Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel Processing Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuproc

Research article

Co-combustion of semicoke and coal in an industry ironmaking blast T

furnace: Lab experiments, model study and plant tests
Z.J. Hua,b,1, Y.R. Liuc,1, H. Xub, J.M. Zhub, S.L. Wua, , Y.S. Shenc,
⁎ ⁎

a
School of Metallurgical and Ecological Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
b
Ironmaking Plant, Baoshan Iron & Steel Co Ltd, Shanghai 201900, China
c
School of Chemical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Low-rank coals can be upgraded to semicoke, and potentially used to partly replace expensive metallurgical
Semicoke coals in pulverised coal injection (PCI) in ironmaking blast furnaces (BFs). In this paper, an integrated research
CFD of “lab experiments – model study – plant test” is used to study the feasibility of injecting semicoke in BFs. First,
Plant test lab experiments are conducted to characterise the metallurgical properties of semicoke. Secondly, a three-di-
PCI
mensional CFD model is developed to study in-furnace phenomena related to two PCI operations: single injection
Co-combustion
of semicoke and co-combustion of PCI coal and semi-coke under full-scale BF conditions. The simulation results
Blast furnace
indicate that the semicoke shows similar combustion profiles with the PCI coal, confirming the feasibility of
using semicoke in BFs. Moreover, the co-combustion of semicoke and PCI coal with the blending ratios of 0–40%
is studied, as a result, the optimal blending ratio of semicoke, 30%, is recommended. Then, plant tests of
semicoke combustion of blending ratio 0–20% are conducted. It is indicated that ironmaking indexes remain
stable largely, confirming the practical feasibility of semicoke co-injection operation. The study provides a
combined view of co-injecting PCI coal and semicoke in terms of fundamental combustion profiles and plant
performance in a commercial BF.

1. Introduction semicoke has several favourable characteristics, such as low-ash, low-

Pulverised coal injection (PCI) has been recognised as an effective
technology in blast furnace (BF) ironmaking for many benefits in-
cluding cost reduction, stable operation and coal supply flexibility [1].
In most cases, coal blends will be injected in PCI operations. In this
process, pulverised coal particles are injected into the lower part of BFs
via tuyere and combust in the void region, the so-called raceway. It
presents a very intense and complicated multiphase and thermo-
chemical process. At present, BF and PCI operations are facing the coal
constraint problems, i.e. steel industry can use only a certain quotation
of coal in ironmaking according to local government environmental
policy [2–5]. Semicoke, also named Lantan, refers to the low-volatility
solid carbonaceous products of the pyrolysis of high-volatility non-
viscous or low viscous bituminous coals with a low temperature of
400–700 °C, where coal tar and retorting gas can also be obtained [6,7].
Notably, semicoke is not regarded as coal according to local govern-
ment environment policy and is not included into the coal quotation in
many countries including some regions in China [8]. In addition,
sulphur, low-phosphorus, low-aluminium, high fixed-carbon, high
chemical reactivity and high specific resistance. Therefore, semicoke
has the potential to be used in PCI operations [9]. Moreover, the price
of semicoke is comparatively lower than coke and anthracite coal,
making semicoke injection in BFs very competitive. Thus, the co-com-
bustion of semicoke and coal is recognised as a desired option for PCI
operation for better coal supply flexibility [10,11], environmental
policy relief [10], and moderate facility modifications [12,13]. On this
basis, key questions related to this promising technology should be
answered before massive implementation: i) Are the in-furnace phe-
nomena of semicoke combustion comparable with the typical PCI op-
eration? ii) If yes, what are the criteria of semicoke blending ratio for
BF stability concern?
To address these issues, different research methods, such as lab
experiment, plant test, and model study, have been used. Firstly, several
attempts were made based on lab-scale experiments and some basic
properties related to PCI operation were studied. Geng et al. [6] studied
the pyrolysis characteristics of Shenmu bituminous coal and its

⁎
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: shengliwu@ustb.edu.cn (S.L. Wu), ys.shen@unsw.edu.au (Y.S. Shen).
1
Contribute equally as first authors.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106165
Received 1 April 2019; Received in revised form 21 June 2019; Accepted 30 July 2019
Available online 26 August 2019
0378-3820/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

