.........

Utilization of Evaporation
Waste Cas Cooling Systems
to Counteract Rising
Energy Costs
THIS ARTICLE IS AVAILABLEONLINE AT AIST.ORC FOR 30 DAYS FOLLOWINC PUBLICATION.

oday's primary sources of energy are oil, coal,

natural gas and nuclear. Fossil fuels like oil, natural
gas and coal represent almost 8.5% of the energy consumption in the world. Renewable energy like hydro,

In conventional
waste gas cooling plants,
the absorbed
heat is emitted unused into
the atmosphere.

This steam

can be used for

various applications, such as steel degassing

or heat and power generation.
Integrating
evaporation
cooling plants into steel works
reduces costs and preserves natural resources.

wind, solar, biomass and nuclear energy account for the

remainder.
As we know, we depend on - and will continue to
depend on for many years to come - fossil fuels as
energy sources to produce
electricity, transportation
and industrial
applications.
We also know that fossil
fuels will increase in cost with time, not because of
depletion but due to increased production
costs, and
we know that fossil fuels produce emissions that could
harm the environment.
In view of the increasing production
costs of these
fuels and the increasing global primary energy demand,
it ca.n be assumed that the cost of energy will strongly
increase in the future. Moreover, most of the industrial
countries
have issued stricter environmental
requirements in order to reduce the adverse impact on the
earth's climate thereby.
This development
entails an increasing cost pressure
that will increase even further in the future, particularly
for companies in energy-intensive
sectors where energy
costs represent a significant part of the produdion
costs.
Therefore,
the use of energy-efficient
and environmentally friendly technologies
is already
highly important
for economic success
and long-term competitiveness.

Oschatz is an innovative, family-owned company that

operates globally in the fields of plant construction,
energy recovery and environmental
technology. With
more than 160 years of experience, 1,200 employees, six
subsidiaries, as well as representative
offices all over the
world, Oschatz is a market leader in the product areas
of iron and steel metallurgy, non-ferrous
metallurgy,
environmental
and chemical technologies.
Iron and steel metallurgy has had a high priority for
Oschatz for many years. In order to relieve the effects on
the environment
and to recover the heat energy in waste
gases, Oschatz has developed solutions for cooling the
hot, highly dust-loaded and CO-containing
waste gases
from production
plants. Each plant concept is based on
customer and process-specific
requirements
to ensure
the highest degree of availability, operational safety and
profitability for the customer.
It is the purpose of this paper to show the benefits of
energy recovery from waste gases of furnaces using the
proven concept of steam generation on an evaporating
cooling system. Lower operating costs and a reduction
of harmful emissions to the environment
are the advantages of operating a more energy-efficient
system.

Cooling Plants for Basic Oxygen Furnace

(BOF) Waste Gases
The first LD (BOF) steel works in the world came
onstream
in Linz and Donawitz in 1952 and 1953,
respectively. Since then, the process has steadily been
developed
and further improved. Today, the greatest
part of the world's crude steel production
is rroduced
according to the LD (Linz-Donawitz) process.
Along the LD process, the converter is filled with
fluid crude steel and a cooling fluid (scrap metal or
iron sponge). Afterward, pure oxygen is blown through
a water-cooled oxygen lance onto the iron melt. During
this blowing process, the carbon concentration
of the
crude steel is reduced from approximately
4-4.5% down
to less than 0.1 %. Within this process, primary gas is
produced that consists of 85-95 vol. % of CO and 15-5
vol. % of CO2 during the main decarburization
period.
In practice, for the design of waste gas cooling plants,
it is calculated with a primary gas analysis of 90 vol. %

Author
Josip Kasalo, Oschatz GmbH. Essen. Germany (kasalo.j@oschatz.com)
48

..

