A Model For Burden Distribution and Gas Flow Distribution of

ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Applied Mathematical Modelling 0 0 0 (2016) 120
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Mathematical Modelling

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apm
A model for burden distribution and gas ow distribution of

bell-less top blast furnace with parallel hoppersR
Lin Shi a, Guangsheng Zhao b,c,, Mingxin Li a, Xiang Ma d
a
School of Mathematics, Physics and Biological Engineering, Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia,
Baotou 014010, China
b
School of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering, Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia, Baotou
014010, China
c
Faculty of Vehicle Engineering and Mechanics, Dalian University of Technology, Liaoning, Dalian 116023, China
d
Iron-making Plant of Steel Union Co. Ltd. of Baotou Steel(Group) Corp, Inner Mongolia, Baotou 014010, China
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 26 August 2015
Revised 2 July 2016
Accepted 21 July 2016
Available online xxx
Keywords:
Blast furnace
Parallel type hoppers
Burden surface
Gas ow proles
a b s t r a c t
In the present work, a collision model is established and combined with a hydrodynamic
model, 3D collision trajectory, Coriolis force model and drag force model to build a hybrid
model for predicting the position of the pile surface in a blast furnace with parallel type
hoppers. The described model is then validated by test data and scene photos of the worn
chute. According to this model, different gas ow proles are formed at different development stages after the burden distribution is nished. During the "initial stage" which
accounts for 30% of the total time of gas ow development, the development of gas ow
is mainly inuenced by the burden surface of ore. During the "intermediate stage" which
accounts for 40% of the total time, the development of gas ow is inuenced by both the
burden surface of ore and the burden surface of coke. During the "late stage" which accounts for 30% of the total time, the development of gas ow is mainly inuenced by the
burden surface of coke. The "snakelike" segregation in the burden surface of blast furnace
with parallel hoppers is caused by the variation in Coriolis force on the burden ow at
the chute exit during one revolution of the chute (the range in total Coriolis acceleration
for chute inclination angle of 42.5 is 1.363.01 m/s2 for ore and 0.364.40 m/s2 for coke).
The model can provide real time guidance for burden distribution in a blast furnace. The
segregation in the burden surface can be reduced by adding a center discharge valve.
2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Burden distribution plays an extremely important role in blast furnace operation. In a given burden distribution system,
the burden surface formed at the furnace throat will not only determine gas permeability, gas ow distribution and CO
utilization, but will also have a great impact on energy saving, eciency, emission reduction, yield and quality of molten iron
and safety, stability and durability of the blast furnace. Currently, parallel hoppers are still used by a considerable number of
the blast furnaces for burden distribution due to their simple operation, easy maintenance and strong overcharging capacity.
R
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 61263015).
Corresponding author at: School of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering, Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia,
Baotou 014010, China.
E-mail addresses: shilin_dingyan@sina.com (L. Shi), 357002206@qq.com (G. Zhao).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.07.024
0307-904X/ 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: L. Shi et al., A model for burden distribution and gas ow distribution of bell-less top blast
furnace with parallel hoppers#, Applied Mathematical Modelling (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.07.024
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
2
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120
Nomenclature
a
al
a
a
A
b
Cd
D
Dh
d
d0
e
E1
E2
F
Fcg
Fcor
Fg
Ff
F
g
h
h0
h1
h2
H
H1
H2
Ha
Hc
Hh
Kd
L
LY
l
l0
l
m
m1
n
N
Nm
Q
rdc
rxd
rdd
rxc
R
Rn
R1
Re
S
t
t0
Acceleration of the burden with respect to the Y tube (m/s2 )