pyrolysates and inferred that the semicoke is a useful material for in-
dustrial production. Zou et al. [14] studied the quality of semicoke and
confirmed it met the very basic requirement of the BF, while the
grindability and combustion performance of semicoke fluctuate greatly.
Li et al. [15] found that semicoke has a lower initial reaction tem-
perature than coke, larger reaction rate than coke particles, and suffi-
cient reactivity with CO2. Yang et al. [16] found that when the semi-
coke ratio reached 40%, the blended coal for PCI showed excellent
metallurgical properties. The above properties and performance tested
by lab experiments make semicoke a possible injectant in PCI opera-
tions. However, lab-scale experiments cannot provide detailed in-fur-
nace phenomena related to semicoke combustion under the industry
scale conditions. Secondly, some initial plant tests were conducted to
confirm the feasibility of semicoke combustion in BFs. Some Chinese
ironmaking industries, including Ansteel, Baotou steel and JISCO, car-
ried out some preliminary plant tests using their commercial BFs and
concluded some basic performance of semicoke injection in the com-
mercial BFs, such as conveying performance, non-explosivity, and high
heat value of semi-coke etc. For example, Ansteel's plant tests [17]
confirmed that the transportation properties, combustion efficiency and
theoretical replacement ratio of the optimised blended could meet the
basic industrial standards. In the plant tests at Baotou Steel [18],
semicoke obtained in the low-temperature pyrolysis can meet the basic Fig. 1. The schematic of “Lab experiment - Model study - Plant test (LMP)”
PCI requirements such as metallurgical performance and cost reduction. approach of this study.
A grindability of 58.22%–62.56%, a similar explosibility and higher
combustibility than the current PCI coals, and a cost reduction of 50
the effectiveness of co-combustion by plant test in a commercial BF.
RMB·t−1 were achieved when replacing the coal with semi-coke. JISCO
[19] conducted a plant test on one BF to find the semicoke has com-
bustibility between bituminous coal and anthracite and to confirm that 2. Methods
pulverised semicoke used in PCI could guarantee the BF smooth op-
eration. However, it is high risk and cost to test, and even higher if The schematic of this integrated LMP research method, including i)
generalise mechanism and experience after plant test. lab experiments, ii) a 3D industrial-scale CFD model study; and iii)
Modelling study then is highly recommended to estimate me- plant tests, is shown in Fig. 1. The three components at different scale
tallurgists because of its cost-effective, and more detailed in-furnace is represent different stages of this research. They are interconnected,
not provided [20–22]. Zhang et al. [23] extended a computational fluid where the lab experiments provide input parameters for the model
dynamics (CFD) model to the virtual use of beneficiated Victorian study; the model study helps understand in-furnace phenomena under
brown coal and its semi-cokes in the 600 MWth plant. However, the PCI different conditions and more importantly, provides a safe and optimal
process largely differs from other coals. This complex process involves design for the plant tests.
gas/powder/solid multiphase flow and heat/mass transfers related to
specific chemical reactions. Liao et al. [24] developed a 3D industry- 2.1. Lab experiments
scale CFD model to simulate the complicated in-furnace combustion
phenomena relevant to the injection of Victorian brown coals, and used The chemical composition of semi-coke is obtained using coal
for investigating the feasibility of replacing conventional PCI coal with proximate analysis procedure GBT 212-2008 and coal ultimate analysis
brown coal products in these validating plant tests. However, co-com- procedure GBT 476–2001. For example, VM% is measured by heating a
bustion of coal and semicoke, the most possible utilisation way of certain amount of air-dried coal sample at 900 ± 10 °C for 7 min (with
semicoke in BFs, has not been studied using a 3D industry-scale PCI air isolated) and calculated by Eq. (1). Ash% is measured by completely
model in the past. As a result, the detailed in-furnace phenomena relate ashing the coal sample in a rapid ash tester from the preheating tem-
to the co-combustion is not clear under industry-scale BF conditions. perature of 815 ± 10 °C and calculated by Eq. (2). S% is measured by
Moreover, the comprehensive view of using semicoke in BFs may need a oxidizing various forms of sulphur in the coal into sulphur oxides and
multiscale study, by combining lab characterization, model studies and then trapped in a hydrogen peroxide solution, then formed sulphuric
plant tests. Such multi-scale comprehensive study is rare in testing a acid solution is titrated with a sodium hydroxide solution.
new material for practice. Wloss
In this study, an integrated research method of “Lab experiment - VM % = × 100% Mad
Wsample (1)
Model study - Plant test (LMP)” is proposed and used to investigate the
feasibility of semicoke combustion in PCI technology. Lab experiments Wresidue
are firstly used to identify its metallurgical properties. A 3D industrial- Ash% = × 100%
Wsample (2)
scale CFD model is used to understand the in-furnace phenomena of
flow and combustion in some co-firing semicoke and coal and confirm where the Wloss is the weight loss of the coal sample, Mad is the moisture
critical conditions of CFD studies for plant tests. A plant test is con- content in the air-dried coal sample, Wsample is the mass of the coal
ducted to confirm the effect of co-combustion of semicoke and coal in sample, Wresidue is the mass of the residue.
real BF practice. The study aims to understand the applicability of The grindability is an indicator of coal hardness, reflecting the dif-
metallurgical properties of semicoke by lab experiments, in-furnace ficulty of raw coal processing and utilisation and affecting the energy
phenomena related to combustion by the CFD model, and to examine consumption in pulverising coal in this study. CNK-60 mill is used for

2
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

testing Hardgrove grindability index (HGI) of the semi-coke. The
semicoke samples are prepared to be in the particle size range of
0.63–1.25 mm and dried at 105 °C for 2 h. HGI is calculated based on
the weight of original powders (W0), and weight of powders sieved by a
200-mesh sieve (W-200) after milled for (60 ± 0.25) r·min−1, as shown
in Eq. (3).
HGI = 13 + 6.93 × (W0 W 200 )
The ignition temperature refers to the lowest temperature at which
the volatile (fuel gas) released by coal will spontaneously ignite in a
normal atmosphere without an external source of ignition. PCI requires
the pulverised fuel to have a relatively high ignition temperature for the
sake of the safety of coal storage, transport, milling and injection. The
semicoke is milled to 3-5 mm and dried in 80 °C for 2 h, and then heated
in the RBX-03 tester continuously. The temperature at which the gas
volume in the heating tube suddenly expands or the rate of temperature
rise suddenly increases is recorded as the ignition temperature of the
sample.
To ensure the safety of PCI, pulverised fuel is required to be non-
explosive or low explosive. At present, the explosiveness of pulverised
fuel is mainly detected by the length of the return flame of the in-
stantaneous explosion of pulverised fuel. Semicoke is prepared to be
0.074 mm or less and dried at 105 °C for 1 h. The length of the return
flame is determined by using 1 g of pulverised semicoke sprayed to a
fire source of 1050 °C (1323 K).
2.2. CFD model study
The model has been described in details in Refs. [24, 25], and is
outlined below for completeness. The model in this paper uses a single
computational domain to cover the lower part of the commercial BF
investigated. Blowpipe-tuyere-raceway region is treated as a cavity, and
the coke bed is treated as a porous medium. The following physico-
chemical processes are included in this model: (1) turbulent flow of gas-
particle in the raceway and coke bed, (2) Pulverised fuel blends com-
bustion process, including the devolatilization of coal, fuel gas com-
bustion and char reactions, (3) gasification and combustion of coke, (4)
heat transfer among gas-solid phase. The CFD model is developed on
(3)
the platform of ANSYS-CFX 17.2.
2.2.1. Model details
A set of 3D, steady-state Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes equations
closed by the standard k-ε turbulence model equations is used to de-
scribe the gas phase flow. The Lagrangian method is used to track
particles along the discrete particle trajectories. Changes in particle
movements are calculated by Newton's second law, where drag force
and turbulent dispersion are considered. The change of particle tem-
perature is governed by three physical processes: convective heat
transfer, latent heat associated with chemical reactions, and radiative
heat transfer. For example, heat transfer associated with mass transfer
QM driven by latent heat in this model:
dmp
QM = Hreac
dt (4)
where the sum is taken over all components of the particle for which
heat transfer is taking place. mp is the particle mass. Hreac is the
latent heat loss/gain by reactions, including the heat loss due to
devolatilization of raw coal and two gasification reactions of char,
and heat gain due to char oxidation reaction. This is also used in Refs.
[22, 25].
Chemical reactions related to the combustion of the blends of
semicoke and coal are considered in Table 1, including preheating,