Iron &.Steel Technology

I.
.t
I,
1
I(
e
s

r
1

CO and 10 vol. % CO2 and a primary gas temperature

of about 1, 700C.
Because of the high temperatures
and the highly dustloaded primary gases, dust removal without cooling is
not possible. Therefore,
the primary gas is led through
a waste gas cooling plant downstream the converter and
is cooled to about 1,000-800C.
An additional cooling of the waste gas can be achieved
only by screen walls and/or convection cooling parts. By
means of these cooling parts that are installed in an
additional section of the (cooling) stack, it is possible
to reduce the waste gas temperature
lower than 600C.
After the cooling, the waste gas reaches the dedusting
system, where it is processed further, depending
on the
chosen dust removal technology.
For the waste gas cooling plants, also called cooling
stacks, there are three different cooling systems:

..
.

Evaporation

cooling.

Pressurized water cooling (closed circuit).

Water cooling in an open circuit.

The last mentioned

cooling technology
implemented
at new plants.
In addition
to the above-mentioned

is only rarely
distinction

of

the cooling system, there is another

differentiation
between the converter cooling stacks, depending on the
combustion
factor. Because of the high CO content in
the primary gas, it is possible, on the one hand, to completely burn the gas (over-stoichiometric/stoichiometric
combustion,
n 2 1.0) or, on the other hand, to cool
down the partly combusted gas under deficiency of air
(under-stoichiometric
combustion,
n < 1.0), to remove
the dust and to store it in a gas holder.
In
modern
steel
works,
usually
the
under-stoichiometric
Figure 1
operation
mode
is
chosen with an intended combustion
factor
of n < 0.1. Only then
can the converter
gas
be recovered with the

of the cooling stack is significantly

minor thermal load.

extended

due to the

Objective
In this paper, two boiler systems - one based on evaporation cooling and the other based on pressurized water
cooling, for the cooling of waste gases downstream from
the LD converter - are described. In addition, for each
plant, the energy supply and the consumption
of feed
water and - for the plant based on evaporation cooling
- the credits for steam are determined and described.
This data is later used as a basis for a rough calculation
of profitability.
The objective is to show that waste gas cooling plants
based on evaporation
cooling have further significant
advantages, in addition to energy recovery in the form
of industrially usable steam. Compared to cooling plants
based on water cooling, they are more profitable and
environmentally
friendly.
Cooling plants based on the open circuit (see Figure
7) were not taken into consideration
in this report. This
technology is not state of the art anymore, and therefore
outdated due to the corrosion problems on the water
and gas side, as well as its reinforced
disposition to a
water-side staining.
Waste Gas Cooling Sjrstems - Cooling stacks, whether
with evaporation
cooling or pressurized water cooling,
consist of basically the same components.
Generally,
these are the skirt, the hood, the stationary stack and the
deflection bend (Figure 1). Since the local conditions
and the available space in the steel works have to be taken
into account, other arrangements
are possible as well.

highest
possible
CO
rate and be used for
other processes.
Another
advantage
of the very low combustion factor is the
lower amount of waste
gas in comparison
to
the higher combustion
factor. By this means,
the dimensions
of the
cooling stack, of the
attendant facilities and
of the dedusting
system are reduced. This
has a positive effect
on the investment and
operating
costs.
In
addition,
the lifetime
of the individual parts

Converter cooling stack. A

and E = deflection bend.

LD converter (BOF), B

skirt, C

hood, D = stationary stack

November 2010

49

.......

Figure 3

Figure 2

Tube-to-tube construction.

Tube-web-tube construction.

In contrast to the doublejacket

cooling implemented
in the past, these components
consist mainly of a tubeto-tube or a tube-web-tube
construction
(Figures 2 and
3) connected
to a circular or square tube wall (also
known as a panel wall or membrane
wall) through
which the cooling medium flows. Round cooling stacks
have an advantage over square cooling stacks, as they are
more stable and therefore safer in case of gas-side explosions. In addition, this form is less prone to sticking of
slag and other deposits.
After leaving the converter,
the primary gas flows
through the skirt. It is directly installed above the converter and is designed for an optimal collection of the
primary gas. By means of lifting and lowering the skirt,
the gap between the converter mouth and the cooling
stack is minimized, so that the intrusion of infiltration
air into the cooling stack is minimized and the adjustment of the planned combustion factor is made easier.
The skirt is particularly important regarding the adjust-

