Alternate Fuels in Blast Furnaces to Reduce Coke Consumption

R Jaffarullah, Non-member
B K Ghosh, Non-member
Blast furnace continues to be principal producer of iron even today due to its size, techno-economics, energy utilisation and quality
of hot metal, when compared to other emerging technologies of iron production. Coke forms a major portion (more than 60%)
of the cost of hot metal and sources of metallurgical coal are limited. The recent crisis of imported coal availability and their cost
increase have forced all the Indian ironmakers to think in terms of coke economy and its partial replacement by alternate fuel.
The paper describes in detail technological considerations such as role of auxiliary fuel, cooling characteristics and thermal
compensation of potential injectants and replacement ratio. The significance of indirect and direct reduction of wustite and
principles of coke economy achieved by auxiliary fuel injection with respect to C-rd diagram have been analysed. The suitability
of injection technology to Indian condition and the status of established auxiliary fuel injection technology through tuyeres, such
as, coal dust injection, natural gas injection, fuel oil injection, coal tar injection and plastic injection have also been discussed in
brief.

Keywords : Blast furnaces; Coke consumption; Alternate fuels; Replacement ratio; C-rd diagrams

INTRODUCTION increased productivity, stable and smooth furnace operation.

Blast furnace continues to be the principal producer of tonnage
iron at competitive cost and acceptable quality even after
emergence of a number of alternate methods for production
of iron. However, the blast furnace process is handicapped
by its dependence on good quality coke which is in short
supply all over the world with regular increase in cost. The
cost structure of hot metal indicates that over 60% of its
cost is due to coke only.
Ironmaking in India is not self sufficient with respect to
availability of good quality coking coals and has to depend
on imports to a large extent. The recent crisis in availability
of imported coals and the increase in their cost have forced
all the Indian ironmakers to think in terms of coke economy
and alternate auxiliary fuel for blast furnaces.
The auxiliary fuels, such as, coal, natural gas, oil and other
carbonaceous materials used globally, for injection into blast
furnaces, is driven primarily by:
- Economic factors, especially the benefits derived from
reducing the consumption of expensive coals for coke
making
- Avoiding major expenditure on renovation /
revamping of existing coke batteries and
- Reducing the overall emissions from the steel plant.
From a blast furnace perspective, the use of auxiliary fuels
decrease the overall cost of production of hot metal through
R Jaffarullah is with and B K Ghosh was with R & D Centre for
Iron & Steel, SAIL, Ranchi 834 002
This paper received the Dr M Visvesvaraya Award for the year 2004-2005.
In this paper, different established technologies of auxiliary
fuel injection and their theoretical consideration for injection
have been reviewed.
BLAST FURNACE PROCESS AND ROLE
OF COKE
As a result of Japanese dissection studies1 of quenched blast
furnaces in the early 1970’s, the inner state of blast furnaces
was revealed, which is schematically represented in Figure 1.
The most significant outcome of the studies was the evidence
of the existence of cohesive zone (softening-melting zone)
with alternate layers of coke, fused slag and iron, which plays
an important role in blast furnace aerodynamics and
distribution of gases in the furnace.
The four important primary functions that are fulfilled by
coke in blast furnace are2:
(i) It supplies heat in accordance with the reaction
2C + O2 → 2 CO + 53 450 kcal
(ii) It supplies reducing gas for the reduction of iron oxides.
(iii) It provides permeability and mechanical support to
the burden.
(iv) It carburises the iron and causes high temperature
reduction of metalloids such as SiO2, MnO and P2O5.
TECHNOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR
AUXILIARY FUEL INJECTION
Role of Auxiliary Fuel
The primary functions of auxiliary fuel in blast furnace are :
(a) Substitution of auxiliary fuel carbon for coke as
reductant,

16 IE(I) Journal-MM
 (b) Substitution of auxiliary fuel hydrogen for coke as a
reductant, and
(c) Alteration of thermal balances in the raceway, hearth
and reduction zones.
P rob e s
Cooling Characteristics of Auxiliary Fuel and
Thermal Compensation
The use of auxiliary fuels is well-established practice in blast
G ra n ular
Zone furnace technology. It decreases the coke consumption and
provides endothermic reactions on decomposition, which
are used to control the tuyere Raceway Adiabatic Flame
C o h esive
Temperature (RAFT). The auxiliary fuels, generally considered
Zone for blast furnace injection, are all inferior to coke as heat
producer in the furnace4.