Table 1
Chemical reactions
Reaction Reaction rate expression Reaction kinetics

Coal blends reactions

Coal
kv1
E A1 = 3.7 × 105s 1; E1 = 18000K
1 Fuel gas + (1 1 ) Char k = A exp
kv2 RTp A2 = 1.46 × 1013s 1; E2 = 30189K
Coal 2 Fuel gas + (1 2 ) Char
d mref 1 = VM (daf ); 2= Q× 1
d = CS d 0 CS = 0.26
dt mref ,0
Fuel gas + O2 → CO2 + 2H2O CA = 4.0
ri = CA min ( ) [ i]
vt
ϕChar + O2 → 2(ϕ − 1)CO + (2 − ϕ)CO2 2( 1) TS A c = 14m s 1 K 1; Tc = 21580K
= AS exp AS = 2500; TS = 6240K
2 Tp
Char + CO2 → 2CO 3 A c = 202300m s 1 K 1; Tc = 39743K
dmc MC
= (k1 1 + (k2 + k3) 1) 1m c AS = 0.0004; TS = 6240K
dt 1 e MO2 C
Char + H2O → CO + H2 D A c = 6069m s 1 K 1; Tc = 32406K
k1 = 2
rp AS = 0.0004; TS = 6240K
kc
k2 = (1 e)
rp
coth 1
k3 = kc Tp 2

Tc
k c = A c Tp exp
Tp
0.5
kc
=R
Dp e

Coke reactions
Coke + O2 ↔ CO2 dmcoke
= (kd 1 + kc _1coke ) 1 [i]4 rcoke
2 P A c = 3.26 × 106kg m 2 s 1
dt PA
Tc = 10855K
Coke + CO2 ↔ 2CO A c = 4.71 × 109kg m 2 s 1

Tc = 29018K
0.75
Dref Tp + Tg Dref Tcoke + Tg P Tc
Note: Dp = effic × D; D = ; kd = ; k c _coke = A c exp
fluid 2Tref rcoke 2Tref PA Tcoke

3
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

Table 2
Operating conditions.
Operating conditions

Working volume 4706 m3

Productivity 2.23 tHM·m−3·day−1 (10,500 t·day−1))
Tuyere number 40 (total area of 0.5019 m2)
Reference pressure 392 kPa (235 + 157 kPa)

Boundary conditions
O2 enrichment in blast 15,000 Nm3·h−1 (2.7% O2 enrichment)
Blast (23.7% O2, 15g·m−3 6700 Nm3·min−1 air 1523 K
H2O) + 15,000 Nm3·h−1 O2 (1250 °C)
3 −1 3 −11
Cooling gas (air) 4000 m ·h (100 m ·h for 298 K
each tuyere)
Conveying gas 3200 m3·h−1 air 353 K
+ 1500 m3·h−1 N2
PCI injection rate 190 kg·tHM−1 353 K
(Blending ratio of semi-coke: 0%,
10%, 20%, 30%, 40%)

devolatilization, gaseous combustion, char gasification and oxidation,

and coke gasification and combustion. The particle swelling due to the Fig. 3. Particle size distribution of the injectant mixture.
gas release during the devolatilization phase is considered in this model
by assuming that the particle diameter change is in proportion to the
volatiles released [26]. In this study, the coal and semicoke are treated
as materials with low VM (also termed fuel gas in figures), according to
the proximate analysis from the industry report (section 3.1). Coke is
treated as non-VM material due to very low VM, < 2% [25,27], and
thus the devolatilization is not considered for coke. Such treatment has
been widely used in PCI or BF modelling works [25,28].

2.2.2. Model validation and simulation conditions

The model is validated against measurements, in terms of burnout
and gas composition in the previous studies for a range of coals, black
coals [1,25] and brown coals [24].
Pulverised coal blends are injected into BF under the same operating
conditions with different blending ratios of the semi-coke, as shown in
Table 2. In this work, a stainless-steel co-axial coal lance is used for PCI
operation. Two streams can be observed in this coal lance, including
coal with conveying gas and cooling gas (Fig. 2 [29]). According to the
industry report, in practice, different raw coals (including semicoke)
are mixed firstly and then used in the grinding process. Thus, in this
study, the blend of coal and semicoke is treated as one injectant with

Fig. 4. Plan of plant test.

weighted average properties of coal and semicoke. Particle size dis-

tribution of the blends is described by Rosin-Rammler distribution
(Fig. 3), where the mean particle size, de, is 115 μm, and a measure of
the dispersion of particle sizes, the spread parameter, γ, is 3.5.

