze the assays. Product
transition from galvanizing to GA by converting the q= D (C1-C1) / (ILT) 2 (SW) (DiB) (CL) / (LS)
galvanizing bath can be very challenging. Predicting the
exact duration of this long process based on experience Where, D=diffusion coefficient of iron atoms through
may be inaccurate as the duration is affected by many inhibition layer.
operational conditions such as coating weight, line speed,
strip width and temperature. If the bath Al decreases faster D=Do exp (- Q / (R*T))
than anticipated, some GI products will be produced at low
bath Al content, resulting in formability problems and C1= concentration of iron within substrate.
coating defects due to incomplete inhibition at the
coating/substrate interface. If the bath Al decreases slower C2 =concentration of iron in bath.
than expected, the production schedule may need to be
altered because the unforgiving GA products cannot be ILT=inhibition layer thickness, m
produced when the bath Al is too high. [8]
DiB=distance in bath, m

CL=coil length, m

LS=line speed, m/s

The chemical formula for defining dross is given by

Dross = fe2Al5 Znx

Dross = Fe + Al + Zn

Where, Fe = ((Fe % wt * net consumption)/100) + iron

dissolution (q)

Fig 1. Schema of Galvanizing Bath Operation [3] Al= ((Al % wt * net consumption)/100)

To minimize the dross, aluminium is added into the zinc As 95% of zinc is present in dross,
bath to lower the iron dissolution. The iron solubility with
molten zinc is reduced by aluminum addition and Zn = (0.95 * dross)
temperature variation of strip entering into the bath. The
dross formation is highly dependent on aluminium % wt of Therefore,
bath, iron dissolution and strip entry temperature. The dross
minimization is done using these three parameters using the Dross = Fe + Al + (0.95 * dross)
theory of heterogeneous nucleation and the objective
function is formed using this theory. And the minimization
So, the objective function is,
of dross is done by optimizing these parameters using
simulation.
Dross = (Fe + Al) / 0.05

46
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

2
III. CALCULATIONS Area=12991 m
Example considering coil parameters. 2
Dross/m2=3.8612 g/m
t=0.36mm
Dross/shift=dross * no of coils
w=1095mm
=443.1kg
L=5930m 2
Area/shift=57745 m
Strip entry temp, SET=497°C 2
Cal. Dross /shift= 7.6733 g/m
Net consumption, Zn=3768/9 kg 2
Act. dross / shift=12.07 g/m
Al=0.29 % wt
% deviation in dross=(cal. dross – act. dross) / act. Dross
Fe=0.15 %wt
= -36.427 %
DiB=3m
IV. SIMULATED PARAMETERS
D=Do exp (- Q / (R*T)) Al=0.15 %wt
=1.29 * E-19
Fe=0.15 %wt
LS=140m/min,
Fe=0.628 kg
Inhibition layer thickness,
Al=0.628kg
ILT=866+376ln (EAL)
Dross=25.12 kg
=400.56nm
Dross after considering deviation
Iron dissolution,
= (simulated dross + (simulated dross * % deviation))
q = D (C1-C1) / (ILT) 2 (SW) (DiB) (CL) / (LS) [1]
=34.27 kg
3
q=1.04 E-5 m
Reduction in dross= (act. dross – simulated dross) /
=82.153 gm (act. dross) = (50.16 – 25.12 ) / 50.16
= 49.921 %
Fe = ((Fe % wt * net consumption)/ 100) + iron dissolution Reduction in dross = (act dross – deviated dross) / (act
(q) dross) = (50.16 – 34.27) / 50.16
=31.628 %
=0.80815kg
V. SIMULATION PROGRAMMING
Al= ((Al % wt * net consumption)/100)

=1.5989kg The simulation programming is done with the help of

flow chart described below. It helps in understanding the
Dross= (Fe+Al)/0.05 program in a simple and logical manner.