D rip p in g
The factors responsible are:
Zone
– Fuel injected is usually at or slightly above, the ambient
temperature and is therefore much cooler than
R acew ay
preheated coke at raceway (around 1500oC).
D e a dm a n
Zone
– Auxiliary fuel consumes an appreciable quantity of heat
for dissociation of organic C-H, C-O and C-S bonds
of the auxiliary fuel, and
– Only the carbon content of the fuel is a source of heat
at the tuyeres.
Figure 1 Zones in the blast furnace
The amount of reducer and heat produced from 1 kg of
Table 1 Properties of coke and auxiliary fuels
auxiliary fuel is different from that obtained from 1 kg of
Parameter O2 in Coke Heavy Natural
blast, % fuel Oil gas ** coke. Bogdandy 5 has carried out calculations for some
Chemical Composition gaseous, liquid and solid injectants, which is reproduced in
C, % 87.0 84.0 — Tables 1 and 2. The tuyere gas formed during gasification of
Ash, % 10.0 0.5 — auxiliary fuels contains more concentration of reducer (CO
S, % 1.0 2.5 —
H, % 0.4 12.0 —
+ H2) than the gas formed from coke. Also the concentration
O, % 0.6 0.5 — of H2 is higher. Hydrogen is a more powerful reducing agent
N, % 1.0 0.5 — than CO as well as its presence in the tuyere gas gives advantage
CH4, % — — ≈ 100 with respect to heat transfer and aerodynamics.
Calorific value, kcal/kg 6900 – 9600 – 8580
7200cc 9800 c The change in the RAFT relative to the amount of fuel injected
Wind required to 21 3.84 3.71 2.38 is used to assess the relative cooling effects of each injectants
transform into CO and H2 22 3.67 3.54 2.27 (Table 3). Natural gas has the greatest cooling effect on the
Nm3/kg or Nm3/Nm3 ** 23 3.51 3.39 2.17
raceway, followed by fuel oil, coal tar, high volatile coal and
Table 2 Blast requirement, tuyere gas volume and composition with a blast humidity of 10 g/Nm3 and ash content of coal: 6% dry
Coal characteristic
Parameter
Anthracite 19% VM 28% VM 35% VM Lignite
Blast requirement, Nm3/kg 3.78 3.53 3.44 3.32 2.01
Tuyere gas volume, Nm3/kg 5.19 5.08 5.02 4.83 3.49
Tuyere gas composition:
CO, % 33.10 32.70 32.20 32.30 36.50
H2, % 9.00 12.20 13.40 14.80 17.80
N2, % 57.00 55.10 54.40 52.90 45.70
Note : VM = Volatile Matter

Vol 86, April 2005 17

Table 3 Effect of various injectant in blast furnace conditions Table 4 Change in RAFT and replacement ratio with different coals
Change in flame Change in kg injected/100K Replacement
Type of auxiliary Coal type C/H C/O
Injection rate temperature coke rate, change in RAFT ratio
fuel
(RAFT), °C kg/thm
Anthracite 43.7 44.2 122 0.99
Natural gas 100 kg/thm - 513 - 82.6
LV bituminous 18.9 29.5 100 0.90
(132 Nm3/thm)
MV bituminous 13.7 12.7 86 0.86
Anthracite coal 100 kg/thm - 162 - 91.0
HV bituminous 15.6 5.5 67 0.72
High volatile coal 100 kg/thm - 218 - 76.1
Sub-bituminous 16.0 3.6 65 0.54
Heavy fuel oil 100 kg/thm - 321 - 98.1
Lignite 15.0 2.8 58 0.50
anthracite coal. Lower cooling from a fuel permits larger Note : LV = Low Volatile; MV = Medium Volatile; HV = High Volatile
quantity to be injected.
(FeO) only is important because of its low equilibrium CO –
In order to balance the endothermic effect of tuyere injection
utilisation or high equilibrium CO/CO2 ratio2. The reduction
and maintain a preset RAFT, either hot blast temperature
(HBT) or oxygen enrichment can be increased or blast of FeO takes place by two reactions, namely,
humidity reduced. (i) Indirect reduction — taking place at temperature below
Coke Replacement Ratio 1000oC