2.3. Plant tests

A plant test of semicoke injection was conducted on a commercial

BF. Based on the lab experiments and model study, detailed plan of
plant test is made as showed in Fig. 4. That is, plant test was conducted
for 49 days using one commercial BF. The blending ratio of semicoke is
changed from 0%, 10%, 15%, 18% and 20%. During the plant test,
other raw materials and operational conditions are maintained at a
Fig. 2. Lance configuration and dimensions [29].
similar level.

4
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

Table 3
The proximate and ultimate analysis of semicoke and two PCI coals.
Properties Semicoke Coal 1 Coal 2

Proximate analysis (ad.)

Moisture, % 7.56 1.17 0.75
Ash, % 9.02 7.72 9.90
Volatile matter (VM), % 10.10 16.24 8.64
Fixed carbon, % 80.16 76.04 81.89
HGI 58 73 57
Qnet_d 31,500 32,570 31,287

Ultimate analysis (daf.)

C, % 81.50 84.59 82.33
H, % 3.5 3.84 3.52
N, % 1.25 1.08 1.16
S, % 0.34 0.47 0.50

3. Results and discussion

The LMP method is used to give a multi-scale view and full picture
of the feasibility of co-combustion of semicoke and PCI coal. The lab
experiments, model study and plant test are conducted and analysed
from the aspects of metallurgical properties, in-furnace combustion
profiles and BF-performance.

3.1. Lab experiments

Metallurgical properties of semicoke are tested in the lab experi-

ments, including the grindability, composition, ignition temperature
and explosiveness. It is shown in Table 3 that the semicoke has the
characteristics of lower ash content, lower sulphur content, higher fixed
carbon content and higher calorific value, and is suitable for PCI op-
eration. HGI of semicoke were tested as 58, 52, 57 and 53, which all
meet the PCI requirement (> 50) [30]. Semicoke has a low VM content
and sulphur content and a high ignition temperature of 420, 430, 440,
450 °C (693, 703, 713, 723 K). Compared with PCI coals, the relative
high ignition temperature shows that semicoke is not easy to gasify and
burn, thus helping to improve the safety for PCI operation. The returned
fire length of semicoke is shorter related to the low VM content,
namely, 180, 220, 200, and 120 mm. In this study, the returned fire
length of semicoke is even shorter than the low VM content, namely the Fig. 5. Particle trajectories coloured by particle temperature: (a) semicoke and
explosiveness of semicoke is weak and semicoke is safe in transporta- (b) Coal 2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend,
tion in view of explosiveness. The weak explosiveness of semicoke helps the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
to improve the safety of PCI. On this basis, the semicoke not only meets
the PCI requirement in terms of the grindability and composition but 3.2.1. Single injections of semicoke and coal
also helps to improve the safety of PCI operation with its high ignition The in-furnace phenomena of a single injection of semicoke and
temperature and weak explosiveness. Qnet_d is used in this study to re- Coal 2 are compared and analysed to investigate the possibility of re-
present net calorific value by combusting a specified quantity (i.e. net placing PCI coal (anthracite) with the semi-coke, in terms of the flow
heat of combustion). The selected semicoke is subjected to the model field within the raceway region and combustion profiles of the pul-
study with these input parameters. verised fuels. As a measure of the combustion efficiency, the burnout is
calculated according to the ash balance, as shown in Eq. (5).
3.2. Model study ma,0
Burnout = 1 /(1 ma,0)
ma (5)
Based on the measurements from lab experiments, the CFD model is
used for studying the semicoke combustion under full-scale BF condi- where ma,0 is the ash content of the original coal blends and ma is the
tions. First, the single injection of semicoke and Coal 2 in Table 3 are ash content of the burnt residual collected. As defined, the burnout
studied, and their in-furnace behaviours are compared for exploring the represents the total weight loss of the semicoke or coal particles. In this
feasibility of replacing Coal 2 with the semicoke. Then, more practi- study, the burnout can be calculated along the particle plume and over
cally, the co-combustion of semicoke and PCI coal (Coal 1) is studied for the entire tuyere-raceway region, respectively.
identifying the suitable blending ratio of semicoke in the blends in PCI Fig. 5 compares the flow pattern and particle temperature between
technology. the two single injection cases. It is indicated that the flow patterns are

