Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Frank M. Wheeler
Yakov M. Gordon
Hatch
Sheridan Science & Technology Park
2800 Speakman Drive
Mississauga, Ontario, L5K 2R7
Canada
Tel: 905-855-7600
Fax.:905-855-8270
E-mail: igordon@hatch.ca
INTRODUCTION
As a step towards continuous steelmaking, Hatch developed the Compact Reduced Iron Steelmaking Process
(CRISP). Conventional established technologies are close-coupled into a unique plant configuration to provide
significantly improved plant availability and energy efficiency at a lower capital cost. The key to the proposed
concept is the innovative use of a stationary six-electrode arc furnace as a continuous melter of direct reduced
iron (DRI) and scrap. Although greenfield installations would advantageously incorporate hot charging of DRI,
the concept of Hatch CRISP also allows the use of cold charge.
The CRISP technology is most relevant to steel flat products plants as this application can justify the high
portion of virgin iron units (DRI) in the charge.
The Hatch CRISP concept provides meaningful capital and operating cost savings stemming from the beneficial
features of this facility, such as:
• Continuous melting
• Extended refractory lining life
• High melting furnace availability
• Reduced electrode, power consumption, and manning
• Excellent matching of DR furnace and EAF operating schedules
1
ISSTech. 2003 Conference Proceedings, April 27-30 , 2003, Indianapolis, Indiana, p.p. 1033-1041
3. Matching of DR Furnace and EAF Operations
4. The Metallurgy of Continuous Melting
5. Capital Cost Advantages
6. Operating Cost Benefits
7. Technology Risk Management
PLANT CONCEPT
One of key aspects of the Hatch CRISP is the use of a stationary six-electrode arc furnace as a continuous
melter. While novel to the steel industry, this type of furnace is well established in nickel and copper smelters.
The size of the brick-lined rectangular furnace, typically 9 x 27 m, can be adjusted flexibly to a given
application, allowing a bath size about 10 times the “heat” size. A major difference compared to a conventional
steelmaking arc furnace, this large bath provides a flywheel effect enabling the periodic tapping of steel while
continuing to melt the charge material – DRI and scrap. These charge materials are continuously fed into the
furnace through several feed points in the roof.
The continuous melter operates in an open-bath mode, utilizing the natural slag-foaming characteristics
associated with the continuous feed/melting of DRI. Arc power is delivered to the furnace from three single-
phase furnace transformers, each coupled with a pair of electrodes. Although total furnace power ranges from
100 to 120 MW and more, the hearth area has a power density an order of magnitude lower than conventional
steelmaking EAFs: approximately 250 kW/m2 as compared to the typical 2,000 to 2,500 kW/m2. This low
power density is one of the main factors contributing to the extended refractory life, projected at two or more
years.
As is common on stationary furnaces in other industries, metal (in our case steel) and slag are tapped
periodically from separate tap holes, typically on opposing ends of the furnace. The semi-finished steel is
transferred in ladles to a ladle metallurgical furnace (LMF) for refining and finishing after which the steel ladles
are brought to the continuous slab caster.
Thus, from the LMF on, the facility is a conventional plant. Upstream, however, the approach is novel. The
stationary arc furnace is charged directly with hot DRI from a direct reduction (DR) shaft. As discussed in detail
in Section 3, this close-coupling is greatly facilitated by the near-perfect match in operational availability of the
two process units – the DR furnace and the continuous melter.
This availability of over 8,000 hours per year also enables a high single-furnace capacity, readily in excess of
1.6 million t/yr. This also represents a good balance with the capacity of a downstream slab caster.
PLANT LAYOUT
The plant layout, shown schematically in Fig. 1*, represents a logical extension of our work on developing
concepts for hot charging of DRI. In our approach to hot charging, the DR shaft furnace is “stacked” above the
electrical arc furnace with DRI fed essentially by gravity from the reduction furnace to the EAF. In the case of
Hatch CRISP, a stationary rectangular furnace is used instead of the conventional circular tilting EAF.
Equipment proven in hot briquetting facilities is used to transfer hot DRI from the shaft furnace to the EAF.
Nitrogen or process gases create the inert atmosphere required to protect the hot material from re-oxidation.
*
The layout in Fig. 1 depicts a shaft DR furnace. The CRISP concept is equally applicable for a rotary hearth furnace. As
well, other modes of transfer of DRI, for instance pneumatic conveying, can also be incorporated.
The ability to instantaneously switch from the “hot” DRI circuit to a “cold” circuit provides operational
flexibility. The readiness of the cold circuit is maintained by a trickle flow of reduced material through the DRI
cooler. The cold DRI is directed to a storage silo to be blended in with the hot DRI or used during DR furnace
outages.
The other charge material, scrap in amounts of up to 20% of charge, is sized to allow the continuous feeding by
conveyor to the melting furnace. This eliminates the need for a high-capacity furnace charge crane. Our
experience with the design of plants with continuously-charged stationary furnaces confirms that crane
coverage for the furnace can be limited to facilities required for electrode handling and addition. As evident
from the capital cost comparison in Table III in Section 5, this reduces not only the costs for cranes but also
provides savings related to a lighter simplified furnace building.
Simulation of the design concepts we developed for hot DRI charging has confirmed that it is possible to
overcome this approximately 800 hours difference in actual operating time through appropriate plant design.
The proposed plant layout and DRI handling circuits avoid the necessity of extensive buffer storage facilities.
Nevertheless, the basic fact remains that DR furnace is “held back” when close-coupled with a conventional
EAF.
