See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264838187

Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace under actual
conditions

Article  in  International Journal of Exergy · January 2013

DOI: 10.1504/IJEX.2013.054119

CITATIONS READS

6 165

3 authors, including:

Ebrahim Hajidavalloo Morteza Behbahani-Nejad

Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz
42 PUBLICATIONS   357 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   210 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

simulation of two-phase flow in UBD View project

Simulation of Francis Turbine Draft Tube with Considering Air and Water Injection View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ebrahim Hajidavalloo on 12 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

380 Int. J. Exergy, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2013

Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc

furnace under actual conditions

Ebrahim Hajidavalloo*, Hamze Dashti and

Morteza Behbahani-Nejad
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Shahid Chamran University,
Ahvaz, Iran
Email: hajidae_1999@yahoo.com
Email: hamze_dashti_1361@yahoo.com
Email: bnmorteza@scu.ac.ir
*Corresponding author

Abstract: The energy and exergy analyses of an existing steel Electric Arc
Furnace (EAF) are performed to estimate the potential for increasing the
furnace efficiency. To obtain realistic results, the effect of air infiltration into
the furnace was taken into account. The results of the analyses revealed that the
energy and exergy efficiencies of the furnace are low and should be increased.
The main sources of energy waste are stack gases followed by heat transfer to
the cooling water, while the main sources of exergy destruction are combustion
and heat transfer. Hot stack gases contain 18.3% and 12.2% of the total input
energy and exergy, respectively. Increasing the air infiltration reduces the
energy and exergy efficiencies of the EAF. By using the energy of flue gas to
preheat the sponge iron, the electrical energy consumption of the furnace can be
reduced by 89 GJ, dictating a 21.4% reduction in electrical energy consumption
and a 13.6% increase in steel production.

Keywords: exergy analysis; steel electric arc furnace; preheating.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Hajidavalloo, E., Dashti, H.
and Behbahani-Nejad, M. (2013) ‘Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel
electric arc furnace under actual conditions’, Int. J. Exergy, Vol. 12, No. 3,
pp.380–404.
Biographical notes: Ebrahim Hajidavalloo is an Associate Professor in
Mechanical Engineering Department of Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz.
He has completed his PhD from Dalhousie University in Canada and since then
is working in current position.
Hamze Dashti is MSc graduate from Mechanical Engineering Department of
Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz.
Morteza Behbahani-Nejad is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering
Department of Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. He has completed his
PhD from Tehran University in Iran and since then is working in current
position.
This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled ‘Exergy
analysis of steel electric arc furnace’ presented at the ‘ASME 2010 10th
Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis’, 12–14 July
2010, Istanbul, Turkey.

Copyright © 2013 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 381

1 Introduction

The iron and steel industries are the largest industrial energy consumers. According to
Camdali et al. (2005), approximately 12% of world energy production is used in the iron
and steel sectors. Bisio et al. (2000) reported that after employee costs, energy costs
represent the highest cost element in integrated steel works (about 30% of the total cost).
The share of Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) technology in the iron and steel industry is
increasing rapidly and was associated with at least 50% of the total steel production in
2010, based on the prediction of Raja et al. (2000).
There have been many investigations regarding the energy analysis of EAFs. Most
recently, Kirschen et al. (2009) presented energy balances for 70 modern EAFs and found
that the total energy requirements of these EAFs ranged from 510 to 880 kWh/ton, with
energy efficiencies between 40% and 75%. They reported that a decrease in energy losses
to off-gassing systems and cooling systems will increase energy efficiency and thereby
decrease CO2 emissions. Fruehan et al. (2000) showed that the energy used to produce
liquid steel by EAF facilities is significantly higher than the theoretical minimum energy
requirements. They also indicated the potential for practical reductions in the EAF energy
requirements by about 24–33%. Hajidavalloo and Alagheband (2008) investigated the
effect of sponge iron preheating on the efficiency of electric arc furnaces. They proposed
that, by using a neutral gas such as nitrogen as the working fluid, some portion of the exit
flue gas can be saved and returned to the furnace.
Contrary to the energy analysis, there has not been much work to address the exergy
analysis of EAFs. In the exergy analysis, the first and second laws of thermodynamics are
used to evaluate the potential improvement in the performance of a thermal system.
Summaries of the evolution of exergy analysis throughout the late 1980s are provided by
Kotas (1985), Moran and Sciubba (1994), Bejan et al. (1996), Rosen (1999), and Dincer
(2002). In recent years, many researchers have used exergy analysis for industrial
processes. Camdali and Tunc (2003) studied the exergy analysis of an EAF and
concluded that its exergy efficiency is about 55%. They also computed the chemical
exergy of the different input and output materials of the EAF. Bisio et al. (2000) studied
the effects of design parameters on the performance of the EAF. Based on their research,
the exergy efficiency of the furnace is about 55% if a heat recovery scheme is used but,
otherwise the exergy efficiency is around 52%. Ostrovski and Zhang (2005) studied the
energy and exergy efficiencies of the blast iron making process and found that the overall
efficiency strongly depends on the utilisation of off-gas. The efficiency of a natural gas-
fired aluminum melting furnace in a die-casting plant was examined by Rosen and Lee
(2009) using energy and exergy methods. They found that the overall-system efficiency
was 10% for energy and 6% for exergy. Coskun et al. (2009) proposed a new approach
for simplifying the calculation of flue gas specific heat and specific exergy value in one
formulation depending on fuel chemical composition.
As seen, there are not many reports on the exergy analysis of EAFs in the literature.
Moreover, those who have discussed the subject made simplifying assumptions that are
not realistic to the best knowledge of the authors. For example, the effect of air
infiltration in the EAF was neglected in previous researches (Camdali et al., 2003;
Camdali and Tunc 2003), even though it has important effects on the energy and exergy
balance of the furnace. In this study, energy and exergy analyses of the EAF were
performed while considering the effect of air infiltration into the furnace.
382 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