5
Z.J. Hu, et al.
Fig. 6. Comparison of semicoke and Coal 2 in terms of the evolution of burnout
along the particle plume within the raceway region.
very similar. Two parts can be observed in both cases: particle plume of
lower temperature and large-scale recirculation of higher temperature.
That is, the inclined particle plume is formed after powder exiting lance
into the tuyere, followed by a recirculation within the raceway centre.
Along the particle plume, the temperature increases from the room
temperature and remains at a relatively low level. It is less than the hot
blast temperature of 1523 K in the upstream, indicating the particles are
heated by hot blast firstly before reaching the peak particle temperature
near the endpoint of raceway as a result of the exothermal reactions
related to combustion. In the recirculation region, the particle tem-
perature starts from the highest temperature, near 2800 K at the
boundary of the raceway to a moderate temperature around the ra-
ceway centre. Therefore, it is indicated that using semicoke in PCI
technology has an insignificant impact on the in-furnace flow and
temperature fields.
Fig. 6 compares the evolutions of burnout along the particle plume
between the two single injection cases. It shows that the combustion
profiles of the two cases are similar. Both injectants start to burn from
around 0.8 m away from the lance tip, where semicoke gives a slightly
earlier start because of its higher VM content and the resulted stronger
gas combustion. The two increase rapidly and continuously until the
endpoint of the raceway. Similarly, semicoke has a slightly higher
burnout than Coal 2 along the particle plume. However, anthracite is a
typical coal component in the coal blends in PCI technology. It means
that due to similar combustion profiles, the semicoke has the potential
to replace anthracite as one of the components in the coal blends.
3.2.2. Co-combustion of semicoke and PCI coal
The single injection simulations indicate that the semicoke has the
potential to replace anthracite as one of the components in the coal
blends. In this part, the semicoke will be used to replace Coal 2, an-
thracite, in the blend and investigate the effect of blending ratio on in-
furnace phenomena for identifying the safe and suitable range of
blending ratio which will be adopted in the plant tests. The in-furnace
phenomena of co-combustion of semicoke and Coal 1 are investigated
with a range of blending ratios of 0–40% semicoke, in terms of gas and
particle phases, such as temperature field, flow field, combustion effi-
ciency.
6
Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165
Fig. 7. Particle trajectories of co-combustion coloured by burnout under the
blending ratio of semicoke of: (a) 0%, (b) 40%. (For interpretation of the re-
ferences to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version
of this article.)
Fig. 7 compares the combustion profiles of two blends: 0% semicoke
(namely 100% Coal 1) vs. 40% semicoke. It is indicated that the flow
patterns also include two parts: i) an inclined particle plume of lower
burnout level. ii) a large scale of recirculation starts from the boundary
of the raceway, with burnout up to 100%. The qualitative similar flow
pattern of two cases indicates it is possible to use semicoke in the blend
in PCI operations.
To identifying the safe and suitable semicoke blending ratio, the
effect of the blending ratio of semicoke on the in-furnace phenomena of
co-combustion is further studied quantitatively.
Fig. 8 compares the fuel gas molar fractions qualitatively and then
quantitatively. It is indicated that in the cases of 0% and 40% semicoke
blending ratio, the fuel gas only appears near the end of particle plume,
indicating a fast devolatilization and gases combustion process. How-
ever, using a higher blending ratio of semi-coke, the devolatilization is
delayed, and less fuel gas is produced. Moreover, four semicoke
blending ratios are compared along the centreline. The difference of
peak values between the cases of 0–20% and cases of > 30% are rela-
tively large. This indicates a relatively larger amount of unburnt coal in
the raceway and thus a much worse permeability in the surrounding
coke bed, when > 30% semicoke is used, because the volatiles yield
plays a key role in determining combustion efficiency of the coal blend
[25]. Thus a blending ratio of semicoke below 30% is recommended in
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

(caption on next page)

