Home Numerical Model of Dephosphorization Reaction Kinetics in Top Blown Converter Coupled with Flow Field
Article Open Access

Numerical Model of Dephosphorization Reaction Kinetics in Top Blown Converter Coupled with Flow Field

  • Wei Liu , Shufeng Yang EMAIL logo , Jingshe Li and Minghui Wang
Published/Copyright: September 14, 2016

Abstract

A 3D transient numerical model of dephosphorization kinetics coupled with flow field in a top blown converter was built. Through the model the dephosphorization reaction rate influenced by the oxygen jets and the steel flow were simulated. The results show that the dephosphorization rate at the droplet metal–slag interface is two orders of magnitude faster than that at bath metal–slag interface. When the lance oxygen pressure increases from 0.7 to 0.8 MPa, the dephosphorization rate increases notably and the end content of P has a decrease of 19 %. However, when the pressure continues rising to 0.9 MPa, the dephosphorization rate has no significant increase. In addition, the lance height shows a nearly linear relation to the end P content of steel, that the lower the height, the faster the dephosphorization rate.

Introduction

Due to the increasing grade of steel, the controlling requirement of phosphorus during steel refining process is getting higher. So the basic theory of dephosphorization, especially the kinetics, is always a hot spot of research. The dephosphorization reaction of hot metal is the first order reaction and the rate is high at steelmaking temperature. Thus the mass transfer is the rate-controlling step. The dephosphorization rate can be expressed as:

(1)d[%P]dt=FWmLp[%P](%P)Lp/Lp(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])+1/1(ρsk(p))(ρsk(p))

where Wm is the mass of steel and F is the interface between steel and slag. In the top blown converter there are two interfaces, which are bath steel-slag interface and droplet steel-slag interface. The area of bath steel-slag interface approximately equals to the cross section area of converter. But the total area of steel droplets is difficult to calculate due to the various sizes. Brooks et al. [1, 2, 3, 4] carried out cold model and high temperature experiment to investigate the size distribution and resistance time of the droplets, and the results show that the droplet size obeys Roser–Raamer–Sperling (RRS) distribution. Nasu [5] applied X-ray to study the effect of interfacial tension on dephosphorization and found that when the dephosphorization reaction is faster, the tension between steel-slag is smaller. Lp[%P](%P) on the right part of eq. (1) is the drive force of dephosphorization reaction and Lp is the distribution ratio of P element between slag and steel, which represents the thermodynamic status. Turdogan [6] indicated that the thermodynamic equilibrium status is mainly influenced by the composition of slag and steel. According to Monaghan [7], the increase of Fe2O3 content in slag will lead to the acceleration of dephosphorization reaction, while the increase of CaF2 and CaCl2 content show an opposite effect. Kitmura [8] suggested that the dissolution rate of lime and the content of 2(CaO)﹒SiO2 solid phase will affect the Lp and dephosphorization drive force. Lp/Lp(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])+1/1(ρsk(p))(ρsk(p)) in the equation contributes to the resistance of reaction and k is the mass transfer coefficient. If Lp/Lp(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])1/1(ρsk(p))(ρsk(p)), the resistance is dominated by P mass transfer in slag side [8], while on the opposite P mass transfer in steel is the rate controlling step. If the resistance of both sides is non-negligible, it is called mixed control theory [9]. The mass transfer contains two ways, which are diffusion and convection, hence the diffusion coefficient and flow pattern are key factors of mass transfer coefficient. Double-film theory, penetration theory and surface renewal theory [10, 11, 12] are common methods to calculate the mass transfer coefficient between two liquid phases.

With the development of computer science, the application of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model in converter flow field research has been successfully implemented. Lv et al. [13] built up a 3D numerical model of flow field in a top blown converter and simulated the effects of oxygen lance and pressure. The flow field in the converter plays an important role in the mass transfer and steel droplet generation, and hence the kinetics of reactions are important. Ersson [14] coupled a CFD model with a thermodynamic model to simulate the decarbonation reaction in the converter. However, the coupling model is just an exploring trial and cannot simulate an industry process.

In this study, by coupling the dephosphorization reaction kinetics model with a CFD model, the multiphase flow field and dephosphorization reaction model in a top blown converter are simulated and some effects of oxygen lance parameters will be discussed.