2 System description

In electric arc furnaces, high voltage is applied to electrodes to create an electric arc
between a metal charge and the electrodes. Heat is generated by the electrical resistance
of the metal charge against passing the electric current. Production of liquid steel in an
electric arc furnace can be defined with the following order:
 Charging with scrap and sponge iron
 Melting the charge material
 Superheating the melt
 Discharging
The production of high-quality steel is the result of using proper materials with good
compositions that produced the following chemical reaction in the EAF (Camdali et al.,
2003):
‘2[Fe]+3[O] → [Fe2O3]’, ‘[Fe]+[O] → [FeO]’, ‘[C]+[O] → CO(g)’, ‘[Si]+2[O] →
[SiO2]’, ‘[Mn]+[O] → [MnO]’, ‘2[P]+5[O] → [P2O5]’, ‘(CaO)+[S] → (CaS)+[O]’,
‘(CaCO3) → (CaO)+ CO2(g)’, ‘2[Al]+3[O] → [Al2O3]’, and ‘[Ca]+[O] → (CaO)’,
‘[Zn]+[O] → [ZnO]’.
where brackets and parentheses are used for materials in solid and liquid phase,
respectively.

3 Analysis

Exergy analysis is a useful tool in furthering a more efficient use of energy-resources,

because it enables the locations, types, and magnitudes of wastes and losses to be
accurately identified and meaningful efficiencies to be determined (Dincer and Rosen,
2007). In the exergy analysis, a complete equilibrium of the system with its environment
is considered, including the chemical and thermal equilibriums. The exergy balance can
be expressed in different forms, depending on the inlet and outlet conditions. For an open
system in a steady state which is in contact with n heat sources, as well as multiple inlets
and outlets, and has a net input work equal to W, the exergy balance over a specific time
period can be expressed as follows:
n
 T 
ExW   1  0 Qi    m  ex     m  ex   Ex I (1)
i 1  Ti  in out

where ExW is the work exergy (MJ), Qi is the heat loss (MJ), ExI is the internal exergy
destruction (MJ), and ex is the inlet or outlet exergy (MJ/kg). The specific time period is
usually considered to be the batch time of the furnace. The temperature and pressure in a
reference state, T0 and P0, are taken as 25°C and 100 kPa, respectively. Figure 1 shows a
general system with all the exergy components.
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 383

Figure 1 Exergy balance of an open system at steady condition

Specific flow exergy is generally divided into thermo-mechanical and chemical exergies
as follows:
ex  ex tm  ex ch (2)
Thermo-mechanical exergy includes kinetic, potential and physical exergies that can be
represented as follows:
ex tm  ex kin  ex pot  ex phy (3)
The physical exergy of the flow is calculated from the following relation:
ex phy   hi1  hi 0   T0  Si1  Si 0  (4)

The kinetic and potential energies of a material stream are ordered forms of energy, so
these are fully convertible to work and can be defined as follows:
Vi 2
ex kin  (5)
2
ex pot  g E Z i (6)

Since the changes in the potential and the kinetic exergies are negligible, so they are not
taking into account in the calculations. Chemical exergy is equal to the maximum amount
of work obtainable when the substance under consideration is brought from the
environmental state to dead state by processes involving heat transfer and exchange of
substance only with environment (Kotas, 1985) The standard chemical molar exergy of
ch
the fuel constituents ( ex ) can be found in thermodynamic tables (Moran and Shapiro,
2000). The molar chemical exergy of a gas mixture is obtained from the following
relation (Moran and Shapiro, 2000):
 j j

Ex  n   yi exi  RT0  yi ln yi 
ch ch
(7)
 i 1 i 1 
where yi is the molar ratio of the i-th gas constituent.
384 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

3.1 Exergy balance of electric arc furnace

An actual AC EAF, working at the Khouzestan Steel Company in Iran, was considered
for this study in order to obtain realistic data. Figure 2 shows a schematic diagram of the
EAF based on the exergy balance terms. The following assumptions are made during the
exergy analysis:
 The heating process in the furnace occurs in a steady state.
 This steady process can be integrated over a specific time period (e.g. the batch time
period of the EAF, which is about 110 min.)
 Stack gases can be treated as ideal gases.
Hence, the exergy balance equation for the EAF can be expressed as follows:

W    m  ex phy   Ex ch,in    m  ex phy   Ex ch ,out  ExTI (8)

in out

where ExTI is the total irreversibility including the internal and external parts. In addition,
the inlet and outlet exergies of the materials are expressed as follows:

  m  ex   m
phy
scr
phy
exscr  msp exspphy  melk exelk
phy
 mck exckphy
in (9)
 mlim exlim
phy
 mdlm exdlm
phy
 moxy exoxy
phy
 mcwexcw
phy

  m  ex   m ex
phy
ls
phy
ls  mst sl exstphy
 sl  mdst exdst  msg exsg
phy phy

out (10)
 mcwexcw
phy

The effect of differences between the ambient and the inlet and the outlet pressure is
usually negligible, so the enthalpy and entropy changes of materials can be calculated as
follows:
T
hi1  hi 0   CP dT (11)
T0