Waste Gas Cooling System With Evaporation

Cooling
- Evaporation cooling applied to waste gas systems
generates steam, which can be used for many industrial
purposes, in contrast to the pressurized water cooling
system, where the energy transferred
to the cooling
water is just wasted.
It could be assumed, based on a rough calculation,
that 75-80 kg of steam per ton of hot metal is generated
in a plant with evaporation cooling, giving the following
process conditions: C content on hot metal (or molten
iron) > 4%, C content on raw steel (or molten steel)
< 0.1 %, combustion
factor = 0.1 and waste gas outlet
temperature
= approximately
950C.
Two different circuits form part of the evaporation
cooling system: the low-pressure system (LP system) and
the high-pressure
system (HP system).
In a typical waste gas cooling plant, the parts that
are connected to the LP system are the skirt, the lance
dome, the sublance dome and the flux chutes. The heat
absorbed during the blowing period by the LP system is
used (in addition to the steam from the HP system) for
degassing of the demineralized
water. Demineralized
water is used as makeup water to compensate for losses
and consumed steam.
The other parts of the waste cooling plant, like the
hood, the stationary stack and the deflection bend, are
connected to the HP system (Figure 4).
The circulation water, coming from the steam drum
at the HP system and the feed water tank at the LP system, which flows through the components
of the waste
gas cooling plant, is mainly in boiling condition.
It
becomes partly evaporated due to the heat transferred
during the waste gas cooling process.
Afterward, the water/steam
mixture of the HP system
is led by the riser piping to the steam drum, where it is
separated and the riser piping of the LP system supplies
the water steam mixture to the feed water tank.
The makeup water necessary for the replacement
of
the consumed steam is delivered by means of feed water
pumps from the feed water tank to the steam drum, and
subsequently
forwarded
by circulation
pumps to the
plant components.
More efficient waste gas cooling systems with evaporation cooling are designed with several components
operated
in natural circulation
to reduce the power
demand on the circulation pumps (Figure 5). This has
the advantage that the quantity of circulation water,
within the forced circulation circuit, is reduced thereby,

ment

of the combustion

factors

- 0.05-0.l.

The outcome of the partial combustion

of the primary gas is waste gas. Afterward, it reaches the hood that is
installed downstream of the skirt. At the waste gas cooling plants used today, the lance dome, sublance dome
and the flux chutes are components
of the hood and
are mostly connected gastight with the hood through a
flange connection.
Due to its location and form, the hood is exposed to
converter emissions and to a very high thermal load.
This entails an abrasion so that the hood has to be
repaired or replaced more frequently
than the other
components
of the cooling stack.
In order to keep the shutdown periods as short as
possible in case of a repair, it therefore makes sense to
separate the hood via valves from the rest of the cooling system. In that way, it is assured that the hood can
quickly be removed and a replacement
hood can be
installed, although the other parts of the cooling stack
are still connected to the cooling circulation.
After the hood, the waste gas is first cooled in the
stationary stack and afterward in the deflection bend.
The deflection bend forms the end of the cooling stack
before the waste gas enters the dedusting
system for
further processing.
Although
the components
of both types of plants
are very similar, there are significant differences upon
closer inspection of the whole plant.

50 .

Iron & Steel Technology

Figure 4

<0

Waste gas cooling system with evaporation cooling in forced circulation.

@
g
IS
tl

g
g
l,
d

g
rl

1. Feed water tank with deaerator.

2. LP-circulation pump.
3. Skirt.
4. Feed water pump.
5. Steam drum.
6. HP circulation pump.
7. Hood with flux chutes, lance dome and
sublance dome.
8. Stationary stack.
9. Deflection bend.
10. Steam accumulator.
A. Demi-water inlet.
B. Feed line LP system.
C. Riser piping LP system.
D. Feed water line.
E. Feed line HP system.
F. Riser piping HP system.
G. Steam outlet.