7
Z.J. Hu, et al.
Fig. 8. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the co-combustion in terms of devolatilization and fuel gas combustion: the contour of fuel gas molar fraction under
blending ratio of semicoke of 0% (a) and 40% (b), the evolution of fuel gas molar fraction along the particle plume (c).
the co-injection of semicoke and PCI coal in BF practice.
Fig. 9 compares the gas temperature profiles under different semi-
coke blending ratios qualitatively and then quantitatively, especially in
the downstream of particle plume. Overall, gas temperature increases
significantly along the particle plume from upstream to downstream
(around 2300 K), followed by a level off near the raceway end. Quan-
titative profile of temperature is compared along the particle plume in
Fig. 9(c). The gas temperature profiles are similar before 1.2 m, corre-
sponding to the process of particles heated by the hot blast. After that,
the gas temperature increases faster and to a higher value when the less
semicoke is used in the blends. This is mainly because that the ignition
and combustion of higher VM of coal blends release more heat and will
ignite and oxidise the residual char, generating more heat and leading
to the higher temperature in the raceway [25]. Moreover, the en-
dothermic char gasification in coal and semicoke combustions in the
raceway and coke gasification in the coke bed also contribute the lower
gas temperature in this region, especially when more semicoke (of low-
VM and high char) is used in the blend.
Fig. 10 compares the burnout profiles under different semicoke
blending ratios, where two burnout calculations are used, respectively.
The final burnout represents the unburnt particles that flow into coke
bed through the endpoint of the raceway region. Average burnout is a
more comprehensive indicator to represent the combustion efficiency of
coal blends over the entire tuyere-raceway region [31]. Both two
burnout calculations decrease with the higher blending ratio of semi-
coke, where final burnout decreases from 39.26% to 30.16% by 9.1%
and the average burnout decreases from 68.33% to 62.83% by 5.5%.
Moreover, it is found that both burnouts are much lower when over
30% of semicoke blending ratios are used. This infers that under the
conditions of the semicoke blending ratios of up to 30%, the burnout
does not change significantly, indicating up to 30% semicoke blending
ratio should be used in the plant test for safety reasons.
3.3. Plant test
Based on the lab experiments and model study, detailed plan of
plant test is made as showed in Fig. 11(a). That is, plant test was con-
ducted for 49 days using one commercial BF. The blending ratio of
semicoke is changed from 0%, 10%, 15%, 18% and 20%. The effects of
blending ratio of semicoke are investigated in aspects of the PCI supply
system and BF performance, including BF efficiency, stability and
products.
3.3.1. Effect of semicoke injection on PCI supply system
Fig. 11 shows the blend properties during the plant test, including
volatile matter (VM%), ash% and S% (STD, the sulphur content in dry
basis) under different semicoke blending ratios conditions.
As increasing the blending ratio of semi-coke, the fluctuations can
be found in the contents of VM, ash and sulphur where VM and S show
slight decrease due to the lower VM and sulphur contents in the
semicoke compared to Coal 1. That is, the addition of semicoke into the
blends does not affect the blend properties significantly.
The effect of semicoke blending on PCI supply system is studied first
by the plant test, in terms of pressure of injecting tank and consumption
of conveying gas, as shown in Fig. 12. It is indicated that the pressure of
injecting tank varies with the PCI rate regardless of the blending ratio of
the semicoke. The consumption of the conveying gas remains at a stable
level, ~3200 m3·h−1, when increasing the blending ratio of the semi-
coke. This can also be reflected by the relatively stable N2 pressure in
8
Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165
the conveying gas. On this basis, it is inferred that using semicoke in the
PCI blends has no significant effect on PCI supply system, thus ensuring
the precondition of the stable BF operation.
3.3.2. Effect of semicoke injection on BF performance
Fig. 13 compares two key BF performance indicators: gas utilisation
rate and K value. The gas utilisation rate is an important indicator to
measure the level of energy consumption in BFs, and the K value
(namely permeability index) is an important parameter of BF stability.
During the plant test, the productivity and PCI rate are remained at
10500 t·d−1 and 190 kg·tHM−1, respectively. In Fig. 13(a), the gas
utilisation rate remains at a relatively stable level, ~52% on average,
indicating a stable BF operation during the plant test when the semi-
coke blending ratio increases from 0% to 20%. Moreover, although
some fluctuations could be found, there is no observed correlation be-
tween the blending ratio of semicoke and K value. This indicates the up
to 20% semicoke injection in the blend does not affect the BF efficiency
and stability significantly.
Then the effect of semicoke injection on BF product is studied. [Si],
the mass fraction of Si in hot metal (i.e. liquid iron), is an indicator of
the temperature of BF that provides a guideline to adjust ironmaking
operation. During the plant test, Fig. 14(a), [Si] largely stays at a level
of 0.40% in the early stage but increases to a bit higher value in the last
few days. This shows the semicoke can be used in PCI, while the higher
[Si] is related to the operations dealing with the problem of elevated
sidewall temperature. It can be seen from Fig. 14(b) that as the blending
ratio of semicoke is increased, the sulphur load in the BF is reduced
from 2.95 kg·t−1 to 2.82 kg·t−1, and the [S] of the hot metal is si-
multaneously decreased. The Sulphur content of the coal blends is
lower due to the low-S content of semicoke, so that it is beneficial to
reduce Sulphur load in BF, thereby reducing the [S] in the hot metal.
Fig. 15 compares the effect of semicoke blending ratio on the fuel
efficiency during the plant in terms of fuel ratio and corrected coke
ratio, as in Table 4. Overall, fuel consumption increases during the
plant test, which is also affected by changes in furnace conditions
caused by elevated sidewall temperatures, changed fuel structure,
newly mixed lump ore and external coke test at the same time.
Therefore, it is difficult to give the quantitative relationship of the fuel
ratio during the plant test. Under this circumstance, Table 4 compares
the product data during the period of blending ratio of 10%–15% cor-
responding to the relatively stable operating conditions and raw ma-
terials conditions. When increasing the blending ratio of semicoke from
10% to 15% in this period, the fuel ratio is increased by 2.5 kg·t−1.
However, the fuel ratio is affected by multiple factors, such as blast
temperature, moisture, heat load, furnace temperature and [Si]. After
all these comprehensive considerations, the corrected coke ratio is
calculated and found to be reduced by 0.1 kg·t−1.
4. Conclusions
An integrated research method of “Lab experiment – Model study –
Plant test (LMP)” is used to study the feasibility of injecting semicoke in
a commercial BF. The metallurgical properties, in-furnace phenomena
of flow and combustion, and effect of semicoke injection on BF per-
formance are studied. The main conclusions are summarized below.
(1) The lab experiments indicate that the semicoke can meet PCI re-
quirement in terms of the grindability and composition and also can
improve the safety of PCI operation considering its high ignition
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

(caption on next page)

9
Z.J. Hu, et al.
Fig. 9. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the co-combustion in terms of gas temperature: the contour of gas temperature under blending ratio of semicoke of 0%
(a) and 40% (b), the evolution of gas temperature along the particle plume (c).
Fig. 10. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the co-combustion in terms of
two calculation of burnouts: (a) final burnout at the endpoint of the raceway,
(b) average burnout over the entire tuyere-raceway region.
temperature and low explosiveness.
(2) The model study indicates that the semicoke could fully replace the
anthracite in the PCI process, their flow patterns are similar, in-
cluding an inclined particle plume followed by a large-scale of re-
circulation around the raceway centre. The semicoke gives a
slightly better combustion performance than the anthracite.
Moreover, co-combustion of semicoke and PCI coal with the
blending ratio ranging 0%–40% are investigated for identifying the
safe and optimal ratio. The higher blending ratio of semicoke gives
worse devolatilization performance and lower combustion
10
Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165
Fig. 11. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on coal blends properties: (a) VM%
and ash%, (b) STD.
efficiency. Both final burnout and average burnout are much lower
when the blending ratio is over 30%. This suggests it is better to use
a blending ratio of semicoke of < 30% in the plant test.
(3) The plant test confirms that the semicoke injection has a slight in-
fluence on the PCI system and BF performance when the blending
ratio of semicoke is < 20%.
Overall, it is feasible to replace PCI coal with semicoke partially in
terms of safe metallurgical properties, similar in-furnace phenomena of
flow and combustion, and stable BF operation and performance.
The LMP research method is an effective research method to test
new raw materials and develop new technology for large scale industry
including ironmaking.
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

Fig. 14. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the BF products: (a) tempera-
Fig. 12. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the PCI supply system in terms
ture of the hot metal and Si content, (b) basicity and [S].
of (a) pressure of injecting tank, and (b) consumption of conveying gas.