T
Si1  Si 0    CP T  dT (12)
T0

CP  a  bT  cT 2 (13)

The coefficients (a, b and c) used in equation (13) can be found in thermo-chemistry
tables (Kubaschewski et al., 1989).
Owing to the presence of induced draft fan (ID fan) at the end of the exhaust duct,
ambient air is generally drawn into the furnace through the opening in the external
surface of the furnace. This opening is used to discharge slag from the EAF. In most
investigations (Camdali et al., 2003; Camdali and Tunc 2003) the effect of air infiltration
has not been taken into account by the energy and exergy analyses of the EAF. Since the
rate of air infiltration in the furnace is not negligible, its effects on the energy and exergy
analyses are significant and must be considered.
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 385

Figure 2 Total exergy balance for EAF

The first-law efficiency of EAF can be defined as the ratio between the energy in the
liquid steel output to the energy input, which is mostly electrical energy. This can be
expressed as follow:
mls I ls
 (14)
 min Iin
Exergy efficiency is defined as the ratio of the recovered exergy to the supplied exergy
(Cengel and Boles, 1994). Accordingly, the exergy efficiency of the EAF is the ratio
between the recovered exergy of the liquid steel output and the mostly electrical exergy
input. This can be expressed as follows:
Exergy recovered mls exls
  (15)
Evergy supplied  minexin

4 Results and discussion

The energy and exergy balances of the EAF can now be calculated on the basis of the
data available in the plant. Most investigations have not considered the effect of air
infiltration in the energy and exergy analyses. This neglect is not accurate, because air is
drawn into the furnace through the external opening and thus affects the thermal balance
of the system (Fruehan et al. 2000). To quantify the effect, the analysis was performed
with and without air infiltration.

4.1 Energy and exergy analyses of EAF without air infiltration

Tables 1 and 2 show the chemical components of input and output materials without air
infiltration. Also, the physical exergies of all input and output materials are listed in
Tables 3 and 4, respectively. The chemical exergies of the input and output materials are
listed in Tables 5 and 4, respectively. Because the masses and temperatures of the input
and output materials are fixed, the difference between chemical exergy input and output
is constant and is defined for simplicity as follows:
Ex ch ,net  Ex ch,in  Ex ch,out  1419324.3  1290107.2  129217.1 MJ
386 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Figures 3 and 4 compare the chemical exergies of the input and output materials,
respectively. It should be noted that sponge iron has the highest chemical exergy of the
input materials and liquid steel has the highest exergy of the output materials.

Figure 3 Chemical exergy of input materials

Figure 4 Chemical exergy of output materials

Table 1 Chemical components of the input materials

Ch. Component (%) m (kg) M (kg/kmole) n (kmole)

Scrap Iron
Fe 97 19,400 55.847 347.3777
C 1 200 12.011 16.6514
Si 0.37 74 28.086 2.6348
Mn 0.66 132 54.938 2.4027
P 0.06 12 30.974 0.3874
S 0.06 12 32.06 0.3743
Cr 0.42 84 51.996 1.6155
Ni 0.12 24 58.71 0.4088
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 387

Table 1 Chemical components of the input materials (continued)

Ch. Component (%) m (kg) M (kg/kmole) n (kmole)

Mo 0.11 22 95.94 0.2293
Cu 0.2 40 63.546 0.6295
TOTAL 100 20,000 484.108 372.7113
Sponge Iron
Fe 89.22 151,674 55.847 2,715.8845
C 1.87 3,179 12.011 264.6740
P 0.41 697 30.974 22.5027
S 0.35 595 32.06 18.5590
MnO 0.43 731 70.937 10.3049
SiO2 3.82 6494 60.084 108.0820
Al2O3 1.1 1870 101.961 18.3403
CaO 1.6 2720 56.079 48.5030
MgO 1.2 2040 40.304 50.6153
TOTAL 100 170,000 460.257 3,257.4658
Cock
C 89 1,780 12.011 148.1975
SiO2 4 80 60.084 1.3315
Al2O3 3 60 101.961 0.5885
H2O 2 40 18.015 2.2204
Fe2O3 0.75 15 159.691 0.0939
CaO 0.75 15 56.079 0.2675
S 0.5 10 32.06 0.3119
TOTAL 100 2,000 439.901 153.0111
Electrode
C 99.3 425.997 12.011 35.4672
Si 0.15 0.6435 28.086 0.0229
Fe 0.15 0.6435 55.847 0.0115
Ca 0.15 0.6435 40.08 0.0161
Al 0.05 0.2145 26.982 0.0079
SiO2 0.05 0.2145 60.084 0.0036
Al2O3 0.05 0.2145 101.961 0.0021
Fe2O3 0.05 0.2145 159.691 0.0013
MgO 0.05 0.2145 40.304 0.0053
TOTAL 100.00 429 525.05 35.54
Lime
CaO 95 7,600 56.079 135.52
MgO 5 400 40.304 9.92
TOTAL 100 8,000 96.383 145.45
388 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 1 Chemical components of the input materials (continued)

Ch. Component (%) m (kg) M (kg/kmole) n (kmole)

Dolomite
CaO 65 2,600 56.079 46.36
MgO 35 1,400 40.304 34.74
TOTAL 100 4,000 96.383 81.10
Oxygen
O2 100 11,377 31.998 355.57
TOTAL 100 11,377 31.998 355.57
Cooling Water
H2O 100 1,146,107 18.02 63619.57
TOTAL 100 1,146,107 18.02 63619.57
215,806.4
OVERALL 4,400.8
(without CW)