)
.t
rl
d
It
e

as well as the required capacity of the circulation

pumps,
so that the efficiency
of the whole cooling
plant is
increased. This plant type was selected for comparison.
For batch-type
steelmaking
processes, like converter
(BOF)
or EAF steel plants, steam accumulators
are
installed
as part of the evaporation
cooling
system to

ensure continuous
supply of
process to the steam network
and Figure 5, No. 11). These
placed as an addition
to the
fore, they could be integrated

steam generated
by the
or consumers
(Figure 4
accumulators
are usually
cooling plant and, thereafterward into the system.

It
s

r
:I

Figure

Waste gas cooling system with evaporation cooling and combined natural/forced
circulation.

e
e
1
i-

e
t
:I

<0

1
S
S

tV

f
r

s
r

1. Feed water tank with deaerator.

2. LP circulation pump.
3. Skirt.
4. Feed water pump.
5. Steam drum.
6. Switching device (three-way valve).
7. HP circulation pump.
8. Hood with flux chutes, lance dome and
sublance dome.
9. Stationary stack with natural circulation.
10. Deflection bend.
11. Steam accumulator.
A. Demi-water inlet.
S. Feed line LPsystem.
C. RiserpipingLPsystem.
D. Feed water line.
E. Feed line HP system.
F. Feed line (HP system) natural circulation.
G. Bypass line.
H. Riser piping HP system.
I. Steam outlet.
November2010 .

51

....

Figure 6

I -

I
i

<P

Waste gas cooling system with pressurized water cooling.

1. Feed water storage tank.

2. Dosing station for chemical degassing.
3. Circulationwater pump.
4. Nitrogen station.
5. Expansion tank.
6. Circulation pump.
7. Skirt.
8. Hood with flux chutes, lance dome and
sublance dome.
9. Stationary stack with deflection bend.
10. Air-cooled heat exchanger.
A. Cooling water inlet.
B. Cooling water feed line.
C. Cooling water return line.

rll!1
~-:.@

1I@
I

Waste Gas Cooling System With Pressurized

Cooling
Water - In this case, a nitrogen volume within the
expansion
tank maintains constant the cooling water
system pressure. The nitrogen
station also keeps the
pressure of the cooling water system high enough to
avoid reaching the critical boiling pressure of the water,

even during spikes in heat load values. The expap.sion

tank also serves as a buffer tank for the cooling water,
which is pumped by means of the circulation pumps
into the components
of the waste gas cooling plant.
The waste gas cooling system components
could be
connected to each other, in a series or a parallel circuit,

Figure 7

I
I

II

I
cD
I
I
iI

@
CD

52

Iron &.Steel Technology

Waste gas cooling system with open

water cooling.
1. Circulation pump.
2. Skirt.
3. Hood with flux chutes, lance dome and
sublance dome.
4. Stationary stack with deflection bend.
5. Cooling tower.
6. Dosing station - inhibitors against
corrosion.
A. Cooling water feed line.
B. Cooling water return line.
C. Cooling water suction line.
This type of plant arrangement is not
considered in this paper.

Table 1
Technical Data for the Steelmaking Process
depending on the hood and stack design arrangement.
The heat load of the waste gas transferred
to the cooling water is then removed by a heat exchanger system.
The circuit is then closed when the cooling water again
reaches the expansion tank (Figure 6).

Cost Comparison of Both Waste Gas

Cooling Plants
Basic Data for Design - The same metallurgical boundary conditions are presumed to allow for a comparison
of the operating
costs of both plant designs, where
investment costs, energy demand, demineralized
water
consumption
and credit for the generated
steam are
taken into consideration.
Tables 1-4 provide the data
for plant design. The following symbols should be considered for the tables:

.
.
.

.
.

All volumes in mn 3 or volumetric

flowrates in
mn3/hour,
mn3/minute
or mn3/second
refer to
the standard state according to DIN 1343.
All volumes in m3 or volumetric flowrates in m3 I
hour, m3/minute
or m3/second
refer to the
operation conditions.
nco = combustion
factor = LILa, related to the
CO in the primary gas, where L = air quantity
effectively drawn in mn3/hour and La = air quantity theoretically
required
to obtain a stoichiometric combustion
of the CO contained
in the
primary gas.
dc/dt .= decarburization
rate in %C/minute,
related to the hot metal quantity per heat.