This drawback is overcome by using a stationary arc furnace as the close-coupled continuous melter.
Commercially-operated stationary six-electrode arc furnaces typically have an annual availability of over 8,000
hours, representing a near perfect match with DR plant operations.
This higher availability of the melting furnace translates into increased plant throughput and lower capital
investment per annual tonne of capacity. As discussed in the subsequent Section 6, it also leads to operating cost
savings.
The operational viability of the proposed arrangements was established through computer simulation using the
Arena software. Actual plant data from DR furnace and EAF operations was utilized in the simulation, which
also accurately reflected the random occurring events.
• The target carbon of the tapped steel of 0.05% has to be achieved without the injection of gaseous oxygen
• The slag composition must support the slag foaming inherent to the open-bath melting of continuously fed
DRI
• The chemical and physical properties of the slag must support the objective of essentially no slag-line
refractory erosion
Obviously, fundamental slag engineering is required to meet these seemingly conflicting requirements of an
active oxidizing slag that will not erode the sidewall refractories. The opportunities afforded by the high
proportion of DRI in the charge were fully utilized.
Firstly, the current level of process control of the established gas-based direct reduction processes allows the
metallization (i.e. the amount of residual iron oxides) and the carbon content of the DRI to be set independently.
Thus, the “natural” melt-in carbon of the steel bath can be targeted through the DRI composition, while
maintaining sufficient foaming of the slag.
Secondly, the typically low sulphur and phosphorus content in the DRI means that sulphur and phosphorus
removal in the melting furnace is not a major requirement, particularly given the desulphurizing capabilities of
an LMF. Thus, there is a greater flexibility in selecting the composition of the slag as high V-ratios are not
required for sulphur and phosphorus removal.
A quasi-empirical method of calculation was used to determine the slag composition. The results were then
verified by slag analyses from EAF operations with continuously-charged DRI.
The slag compositions calculated for two steel carbon levels: 0.06% C and 0.10% C, are shown in Table II.
The melting point of the slag can be estimated, for instance, from the ternary FeO – CaO – SiO2 diagram.
Assuming that, CaO is the sum of CaO + MgO and SiO2 the sum of SiO2 + Al2O3. Thus, the melting point for
the slag projected of steel with 0.05% carbon is approximately 1450°C. While recognizing that the real world
multi-component slag systems are far more complex, this first approximation serves as a useful guide.
30
25
20
FeO, %
15
10
5
1.5 2 2.5 3
CaO/SiO2
0.1% C 0.06% C
For purposes of comparison the throughput of all three plants was set at 1.25 million tonnes, the typical
maximum capacity of a conventional cold-charged EAF, even though a single stationary furnace is capable of
providing substantially more. The furnace parameters of the three cases are shown in Table III.
The differential in the capital costs of the three options is shown is Table IV. For clarity only areas impacted by
the technologies are shown; facilities with the same costs, for instance slab casting, are not included.
As evident, the CRISP technology with a continuous melter provides significant capital cost savings derived
primarily from four areas:
• Simplified scrap handling including savings from avoiding the need of a scrap charging crane
• Less extensive DRI handling circuits, primarily lower buffer storage requirements.
• Related lower building costs
• Less expensive arc furnace
A plant using the full potential of a stationary continuous melter – close to 2 million tonnes per year - would be
even more attractive in terms of capital cost per annual tonne of capacity.
Conventional EAF
Hatch CRISP
Parameter Cold Charging Hot Charging
Building Costs 14.1 14.1 12.4
Cranes 3.4 3.4 0.4
DRI Material Handling 14.5 4.1 2.0
Scrap Handling 19.8 19.8 5.7
EAF Furnace (melter) 158.0 151.4 130.0
Capital Cost Savings Base Case - 17.8 60.1
Note: Only facilities impacted by technology are shown. Items with same costs are not included.
Note: The beneficial effect of increased productivity on fixed costs is not considered.
The results of assessing the risks of Hatch CRISP in these two areas, technology and commercial, are
summarized in Table VI. In order to manage the risks associated with this novel technology our development
program included the following mitigating activities:
• Complete process and plant design including the detailed design and layout of critical systems, for example
the hot DRI transfer circuit.
• Inclusion of proven design precedents from other steelmaking facilities (e.g. hot briquetting system) or from
other industries (e.g. stationary six-electrode furnaces in the non-ferrous industry)
• Incorporation of proprietary Hatch technologies such as the copper refractory cooling elements
• Fundamental engineering of an appropriate slag
• Testing of the operability of the plant through plant simulation which included the randomness experienced
in actual plant operation
• Building on the definition established in the above activities, development of realistic capital and operating
cost estimates.
While recognizing the work still to be done in the area of steelmaking practices and slag engineering, this
approach has brought the risks to a manageable level. The Hatch CRISP technology can be seriously considered
without the fear of failure.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Hatch is greatly indebted to the suppliers of DR technology and facilities: HyL in Monterrey, Mexico and in
particular Midrex Corporation in Charlotte, N.C, USA, for the open discussions and exchange of information
that contributed to the development of a viable plant concept. The authors wish to express their thanks to their
colleagues – members of the multi-disciplinary team that developed Hatch CRISP: Albert Norrmalm, Peter
Blake, Clarence Nichols, Arnd Koechlin, Andy Matyas, Kevin O’Leary and John Wheeler to name but a few.
REFERENCES
1. K.G. Trubin and G.N. Oiks, “Metallurgy of Steel” (In Russian) Metallurgiya Moscow 1970,.