Fig. 13. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the BF performance: gas utili- Fig. 15. Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the fuel ratio.
sation rate and K value.

11
Z.J. Hu, et al. Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165

Table 4 Wloss weight loss of the coal sample during heating with air iso-
Effect of blending ratio of semicoke on the fuel ratio and coke ratio. lated
Blending ratio Productivity, PCI rate, Fuel ratio, Corrected coke Wsample mass of the coal sample
of semicoke t·d−1 kg·t−1 kg·t−1 ratio, kg·t−1 Wresidue mass of the ashing residue
W-200 weight of powders sieved by a 200-mesh sieve
10% 10,544 189.7 487.2 456.6
W0 weight of original powders
15% 10,504 192.8 489.7 456.5

Greek letters

α volume/internal surface area ratio in Gibb model

Nomenclature α1, α2 volatile yield
ϕ mechanism factor in Gibb model
A1, A2 pre-exponential factors of devolatilization reactions, s−1 γ spread parameter in Rosin-Rammler distribution
Ac pre-exponential factors in Gibb model, m s−1 K−1 ρ density, kg m−3
As constant in Gibb model, 0.0004 ρc Char density
a exponent in Gibb model, 0.75 ρfluid Fluid density
CA Eddy dissipation model constant, 4 ρ∞ Far field concentration of reacting gas for time averaged
Cs Swelling coefficient value obtained from gas phase calculation
D external diffusion coefficient of oxygen in Gibb model,
m2 s−1 Subscripts
Dref reference dynamic diffusivity in Gibb model,
1.8e−5 kg m−1 s−1 c char
Dp Pore diffusivity coke coke
daf. dry and ash free g gas
d0 particle diameter at start of devolatilization p particle
de the volume-equivalent-sphere diameter, μm
e void fraction of char particles Acknowledgements
E1, E2 activation energy of devolatilization reactions, K
Hreac reaction heat, J kg−1 The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from
[i] molar concentration of component i Baosteel Group Corporation and Australian Research Council
k turbulent kinetic energy, m2 s−2 (LP150100112).
kv1, kv2 devolatilization rate constant, s−1
k1 rate of external diffusion in Gibb model, s−1 References
k2 rate of surface reaction rate in Gibb model, s−1
k3 rate of internal diffusion and surface reaction in Gibb model, [1] Y. Shen, B. Guo, A. Yu, D. Maldonado, P. Austin, P. Zulli, Three-dimensional
s−1 modelling of coal combustion in blast furnace, ISIJ Int. 48 (2008) 777–786, https://
doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.48.777.
kc carbon oxidation rate in Gibb model, m s−1 [2] D. Wu, P. Zhou, H. Yan, P. Shi, C.Q. Zhou, Numerical investigation of the effects of
kd diffusion rate of coke reactions in Field model, kg m−2 s−1 size segregation on pulverized coal combustion in a blast furnace, Powder Technol.
ma ash mass fraction 342 (2019) 41–53, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2018.09.067.
[3] K. Luo, J. Xing, Y. Bai, J. Fan, Universal devolatilization process model for nu-
ma,0 original ash mass fraction merical simulations of coal combustion, Energy Fuel 31 (2017) 6525–6540, https://
mc mass of char, kg doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b00970.
mcoke mass of coke, kg [4] K. Dong, A. Yu, S. Liu, D. Pinson, J. Tsalapatis, Z. Zhou, Numerical investigation of
burden distribution in a blast furnace, Steel Res. Int. 86 (2015) 651–661, https://
ṁref rate of change of mass of the reference material doi.org/10.1002/srin.201400360.
mref,0 mass of the reference material at the start of devolatilization [5] C. Wen, N. Karvounis, J.H. Walther, Y. Yan, Y. Feng, Y. Yang, An efficient approach
Mad Moisture content in air-dried coal sample to separate CO2 using supersonic flows for carbon capture and storage, Appl.
Energy 238 (2019) 311–319, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.062.
Mc molecular weight of carbon
[6] C. Geng, S. Li, C. Yue, Y. Ma, Pyrolysis characteristics of bituminous coal, J. Energy
MO2 molecular weight of oxygen molecule Inst. 89 (2016) 725–730, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2015.04.004.
p pressure, Pa [7] Y. Zhuo, T. Wang, C. Li, Y. Shen, Numerical study of the pyrolysis of ellipsoidal low-
P local pressure, Pa rank coal briquettes, Energy Fuel 32 (2018) 4189–4201, https://doi.org/10.1021/
acs.energyfuels.7b03224.
PA atmospheric pressure, Pa [8] J. Tian, H. Ni, Y. Han, Z. Shen, Q. Wang, X. Long, Y. Zhang, J. Cao, Primary PM2.5
Q Q-factor for devolatilization model and trace gas emissions from residential coal combustion: assessing semi-coke
QM heat transfer associated with mass transfer briquette for emission reduction in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China, Atmos.
Environ. 191 (2018) 378–386, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.07.031.
Qnet_d net calorific value of coal sample [9] Y. Yu, M. Xu, H. Yao, D. Yu, Y. Qiao, J. Sui, X. Liu, Q. Cao, Char characteristics and
R resistance to flow in porous media (R = 0 for cavity) particulate matter formation during Chinese bituminous coal combustion, Proc.
rcoke coke particle radius, m Combust. Inst. 31 II, 2007, pp. 1947–1954, , https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2006.
07.116.
rp particle radius, m [10] J.M. Lee, D.W. Kim, J.S. Kim, Characteristics of co-combustion of anthracite with
ri reaction rate of gas species i, mol m−3 s−1 bituminous coal in a 200-MWe circulating fluidized bed boiler, Energy 36 (2011)
T temperature, K 5703–5709, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.051.
[11] Y. Shen, A. Yu, P. Zulli, CFD modelling and analysis of pulverized coal injection in
Tc activation energy in Gibb model, K
blast furnace: an overview, Steel Res. Int. 82 (2011) 532–542, https://doi.org/10.
Tcoke coke particle temperature, K 1002/srin.201100045.
Tg gas temperature, K [12] P. Wang, G. Wang, J. Zhang, J.-Y. Lee, Y. Li, C. Wang, Co-combustion characteristics
and kinetic study of anthracite coal and palm kernel shell char, Appl. Therm. Eng.
Tp particle temperature, K
143 (2018) 736–745, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.08.009.
Tref reference temperature in Gibb model, 293 K [13] J. Yu, A. Tahmasebi, Y. Han, F. Yin, X. Li, A review on water in low rank coals: the
Ts constant in Gibb model, 6240 K existence, interaction with coal structure and effects on coal utilization, Fuel
VM volatile matter Process. Technol. 106 (2013) 9–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2012.09.051.
[14] C. Zou, C. Ma, J. Zhao, L. Wen, C. Bai, Research status and suggestion of mid-low
vi stoichiometric coefficient of species i.