Table 2 Chemical components of the output materials

Ch. Component (%) m (kg) M (kg/kmol) n (kmol)

Liquid Steel
Fe 99.10 163,123.92 55.85 2,920.91
C 0.08 137.65 12.01 11.46
Si 0.16 262.34 28.09 9.34
Mn 0.17 277.31 54.94 5.05
P 0.16 271.48 30.97 8.76
S 0.26 421.83 32.06 13.16
Cr 0.02 28.81 52.00 0.55
Ni 0.01 23.80 58.71 0.41
Mo 0.01 21.82 95.94 0.23
Cu 0.02 39.67 63.55 0.62
TOTAL 100.00 164,608.63 484.11 2,970.49
Steel in Slag
Fe 99.10 1,365.26 55.85 24.45
C 0.08 1.15 12.01 0.10
Si 0.16 2.20 28.09 0.08
Mn 0.17 2.32 54.94 0.04
P 0.16 2.27 30.97 0.07
S 0.26 3.53 32.06 0.11
Cr 0.02 0.24 52.00 0.00
Ni 0.01 0.20 58.71 0.00
Mo 0.01 0.18 95.94 0.00
Cu 0.02 0.33 63.55 0.01
TOTAL 100.00 1,377.69 484.11 24.86
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 389

Table 2 Chemical components of the output materials (continued)

Ch. Component (%) m (kg) M (kg/kmol) n (kmol)

Dust
Fe2O3 79.90 9,195.14 159.691 57.58
Al2O3 4.98 572.97 101.961 5.62
CaO 3.93 451.85 56.079 8.06
MnO 0.52 60.00 70.937 0.85
Cr2O3 0.09 10.41 151.989 0.07
SiO2 7.97 917.73 60.084 15.27
C 2.61 300.12 12.011 24.99
TOTAL 100.00 11,508.22 612.752 112.43
Slag
CaO 49.01 12,148.84 56.08 216.64
FeO 0.82 204.21 71.85 2.84
SiO2 21.18 5,250.24 60.08 87.38
MnO 1.94 480.37 70.94 6.77
Fe2O3 0.03 8.49 159.69 0.05
Al2O3 5.48 1,357.65 101.96 13.32
Cr2O3 0.28 69.90 151.99 0.46
P2O5 4.02 997.29 141.94 7.03
CaS 1.74 431.22 72.14 5.98
MgO 15.49 3,840.21 40.30 95.28
TOTAL 100.00 24,788.43 926.97 435.75
Stack Gas
CO 69.55 9,405.10 28.01 335.78
CO2 30.16 4,078.35 44.01 92.67
H2O 0.30 40.00 18.02 2.22
TOTAL 100.00 13,523.46 90.03 430.67
Cooling Water
H2O 100.00 114,106 18.02 63,619.57
TOTAL 100.00 114,106 18.02 63,619.57
215,806.4
OVERALL 3,974.2
( without water)

Table 3 Physical exergy of input materials

Input Materials m (kg) T (K) Δh (kJ/kg) Δs (kJ/kg K) Exphy (MJ)

Scrap Iron 20,000 303 2.32 0.008 0.37
Sponge Iron 170,000 303 3.57 0.012 3.39
Coke 2,000 303 4.33 0.014 0.07
Electrode 429 303 3.51 0.012 0.01
390 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 3 Physical exergy of input materials (continued)

Input Materials m (kg) T (K) Δh (kJ/kg) Δs (kJ/kg K) Exphy (MJ)

Lime 8,000 303 4.16 0.014 0.26
Dolomite 4,000 303 4.16 0.014 0.14
Oxygen 11,377 303 4.59 0.015 13.87
Cooling Water 1,146,107 308 41.81 0.138 786.71
OVERALL 215,806.4 (without CW) 804.8

Table 4 Physical exergy of output materials

Output Materials M (kg) T (K) Δh (kJ/kg) Δs (kJ/kg K) Exphy (MJ)

Liquid Steel 164,609 1933 1,355.10 1.34 168,345.01
Steel in Slag 1,378 1933 1,355.10 1.34 1,408.96
Slag 24,788 1933 1,739.64 1.85 29,596.52
Dust 11,508 1933 1,574.11 1.72 12,100.57
Stack Gas 13,523 1933 2,321.05 2.51 17,652.07
Cooling Water 1,146,107 318 83.63 0.27 3,079.97
OVERALL 215,806.4 (without CW) 232,183.1

Table 5 Chemical exergy of input materials

Ch. Component n (kmol) Standard Ch. Exergy (kJ/kmol) Ch. Exergy (MJ)
Scrap Iron
Fe 347.68 376,400 130,752.95
C 16.65 410,260 6,831.4
Si 2.63 854,600 2,251.67
Mn 2.4 482,300 1,158.83
P 0.39 875,800 339.3
S 0.37 609,600 228.17
Cr 1.62 544,300 879.32
Ni 0.41 232,700 95.13
Mo 0.23 730,300 167.47
Cu 0.63 134,200 84.47
TOTAL 372.71 5,250,460 142,788.71
Sponge Iron
Fe 2,715.88 376,400 1,022,258.91
C 264.67 410,260 108,585.18
P 22.5 875,800 19,707.9
S 18.56 609,600 11,313.54
MnO 10.3 119,400 1,230.41
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 391