=80.16kg

47
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

All =Aluminium lower limit

l u l u
Input: Al , Al , t , t , C, Fe%, A, S, q, n
Alu =Aluminium upper limit

C=Total no of coils
Start with All and tl, Alu, tu for a coil
n=No of coils

tl =Temperature lower limit

tu =Temperature upper limit

Check
No
l
Al < Al < Al u A= area of coil

S=speed of coil
Yes q=iron dissolution

Check No The above flow chart showing the logic of simulation

t < t < tu
l
programming. The programming is done for calculation
purpose so as to get the optimum value. This programming
helps to reduce manual calculations.
Yes
VI. A) OPTIMIZATION OF ALUMINIUM CONTENT
Calculate q
During hot dip galvanizing, the small amount of Al is
added into the zinc bath so as to form the protective layer
Increment t on the steel strip. Al addition is done as it restricts the iron
strip to dissolve into the molten zinc.

Al has greater affinity towards iron and also it is lighter

Al increment metal. The melting point of Al is 423°. So the temperature
of zinc bath has to maintain above this temperature. The
zinc bath is maintained at the temperature of 460°C to
Calculate q (min) and identify optimum Al and t 470°C under standard processing parameters. The iron
dissolution is calculated using above equation and is
compared with Al %wt.
Calculate dross based on optimum parameters
& original data qmin = D* (C1-C2) / [(ILT)* 2* (SW)* (DiB)*[(CL) / (LS)]]

Where,ILT=866 + 376 ln (EAL)

Calculate %age reduction in dross
D=Do exp (- Q/RT)

If n<C
C1= concentration of iron within substrate.
No Stop
Yes
=100

48
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

C2 =concentration of iron in bath. B) OPTIMIZATION OF STRIP ENTRY TEMPERATURE

=0.14 The strip entry temperature plays an important role in

galvanizing industry. If the strip is hotter than the bath
ILT=inhibition layer thickness, m when the strip immersed in the bath, the bath can overheat,
which causes increased dissolution of iron from the strip
DiB=distance in bath, m into the bath. The strip is hotter than the bath at the snout
(i.e., near the point of immersion) unless the strip is
=3m sufficiently cooled following heat treatment that occurs
prior to immersion in the bath. In conventional processes,
CL=coil length, m the temperature of the bath is relatively high to avoid
freezing of zinc bath at the bath surface. Use of a
LS=line speed, m/s significantly cooler bath, however can cause zinc to freeze
at the bath surface because of poor circulation in
0.32 conventional bath and because the small difference between
data1
0.3 the strip immersion temperature and bath temperature.
0.28

0.26

0.24
Al %wt

0.22

0.2

0.18

0.16

0.5 1 1.5 2
iron dissolution -4
x 10

Fig. 2 Al content Vs iron dissolution

Fig. 4 Matlabs M file Environment

C.TESTING AND VALIDATION

Testing of the program has been carried out with the help
of actual data. The work involved taking samples of dross
formed from the ISPAT STEEL INDUSTRIES line during
galvanizing production. Knowing the process parameters
and iron dissolution rate, it is possible to calculate the dross
formed and to minimize it. An average effective aluminium
Fig.3 Mat lab M file Environment content of 0.18 wt-% and strip entry temperature of 470°C
is suggested.

49
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

D. VALIDATING THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL

For validating the mathematical model, the math model

dross is equated with actual data, so as to get the
approximate figures for further calculations, and the
developed math model shows the approximate figures and
the deviation in math model and actual dross is also within
the same range as shown in above graph.

TABLE 1

Actual dross(kg) Dross after math model dev.(kg)

443.1 339.273
428.39 356.094 Fig.5) Actual Dross Vs Math Model Dross
436.35 195.895
445.67 174.321
402.19 219.609 VII. VALIDATION OF SIMULATED PROGRAM

For validating the present simulated program, the

The practical dross is greater than the math model
calculated dross, also graph shows the deviation between
above drosses are approximately in same range, so the
mathematical model developed is computed true for
calculation purpose.
values of simulated program are compared with previous
data at which the input parameters are taken same i.e. Al
content and SET are taken into consideration.
Al=0.18 %wt
Fe=0.15 %wt