Ch = heat.

Figure 8 shows a diagram of the thermal energy

absorbed by the boiler, the combustion factor, as well as
the decarburization
rate during the blowing time.
Energy Consumption
- Considering
the basic data calculated earlier, the energy consumption
for both cooling systems is shown in Table 6.
Considering
the energy consumption
of the plant
with pressurized water cooling (Table 7), the feed water
pumps are neglected because they are used solely for

Process

--

---~--

Number of BOFs
Hot metal quantity
-~

,..

LD converter

(BOF)

340 t/Ch

--- - u-

..

Carbon content of hot metal

4.50%

Carbon
~-

0.10%

content of crude steel

Decarburization

rate

------.

4.50% - 0.1 0%

-----

4.40%

---....
-- ------ - -

16 minutes

---

Heat period (tap-to-tap time)

44 minutes

Max. reacting oxygen quantity

1,300 mn3/minute

Table 2
Technical Data for Primary Gas/Waste Gas
Temperature of primary gas

1,700 C

Analysis of primary gas:

90 vol. %
10 vol. %

Combustion

CO
CO2

0.1

factor nca

Outlet temperature

850C

of waste gas

--

Table3
Technical Data for the Water/Steam

System

Operation pressure
Waste gas cooling plant with evaporation cooling
HP system
20-40 bar
LP system
4-8 bar
Waste gas cooling plant with pressurized water cooling
14-1 8 bar

---

Cooling water temperature

------------

"A"'_--

--" ---

(pressurized water cooling)

at boiler inlet
105 C
at boiler outlet
150C

.- ------

Table 4
Calculated Values With Regard to the Gas Flow and Heat Flowrates

--

Primary gas flowVp'

142.000

-,-- --- - -----

166,000

Waste gas flow VA'

22.5 MWh/Ch i) 81.0 GJ/Ch

--

Absorbed

heat flow 1' (uncontrolled

Absorbed

heat flow 2' (controlled at nea

Max. decarburization
Note: The values

rate

at nea ~ 1.0)
~

0.1)

120.0 MW

98.0 MW
0.372%

---

C/minute

and are based on a max. reacting oxygen flowrate of 1,300 mn3/hour.

November2010 .

53

11"

"-'11

Figure 8
130
120
110
~ 100

~
:
.c
]

1,50
1,40
1,30
1,20
1,10 ~

01'
A

O2'

90

c
'E

80
70

60
50

40

'r

30

20

0.40

0,40

0,30

f 0,30

0,20

0,20

0,00

ro "

M ~

0.60 u
0.50

0.10

~
~

...

0,70

0.50

10

0,80

~
B

1,00

0,90

Oge,

filling the plant and for compensating

the eventual leakage losses.
Cost Analysis - For the comparison of
both plants under the economic point
of view, the following average specific
costs/ credits are taken as a basis:

.
..

0.10
0.00

17

Blowl... period [ mln )

Heat diagram, A. Absorbed thermal energy by boiler system at nco = 0.1; B.

Decarburization rate (dc/dtJ; and C. Combustion factor.

Electrical

energy

cost
Steam

$O.08/kWh
$27.6/t

credit

Demi-water (fully
demineralized)
costs

$6.9/t

The one-time
accruing
investment
costs, which have been only roughly
estimated, are shown in Table 8.

Table 5
Generated
Generated

Steam

steam quantity approx,

- ~--

36 tICh ~ 49 t/hour

Required steam for degassing

Delivered steam quantity (to consumers)
(the delivered steam quantity is related to the system boundaries:
accumulator outlet and a demi-water temperature of 200 C)

--- -- -

Required demi-water

Table

quantity

7,5 tICh ~ 10 t/hour

n - - n

28,5 t/Ch ~ 39 t/hour

Inlet demi-water at feed water tank/steam

- ----

- --

28.5 t/Ch ~ 39 t/hour

Energy Consumption of Waste Gas Cooling for a Plant With Evaporation Cooling
Feed water pumps: For the design of the feed water pumps, it was considered that the full delivery is achieved only during the blowing period of 16
minutes and that, during the intermission of 28 minutes, only a minimum
flow is returned to the feed water tank.