The choice of auxiliary fuel for injection does significantly FeO + nCO = Fe + CO2 + (n – 1) CO + 3250 kcal
alter the cost benefit that can be obtained by the injection. (ii) Direct reduction — taking place at temperature above
The primary factor that influences the cost benefit of any 1000oC
injection technology is the amount of coke that can be
replaced by the injected auxiliary fuel. FeO + CO = Fe + CO2

Replacement ratio (RR) is the ratio of kg coke saved per ton
of hot metal (thm) to the kg/Nm3 of auxiliary fuel injected
per thm2.
The replacement ratio normally quoted in the literature is the
metallurgically corrected coke rate where the coke rate is
corrected for furnace parameters, such as hot metal silicon
content and blast temperature to give coke rate under
standard condition.
Hoogovens, a leading coal injector has developed the two
formulae to determine the replacement ratio of a coal based
on its carbon (C), hydrogen (H) and ash contents:
RR = [%C(dry basis) + (2H% (dry basis)/0.903)] / 100
RR = (– 118.9 + 2.3C + 4.5H + 0.97 ash) / 100
6
Russians has developed replacement ratio formulas for
gaseous, and solid or liquid fuel using the ratio of enthalpies
of auxiliary fuel and coke.
Actual replacement ratios achieved in blast furnace operation
with low to moderate injection rates tend to be slightly higher
due to reduced heat losses (in view of increased productivity)
and some increase in reduction efficiency. But, at higher rates
of injection, heat loss can increase which may lead to lowering
of replacements than theoretical. Table 4 shows the changes
in RAFT and replacement ratio achieved with different coals.
PRINCIPLES OF COKE ECONOMY
Indirect and Direct Reduction of Iron Oxide
In blast furnace fuel calculations, the reduction of wustite
CO2 + C = 2CO (solution loss reaction)
Adding FeO + C = Fe + CO – 36,500 kcal.
These two reactions are diametrically opposite in their thermal
effect and reducer requirement. Indirect reduction is slightly
exothermic with large reducer requirement (n = 3 to 4)
because of equilibrium consideration, whereas direct
reduction is highly endothermic but requires only one mole
of carbon for reducing one mole of FeO. Therefore, it is
apparent that a compromise between the two reactions will
give the optimum carbon consumption for reduction of a
mole of FeO to Fe.
C-rd Diagram
If the carbon rate per ton of hot metal (thm), as dictated
separately by thermal and chemical requirements, is plotted
against the degree of direct reduction, rd = FeOD/ FeOT
(ratio of FeO reduced directly to the total FeO per thm), a
plot known as C-rd diagram (Figure 2) is obtained. The point
of intersection of the two lines at which both the thermal
and chemical requirements are satisfied, gives the optimum
degree of direct reduction (rdopt) and corresponding carbon
rate is the optimum carbon rate (Copt).
The chemical requirement line shown in the C-rd diagram
corresponds to attainment of Fe-O-C equilibrium in the top
zone (stack). In case of departure from equilibrium due to
poor reducibility or kinetics caused by poor gas-solid contact
condition, high velocity of gas etc., the line will shift upwards.
The thermal requirement line will shift upwards if either the

18 IE(I) Journal-MM
 T h e rm a l
T h e rm a l R eq u ire m e nt R e q uire m en t
O o pr
C o pr
O o pt O´
C to b e B u rnt a t C2 O
C o pt
T u y ere s C1
uy e re s
at T
e B u rn t m e n t
to b R eq u ir e
s a ry A
C R ate, k g/th m

l
N ec e s T he rm a C h e m ic a l A´ C h e m ic a l
C eet

C R ate, k g /th m
to M R e q uire m en t R e q uire m en t
C R e qu ire d fo r D ire ct R e d uc tion