TABLE 2 SET=470°C
/Actual Simulation
Dross(g/m2) Output(g/m2) Deviation
Math Model 8.048 7.68 4.34%
Shift Actual Dross Calculated Dross
g/m2 g/m2 TABLE 3
1 8.41 6.5815
As the validation is done for same values of Al and SET, so
2 4.43 6.0364 dross/shift is compared in grams/m2. And it is observed
3 10.32 10.301 that the simulated dross after programming and actual dross
of previous data taken for comparison is approximately
4 5.69 7.6929
same and there is deviation of 4.34 % which proves the
5 6.69 9.1479 validation of program and can be useful for practical
6 3.97 6.4532 application in galvanizing industry for processing steel.
7 18.33 15.904
VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
8 9.3 7.9524
11 8.01 6.4705 A mathematical model has been produced and the amount
of iron dissolution that occurs during the hot dipping of a
12 8.75 7.5712
steel substrate has been calculated. The dross reduction
takes place on an average of 20-30% from previous one.
The main conclusions from the work are as follows.
50
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012)

A. STRIP ENTRY TEMPERATURE REFERENCES

At higher strip entry temperature, the inhibition layer forms
much more rapidly upon the surface of the steel, thus
leading to a decrease in the amount of iron dissolution
before inhibition layer formation. However at higher
temperatures the diffusion of iron through the inhibition
layer increases, resulting in an increase in the amount of
dissolution. So the optimum strip entry temperature for
reducing iron dissolution is 470°C.
B. EFFECTIVE ALUMINIUM CONTENT OF BATH
Increasing the effective aluminium content of the bath
results in a considerable decrease in the amount of iron
dissolution. The biggest effect is before the inhibition layer
formation, where as increase in aluminium content leads to
quicker formation of the inhibition layer upon steel
substrate. In addition, it can be seen that Al content
increases the dross formation after particular range of
addition. So the optimum aluminium content in the bath is
0.18 % wt of bath.
SUGGESTIONS
An entry temperature that is too high can also result in
more enrichment of Al in the ternary alloy layer, causing a
higher depletion rate of Al from the bath and overall poor
Al level control. It also results in more dissolution of the
steel strip – leading to more dross generation. So the
difference between the strip entry temperature and bath
temperature has to be kept as minimum as possible.
[1] S. O’Dell, J. Charles, M. Vlot and V. Randle, 2003. Modeling of iron
dissolution during hot dip galvanizing of strip steel.
[2] N.Y. Tang, Demystifying CGL bath chemistry management, Tech
Cominco Ltd. Product Technology Centre, Mississauga, Ontario,
Canada.
[3] F.Ilinca, F. Ajersch, C. Baril and F. E. Goodwin, Numerical
simulation of the galvanizing process during GA to GI transition, Int.
J. Meth. Fluids 2007; 53, 1629-1646.
[4] Daniel Groteke, March 2004, pg 32-37, Aluminium Drosses.
[5] Arturo Lazacano-Navarro, mar 28.1994, Process to reduce dross in
molten aluminium, United States Patent.
[6] Ramchandra S. Patil, Nov. 23, 1998. Method for galvanizing and
galvannealing employing a bath of zinc and aluminium, United
States Patent.
[7] Yoshikazu Fukuoka, Hiroshi Miwa, July 7, 1975. Continuous hot-dip
galvanizing process for steel strip, United States Patent.
[8] G. K. Mandal, R. Balasubramaniam and S. P. Mehrotra, Jan. 13,
2009. Theoretical investigation of the interfacial reactions during
hot-dip galvanizing of steel.
[9] Perti J. Sippola, Jan 29. 1998. Method of producing hot-dip zinc
coated steel free of dross pick-up defects on coating and associated
apparatus.
[10] L. Chen, R. Fourmentin, J. R. Mc Dermid, 2008. Morphology and
kinetics of interfacial layer formation during galvanizing hot-dip
galvanizing

The higher the Al level is above 0.14%, the higher the

bulk Al level in the coating. If the bulk Al content of the
coating reaches levels above 0.30%, spot weld ability
problems could result.

Since the amount of Al extracted from the bath by the

ternary alloy layer is independent of line speed and coating
weight, it is important that operators know the rate of Al
extraction at all times so that it can be replenished. So, the
Al content and strip entry temperature should be maintained
at 0.18 %wt of bath and 470° C respectively so as to reduce
dross without affecting the quality of steel strip processed.

51