Acceleration of the burden with respect to the longitudinal direction of the chute (m/s2 )
Acceleration of the burden with respect to the tangential direction of the chute (m/s2 )
Acceleration of the burden with respect to the freeboard (m/s2 )
Maximum cross-sectional area of the burden (m2 )
Half-width of the projection of the throttle valve opening (m)
Gas resistance coecient of the burden in the freeboard
Diameter of the throttle valve opening (m)
Diameter of the centering tube (m)
Equivalent spherical diameter (ESD) of the particle, taking the average particle diameter d0 (m)
Average particle diameter (m)
Chute tilting distance, i.e. the vertical distance between the chute tilting axis and the chute bottom face
(m)
Elastic modulus of burden material (Gpa)
Elastic modulus of centering tube material (Gpa)
Gas resistance of the burden in the freeboard (N)
Inertial centrifugal force (N)
Coriolis force (N)
Gravitational force (N)
Frictional force between the burden particle and the Y tube (N)
Frictional force between the burden particle and the chute (N)
Local gravitational acceleration (m/s2 )
Height of the vertical position of the chute over the impact point on the burden surface (m)
Height of the end of the chute bottom surface over the impact point on the burden surface (m)
Height of the stock line (m)
Stock line height difference, i.e. the distance from the vertical position of the chute to the zero point of the
stock line (m)
Drop height of the burden (m)
Distance from the last collision point of the burden and the centering tube to the centering tube entrance
(m)
Distance from the last collision point of the burden and the centering tube to the centering tube exit (m)
Distance from the chute suspension point to the stock line zero point (m)
Length of the centering tube (m)
Distance from the chute suspension point to the centering tube exit (m)
Gas resistance per unit mass of burden per unit velocity in the freeboard (1/s)
Side length of the projection of the throttle valve opening (m)
Side length of the Y tube (m)
Displacement of the burden particle along the axial direction of the chute
Design length of the chute (m)
Effective length of the chute, i.e. the actual moving length of the burden on the chute (m)
Mass of the burden particle (kg)
Mass of the burden, calculated from the equivalent diameter of the burden stream (kg)
Number of collisions of the burden on the centering tube
Reaction force of the chute on the particle (N)
Supporting force of the internal curved chute surface per unit mass of the burden (N/kg)
Discharging ow through the throttle valve (kg/s)
Semi-major axis of the big oval in the horizontal projection (m)
Semi-minor axis of the small oval in the horizontal projection (m)
Semi-minor axis of the big oval in the horizontal projection (m)
Semi-major axis of the small oval in the horizontal projection (m)
Radius of the inner arc of the chute (m)
Radius of the burden impact point (m)
Rotation radius of the inner valve plate of the throttle valve
Reynolds number of the burden in the freeboard
Projected area of the throttle valve (m2 )
Moving time of the burden particle on the chute (s)
Total moving time of the burden particle in the Y tube (s)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
t1
t2
t3
t
t
vh
vr,0
vR
vs
vs(0,1,,n-1)
vs
v
V
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
Vg
Vl
V
W
x, y,
z, xr ,
Yr , zr ,
xl , yl ,
Zl , x,
y, z
x0
X,
Y,
Z,
Total moving time of the burden particle in the centering tube before the last collision (s)
Time elapsed from the last collision between the burden particle and the centering tube to the contact
between the particle and the chute (s)
Moving time of the burden particle on the chute (s)
Moving time of the burden particle in the centering tube (s)
Moving time of the burden particle in the freeboard (s)
Vertical velocity of the burden upon contact with the chute (m/s)
Burden collision velocity (m/s)
Horizontal velocity of the burden upon contact with the chute (m/s)
Horizontal velocity of the burden stream during the last collision with the centering tube (m/s)
Horizontal velocity of the burden stream during the rst, second ... nth collision with the centering tube
(m/s)
Equal in magnitude but opposite in directions to vs (m/s)
Vertical velocity of the burden stream during the last collision with the centering tube (m/s)
Velocity of the burden particle in the freeboard (m/s)
Velocity of burden stream at the throttle valve opening (m/s)
Velocity of burden owing out of the Y tube (m/s)
Velocity of the burden upon contact with the chute (m/s)
Initial velocity of the burden in the chute (m/s)
Velocity of the burden at the chute exit (m/s)
Gas ow rate at the furnace top, 0 (m/s) for charging before blowing-in
Velocity of the burden along the chute direction (m/s)
Tangential velocity of the burden along the chute arc (m/s)
Total elastic vibration energy of the burden during the collision process (J)
Coordinate direction
Distance from position M where the particle leaves the chute to the furnace centerline
Displacement of the particle in the x, y and z direction
Greeks
1
2
1
2
1
2
g
s
Chute angle (rad)

Inclination angle of the Y tube, for the right hopper and for the left hopper ()
Degree of opening of the throttle valve ()
Poissons ratio of the burden
Poissons ratio of the centering tube material
Maximum deformation occurring when the burden collides with the centering tube
Collision dissipation factor of the burden
Viscosity coecient of gas (Pa s)
Circumferential angle of the burden particle moving along the internal curved surface of the chute, i.e. eccentric angle of the burden (rad)
Rotation angle of the chute at t0 + t1 + t2 (rad)
Angle of the burden impact point below the Oxy plane (rad)
Energy loss of the burden
Coecient of friction between the chute and the burden
Coecient of friction between the Y tube and the burden
Bulk density of the burden (kg/m3 )
Density of the burden (kg/m3 ), taking the apparent density s (kg/m3 )
Density of wall material (kg/m3 )
Gas density during smooth BF operation, 0.81 kg/m3 (air density 1.35 kg/m3 at the blowing-in temperature)
Apparent density of the burden particle (kg/m3 )
Shape factor of the particle (sphericity)
Rotation speed of the chute (r/s)
Acute angle between the ox axis and the ox axis (rad)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
4
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 1. The burden movement in blast furnace with parallel hoppers. 1. Hopper and throttle valve. 2. Y tube. 3. Corrugated tube and centering tube.
4. Rotary chute.
The burden surface prole and gas ow distribution for the blast furnace with parallel hoppers have always been a challenge
and center of attention for metallurgy researchers. The existing models for burden surface cannot properly predict the actual
surface and gas ow distribution. Therefore, it is of great practical signicance to establish a model which accurately reects
the burden surface distribution and gas ow distribution for a blast furnace with parallel hoppers. Various scholars have
studied burden distribution modeling and burden surface distribution modeling for a blast furnace with parallel hoppers
[1-5]. However, there are still some problems:
1 the collision between the burden stream and the centering tube is not
taken into account by the burden distribution models;
2 the horizontal velocity of burden stream after collision is ignored;