Table 5 Chemical exergy of input materials (continued)

Ch. Component n (kmol) Standard Ch. Exergy (kJ/kmol) Ch. Exergy (MJ)
SiO2 108.08 7,900 853.85
Al2O3 18.34 200,400 3,675.41
CaO 48.5 110,200 5,345.03
MgO 50.62 66,800 3,381.1
TOTAL 3,257.47 2,776,760 1,176,351.33
Cock
C 148.2 410,260 60,799.5
SiO2 1.33 7,900 10.52
Al2O3 0.59 200,400 117.93
H2O 2.22 900 2
Fe2O3 0.09 16,500 1.55
CaO 0.27 110,200 29.48
S 0.31 609,600 190.14
TOTAL 153.01 1,355,760 61,151.11
Electrode
C 35.47 410,260 14,550.79
Si 0.02 854,600 19.58
Fe 0.01 376,400 4.34
Ca 0.02 712,400 11.44
Al 0.01 888,400 7.06
SiO2 0.004 7,900 0.03
Al2O3 0.002 200,400 0.42
Fe2O3 0.001 16,500 0.02
MgO 0.01 66,800 0.36
TOTAL 35.54 3,533,660 14,593.68
Lime
CaO 135.52 110,200 14,934.65
MgO 9.92 66,800 662.96
TOTAL 145.45 177,000 15,597.61
Dolomite
CaO 46.36 110,200 5,109.22
MgO 34.74 66,800 2,320.37
TOTAL 81.1 177,000 7,429.59
Oxygen
O2 355.57 3,970 1,411.6
TOTAL 355.57 3,970 1,411.6
OVERALL 4,400.8 1,419,323.6
392 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 6 Chemical exergy of output materials

Ch. Component n (kmol) Standard Ch. Exergy (kJ/kmol) Ch. Exergy (MJ)
Liquid Steel
Fe 2,920.91 376,400 1,099,429.56
C 11.46 410,260 4,701.59
Si 9.34 854,600 7,982.62
Mn 5.05 482,300 2,434.53
P 8.76 875,800 7,676.18
S 13.16 609,600 8,020.83
Cr 0.55 544,300 301.56
Ni 0.41 232,700 94.34
Mo 0.23 730,300 166.08
Cu 0.62 134,200 83.77
TOTAL 2,970.49 5,250,460 1,130,891.06
Steel in Slag
Fe 24.45 376,400 9,201.64
C 0.1 410,260 39.35
Si 0.08 854,600 66.81
Mn 0.04 482,300 20.38
P 0.07 875,800 64.25
S 0.11 609,600 67.13
Cr 0 544,300 2.52
Ni 0 232,700 0.79
Mo 0 730,300 1.39
Cu 0.01 134,200 0.7
TOTAL 24.86 5,250,460 9,464.95
Dust
Fe2O3 57.58 16,500 950.08
Al2O3 5.62 200,400 1,126.15
CaO 8.06 110,200 887.92
MnO 0.85 119,400 100.99
Cr2O3 0.07 36,500 2.5
SiO2 15.27 7,900 120.66
C 24.99 410,260 10,251.05
TOTAL 112.43 901,160 13,439.37
Slag
CaO 216.64 110,200 23,873.5
FeO 2.84 127,000 360.98
SiO2 87.38 7,900 690.32
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 393

Table 6 Chemical exergy of output materials (continued)

Ch. Component n (kmol) Standard Ch. Exergy (kJ/kmol) Ch. Exergy (MJ)
MnO 6.77 119,400 808.55
Fe2O3 0.05 16,500 0.88
Al2O3 13.32 200,400 2,668.4
Cr2O3 0.46 36,500 16.79
P2O5 7.03 319,540 2,245.09
CaS 5.98 844,600 5,048.61
MgO 95.28 66800 6,364.79
TOTAL 435.75 1,848,840 42,077.9
Stack Gas
CO 335.78 275,100
CO2 92.67 19,870
H2O 2.22 9,500
TOTAL 430.67 304,470 94,233.25*
OVERALL 3,974.2 1,290,106.5
Note: This value is calculating by using equation (7).
Table 7 lists the energy balance of the different components in the EAF. Clearly, the
electrical energy contributes the highest percentage of the input section, while liquid steel
followed by heat loss contributes the highest percentages of the output section. In this
table, heat loss was calculated by applying the first law (energy balance) to the energy
input and output of the EAF. Table 8 lists the exergy balance of the different components
in the EAF. In this table, the chemical exergy input and output are not shown; instead the
difference is listed as the net chemical exergy in the input section.
Table 7 Total energy balance of EAF without air infiltration

Component Energy (MJ) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 45.08 0.01
Sponge Iron 408.51 0.08
Coke 7.97 0.00
Electrode 1.55 0.00
Lime 31.18 0.01
Dolomite 16.46 0.00
Oxygen 52.22 0.01
Cooling Water 47,933.78 8.91
Electrical Energy 386,560.75 71.82
Net Chemical Energy 103,145.69 19.16
Total 538,204.1 100
394 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 7 Total energy balance of EAF without air infiltration (continued)

Component Energy (MJ) (%)

Output
Liquid Steel 236,588.29 43.96
Steel in Slag 1,980.12 0.37
Dust 17,998.41 3.34
Slag 43,733.15 8.13
Stack Gas 26,224.92 4.87
Cooling Water 95,867.56 17.81
Heat Lost 115,811.69 21.52
Total 538,204.1 100