Modeling

Physics model

The simulated domain is the space just below the oxygen lance tip (including lance nozzles). The capacity of the converter is 80 ton and the hot metal surface height is 1,130 mm, and the lance height is 1,700 mm. The domain is central symmetry and can be simplified into 1/8 for calculation efficiency. Note that the details of geometry size are taken into consideration. The 3D model was then built (on the scale of 1:1) and meshed up with certain mesh distribution and geometric parameters, see Figure 1 and Table 1.

The designed stagnation oxygen pressure is 0.8 MPa, and once the lance parameters are given, the gas flow rate is a function of oxygen pressure. In order to investigate the influence of oxygen pressure, the flow field in converter was simulated under oxygen pressure of 0.7, 0.8 and 0.9 MPa respectively.

Figure 1: Geometric parameters of converter and mesh distribution.
Figure 1:

Geometric parameters of converter and mesh distribution.

Table 1:

Design parameters of oxygen lance nozzle.

Stagnation pressure, MPaThroat diameter, mmThroat length, mmExit diameter, mmDiffuser length, mmInclination angle,°Flow rate, Nm3/h*Mach number
0.837.31048.41001220,0002.0
  1. Note: * Nm3/h, standard cubic feet per hour, gas flow rate at 20 °C, 1 atm.

CFD model

The CFD model was built up based on the method that described in a previous report [13] in detail. The governing equations are continuity, volume fraction (VOF) and standard kε.

Dephosphorization kinetics model

Hypothesis

In order to simplify the model, some assumptions must be made as follows:

  1. The mass transfer in the steel is faster than that at interface;

  2. The mass transfer of phosphorus between bath metal and slag interface obeys the penetration theory and the velocity of slag at the interface equals to that in steel;

  3. The droplets are supposed to be spherical with uniform size;

  4. The area of bath metal and slag interface is calculated from the mesh area approximately;

  5. The oxygen blowing time is set to be 800 s and during this time the lance height, oxygen pressure or Lp remain no change;

  6. The effects of other reactions on dephosphorization are negligible in this model.

The equation of dephosphorization is as:

2[P]+8(FeO)=(3FeOP2O5)+5[Fe]ΔGΘ=413,575+245.46TJ/mol

The reaction has no gas attend or produced. The reactants of de-P reaction are from steel and slag and then the products go to slag and steel respectively. This means the reaction can only happen at steel-slag interface. There are two interfaces at the top blown converter and in this model the mixed control theory is applied.

For the bath metal–slag interface, if the resistance from reaction is neglected, the dephosphorization rate can be expressed as below:

(2)vp1=d[%P]dt=FWmLp[%P](%P)Lp/Lp(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])+1/1(ρsk(p))(ρsk(p))

where vp1 is the dephosphorization rate at bath metal–slag interface, %/s; F is the interface area, m2; Wm is the mass of total molten steel, which is supposed to be constant during refining; ρm and ρs are density of molten steel and slag respectively, kg/m3; k[p] and k(p) are mass transfer coefficient of phosphorus in steel and slag boundary respectively, m/s; Lp is the equilibrium phosphorus distribution between slag and steel.

Given that the mass transfer of phosphorus in the steel and slag sides obeys penetration theory [11], the mass transfer coefficients can be calculated by the following equations:

(3)k[p]=2Dmumπlk(p)=2Dsusπl

where Dm and Ds are diffusion coefficient of phosphorus in steel and slag, m2/s; um and us are velocity of steel and slag around the interface, m/s; l is cycle length of steel flow, and in this model it is the radius of converter, 2.02 m.

For the droplet metal–slag interface dephosphorization, the rate is described as:

(4)d[%P]dt=fWd[%P][%P]eq1/1(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])+1/1(ρsk(p)Lp)(ρsk(p)Lp)

where [%P]is mass concentration of phosphorus at steel and [%P]eqis the equilibrium concentration, [%P]eq=(%P)/Lp; f is the surface area of one droplet, which is calculated from droplet size, m2; Wd is the mass of one droplet, kg.

Since the droplet keeps moving in the slag and can be considered as a sphere, the mass transfer of phosphorus in the surrounding slag is [15]:

(5)k(p)=ShDsd

where d is the diameter of droplet; Sh is Sherwood number:

Sh=2+0.64Re1/2Sc1/3

In which Re is Reynolds number and Sc is Schmitt number:

(6)Re=ρsvdμSc=μρsDs

In the equation above, v is the velocity of droplet moving in the slag, and in the converter condition with high viscosity slag, it is supposed to be Stokes flow. So v here can be calculated as follows:

(7)v=g(ρmρs)d218μ

where μ is the viscosity of slag, Pa · s.