3 the gravitational acceleration of burden stream is ignored;
4 only theoretical analysis is provided, without relating the
results to the actual situation in operating blast furnaces. Although there are shortcomings, a variety of methods, such as
the discrete element method (DEM), are being applied to predict the burden distribution in blast furnaces [6,7]. We also
found inspirations about the Coriolis force, gas drag force and the modeling method of collision model from Reference [2,8
11]. In the present work, a collision model, which calculates the energy dissipation coecient of particles by simulation, is
combined with hydrodynamic model, 3D collision trajectory, Coriolis force model and drag force model to build a hybrid
mathematical model for burden distribution of a bell-less top blast furnace with parallel hoppers. The model is validated by
test data obtained from Baotou Steels 2500 m3 blast furnace with parallel hoppers before blowing-in and site photos of the
worn chute.
2. Establishment of the mathematical model for burden distribution of blast furnace with parallel hoppers
The burden movement in a blast furnace with parallel hoppers is shown in Fig. 1. The burden from the throttle valve
opening collides on the Y tube at a speed of V1 , slides down through the corrugated tube and collides on the centering tube
at a speed of V2 . After the collision, the speed and direction of the burden changes due to energy dissipation. The burden
then collides on the chute at a speed of V3 , which results in a reduced speed and changed direction, ows to the end at a
speed of V4 , enters the freeboard and moves downward along a parabolic path at a speed of V5 .
2.1. Establishment of the hydrodynamic model of burden stream
Qiu et al. [10] provided a hydrodynamic formula for calculation of initial velocity based on the difference between coke
and ore in the circulation area. However, in the present research, the burden circulation area is calculated with a throttle
valve with an octagonal-shaped opening, based on the burden distributor for a blast furnace with parallel hoppers independently developed by Baotou Steel. The velocity of the burden stream V1 at the throttle valve opening is calculated with the
following formula:
V1 = Q/( S ),
(1)
where Q is the discharge mass ow rate of coke or sinter, which is obtained by regression of the measured discharge data
at blowing-in.
The structure of the throttle valve opening is shown in Fig. 2. The relationship between the side length of the projection
L and the degree of opening is as follows:
L=
2b =
2R1 sin .
(2)
The projection of the throttle valve opening is similar to a square. In the present research, the projection area of the
opening S is calculated based on a throttle valve with an octagonal-shaped opening. The relationship between S and the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 2. Structure diagram of the throttle valve opening.
Fig. 3. Force model of burden moving in the Y tube.
side length of the projection L is as follows:
S=

2
L2
2L D cos 8
2 2
2
2
2
2
2
cos 8 D
cos 8 D < L < cos 8 D
(3)
L cos 8 D
Eq. (2) applies to the length calculation of one side when the projection of the throttle valve opening is similar to a
square. Eq. (3) only applies to a throttle valve with octagonal opening installed on a xed position.
2.2. Motion model of burden stream in Y tube
A three dimensional Cartesian coordinate system is established in Fig. 3. With the intersection Or of the centerline of
chute suspension point and the centerline of the centering tube as the origin and the vertical downward direction along
the midline of the centering tube (i.e. the furnace centerline) as the positive direction of the zr axis, the static coordinate
system Or xr yr zr is established for the centering tube. The burden movement takes place on the Or yr zr plane where xr = 0.
There is a Y-shaped connecting tube between the hoppers and the corrugated tube on a bell-less top with parallel hoppers.
The burden enters the corrugated tube through the Y tube and then collides with the centering tube. Fig. 3 shows the force
model of burden from the left hopper moving in a Y tube with a length of LY and an inclination angle of ( for the
right hopper). The friction coecient between burden and the Y tube is 1 . The acceleration of burden a is:
a = g(cos ( ) 1 sin ( ) ).
(4)
The velocity of burden owing out of the Y tube, V2 , is:
V2 =
(V1 cos )2 + 2g(cos + 1 sin )LY .
(5)
After the burden ows out of the throttle valve and before the burden leaves the Y tube, the elapsed time t0 is:
t0 = (V2 V1 cos )/a.
(6)
2.3. Trajectory and collision model of burden stream touching the centering tube
2.3.1. Establishment of the equation of the trajectory for burden at the centering tube
As shown in Fig. 4, during the burden distributing process in a blast furnace with parallel hoppers, the burden stream
from the left hopper ows out of the Y tube and enters the centering tube where the stream collides with the tube wall. The
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
6
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 4. Collision of burden on the centering tube.
horizontal and vertical velocity of the burden stream falling down in the centering tube can be calculated by the following
formula:
Vy = Vy0 ,
(7)
Vz = Vz0 + gt .
(8)
We integrate Vy = dy/dt and Vz = dz/dt within the time t to obtain the displacements of the burden along each direction:
y = Vy0t ,
(9)
z = Vz0t + 1/2g(t )2
(10)
The time parameter t is removed from Eqs. (9) and (10) to obtain the following equation: zr = f ( yr ). According to the
equation obtained, the equation of trajectory for the burden in the centering tube before hitting the centering tube can be
determined as:
zr + Hc H2 = f (yr Dh /2 ).
(11)
2.3.2. Collision model of burden stream and the centering tube