Table 8 Total exergy balance of EAF without air infiltration

Component Exergy (MJ) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 0.37 0.00
Sponge Iron 3.39 0.00
Coke 0.07 0.00
Electrode 0.01 0.00
Lime 0.26 0.00
Dolomite 0.14 0.00
Oxygen 13.87 0.00
Cooling Water 786.81 0.15
Electrical Exergy 386,560.75 74.83
Net Chemical Exergy 129,217.10 25.01
Total 516,583.0 100
Output
Liquid Steel 168,345.01 32.59
Steel in Slag 1,408.96 0.27
Dust 12,100.57 2.34
Slag 29,596.52 5.73
Stack Gas 17,652.07 3.42
Cooling Water 3,079.97 0.60
Exergy Losses 284,400.62 55.05
Total 516,583.0 100

Using data in Tables 7 and 8, the energy and exergy efficiencies of EAF without air
infiltration were calculated as η=43.9% and φ=32.5%.
In this case the major sources of energy losses are heat transfer to the environment
and the cooling water. The energy loss by stack gas is around 4.87% of total energy
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 395

output and the exergy loss is around 3.42% of total exergy output which are relatively
lower than other sources. The major sources of exergy destruction are chemical reactions
and heat transfer.

4.2 Energy and exergy analyses of EAF with air infiltration

As mentioned above, it is necessary to consider air infiltration into the EAF to obtain
more realistic results. The air that infiltrates the EAF increases the heat loss through
convection; therefore, more electrical energy is required to melt the iron. Furnace design
data shows that the total mass flow rate of hot flue gas from the furnace is about 10.4 kg/s
on average. In the case of EAF without air infiltration, mass balance of input and output
materials (Tables 4 and 6) show that the mass flow rate of hot flue gas is 4.0 kg/s which
represents the mass flow rate due to only combustion products. The difference between
total mass flow rate of hot flue gas (10.4 kg/s) and 4.0 kg/s represents air infiltration mass
flow rate which is 6.4 kg/s. Therefore, neglecting the effect of air infiltration in the
analysis is not acceptable. Total mass balance of EAF with considering air infiltration is
shown in Table 9. Also, Tables 10 and 11 list the total energy and exergy balances of the
EAF considering the effects of air infiltration. Obviously, the electrical energy required is
considerably increased. The output energy and exergy shares of hot stack gas also
increase considerably to reach 18.3% and 12.2%, respectively. These values match the
previous data published in the literature (Bisio, 1993).
Using the data in Tables 10 and 11, the energy and exergy efficiencies of EAF with
air infiltration were calculated as η=41.7% and φ=30.8%.
Table 9 Total mass balance of EAF considering air infiltration

Component m (kg) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 20,000 7.71
Sponge Iron 170,000 65.53
Coke 2,000 0.77
Electrode 429 0.16
Lime 8,000 3.08
Dolomite 4,000 1.54
Oxygen 11,377 4.39
Input Air 43,608 16.81
Cooling Water 1,146,107 –
Total 259,414.4 (without CW) 100
Output
Liquid Steel 164,609 63.45
Steel in Slag 1,378 0.53
Slag 24,788 9.56
Stack Gas 68,639 26.46
Cooling Water 1,146,107 –
Total 259,414.4 (without CW) 100
396 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 10 Total energy balance of EAF considering air infiltration

Component Energy (MJ) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 45.08 0.01
Sponge Iron 408.51 0.07
Coke 7.97 0.00
Electrode 1.55 0.00
Lime 31.18 0.01
Dolomite 16.46 0.00
Oxygen 52.22 0.01
Input Air 220.80 0.04
Cooling Water 47,933.78 8.44
Electrical Energy 415,800.00 73.25
Net Chemical Energy 103,145.69 18.17
Total 567,663.2 100
Output
Liquid Steel 236,588.29 41.68
Steel in Slag 1,980.12 0.35
Slag 43,733.15 7.70
Stack Gas 104,067.10 18.33
Cooling Water 95,867.56 16.89
Heat Lost 85,427.02 15.05
Total 567,663.2 100

Table 11 Total exergy balance of EAF considering air infiltration

Component Exergy (MJ) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 0.37 0.00
Sponge Iron 3.39 0.00
Coke 0.07 0.00
Electrode 0.01 0.00
Lime 0.26 0.00
Dolomite 0.14 0.00
Oxygen 13.87 0.00
Input Air 1.83 0.00
Cooling Water 786.71 0.14
Electrical Exergy 415,800.00 76.18
Net Chemical Exergy 129,217.10 23.68
Total 545,823.7 100
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 397

Table 11 Total exergy balance of EAF considering air infiltration (continued)

Component Exergy (MJ) (%)

Output
Liquid Steel 168,345.01 30.84
Steel in Slag 1,408.96 0.26
Slag 29,596.52 5.42
Stack Gas 66,293.23 12.15
Cooling Water 3,079.97 0.56
Exergy Losses 277,100.06 50.77
Total 545,823.7 100

A comparison of these efficiencies with the values above shows that the energy and
exergy efficiencies are reduced by air infiltration into the furnace, which thus indicates its
negative effect on the system. These reduced efficiencies are due to a requirement for
more electrical energy to heat the additional air that infiltrates the control volume and
increases the energy waste at the exhaust duct.
Figure 5 shows the effects of various air infiltration rates on the EAF efficiencies. As
the mass flow rate of the air infiltration increases, the energy and exergy efficiencies of
the furnace are reduced. For example, by a 50% reduction of the air infiltration, about
2.7% of electrical energy input can be saved. Air infiltration can be reduced by better
sealing of the openings in the furnace.