C R e qu ire d fo r M e ta llo id R ed u c tio n

[C ] fo r S olution in H ot M e ta l rd 2 rd 1

rd o pt rd o pr rd , %

rd , %
Figure 3(a) Effect of auxiliary fuel injection without thermal
compensation
Figure 2 C-rd diagram

thermal requirements of bottom zone go up or if HBT goes T h e rm a l R e q u ire m en t

down. Therefore, more carbon has to be burnt to meet the (B a se a n d w ith O 2 E n ric h m e nt)

thermal demand of the process. Due to poor raw material

characteristics and their improper distribution in the stack,
O
the chemical equilibrium is usually not attained. Hence, indirect C1 O ´´ In c rea se in H B T o r
C2
reduction is achieved to a lesser degree and consequently the C3
O´ D e c re ase in B la st M o istu re

degree of direct reduction is always greater than rdopt. The

C R ate, k g/th m

furnace works at a point Oopr corresponding to a degree of A´´ A A´

C h e m ic al
direct reduction rdopr (greater than rdopt) and carbon rate Copr R e q uire m e n t
(greater than Copt). The distance Oopt minus Oopr, thus gives
the departure from equilibrium.
rd 2 rd 1
Effect in C-rd Diagram for Injection Without Thermal
Compensation rd , %
Figure 3(b) Effect of auxiliary fuel injection with thermal
Due to auxiliary fuel injection, the following modifications compensation
will have to be incorporated in C-rd diagram:
tuyere gases resulting in shifting of thermal requirement line
– Each kg of carbon in injection case will represent the upwards. Such an operation can be allowed to the extent that
carbon from coke and carbon from injectant in the flame temperature does not drop below the minimum flame
proportion dictated by the amount of injectant and its temperature, which is required for maintaining adequate heat
composition. exchange condition in the bottom zone. Hence, coke savings
– This carbon will yield lesser heat in the bottom zone will be poor as well as production will start falling beyond
but at the same time more reducer in the top zone as the point when O´A´ exceeds OA due to an increase in carbon
compared to carbon of coke. to be burnt per thm.
Therefore, the thermal requirement line will shift upwards Effect in C-rd Diagram for Injection with Thermal
and the chemical line will shift downwards [Figure 3(a)]. Compensation
Figure 3(a) shows that as a result of injection, the degree of In practice, injection is usually done with adequate thermal
direct reduction decreases from rd1 to rd2, while the carbon compensation. This compensation is provided either through
rate goes up from C1 to C2. The carbon rate C2 minus the an increase in HBT, or a decrease in blast moisture content,
carbon (C) from injectant will then correspond to the coke or an increase in oxygen content of the blast, or a combination
rate with injection. In this case, the injection may not give of these. The popular criteria for such compensation is that
energy saving, the total carbon rate has gone up from C1 to RAFT should be maintained same with injection as in the
C2 because the injection was done without compensation for base practice to ensure smooth running of the furnace.
the endothermic effect of injection on flame temperature of Figure 3(b) shows an increase in HBT or a decrease in blast