Du et al. [2] provided a method and formula for calculating the collision model. However, in the present research, we
believe that the burden mass should be calculated from the equivalent diameter of the burden stream and the changes in
velocity caused by gravity are considered for the vertical velocity of the burden stream v , so that the track of the burden
stream at the centering tube will be parabolic rather than linear, which is more realistic. According to the collision model
presented by Du et al. [2], we will only take into account the energy dissipation in the horizontal direction and will not
take into account the energy dissipation in the tangential direction. The horizontal dissipation factor during the collision
can be calculated with Eq. (12):
1
= (1 ) 2 .
(12)
Energy dissipation occurs when the burden collides with the tube wall. Assume there is no plastic deformation in both
the burden and the tube wall and no adhesion between burden particles, then the energy loss of the burden can be
obtained from Eq. (13) [12]:
W
1
m 2
2 1 r,0
= 7.267

(1 + 2 )
3
2C0
122
12
12
1 5 K 5 m1 vr,5 0 ,
1
(13)
where
+
0
1

1
E 12
122
( 2 1 ) 2
4 112
2
d , C0 =
,K =
+

12
2
3
E1
E2
2 ) 2
2 2 1 2 2(12 )
2 2 21(12
4
2
122
With the above analysis and solution of the energy dissipation factor, the horizontal velocity of the burden after n collisions can be obtained:
vsn = (1 )n nV2 sin ( )
(14)
The time elapsed from the burden leaving the Y tube to the last collision between the burden stream and the centering
tube, t1 , is the sum of the time elapsed until the rst collision t10 , the time elapsed until the second collision t11 , ... and the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 5. Analysis of the three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the rotary chute of blast furnace with parallel hoppers.
time elapsed until the nth collision t1(n-1) . The calculation formula is as follows:
t10 = (1 )Dh /vs0

t11 = (1 )2 Dh /vs1

t1(n1) = (1 )n Dh /vs(n1)
t1 = t10 + t11 + +t1(n1)
(15)
The number of collisions n in the Eq. (15) is determined by the diameter and the length of the centering tube. The
method for calculating n is as follows:
After the burden leaves the Y tube and before the last collision with the centering tube, the displacement H1 in the zr
direction along the height of the centering tube is:
H1 = V2 cos t1 + 1/2gt1 2
(16)
Increment t1 . Continue to increment t1 when H1 Hc until H1 > Hc . At this time, there has been theoretically n + 1
collisions between the burden and the tube wall. Since t1 = t10 + t11 + +t1(n1) , the actual number of collisions is n.
The number of collisions n is now obtained. In the present model, it is decided by numerical calculations that n = 1.
During the last collision with the centering tube, the vertical velocity v of the burden stream is:
v = V2 cos + gt1 .
(17)
During the last collision with the centering tube, the horizontal velocity vs of the burden stream is:
vs = vsn = (1 )n nV2 sin ( ).
(18)
2.4. Three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the rotary chute

