Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Thermal Distributive Blast Furnace Gas
Characterisation; a Steelworks Case Study
Tata Port Talbot Steelworks
Daniel Pugh – Ph.D Research Student Cardiff University School of Engineering
Sustainable Thermal Energy Management in the Process Industries International Conference (SusTEM2011)
Sampling Objectives
Dynamic Compositional Sampling – Compare compositions attained through chromatographic analysis with values attained from steelworks probes. Gravimetric Particulate Loading Evaluation – Determine particulate mass gas contamination through isokinetic analysis. Condensate Characterisation – Evaluate the change in condensate chemistry as gas is distributed around the works.
N2 + O2
1200°C
CxHy + H2O
FexOy C
Fe + C
N2 + CO + CO2 + H2 + H2O
Reduction of Hematite: Fe2O3 + 2C → 2Fe + CO + CO2
Fe2O3 + 3CO → 2Fe + 3CO2
Boudouard Reaction:
2CO ↔ CO2 + C
What is Blast Furnace Gas?
Blast Furnace Gas
2000°C
What is Blast Furnace Gas?
H2
N2
CO2
CO
52
23
23
2
Typical Calorific Value 3-4 MJ·Nm-3
Each furnace can produce over 400 kNm3 per hour
Volumetric
Sampling Location
A
B
B B
C
Coke Ovens
BOS Plant
Service Boilers
Sinter Plant
Power Plant
Blast Furnace 5
Blast Furnace 4
P
S
Flares
B
Gas Holder Approx
1.5km
Cold Rolled
Products
Hot Rolled
Products
Live Site Ring Main: 3 Flow distribution directions A, B, C Over 1.5 km between where gas is produced and sampled
S
- Gas Produced
- Gas Sampled
P
Gas Sampling Apparatus
2. Valve
1. Sample Probe
7. Rotameter
8. Pump
5. Filter Holder
6. Gas Sampling Pump
4. Manometer
3. N2 Purge
3. N2 Purge
Test at multiple points across the pipe diameter, gas samples taken into ‘Gresham’ kit. Use laboratory gas-chromatograph for compositional analysis. Use of pseudo-isokinetic gravimetric technique to calculate particulate loading. Filter mechanism developed.
Filter Development
Emfab Pallflex borosilicate glass micro-fibres
Woven glass cloth and bonded PTFE chosen for favourable hygroscopic properties. Nominal Pore size - 1μm. Sterilised and strengthened.
Gas Chromatograph Results
DATE - TIME
DRY COMPOSITION (% VOL) GAS PROPERTIES
DRY GAS
N2 H2 CO CO2 DENSITY KG/NM3
CV GROSS
MJ/NM3
CV NET MJ/NM3
01/02/11 – 11:45 48.29 2.74 25.67 23.30 1.385 3.592 3.538
01/02/11 – 12:25 46.74 2.62 26.71 23.93 1.391 3.708 3.656
01/02/11 – 13:35 48.34 2.78 25.48 23.41 1.385 3.572 3.518
01/02/11 – 14:14 48.58 2.62 25.57 23.23 1.386 3.564 3.513
01/02/11 – 14:16 48.27 2.71 25.49 23.53 1.387 3.565 3.512
10/02/11 – 11:00 49.64 2.82 25.05 22.49 1.378 3.524 3.469
10/02/11 – 11:40 49.33 2.81 25.28 22.58 1.379 3.551 3.496
10/02/11 – 13:00 49.26 2.83 25.52 22.39 1.378 3.584 3.529
10/02/11 – 13:50 49.97 2.78 25.04 22.21 1.377 3.517 3.462
10/02/11 – 14:45 49.28 2.91 25.59 22.22 1.375 3.603 3.546
16/02/11 – 11:00 53.09 2.24 23.46 21.20 1.376 3.249 3.205
16/02/11 – 12:00 52.87 2.57 26.29 18.26 1.351 3.649 3.599
16/02/11 – 13:25 49.42 2.89 27.00 20.70 1.365 3.778 3.722
16/02/11 – 14:50 53.23 2.39 24.40 19.98 1.365 3.387 3.340
Use of single Calibration Standard with linear response factors H2 – 2.5 %
CO – 23 %
CO2 – 23 %
N2 – 51.5 %
Gas Chromatograph Results
N2 H2 CO CO2
% 48.05 2.69 25.78 23.48
SD 0.739412 0.071972 0.52324 0.276043
N2 H2 CO CO2
% 52.15 2.52 25.28 20.05
SD 1.827683 0.279687 1.639621 1.284925
N2
H2
CO
CO2
N2
H2
CO
CO2
N2
H2
CO
CO2
N2
H2
CO
CO2
01/02/2010 16/02/2010
Particulate Loading Results
AV. WEIGHT BEFORE mg (SD)
AV. WEIGHT AFTER
mg (SD)
AV. CHANGE IN MASS
mg
GAS VOLUME L
PARTICULATE LOADING mg/m3
258.4 (0.1) 258.5 (0.07) + 0.091 540 0.169
264.2 (0.12) 264.3 (0.08) + 0.050 720 0.069
289.1 (0.05) 289.2 (0.05) + 0.167 2160 0.077
291.4 (0.04) 291.6 (0.07) +0.208 2160 0.096
288.1 (0.05) 288.2 (0.05) + 0.133 3600 0.037
297.3 (0.09) 297.9 (0.08) + 0.592 6000 0.099
289.4 (0.05) 289.7 (0.06) + 0.242 4500 0.054
Calibrated, high precision balance resolution: 0.1mg Fluctuations in results obtained, therefore average taken from multiple readings
(Expected up to 50 mg/m3)
Condensate Analysis
Samples taken from each point:
− 20 ml sample for ICP non-filtered - Analyse for Fe, Zn, Ca, Si, S
− 20 ml sample for ICP Filtered using 0.45μm Millipore disposable filter tip
− 25ml sample taken for GC-MS analysis Water Chemistry:
pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Electrical Conductivity, temperature, measured with Hanna H9828 multi-parameter probe
Condensate Trap Locations
A
B
B B
Coke Ovens
BOS Plant
Service Boilers
Sinter Plant
Blast Furnace 5
Blast Furnace 4
P
S
Flares
B
Gas Holder Approx
1.5km
Cold Rolled
Products
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
5
10 11
Site Ring Main
Condensate trap locations were sampled around the works
Condensate Results
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Distance (m)
Si Ca S
Flow Directions A B
No
rmal
ised
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n
Conclusions
Compositional analysis yielded favourable values to those obtained from the furnace, allowing for further combustion work into dynamic fuel performance. Particulate loading analysis at the used location yields negligible results, with further analysis suggesting accuracy of results depends on location. Condensate analysis suggests gas appears to be thermally scrubbed of particulate matter, and therefore gas cleanliness a function of distance from the furnace.
Industrial Ramifications
Analysis work used in discussions with industrial partners to further considerations of alternative use for Blast Furnace Gas as a fuel. Explanation given for the agglomeration of matter within the condensate overflow, leading to a possible redesign to avoid maintenance issues.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to: EPSRC
Tata Steel – Chris Williams
Cardiff Catalysts institute - Dr. Karen Wilson, Dr. Tom Davies, and James Hayward
Cardiff University School of Engineering - Gareth Hunt
Thank You – Questions?