155 m3/hour

Volume flowrate
Power consumption

---

of feed water pump

265 kW

Number of pumps
Electric

motor

95%

efficiency

Energy consumption per heat

74 kWh/Ch

Circulation pumps:
a. HP circulation pumps:
Volume flowrate

1,900 m3/hour

b, LP circulation pumps:
Volume flowrate

400 m3/hour

Power consumption

160 kW

Power consumption

57kW

2 (with 950 m3/hour/pump)

Number of pumps

95%

Electric

2 x 124 kWh/Ch

Energy consumption per heat

of HP cire. pump

----

Number of pumps
Electric

motor

efficiency

Energy consumption

per heat

Summary
Plant component

Energy demand

Feed water pump

74 kWh/Ch

HP circulation pumps

248 kWh/Ch

LP circulation pumps

44 kWh/Ch

Total energy consumption

366 kWh/Ch

54

Iron & Steel Technology

---

motor

of LP cire. pump

efficiency

-----

95%
44 kWh/Ch

Table 7
Energy Consumption of Waste Cas Cooling for a Plant With Pressurized

f
t

Circulation pumps:
Volume flowrate

2,400

Power consumption

240 kW

Power consumption

Number of pumps

2 (with 1,200 m31

hour per pump)

Energy consumption

Electric

95%

motor

of circulation pumps

efficiency

Energy consumption

Air-cooled
Airflow

m3/hour

Water Cooling (Closed Circuit)

heat exchanger:
1,300 m3/second

285 kW
per heat

209

kWh/Ch

2 x 185 kWh/Ch

per heat

Summary:
Plant component

Energy demand

Circulation pumps

370 kWh/Ch

Air-cooled heat exchanger

209 kWh/Ch

Total energy consumption

579

kWh/Ch

Table 8
One-Time

Accruing

Investment

Waste gas cooling plant with evaporation

Costs
Waste gas cooling plant with pressurized water cooling

cooling

Design

Design

Waste gas cooling stack

Waste gas cooling stack

Steam drum

Feed water tank

Steam accumulator

Expansion tank

Feed water 'tank

Circulation pumps

HP circulation pumps

Feed water pumps

LP circulation pumps

Piping

Feed water pumps

Valves

Piping

Measuring

Valves

Air-cooled heat exchanger

Measuring

and control equipment

Note: The costs for transportation,

as well as the costs for installation,

are considered

Cost Comparison - Table 9 shows the cost comparison

for each waste gas cooling plant. The credit entries are
marked with a plus sign (+) and the costs with a minus
sign (-). The cost breakdown comparison includes only
the costs that are different between both plants, being
the costs for direct capital investment, energy consumption, demineralized
water consumption
and steam
utilization. The rest of the capital and operating costs,
like indirect costs for the capital project, amortization,
operating costs, maintenance,
labor, etc., are considered
equal and are not shown on the breakdown.
General

and control equipment

Consideration

The

higher

capital

invest-

ment cost of the evaporation cooling plant compared to

the conventional
pressurized cooling water plant is due
to the additional costs for valves and components,
the
boiler's higher operating
pressure, as well as the costs
for additional plant components
like the steam drum

to be similar.

and steam accumulator.

It is even higher if one considers the cost of the air-cooled heat exchanger needed on
the pressurized cooling water system.
However, if one considers the advantages in operating
costs, assuming that one could consume or sell the generated steam, the selection of an evaporation
cooling
system is still economically recommended.
It is not only
the advantage of the steam generation
and use capabilities of the system, but also the lower electric energy
consumption
due to the combined natural/forced
circulation design.
Even more, if one considers that both waste gas cooling systems could store a certain amount of CO gas and
receive credit for it, one could add it to the benefits
of the steam generation
credit and conclude that the
returns of the evaporation
cooling system are higher
than of the plant with pressurized water cooling (see
Figure 9).

November2010 .

55

.,....