First, a moving coordinate system Ol xl yl zl is set up for the rotary chute in Fig. 5, with as the chute angle, the intersection Ol of the furnace centerline and the chute bottom surface as the origin, the vertically upward direction along the
furnace centerline as the zl axis positive, the exit direction of the chute midline in the horizontal projection as the xl axis
positive.
After the direction is changed due to the collision with the centering tube, the burden enters the rotary chute. The
longest semi-axis and the shortest semi-axis from the three-dimensional collision trajectory are shown in Fig. 5. In the
horizontal projection of the three-dimensional collision trajectory, the semi-major axis rdc of the big oval and the semiminor axis rxd of the small oval are calculated respectively from the yr values of the intersections of the linear equation
of the rotary chute under the inclination angle and the trajectories P and P of the burden entering the chute from the
collision point ( yr0 , zr0 ), i.e. (Dh /2, H2 + Hh ). The equations for calculating the intersection of the semi-major axis rdc
of the big oval are as follows:
zr + H2 Hh = f (yr + Dh /2 )
.
zr e/ sin = yr / tan
(19)
Since P and P are symmetrical with respect to the z axis, the equations for calculating the intersection of the semi-minor
axis rxd of the small oval are as follows:
zr + H2 Hh = f (yr + Dh /2 )
.
zr e/ sin = yr / tan
(20)
Fig. 6 shows the contact point between the big oval and the small oval in the three-dimensional collision trajectory of
the burden in the rotary chute of blast furnace with parallel hoppers. The coordinate value of this point yr is the semi-minor
axis rdd of the big oval and the semi-major axis rxc of the small oval in the horizontal projection of the three-dimensional
collision trajectory. The two axes are of equal length: rdx = rdd = rxc . The length of this axis is obtained from the yr value
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
8
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 6. The contact point between the big oval and the small oval in the three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the rotary chute of blast
furnace with parallel hoppers.
Fig. 7. The three-dimensional collision trajectory formed by the burden and the rotary chute and the kinematics of the burden.
of the intersection of the trajectory of the burden entering the chute, P or P , and the lower part
y2r
R2
)2
+ (z(e2R )/sin
= 1 of
2
R /sin
the elliptic equation z (e R )/sin = R2 yr 2 / sin (z (e R )/ sin ) formed by the vertical cross-section of the rotary
chute at an inclination angle of and xr = 0. The equations for calculating the axis length rdx are as follows:
z + H2 Hh = f (yr +
Dh /2 )
.
z (e R )/sin = R2 yr 2 / sin
(21)
Fig. 7 shows the three-dimensional collision trajectory formed by the contact between the burden and the chute surface
and the kinematics of the burden. The chute is rotating clockwise on the graph. With respect to the moving coordinate
system Oxl yl of the horizontal projection, the burden moves counterclockwise on the three-dimensional collision trajectory.
With a chute rotation angle of 1 , the trajectory of the contact point consists of the intersections of the linear equation
formed by the burden falling from the centering tube on the horizontal projection and the irregular elliptic equations formed
by the connection of the big oval and the small oval. The equations for solving the intersection coordinates (xl0 , yl0 ) are as
follows:
x2
l
rdc2 +
y2l
2
rdx
y2l
2
rdx
= 1 xl > 0
x2l
=1
2 +
rxd
yl
= cosxl
sin 1
1
xl < 0 ,
where 1 = 2 (t0 + t1 + t2 ), t2 = Ry /v s and Ry =
(22)
x2l0 + y2l0 + Dh /2.
In Fig. 7, the vertical velocity vh of the burden upon contact with the chute is:
vh = v + gt2
(23)
When the burden is in contact with the chute, the horizontal velocity is vR = vs , the velocity component along the
axial direction of the chute is vxl = vR cos 1 and the velocity component along the tangential direction of the chute is
vyl = vR sin 1 . The moving time of the burden in the chute is t3 . When the burden is rst in contact with the chute, i.e. at
the beginning of the movement (t3 = 0), the formulas for calculating axial velocity, eccentric angle, total tangential velocity
and angular velocity are as follows
dl
dt
= vxl sin + vh cos ,
(24)
t3 =0
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 8. Kinematics and force analysis of the burden particle in the rotary chute. (a) Kinematics of the burden in the chute. (b) Force analysis of the burden
from view A. (c) Kinematics of the burden from view B. (d) Force analysis of the burden from view C.
0 = arcsin (yl /R ),
(25)
v 0 = vyl cos 0 vh sin 0 sin ,
(26)
d
dt
t3 =0
v 0
R
(27)
2.5. Coriolis force model of burden moving in the rotary chute

The state of stress of a burden particle is shown in Fig. 8: gravitational force Fg , support force of the chute on the particle
N, frictional force between the particle and the chute F , inertial centrifugal force Fcg and Coriolis force [8] Fcor (Fcor = 2mV),
where the Coriolis force Fcor (and the inertial centrifugal force Fcg ) originate from the fact that particles are tracked in a
frame of reference rotating with the chute. The motion equation in vector form of the burden particle is:
) Ff ,
= Fg + Fcg + Fcor Ff = Fg + m[
(
r )] + 2m(
V
ma
(28)
= 2 ( is the rotational speed of the chute). The total Coriolis force borne per unit mass of the burden particle,
where
Fmcor , is:
Fmcor = 4
sin + R cos sin
d
dt
2
+ R cos
d
dt
2
.
(29)
Through the force analysis of the burden particle, the following differential equations of motion are set up:
d2 l
d
dl/dt
= al = g cos + 4 2 2 [l sin + R(1 cos )] sin 4 R sin cos

dl 2 d 2 Nm ,
dt
dt 2
+ R dt
dt
R ddt2 = a = g sin sin + 4 2 2 [l sin cos + Rcos2 + R cos sin ] sin
dl
+ 4 R cos sin cos ddt + 4 sin cos dt

R(d2 /dt ) 2 Nm
(30)
(31)
( dtdl ) +(R ddt )
2
dl
Nm = g sin cos + 4 R cos ddt + R ddt + 4 sin sin dt
+ 4 2 2 R
4 2 2 sin cos (l cos + R sin cos ) 4 2 2 Rcos2 cos
(32)
Solve the differential equations (30)(32) with the fourth order RungeKutta method. The initial conditions include
dl
lt30 = 0, dt
|t3 =0 = vxl sin + vh cos , 0 = arcsin(yl /R ) and ddt |t3 =0 = vR 0 . According to the effective moving length of the burden on the chute l = l0 e/tan xl 0 /sin , the moving time t3 of the burden under the chute angle can be obtained. Then
the velocity of the burden along the chute direction Vl = dl/dt, the tangential velocity V = Rd /dt and the eccentric angle of
the burden can be obtained.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
10
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 9. Kinematic analysis of the burden dropping in the freeboard.
Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of the drop height.
The downward projectile movement of the burden after leaving the chute end is shown in Figs. 9 and 10. When the
burden particle leaves the chute, the distance between the mass point M and the centerline of the centering tube is:
x0 =
[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin ) .