Vol 86, April 2005 19

moisture are almost equivalent and bring down the thermal
requirement line. The degree of direct reduction may increase
or decrease depending upon composition of the injectant
but mainly carbon rate goes down by a considerable extent.
Thus, a good coke economy can be expected. Also, the
productivity can substantially increase due to a decrease in
carbon to be burnt per thm (O´A´ is less than OA).
With oxygen enrichment, the thermal requirement line does
not change its position because oxygen does not bring any
enthalpy. The carbon rate decreases from C1 to C2 only due
to lowering of the chemical requirement line. The coke
economy would obviously be less than that in case of
increased hot blast temperature or decreased blast moisture.
Therefore, the coke economy by auxiliary fuel injection is mainly
obtained on account of heat and reducer supplied by the injectant.
However, it has been found that some additional economy is
also obtained as a result of improvements, which are brought
by injection such as improvement in reduction condition in the
stack zone resulting from increased concentration of reducing
gases and more ore/coke ratio in the charge.
VARIOUS AUXILIARY FUEL INJECTION
TECHNOLOGY
Coal Dust Injection (CDI)
Status of CDI
Coal injection is the most developed and well-established
technology for auxiliary fuel injection in a blast furnace. This
is due to abundant availability of coal for injection, uniform
global distribution and coal, in association with oxygen
enrichment of blast, can replace a large quantity of coke and
increase blast furnace productivity.
At present in India, coal injection of moderate rate is being
practiced in three blast furnaces of Tata Steel and two blast
furnaces of Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) Plants.
New facilities with higher rate of injections are being installed.
A coal injection rate of 180 kg/thm - 200 kg/thm has been
achieved replacing more than 40% of coke requirement in
blast furnace and a few blast furnaces have demonstrated
successfully an injection rate of 250 kg/thm - 300 kg/thm.
The coke replacement ratio of a coal is dependent on the
energy or carbon content of coal, with low volatile coals
having the higher coke replacement ratio.
CDI System
There are two types of coal injection in blast furnace:
(a) pulverised coal injection (PCI)
(b) granular coal injection (GCI)
PCI, defined as the injection of coal of size 70%-80% passing
20
through a 200 mesh screen, is practiced on larger scale, all
over the world (more than 170 installations worldwide).
GCI, defined as the injection of coal of size only 10%-30%
of the particles passing through a 200 mesh screen, requires
about 60% less energy in grinding than in pulverisation. GCI
is practiced in smaller scale compared to PCI.
The systems and technologies available for coal injection are
proprietary in nature, and therefore, these technologies are
identified by their supplier names. For selection of suitable
CDI technology, the most commonly used parameters are:
– Individual tuyere control system
– Common control system with a distributor for even
distribution
– Mode of conveyance, ie, thin or dense phase
– Types of distributor, ie, static (no moving parts) or
dynamic (having moving parts)
Figure 4 shows a typical flow diagram of the coal injection
system. It consists of three main sections, namely:
(a) Raw material receiving and storage
(b) Coal drying and grinding
(c) Coal injection proper
Future Challenges of CDI Technology
For the success of coal injection, it is necessary to inject
maximum amount of coal with the highest possible
replacement ratio, without affecting the blast furnace
productivity and hot metal quality. This necessitates proper
coal selection so as to ensure simultaneous maximisation of
injection rates and replacement ratio.
The suitability of a coal for injection is essentially dictated by
the factors7:
(i) better combustibility of coal
(ii) ash characteristics of coal, which should be such that
no deposition takes place in the injection lance and
tuyeres.
(iii) low ash content to achieve a high replacement ratio.
(iv) cooling effect of the injected coal in the raceway should
be such that the blast parameters can be adjusted within
practical limits to maintain an optimal flame
temperature (RAFT).
Table 5 shows the quality of coals used for blast furnace
injection in selected steel plants globally.
Apart from availability of reliable coal preparation and
injection equipment and suitable coal for injection, the
following measures has to be carried out for achieving high
IE(I) Journal-MM
 M ate ria l R ec e iv in g S e c tio n D ry in g a nd G rind in g S ec tion In je c tio n S e c tion
F la m e F ro n t E qp t

B last
F urn a c e
B ag F ilte r
L a n c es (1 8/2 0 N o s)

H ig h R ise R a w C oa l
C o n ve y or S ilo
S cre w C o nv e yo r
6 0 t/h 3 50 m 3

C oal
D istrib utor
F ine C o al
S ilo
1 00 0 m 3
D rag C h air
C o nv eyo r

G ro u nd
H o pp e r
M agn etic B a ll
S ep arato r M ill To
2 1.25 t/h C h im n e y

B e lt F e e d e r 6 0 t/h ID
F an S cre e n s
R e c irc u la tio n In je c tio n 15 m 3 15 m 3
G a se s Ve sse ls