In eq. (4), if

(8)K=fWd11/1(ρmk[p])(ρmk[p])+Lp/Lp(ρsk(p))(ρsk(p))

And after integration, eq. (4) becomes:

(9)[%P]t[%P]eq[%P]0[%P]eq=eKt

where [%P]0is the phosphorus content when the droplet leave the bath, and [%P]t is the content when the droplet move back to the bath.

So by some mathematical transformations:

(10)[%P]t[%P]0=([%P]0[%P]eq)(1eKt)

Equation (10) means dephosphorization amount of one droplet and thus for all the droplets above, the reaction rate is

(11)vp2=m([%P]0[%P]eq)(1eKt)

where vp2 is the dephosphorization rate at droplet metal–slag interface, %/s; m is droplet generation rate, kg/(kg steel)/s.

At initial stage of oxygen blowing, the droplets generate but not fall back to the bath. Once the droplets begin to fall (reach the resistance time of the first droplet, t), the amount of droplets that suspending in slag reaches an equilibrium state, in which M represents the mass fraction of these droplets in total steel, kg/(kg steel).

(12)m=Mt

In the converter, the whole dephosphorization rate is

(13)Vp=Vp1+Vp2

Coupling of models

Considering that the dephosphorization reaction has little effect on the flow field, the two models are coupled by adopting one direction method. That means firstly the CFD model computes stable flow field results in converter and then some parameters from the CFD results, such as interface area, fluid velocity and droplet mass fraction, will be transferred to the kinetics model to simulate the dephosphorization process. The flow sheet is as shown in Figure 2. The relation between models is as shown in Table 2.

Figure 2: Flow sheet of coupling dephosphorization kinetics and CFD model.
Figure 2:

Flow sheet of coupling dephosphorization kinetics and CFD model.

Table 2:

Coupling relations of models.

Results and discussion

Dephosphorization rate

Figure 3: Comparison of dephosphorization rates at different interfaces.
Figure 3:

Comparison of dephosphorization rates at different interfaces.

There are two interfaces in top blown converter and at both of them dephosphorization reaction happens. As is shown in Figure 3, Vp1 and Vp2 are dephosphorization rates and they both decline with time, which is caused by the decreasing phosphorus content. Besides, Vp1 is two magnitudes larger than Vp2, which is consistent with the results of Molloseau [16], who has reported that the decarbonation rate with emulsion is two magnitudes bigger than that without droplets generated. This means that the dephosphorization reaction mainly happens at the droplet metal–slag interface and is governed by the droplet generation parameters. Although the size of single droplet is small, the big specific surface area leads to a large total area.

Effect of oxygen lance pressure

Figure 4 is velocity contour map of converter vertical section. It can be seen that with the oxygen pressure getting higher, the velocity of steel increase, the area with relatively high velocity expands.

Figure 4: Converter’s velocity contour map of vertical section at different oxygen pressure.
Figure 4:

Converter’s velocity contour map of vertical section at different oxygen pressure.

Figure 5: Phosphorus content in steel changing with time at different oxygen pressure.
Figure 5:

Phosphorus content in steel changing with time at different oxygen pressure.

Figure 5 shows the relationship between phosphorus content and time under different oxygen pressure, and the slope of the curve represents the dephosphorization rate. It is indicated that when the pressure gets higher, the rate decreases. As is shown, the dephosphorization rate has an obvious increase with the pressure rising from 0.7 to 0.8 MPa, and the end phosphorus content decreases 19 %. However, when the pressure increases from 0.8 to 0.9 MPa, the change of end phosphorus content is almost negligible.

The dephosphorization rate is related to many factors, such as droplet fraction, bath metal–slag interface area and steel flow velocity. For investigating the influence of different factors on end phosphorus content, their values were monitored under different pressure, see Figure 6. The drop fraction seems to be inversely correlated with the end phosphorus content, while the others do not show any obvious relationship.

Figure 6: Parameters related to dephosphorization kinetics at different oxygen pressure.
Figure 6:

Parameters related to dephosphorization kinetics at different oxygen pressure.

Effect of oxygen lance height

Figure 7 illustrates that the flow field is better at highest (2.0 m) and lowest (1.2 m) lance height, while at 1.5 m the high speed area of the flow field is smallest and the low speed area is the biggest. However, in Figure 8, the trends are different, which shows that the dephosphorization rate increases continuously with the lance height getting higher. In fact, dephosphorization has nothing to do with the flow field, but is influenced by the droplet fraction. As is shown in Figure 9, the end phosphorus content is nearly in linear relationship with lance height, and the droplet mass faction shows an inverse correlation with the end phosphorus content.