2
(33)
When the burden is at the end of the chute, the three components of its velocity V5 in a spatial coordinate system is:
V5x = (Vl sin + V sin cos ) cos + V cos sin

V5y = 2 x0 V cos cos + (Vl sin + V sin cos ) sin ,
V5z = Vl cos V sin sin
(34)
where
R sin
sin =
cos =
[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin )

2
l sin + R(1 cos ) cos

[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin )
2
(35)
(36)
As shown in Fig. 10, the height H from the position M where the burden leaves the chute to the impact point (the drop
height of the burden) is calculated by Eq. (37):
H = h0 + R(1 cos ) sin ,
(37)
where h0 = h + l0 l cos e/ sin and h = h1 + h2 .

2.6. Gas drag force model of the burden moving in the freeboard
When moving in the freeboard, the burden is subject to a gas drag force in addition to the force of gravity [2]. In the
present work, the moving speeds of the burden stream in the three directions x, y and z are considered to be different. As
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
11
Table 1
Specications of bell-less top charging system.
l0 (m)
e (m)
R (m)
R1 (m)
D (m)
Dh (m)
Ha (m)
()
LY (m)
Hc (m)
Hh (m)
(r/s)
3.5
0.77
0.44
0.65
0.7
0.6
4.87
38
1.69
2.5
0.215
0.133
a result, the parameters required to calculate the gas drag forces in each direction (Re, Cd and Kd ) are different from each
other, which will inuence the trajectory of burden movement, the position of the falling point and the burden distribution.
However, these differences are not covered in the relevant literature. It has been found by actual measurement that the
positions of impact points are different for coke and sinter. This is because of different gas drag forces due to their difference
in density, sphericity and size. Mariotte [13] suggested that drag force of uid is proportional to the velocity V2 . In the
present work, the gas drag force on the burden particle is proportional to the relative gas ow velocity (V + Vg )2 and can be
calculated by the following formula:
F = Cd Ag (V + Vg )2 /2, a = 3Cd g (V + Vg )2 /4s d
(38)
Under the effect of the gas drag force, the accelerations of burden moving along x, y and z direction are, respectively:
3 C dx g (V + Vg )
dVx
=
Vx ,
dt
4
s d
(39)
dVy
3 C dy g (V + Vg )
=
Vy ,
dt
4
s d
(40)
3 C dz g (V + Vg )
dVz
(s g )g
=
,
(Vz + Vg ) +

dt
4
s d
s
(41)
Let
Re = g d (V + Vg )/,
(42)
Kd =
3 C d g (V + Vg )
3 C d Re
=
,
4
s d
4 s d 2
(43)
Cd can be calculated from Eq. (44) [14]:
Cd =
24
c3
c
1 + c1 Re 2 +
,
Re
1 + c4 /Re
(44)
where coecients c1 , c2 , c3 and c4 are functions of the particle sphericity .

Perform numerical integration on Eqs. (39)(41) to obtain the displacements of the burden along each direction X, Y
and Z. The radius of the impact point can be calculated from Eq. (45):
Rn =
(x0 + X ) + (Y ) =
2
2
[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin ) + X
2
+ (Y )2 .
(45)
The angle of the impact point below the Oxy plane 2 is:
2 =1 + 2 t3 + arctan (Y /(X +x0 ) ) ,
(46)
where 1 [1 , 1 + 2 ].
3. Validation of the burden distribution model for blast furnace with parallel hoppers
The mathematical model for burden distribution in blast furnace with parallel hoppers, which is a hybrid model integrating a collision model calculating the energy dissipation coecient of particles by simulation, hydrodynamic model, 3D
collision trajectory, Coriolis force model and drag force model, is used in combination with the specications and material
properties et al. (Tables 13) of a 2500 m3 bell-less top blast furnace with parallel hoppers in Baotou Steel to obtain the
burden impact points with different hoppers, burden materials, stock lines and inclination angles. The model is validated by
data measured (Table 4) before blowing-in and site photos of the worn chute.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
12
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]