12
Z.J. Hu, et al.
temperature pyrolysis semi-coke as the PCI fuel in blast furnace, Clean Coal
Technol. 23 (2017) 57–64.
[15] P. Li, J. Zhang, R. Xu, T. Song, Representation of characteristics for modified coal
simi-coke and coke used in blast furnace injection, Energy Metall. Ind. 34 (2015)
41–45.
[16] S. Yang, W. Cai, H. Zheng, J. Liang, S. Zhang, Q. Xue, Performance analysis of semi-
coke for blast furnace injection, Chin. J. Process. Eng. 14 (2014) 896–900.
[17] L. Zhang, W. Ren, D. Liu, W. Zhang, Z. Wang, W. Deng, Study on semi-coke used as
pulverized coal for injection into blast furnace, Angang Technol. (2015) 13–17.
[18] Y. Wang, Y. Zhang, J. Zhang, Lab study of low-temperature semicokes for injection,
Sci. Technol. Baotou Steel. 38 (2012) 6–8.
[19] Y. Jiao, B. Hu, Y. Gui, Feasibility analysis of semi-coke as JISCO blast furnace with
coal injection, Energy Metall. Ind. 30 (2011) 20–22.
[20] D. Rangarajan, T. Shiozawa, Y. Shen, J.S. Curtis, A. Yu, Influence of operating
parameters on raceway properties in a model blast furnace using a two-fluid model,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 53 (2014) 4983–4990, https://doi.org/10.1021/ie301936r.
[21] Y. Shen, B. Guo, S. Chew, P. Austin, A. Yu, Three-dimensional modeling of flow and
thermochemical behavior in a blast furnace, Metall. Mater. Trans. B Process Metall.
Mater. Process. Sci. 46 (2015) 432–448, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-014-
0204-y.
[22] T.J. Taha, A.F. Stam, K. Stam, G. Brem, CFD modeling of ash deposition for co-
combustion of MBM with coal in a tangentially fired utility boiler, Fuel Process.
Technol. 114 (2013) 126–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2013.03.042.
[23] J. Zhang, Q. Wang, Y. Wei, L. Zhang, Numerical modeling and experimental in-
vestigation on the use of brown coal and its beneficiated semicoke for coal blending
combustion in a 600 MWe utility furnace, Energy Fuel 29 (2015) 1196–1209,
13
Fuel Processing Technology 196 (2019) 106165
https://doi.org/10.1021/ef502287c.
[24] J. Liao, A.B. Yu, Y. Shen, Modelling the injection of upgraded brown coals in an
ironmaking blast furnace, Powder Technol. 314 (2017) 550–556, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.powtec.2016.11.005.
[25] Y. Shen, B. Guo, A. Yu, P.R. Austin, P. Zulli, Three-dimensional modelling of in-
furnace coal/coke combustion in a blast furnace, Fuel 90 (2011) 728–738, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2010.08.030.
[26] J. Yu, J.A. Lucas, T.F. Wall, Formation of the structure of chars during devolatili-
zation of pulverized coal and its thermoproperties: a review, Prog. Energy Combust.
Sci. 33 (2007) 135–170, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2006.07.003.
[27] M. Zaharia, V. Sahajwalla, B.-C. Kim, R. Khanna, N. Saha-Chaudhury, P. O’kane,
J. Dicker, C. Skidmore, D. Knights, Recycling of rubber tires in electric arc furnace
steelmaking: simultaneous combustion of metallurgical coke and rubber tyres
blends, Energy Fuel 23 (2009) 2467–2474, https://doi.org/10.1021/ef8010788.
[28] H. Nogami, M. Chu, J. Yagi, Multi-dimensional transient mathematical simulator of
blast furnace process based on multi-fluid and kinetic theories, Comput. Chem. Eng.
29 (2005) 2438–2448, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2005.05.024.
[29] Y. Shen, A. Yu, Characterization of coal burnout in the raceway of an ironmaking
blast furnace, Steel Res. Int. 86 (2015) 604–611, https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.
201400333.
[30] M. de L.I. Gomes, E. Osório, A.C.F. Vilela, Thermal analysis evaluation of the re-
activity of coal mixtures for injection in the blast furnace, Mater. Res. 9 (2006)
91–95 http://www.scielo.br/pdf/mr/v9n1/28577.pdf (accessed March 8, 2019).
[31] Y. Liu, Y. Shen, Computational fluid dynamics study of biomass combustion in a
simulated ironmaking blast furnace: effect of the particle shape, Energy Fuel 32
(2018) 4372–4381, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b03150.