C O /B F G a s
H ot G as
A ir
G e n era tor D o sin g
N itrog e n Va lv e s
H o t G a s from S to ve s
N itrog e n fo r C o o lin g

Figure 4 Flow diagram of the coal dust injection

Table 5 Quality of coals used for blast furnace injection in selected steel plants globally
Coal characteristics
Replacement
Location Coal type H2O, % Ash, VM, % S, % CV, Size, HGI ratio
% Mj/kg % <µm
Arbed, Esch-Belval Lignite 10-12 4 50 0.5 22 70<74 — —
Lignite 11 4 44 — 21 70<90 — 0.54
LV bituminous 1 14 12 — 30 90<90 — 0.81
Usinor/ Sollca, Dunkirk LV bituminous — 12-13 11-12 1.3 30 — 68 0.84
British Steel, HV bituminous 2 4 31 1.5 — 89<2 mm — 0.90
Scunthorpe HV bituminous 1.4 10 22 0.4 — 97<2 mm — 0.91
SocHF Reunis, Uckange HV bituminous 1.2 7 35 — 31 67<80 — Variable
VEB, Maxhutte Lignite 6.8 14 51 3.5 22 90<200 — 0.55
Hoogovens, IJmuiden LV, MV & HV bituminous 0.7-5 4-11 18-39 0.5-1.1 — 80<75 45-100 0.79-0.98
2-9 6-8 32-35 0.7-1.4 — — — 0.93-1.02
Stanton HV bituminous anthracite
1 9 7 0.8 — 100<1.7mm — 1.01
Blend: HV bituminous + 1 8 20 1 — 80<90 — 0.86
Thyssen Stahl, Hamborn etc.
semi-anthracite
ILVA, Taranto HV bituminous 1 8 26 — — 80<90 — 0.83
Various blends of HV — 7-10 22-40 0.3-1.0 — 80<74 — —
SSAB, Lulea
bituminous + petcoke
Sidmar, Ghent MV &HV bituminous 1 7-14 23-37 0.4-0.6 28-33 90<90 — —
Armco Ashland HV bituminous 5 4.6 38 0.7 — 78<74 — 1.1
Note : LV = Low Volatile; MV = Medium Volatile; HV = High Volatile; CV = Calorific Value; HGI = Hardgrove Grindability Index

Vol 86, April 2005 21

coal injection rate exceeding 200 kg/thm on a regular basis; Table 6 Comparison of furnace performance with and without natural gas
injection for Armco Steel
– Improvement in burden quality (coke and sinter) Without With
Parameter
injection injection
– Better burden distribution control, and
Production rate, t/ day 4309 4724
– Intensive research in various aspects of coal Wind rate, Nm3/thm 1097 935
combustion. Natural gas injection rate, kg/thm — 87.5
Natural Gas Injection Oxygen consumption, kg/thm 22.25 92.6
Coke rate, kg/thm 457 343
Natural gas is primarily a methane based hydrocarbon whose Energy released at hearth, Gcal/thm 0.554 0.454
physical and thermal properties are : Hearth gas temperature, °C 1832 1633
CH4, % : 85 – 95 Top gas temperature, °C 73 176
Top gas CO/CO2 ratio 1.10 1.08
C2H6, % : 0.5 – 4
Top gas H2/H2O ratio 2.31 1.25
C3H8, % : 0.1 – 2 Solution loss reaction, kg/thm 80.64 48.48
C4H10, % : 0.1 – 1 Source : Charles Associates, 1992