Table 9
Cost Comparison for Each Waste Cas Cooling Plant
Waste gas cooling plant with evaporation

~ --~-

Investment

costs approx.

- -_.- --- --

Energy consumption
Demand per heat
Specific costs
Total costs

Ii

j'
i

Demand demi-water
Demand per heat
Specificcosts
Total costs
Steam utilization
Del ivery per heat
Specific costs
Total credits/costs

--.~--

Credits/costs per heat

$15,800,000

Investment

366

Energy consumption
Demand per heat
Specific costs

kWh/Ch

----

Annual credits/costs
Heats per year
Total credits/costs per year

--~-~---

---

$13,100,000

--............

579 kWh/Ch
$0.08/kWh
-$46/Ch

---

Total costs

Demand demi-water
Demand per heat
Specific costs

28.5 t/Ch
$6.9/t
-197/Ch

costs approx.

--- -- -------

$0.08/kWh
-$29/Ch

- -~

-----

Waste gas cooling plant with pressurized water cooling

cooling

---

Total costs

-.-.

,_. ,-.-

Steam utilization
Delivery per heat
Specific costs
Total credits/costs

28.5 t/Ch
$27.6/t
+$787/Ch

---

--

--

--

----

Credits/costs per heat

+ $561 /Ch

Annual credits/costs
Heats per year

7,500 Ch/a
$4,207,000/a

---

~-

The differences
between both plants in the cost/
return development
become especially evident when
the plant is operated with a higher combustion
factor.
One must consider that, at a high combustion
factor
(nea;:: 1.0) the storage of CO gas is no longer feasible,
and at a low combustion factor (nea > 0.4) the storage
is seldom carried out due to the low calorific value. At
these two scenarios, credit is not available.
In Figure 10, for both waste gas cooling systems
without CO storage, the progress of the cost/returndevelopment
is qualitatively shown.
As a result of the missing credits for the CO storage,
the pressurized cooling water system works primarily as
a consumer;
therefore,
the permanent
charges affect

- t/Ch
-$/t
-$/Ch

- ----$46/Ch

7,500 Ch/a
-$345,000/a

- . _'_'T"- --Total credits/costs

- t/Ch
- $/t
- $/Ch

-- -- -

per year

the cost side negatively (Figure 10, curve B). At the

plant with evaporation cooling, the steam credit leads to
the fact that this type of plant is still economically recommended,
in spite of the missing credit for CO storage
(Figure 10, curve A).
It should be also considered that a desire for a higher
combustion
factor will mean an increase in the waste
gas flowrate, and therefore
the complete plant needs
to have greater dimensions,
resulting in higher capital
investment costs. It could be assumed that the amortization time for a plant with steam-only utilization would
be longer than for a plant with combined energy utilization, steam and CO storage. These factors should be
taken into account during the project feasibility study.

Figure 10

Figure 9

>-

>-

dY

O.
dZ

dY2

B
dY1

!
N

.... X
Return
development for a plant with CO storage (qualitatively illustrated). A = plant with evaporation cooling; B =
plant with pressurized cooling water; X = time; Y = return;
dYl = Return development - pressurized water cooling;
dY 2 = Return development - evaporation cooling.

56 .

Total cost/return development for a plant without CO-storage

(qualitatively illustrated). A = Plant with evaporation cooling;
B = Plant with pressurized cooling water; X = Time; Y =
Return; Z = Cost; dY = Return development - evaporation
cooling; dZ = Cost development - pressurized water cooling.

Iron IS!Steel Technology

I

!!!!!II

due to thermal stress, lack of cooling, etc. eliminated to a large extent.

Evaporation Cooling Systems

Operational Safety and Environmental
Protection
In the previous section, it was shown that evaporation cooling plants have clear economic
advantages
compared
with pressurized
cooling water plants. In
the following paragraphs,
some other advantages are
described briefly.