Figure 5 EAF efficiency versus infiltration air mass flow rate

4.3 Increasing the energy and exergy efficiencies of the EAF

Melting iron by EAF is a highly energy-consuming process in which the temperature of
sponge iron and other input materials is increased from the ambient value to 1600°C.
Since electrical energy is the most expensive form of energy used in the EAF, lowering
its consumption is a major concern in these industries.
In the conventional EAF design, the hot stack gas passes through a series of water-
cooled and air-cooled ducts to reach the radiant cooler and is finally exhausted to the
398 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

atmosphere by an ID fan. The flue gas is a rich source of thermal energy, because its high
mass flow rate and high temperature. This could be used for sponge iron preheating,
which in turn would reduce the electrical energy consumption in the furnace.

4.3.1 Sponge iron preheating

The furnace stack gas cannot be directly used to preheat the sponge iron because of
particle re-oxidation. Therefore, an intermediate gas must be used in the preheating
process. Nitrogen is a fine candidate for this purpose because it does not react with
sponge iron particles and is a readily available by-product of other processes in steel
making plants (Hajidavalloo and Alagheband, 2008).
It is possible to place a heat exchanger in the exhaust duct of the furnace in which
nitrogen absorb heat from the hot flue gas. The heated nitrogen would then enter the silo
to preheat the sponge iron particles. Then, nitrogen could be recirculated to avoid its
consumption. Figure 6 shows the schematics of the design for an actual EAF. The
specification and performance of the heat exchanger are not a major concern in this paper
but were discussed before (Hajidavalloo and Alagheband, 2008).

Figure 6 Layout of design for preheating of sponge iron using hot flue gas

4.3.2 Effect of sponge iron preheating on energy and exergy analysis

As mentioned above, to increase the energy and exergy efficiencies of the system, the
heat lost through stack gas can be recovered for preheating the sponge iron particles. In
order to consider the effect of the preheating scheme on the efficiencies, the control
volume is extended to include the elbow and exhaust duct as well as the EAF itself. This
means that the cooling water for the elbow and duct is considered in the energy and
exergy calculations.
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 399

Figure 7 shows the percentage of electrical energy saved versus the preheating
temperature. For example, by preheating the sponge iron to 793 K, electrical energy
consumption of the EAF would be reduced by about 21.4% which corresponds to about
89 GJ of electrical energy saved in each working period.

Figure 7 Percentage of energy recovered from EAF versus sponge iron preheating temperature

Table 12 lists the total exergy balance of the EAF with the newly extended control
volume and sponge iron preheating to 793 K. Considering all other variables almost
constant, the electrical energy required is considerably reduced. The exergy efficiency of
the EAF is increased to 36.8% from 30.8% and its energy efficiency is increased to
46.7% from 41.7%. Evidently, the preheating scheme improves the energy and exergy
efficiencies considerably.
Table 12 Total exergy balance for EAF with preheating sponge iron

Component Exergy (MJ) (%)

Input
Scrap Iron 0.37 0.00
Sponge Iron 3.39 0.00
Coke 0.07 0.00
Electrode 0.01 0.00
Lime 0.26 0.00
Dolomite 0.14 0.00
Oxygen 13.87 0.00
Furnace 786.71 0.17
Cooling Water Elbow 131.12 0.03
Duct 337.16 0.07
Nitrogen 0.16 0.00
Electrical Exergy 326,717.72 71.46
Net Chemical Exergy 129,217.10 28.22
Total 457,209.9 100
400 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Table 12 Total exergy balance for EAF with preheating sponge iron (continued)

Component Exergy (MJ) (%)

Output
Liquid Steel 168,345.01 36.82
Steel in Slag 1,408.96 0.31
Slag 29,596.52 6.47
Stack Gas 20,523.81 4.49
Furnace 3,079.97 0.67
Cooling Water Elbow 513.33 0.11
Duct 1,319.99 0.29
Nitrogen 31.14 0.01
Exergy Losses 232,391.18 50.83
Total 457,209.9 100

Figure 8 shows the effect of sponge iron preheating on the energy and exergy efficiencies
of the EAF. As the sponge iron preheating temperature increases, the energy and exergy
efficiencies increase.

Figure 8 Change of EAF efficiencies versus sponge iron preheating temperature

Apart from the energy and exergy improvements, the major benefit of the sponge iron
preheating scheme is the accelerated production rate of the furnace due to a shorter tap-
to-tap time which is the time between input and output materials. There are different
estimations on the amount of time reduction in the melting process for a given increase in
the charge temperature, because it is highly plant dependent and many local parameters
should be taken into account to precisely predict the time reduction, as reported by Baily
(2001). If it is assumed that tap-to-tap time reduction for every 100°C increase in
charging material temperature is around 3 min., then for 500°C increase in charging
temperature due to the preheating, tap-to-tap time reduction would be around 15 minutes.
Since overall tap-to-tap time for each melting is around 110 min., then melting time
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 401

reduction would be around 13.6%, which means steel production may be increased
around 13.6%. The production rate would be further increased if inlet gas temperature
were increased.