C5H12, % : 0.1 – 1
of lower gas density (bosh gas) due to high hydrogen
CO2, % : 0.5 – 5 concentration and the decrease in nitrogen concentration of
H2S : traces the blast furnace stack gases. Natural gas requires higher oxygen
enrichment than other fuel injection.
Calorific Value, kcal/Nm3 : 8540 – 9150
Coal Tar Injection
Natural gas is being widely used in blast furnaces of CIS
countries, the USA and Europe because of its easy availability, Coal tar is a byproduct generated during the coke oven
low cost, high heat value, ease of handling and environment operation in a steel plant. Depending upon the market
friendly nature. Natural gas injection does not introduce any condition, tar could be an alternate fuel for injection in blast
slag forming constituents and, therefore, the net heat obtained furnace. Tata Steel has pioneered coal tar injection in India
is substantially higher per unit weight of injected gas. and it is being practiced in their four blast furnaces at present.
Maximum natural gas injection rate is limited to around 100 SAIL has also started tar injection in one of their blast furnace
kg/thm due to blast furnace operational problems. Normally, and has planned in some blast furnaces in near future.
natural gas injection is carried out in conjunction with increase A typical coal tar analysis is9 :
in hot blast temperature and oxygen enrichment of the blast
C, % : 89.5
to compensate decrease in RAFT and to increase the coke
replacement ratio8. H2, % : 5.0
S, % : 0.3
Recent discovery of large reserves of natural gas in the coastal
region of India has brightened the prospects of natural gas Ash, % : 0.5
injection in blast furnaces in India. Capital investment in natural Quinolene insoluble, % : 1–5
gas equipment would be less as compared to coal dust Toluene insoluble, % : 5 – 10
injection. Coal bed methane gas, a variant of natural gas has
Moisture, % : 3–4
also been discovered in huge quantity near West Bengal -
Jharkhand coal belt. This promises to be an attractive Specific gravity : 1.18 – 1.20
proposition for injection in blast furnaces existing nearer to Calorific Value, kcal/kg : 8600
the location of gas reserves. Published data indicate a replacement ratio of around 1.35
Table 6 shows the comparison of blast furnace performance and productivity improvement of more than 4% for an
with and without natural gas injection for Armco Steel. Use injection rate of around 40 kg/thm9. Figure 5 shows a typical
of natural gas in blast furnace introduces significant amount flow diagram of tar injection system. The main sections of
of hydrogen in the bosh gas. The presence of hydrogen in tar injection system are :
the bosh gas reduces coke consumption by decreasing the l Coal tar storage, pumping and heating system
extent of the solution loss reaction and thermal energy
requirement associated with the endothermic effect of l Coal tar ring main and supply
solution loss reaction3. The productivity will increase because l Coal tar distribution and injection system