Figure 7: Converter’s velocity contour map of vertical section at different lance height.
Figure 7:

Converter’s velocity contour map of vertical section at different lance height.

Figure 8: Phosphorus content in steel changing with time at different lance height.
Figure 8:

Phosphorus content in steel changing with time at different lance height.

Figure 9: Droplet mass fraction vs end phosphorus content at different lance height.
Figure 9:

Droplet mass fraction vs end phosphorus content at different lance height.

Conclusions

A dephosphorization reaction kinetics model in top blown converter coupled with CFD model has been built. The effects of oxygen lance have been simulated by this model:

  1. The dephosphorization reaction rate at the droplet metal–slag interface is two magnitudes bigger than that at bath metal–slag interface;

  2. The flow field of steel has no obvious relation with dephosphorization reaction rate but is related to the interaction of oxygen jets and steel, especially the droplet mass fraction, has a direction relation with reaction rate;

  3. When the oxygen lance pressure increases from 0.7 to 0.8 MPa, the end phosphorus becomes 19 % lower, but further to 0.9 MPa, no obvious improvement will be observed;

  4. The end phosphorus content has a nearly linear relation with the lance height, the lower the height is, the smaller the end content is.

Funding statement: This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51474085 and 51374047) and the Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Advanced Metallurgy (Grant No.KF14-02 and KF14-06).

References

[1] G. Ne Dogan, A. Brooks and M.A. Rhamdhani, ISIJ Int., 49 (2009) 24–28.10.2355/isijinternational.49.24Search in Google Scholar

[2] M.A. Rhamdhani, K.S. Coley and G.A. Brooks, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 36 (2005) 219–227.10.1007/s11663-005-0023-2Search in Google Scholar

[3] G.A. Brooks, S. Yuhua Pan and K. Coley, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 36 (2005) 525–535.10.1007/s11663-005-0044-xSearch in Google Scholar

[4] G.A. Brooks, K.S. Coley and G.A. Irons, ISIJ Int., 43 (2003) 983–989.10.2355/isijinternational.43.983Search in Google Scholar

[5] M. Nasu, K.C. Mills, B.J. Monaghan, A. Jakobsson and S. Seetharaman, Ironmaking Steelmaking, 26 (1999) 353–357.10.1179/030192399677211Search in Google Scholar

[6] E.T. Turkdogan, ISIJ Int., 40 (2000) 964–970.10.2355/isijinternational.40.964Search in Google Scholar

[7] B.J. Monaghan, R.J. Pomfret and K.S. Coley, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 29 (1998) 111–118.10.1007/s11663-998-0013-2Search in Google Scholar

[8] S.-ya Kitamura, K.-ichiro Miyamoto, H. Shibata, N. Maruoka and M. Matsuo, ISIJ Int., 49 (2009) 1333–1339.10.2355/isijinternational.49.1333Search in Google Scholar

[9] K. Mori, Y. Fukami and Y. Kawai, Trans. Iron Steel Inst. Jpn., 28 (1988) 315–318.10.2355/isijinternational1966.28.315Search in Google Scholar

[10] W.K. Lewis and W.G. Whitman, Ind. Eng. Chem., 16 (1924) 1215–1220.10.1021/ie50180a002Search in Google Scholar

[11] R. Higbie, Trans. Am. Inst. Chem. Engrs., 31 (1935) 365.Search in Google Scholar

[12] P.V. Danckwerts, Ind. Eng. Chem., 43 (1951) 1460–1467.10.1021/ie50498a055Search in Google Scholar

[13] M. Lv, R. Zhu, H. Wang and R. Bai, Steel Res. Int., 84 (2013) 304–312.10.1002/srin.201200136Search in Google Scholar

[14] M. Ersson, L.H. Glund, A. Tilliander, L. Jonsson and P.R.J. Nsson, ISIJ Int., 48 (2008) 147–153.10.2355/isijinternational.48.147Search in Google Scholar

[15] W.E. Ranz and W.R. Marshall, Chem. Eng. Prog., 48 (1952) 141–146.Search in Google Scholar

[16] C.L. Molloseau and R.J. Fruehan, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 33 (2002) 335–344.10.1007/s11663-002-0045-ySearch in Google Scholar

Received: 2015-8-23
Accepted: 2016-4-25
Published Online: 2016-9-14
Published in Print: 2017-7-26

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Downloaded on 11.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/htmp-2015-0184/html
Scroll to top button