5 Conclusions

Energy and exergy analyses were performed to evaluate the performance of an electric
arc furnace. Energy and exergy shares of different input and output materials in the
steelmaking process of the EAF were specified. It was found that combustion and heat
transfer are two major sources of irreversibility in the EAF. Considering air infiltration
into the EAF has a significance effect on the calculated energy and exergy efficiencies.
The infiltration considerably reduces both the energy and the exergy efficiency. The study
has shown that vast amounts of energy and exergy are wasted in the EAF industry which
can be recovered by the application of a preheating scheme. The output hot flue gas
contains 18.3% and 12.2% of the total energy and exergy inputs, respectively. Preheating
the sponge iron particles by using waste heat from flue gas could decrease energy
consumption and increase productivity. By adopting the preheating scheme, the energy
and exergy efficiencies could increase by 5.0% and 6.0%, respectively.

References
Baily, R. (2001) Benefits of Hot DRI Charge to the EAF, Direct from Midrex, 2Q, pp.7–8.
Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G. and Moran, M.J. (1996) Thermal Design and Optimization, Wiley,
New York.
Bisio, G. (1993) ‘Exergy method for efficient energy resource use in the steel industry’, Energy,
Vol. 18, pp. 971–978.
Bisio, G., Rubatto, G. and Martini, R. (2000) ‘Heat transfer, energy saving and pollution control in
UHP electric-arc furnaces’, Energy, Vol. 25, pp.1047–1066.
Camdali, U. and Tunc, M. (2003) ‘Exergy analysis and efficiency in an industrial AC electric ARC
furnace’, Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 23, pp.2255–2267.
Camdali, U. and Tunc, M. (2005) ‘Computation of chemical exergy potential in an industrial AC
electric ARC furnace’, Energy Resources Technology, Vol. 127, pp.66–70.
Camdali, U., Tunc, M. and Karakas, A. (2003) ‘Second law analysis of thermodynamics in the
electric arc furnace at a steel producing company’, Energy Conversion Management, Vol. 44,
pp.961–973.
Cengel, Y.A. and Boles, M.A. (1994) Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach, 3rd ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Coskun, C., Oktay, Z. and Ilten, N. (2009) ‘A new approach for simplifying the calculation of flue
gas specific heat and specific exergy value depending on fuel composition’, Energy, Vol. 34,
pp.1898–1902.
Dincer, I. (2002) ‘The role of exergy in energy policy making’, Energy Policy, Vol. 30,
pp.137–149.
Dincer, I. and Rosen, M. (2007) Exergy, Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development,
Elsevier, London.
Fruehan, R.J., Fortini, O., Paxton, H.W. and Brindle, R. (2000) Theoretical Minimum Energies to
Produce Steel for Selected Conditions, Report for U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
Industrial Technologies, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
402 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

Hajidavalloo, E. and Alagheband, A. (2008) ‘Thermal analysis of sponge iron preheating using
waste energy of EAF’, Materials Process Technology, Vol. 208, pp.336–341.
Kirschen, M., Risonarta, V. and Pfeifer, H. (2009) ‘Energy efficiency and the influence of gas
burners to the energy related carbon dioxide emissions of electric arc furnaces in steel
industry’, Energy, Vol. 34, pp.1065–1072.
Kotas, T.J. (1985) The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis, Butterworths, London.
Kubaschewski, O., Evans, E.L. and Alcock, A.B. (1989) Metallurgical Thermo-chemistry,
Pergamon Press, Oxford.
Moran, M.J. and Shapiro, H.N. (2000) Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics, 5th ed.,
Wiley, New York.
Moran, M.J. and Sciubba, E. (1994) ‘Exergy analysis: principles and practice’, Engineering for
Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 116, pp.285–302.
Ostrovski, O. and Zhang, G. (2005) ‘Energy and exergy analyses of direct irons melting processes’,
Energy, Vol. 30, pp.2772–2783.
Raja, B.V.R., Pal, N., Talwar, P.L. and Jayaswal, N.P. (2000) ‘Technologies for cost reduction in
EAFs’, Steelworld, pp.1–4.
Rosen, M.A. (1999) ‘Second-law analysis: approaches and implications’, Energy Research,
Vol. 23, pp.415–429.
Rosen, M.A. and Lee, D.L. (2009) ‘Exergy-based analysis and efficiency evaluation for an
aluminum melting furnace in a die-casting plant’, Fourth IASME/WSEAS, International
Conference on Energy and Environment Cambridge, England.
 Exergy and energy analysis of an AC steel electric arc furnace 403

Nomenclature

CP constant pressure specific heat (kJ/kg-K)

I specific energy (kJ/kg)
Ex specific flow exergy (kJ/kg)
Ex exergy (MJ)
gE gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)
m Mass (kg)
n mole numbers (kmole)
P pressure
Q, q heat (MJ), specific heat (kJ/kg)
n molar ratio
S entropy (kJ/kg-K)
T temperature (K)
V flow rate (m/s)
W,w work (MJ), specific work (kJ/kg)
Y molar ratio of the gas constituent parts
Z height of flow (m)
η first law efficiency
φ exergy efficiency

Subscripts
act actual
ch chemical
ck coke
cw cooling water
dlm dolomite
dst dust
elk electrode
I for component i
in input
lim lime
 404 E. Hajidavalloo, H. Dashti and M. Behbahani-Nejad

loss loss
ls liquid steel
out output
oxy oxygen
phy physical
pot potential
rev reversible
scr scrap iron
sg stack gas
sl slag
sp sponge iron
st-sl steel in slag
0 property at environmental conditions

Superscripts
ch chemical
I irreversibility
kin kinetic
phy physical
pot potential
tm thermo-mechanical

View publication stats