Table 2
Material properties.
Ore
Coke
d0 (m)
d (kg/m3 )
s (kg/m3 )
E1 (Gpa)
0.0184
0.044
1690
520
3520
900
0.44
0.72
0.7
0.5
0.25
0.22
87.5
10
Table 3
Gas parameters.
g (kg/m3 )
Blowing-in
Smooth operation
Vg (m/s)
Blowing-in
Smooth operation
1.35
0.81
2.5
(Pa s)
g (m/s2 )
E2 (Gpa)
9.04 104
9.7967
0.291
211.9
Table 4
The position angles of sinter and coke burden during actual measurement.
Sinter position angle ()
Coke position angle ()
1m
2m
1m
2m
stock
stock
stock
stock
line
line
line
line
42.72
42.72
41.19
41.19
40.19
39.89
41.19
41.35
38.75
38.75
40.19
40.06
36.94
36.94
33.64
21.89
35.55
29.19
22.19
33.64
25.95
25.95
22.19
22.19
Fig. 11. Comparison between the simulation values and measured values of the radius of impact point.
3.1. Validating simulation values of the radius of the burden impact point with the measured values
Fig. 11 (a) and (b) compares the simulation values and measured values of the radius of impact points for sinter and
coke under different stock lines and inclination angles. The burden is distributed with a very small chute angle, resulting in
relative large deviation of the simulation values from the measured values, which is caused by the bounces of burden on
the chute due to the small chute angle. When the stock line is at 1 m, the average absolute error between the simulation
values and the measured values is 0.065 m for sinter and 0.168 m for coke; the average relative error is 2.6% for sinter and
6.1% for coke. When the stock line is at 2 m, the average absolute error between the simulation values and the measured
values is 0.087 m for sinter and 0.149 m for coke; the average relative error is 3.3% for sinter and 4.7% for coke. The average
absolute error and average relative error of the hybrid model are 0.117 m and 4.2%, respectively. When the relative error is
11% and 9%, respectively, the error rate of the prediction of the radius of impact point with the hybrid model is 0% and 4.3%,
respectively, indicating a high prediction accuracy for the radius of impact point.
3.2. Comparison of the theoretical collision trajectory and the actual worn chute
Please refer to Section 2.4 for the three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the rotary chute. The big
ellipses or small ellipses mentioned below are all formed by the three-dimensional collision trajectory in the horizontal
projection (see Fig. 7).
Fig. 12 compares the theoretical three-dimensional collision trajectory and the actual worn chute. It can be seen that the
worn area in the chute is exactly the small oval area in the theoretical three-dimensional collision trajectory. This is because
that both the big oval and the small oval are formed by a 180 rotation of the chute. Since the burden stream has spent the
same time on both processes, the burden ow is the same for the big oval and the small oval in the trajectory. The burden
ow per unit length of the small oval is greater than that of the big oval. Meanwhile, the impact angle of the burden stream
JID: APM
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
13
Fig. 12. Theoretical three-dimensional collision trajectory and actual situation.
Fig. 13. The projection of the minor axis of the small ellipse on the chute.
on the small oval is also greater than that on the big oval (nearly 90). Therefore, the small oval area in the chute is more
easily worn.
It is known from Fig. 12 that, when viewing from the owing direction of the burden stream toward the chute exit, the
left part of the worn area is greater than the right part. This is because that the burden ow is moving toward the left part
of the chute under the inertial centrifugal force produced by the clockwise rotation of the chute.
In Fig. 13 (b), a moving coordinate system oxl yl zl is established for the chute. The small ellipses of chute mentioned
below are all formed by the projection of the three-dimensional collision trajectory on the oxl yl plane of the chute. Fig.
13 shows the projection of the curve (with the length of lc ) corresponding to the minor axis of the small ellipse (with the
length of yr ) on the oxl yl plane of the chute. Fig. 13 (d) is an enlarged view of the area enclosed by the black circle in
Fig. 13 (d).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
14
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 14. The effectiveness of the infrared images and the development of the gas ow.
The major axis length of the small ellipse of the worn chute is 0.66 m. Since the yl axis is parallel to yl in the model,
2rdx is the length of this major axis. Calculation shows that, when the inclination angle is 31.5, the major axis length of
the small ellipse formed by the burden stream is 0.6 m with a relative error of 9%, which matches the actual value.
The minor axis length of the small ellipse of the worn chute is 0.4 m. 2lc in Fig. 13 is the length of this minor axis. The
calculation formula is as follows:
lc = la lb = yr sin
zr cos = yr1 sin (zr1 zr0 ) cos ,
(47)
where is the inclination angle of the chute and the coordinates (0, zr0 ) and (yr1 , zr1 ) are calculated by Eqs. (20) and
(21). Calculation shows that, when the inclination angle is 31.5, the minor axis length of the small ellipse formed by the
burden stream is 0.44 m with a relative error of 10%, which matches the actual value.
It can be concluded from the above discussion that the three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the present
model is consistent with the actual situation.
4. Burden distribution model and gas ow distribution
First, the BF production process is a continuous and dynamic process. The video captured by the infrared camera on blast
furnace top reects the development trend of the gas ow. The infrared images extracted from the infrared video directly
reect:
1 temperature distribution on the burden surface;
2 temperature distribution of the gas ow;
3 distribution of
the gas ow (distribution of CO and CO2 content in the gas ow). Meanwhile, the infrared images of the burden surface also
reect the shape of the burden surface indirectly. The reasons are as follows:
According to the principle of heat transfer, there are three basic methods of heat transfer, namely conduction, convection
and radiation. The heat of the burden surface comes from forced convection, conduction and radiation.
1 Forced convection
is performed by the gas ow. According to the metallurgical principles of blast furnace, the gas ow, driven by the bottom
blower, passes the heat generated by the furnace upward until the heat leaves the whole burden layer from the surface.