22 IE(I) Journal-MM

Ta r Tan k P um p H o u se Ta r H e a te rs
R e tu rn L ine
Ta r C o o le r
D istrib utor fo r S te a m
P urging S tea m
Ta r to
In dividu a l
T u y ere D istrib utor fo r F low M ea su re m en t Ta r to B F
Ta r a nd C on tro l
Figure 5 Flow diagram of coal tar injection system
The critical parameter for tar injection is the viscosity, which
is dependent on its temperature. Proper temperature has to
be maintained for better flowability and atomization of tar
in raceway. Maximum injection rate is limited by tar handling
and transportation problems.
Fuel Oil Injection
During the 1950’s, oil was the preferred injectant due to its low
price relative to natural gas and coal. After oil price shocks of
the 1970’s, renewed interest in oil injection has started in Europe.
Oil injection levels upto 150 kg/thm have been practiced in
the last few years with good economic results. Technically, oil
injection occupies intermediate level between gas injection and
coal injection as regards the temperature compensation
requirement2. Oil produces large amount of reducing agents
as well as heat at tuyere, leading to better economics. Oil injection
equipment is similar to tar injection facilities.
Major limitation and important consideration in oil injection
practice is the sulphur level of the fuel. At BHP, New Castle,
the maximum sulphur content in oil specification is 2.5%.
Any variation in oil sulphur level will affect coke and limestone
consumption. At New Castle, a coke replacement ratio of
around 1.5 and productivity increase of around 1.4 thm / t
of oil injection has been reported.
Plastic Injection
Plastic injection of around 30 000 t/year is being practiced in
Keihin works of NKK Corporation, Japan10. The granulated
or pelletised plastic replaces an equal amount of coking coal.
The only hurdles faced by NKK are limited collection network
of waste plastic and non-availability of adequate storage facilities.
As per NKK, upto 40% of the coking coal can be replaced
by recycled plastic in a blast furnace. However, polyvinyl plastic
(PVC) accounting for about 15% of Japan’s waste plastic
emits corrosive chlorine gas during combustion and was found
unsuitable for injection in blast furnace.
In India a large amount of waste plastic are generated from
industrial and municipal sources whose disposal is causing a
great environmental hazard. Adoption of this technology in
India has to be seriously explored and research for its use has
to be taken for achieving benefits in coke consumption at
blast furnace and environmental protection.
Vol 86, April 2005
CONCLUSIONS
To overcome the availability of imported coal and to reduce
the hot metal cost, Indian ironmakers has to incorporate suitable
auxiliary fuel injections in priority basis in all of their blast furnaces
by doing in-depth study of techno-economics, auxiliary fuel
availability and feasibility of suitable injection technology.
Auxiliary fuel injection technology has come to stay as an
important part of modern ironmaking technology. Due to
availability of large varieties of coal for injection, higher
injection rate and lower temperature compensation required
compared to other fuels; coal injection will be better suitable
for Indian blast furnaces.
Natural gas and coal bed methane might be suitable for those
plants situated nearer to those production fields. Depending
upon the availability and techno-economics coal tar injection
will be suitable for some blast furnaces. Plastic injection could
be adopted because of its huge potential in coke saving and
environmental protection.
Lastly, more research has to be carried out for adoption and
maximising of the injection rates of auxiliary fuel for our
Indian condition.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors are thankful to the Management of R & D Centre for
Iron & Steel, SAIL, Ranchi for granting permission to publish
this paper. Authors are also thankful to the colleagues of their
department for providing support in preparation of this article.
REFERENCES
1. K Kanbara, T Hagiwara, A Shigemi, S Kendo, Y Kanayama, K
Wakabayashi and N Hiramoto. ‘Dissection of Blast Furnaces and Their
Internal State.’ Trans ISIJ, vol 17, 1977, pp 371-390.
2. A K Biswas. ‘Principles of Blast Furnace Ironmaking.’ Cootha Publishing,
Brisbane, Australia, 1981, pp 375-425.
3. J C Agarwal, F C Brown, D L Chin, A R Frydenlun, N S Jessiman, A P
Lingras and S J Sikirica. ‘The Role of Oxygen-plus-fuel Injection in
Increasing the Productivity of the Blast Furnace.’ Ironmaking Conference
Proceedings, 1992, pp 139-147.
4. R Athappan, U N Mishra, B Thakur and S R Mediratta. ‘Auxilliary Fuel
Injection: An Energy Alternative for Economic Blast Furnace Practice at
VISL, Bhadravati.’ Steel India, vol 18, no 2, October 1995, pp 65-70.
5. L Von Bogdandy and H J Engell. ‘The Reduction of Iron Ore.’ Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, 1971, pp 454-456.
6. B P Dovgalyuk. ‘Methods of Monitoring Effectiveness of Using Auxiliary
Fuels and Process Oxygen and Their Optimum Distribution Among Blast
Furnaces.’ Steel in the USSR, vol 17, August 1987, pp 348-350.
7. R N Singh. ‘Coal Injection in Blast Furnace – An Overview.’ Steel India,
vol 24, no 1, April 2001, pp 1-14.
8. J C Agarwal, F C Brown, D L Chin, G S Stevans, F C Gansbil, J R
Wandling, R K Clark and D M Smith. ‘Production Increase with High
Rates of Natural Gas Injection at ACME Steel and National Steel’s Granite
City Division.’ Ironmaking Conference Proceedings, 1996, pp 107-114.
9. Ashok Kumar, A Ahmed and L M Chaterjee. ‘Coal Tar Injection in ‘A’
and ‘B’ Blast Furnaces at Tata Steel.’ Tata Search, 1997, p 109.
10. T Furukawa. ‘Plastic as Ironmaking Fuel at NKK.’ New Steel, May 1998.
23