Operational
Safety - Water leakage from water-cooled
elements entering
the furnace is the main source of
explosion hazard on any steelmaking plant. Therefore,
one of the requirements
for a safe steelmaking
operation is to avoid tube damages that would lead to water
leakage.
One important
advantage of evaporation
cooling is
the reduction
of the risk of water leakage due to tube
damage. The cooling water inside the tube is under
saturation pressure in boiling condition. Therefore, the
cooling water flows through the cooling elements under
a constant temperature.
Consequently,
there are no differential tensions and/or increased tension on the cooling element due to a sudden increase of waste gas heat
load. Furthermore,
due to the higher heat-transfer
coefficient, the temperature
gradient between the unheated
and heated sides of the tubes would be less than in the
pressurized cooling water system. In this case, the risk
of thermal shock cracks is also reduced by the lower
tube material temperature
difference in the tube wall,
whereby the lifetime of the cooling plant components
is increased.
In the event of mechanical or thermal damage during
operation,
which causes a leak, the following physical
effect takes place in the evaporation cooling system: due
to the sudden expansion of the coolant and following
evaporation
in the leakage point, a blocking effect for
the coolant occurs. The quantity ofleaking water, along
with the resulting losses in such systems, is insignificant
compared to pressurized cooling water systems.
Additionally,
the residual water in the system is at
boiling point; hence it is evaporated
immediately
by
the contact with the gas thermal load and/or furnace
radiation. Leakage of important
water quantities, and
consequently
risk of explosion and damage, is greatly
reduced.
These facts considerably reduce the causes for explosion incidents,
increasing
in that way the operation
safety of the furnace.
Another advantage is that it leaves sufficient time to
the plant owner to establish a well-defined repair program. The main root causes of damage that normally
leads to emergency shutdowns - such as damage to the
tube and cooling elements leading to water leakages,

This paper was presented at AISTech 2010

can be

Protection - Today, besides economic

efficiency and operational
safety, industrial plants must
also be evaluated with regard to their environmental
impact and the sustainable use of energy.
Evaporation
cooling plants recover energy in the
form of steam. Two examples are described here, showing the magnitude
of the energy recovered, which is
otherwise dissipated unused to the environment.
In accordance
with the calculated values shown in
Table 5, the utilizable amount of steam generated has a
thermal energy content of approximately
21.5 MWh/Ch
(- 28.5 t/ Ch of steam generated related to a demineralized water temperature
of 20C).
If we assume 7,500 heats/year
and an annual power
demand of approximately
14,500 kWh per year and
household for the production of heat, this energy would
suffice to supply about 11,100 private households
during one year with heat.
Additionally,
this energy amount is enough to save
approximately
14.5 x 106 m3 of natural gas (Hi = 10.5
kWh/m3)
in a year, by which 32,250 t CO2 (emission
factor for natural gas 0.2 kg/kWh) would not be emitted
into the atmosphere in a year.
Following these two examples, it quickly becomes evident that the potential of energy recovered as steam is
significant and could make a positive impact: there will
be less detrimental
exhaust gas emitted into the atmosphere, and energy is saved.

Environmental

Summary
Based on an LD converter (BOF) operation with a hot
metal capacity of 340 t/Ch and using average unit costs,
it has been shown that waste gas cooling plants with
evaporation
cooling are more economically
feasible
to operate due to the return received from the steam
generation
and use, in addition
to the CO storage
possibility, than comparable
pressurized cooling water
plants. Another advantage is the fact that, due to the
heat recovery capabilities as industrially usable steam,
less fossil fuel is consumed and less CO2 is emitted into
the atmosphere.
The use of energy-efficient
and environmentally
friendly technologies
is proven to be highly important
for the competitiveness
of companies in energy-intensive sectors. Only those who efficiently protect natural
resources, the environment
and our communities
will
have sustainable success within the global competition.

Reference
1. http://www.stahl-online.de/wirtschafcund_politik/stahUnzahlen/start.asp,Jan. 20, 2009.
..

The Iron & Steel Technology Conference and Exposition,

Pittsburgh,Po., and publishedin the ConferenceProceedings.

Did you find this article to be of significant relevance to the advancement of steel technology?
If so, please consider nominating it for the AISTHunt-KellyOutstanding Paper Award at AIST.org/huntkelly.
November 2010

..

57