2 Conduction occurs between the burden layers. The burden surface continues to receive the heat from the lower layers.

3 Radiation occurs between the burden surface and the wall of furnace throat. Since the burden surface is hotter than the
furnace wall, the radiation direction is from the burden surface to the furnace wall. The inuence of this radiation on the
burden surface temperature can be ignored. When the balance is reached, there shall not be heat transfer in the gas ow
from the burden surface and the corresponding spot. Therefore, under a balanced state, it can be deemed that the burden
surface temperature is equal to the temperature of the gas ow from the corresponding spot.
The grayscale images captured by the infrared camera on the blast furnace top store the temperature information of
burden surface in the form of pixel grayscale. The pixel grayscale value will be larger (i.e. brightness is higher) at the spot
with higher burden surface temperature. Therefore, the gas ow temperature will also be higher, and vice versa. According
to the analysis of BF production process, the further the gas ow is evolved, the higher the gas ow temperature is, the
higher the CO content and the lower the CO2 content will be in the gas, and vice versa. Therefore, the infrared images can
reect the distribution of the gas ow.
The infrared images can not only reect the temperature eld inside the furnace, but also indirectly reect the shape
information. According to the analysis of BF production process, the temperature information is the gas distribution information. According to the experience of BF operation, the gas ow distribution is determined by the pattern of the burden
distribution inside the furnace.
Therefore, the infrared images directly reect the temperature distribution on the burden surface; temperature distribution of the gas ow; distribution of the gas ow (distribution of CO and CO2 content in the gas ow). Meanwhile, the
infrared images of the burden surface also reect the shape of the burden surface indirectly.
Second, the infrared images referenced in the paper do not include the images captured during the burden distribution.
The explanation is as follows:
Fig. 14 shows the effectiveness of test information and the development process of the gas ow during a burden distribution operation cycle. During the burden distributions, the rotary chute distribute the burden from the edge to the center
of the furnace. The newly dropped burden covers the original burden surface with a very large disturbance to the gas ow.
JID: APM
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
15
Fig. 15. A single frame.
Fig. 16. Image ltered by mean lter.
At this time, the temperature test information of the burden surface cannot reect the true distribution of the gas ow.
Therefore, the information displayed by infrared images are completely invalid. After the burden distribution is completed,
the gas ow will develop gradually. It can be known from the physical and chemical properties of the ore that, the development of gas ow is largely inuenced by the ore. During the "initial stage" of gas ow development, the development of
gas ow is slow due to the hindering effect of the ore. During the "intermediate stage" of gas ow development, the ore
begins to react with the gas ow and the development of the gas ow is stable with inuence from both the ore and the
coke. During the "late stage" of gas ow development, the gas ow reacts suciently with the ore. Due to various factors
including the supporting role and good gas permeability of coke, the gas ow is largely inuenced by coke and develops
strongly. Therefore, after the burden distribution is completed, the information displayed in the infrared images captured
during the gas ow process is valid.
Finally, the gas ow, gas ow development trend and gas ow development processes are all continuous and dynamic
processes during BF production and can be seen in the video captured by the infrared camera. The gas ow distribution is
reected by the static infrared image at a certain moment. However, the gas ow mentioned in the paper include the burden
distribution process, and the gas ow development and the gas ow distribution do not include the burden distribution
process.
It can be known from the validation section of the above-mentioned burden distribution model that the theoretical
shape of the burden surface is close to the actual shape of the burden surface in this paper. Therefore, in the following
discussion section, we will discuss the inuence of the theoretical shape of the burden surface on the infrared images (gas
ow distribution).
4.1. Gas ow distribution

In order for the infrared images to reect the gas ow distribution accurately, this paper extracts the infrared images
from the infrared video and then processes the infrared images.
1) An infrared image acquisition model is established based on software decoding. The infrared video data is acquired for
Baotou Steels 2500 m3 BF. The extraction of each image from the video is achieved by software decoding. This image
acquisition model features high accuracy and eciency. It takes an hour for conventional video software to acquire frame
images from an hour long-video. However, this image acquisition model needs only about 4 min on average, produces
no frame loss or distortion and can be used on multiple systems including Windows and Linux. Fig. 15 is one frame
extracted by this model.
2) A mean ltering model with time scale based on image recognition. Since the video images acquired are large in quantity
(a month-long video contains 64,80 0,0 0 0 frames) and complex with noises, it is necessary to overlay and lter the
images. In order to keep the consistency of the images, the 25 frames from the same second are overlaid by image
recognition to produce a single image, so that mean ltering with time scale can be achieved as shown in Fig. 16.
JID: APM
16
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 17. Theoretical burden surface (of ore) and corresponding infrared image during discharging. (a) Theoretical ore burden surface. (b) Actual image.
4.2. Discussion of the theoretical burden surface and corresponding infrared image
In the actual operation of blast furnace, in order to reduce the wear of the hoppers and reduce the surface segregation,
the ore hopper and the coke hopper need to be swapped on a regular basis. Reloading operation refers to the operation
with coke in the left hopper and ore in the right hopper. Discharging operation refers to the operation with ore in the left
hopper and coke in the right hopper.
42.5 40.0 37.5 34.5 31.5
42.5 40.0 37.5 34.5 31.5 16
According to the charging programs (O
and C
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
[15], where O and C stand for ore and coke, respectively; the superscript refers to the position angle and the subscript refers
to the number of rotations of the rotary chute for burden distribution under this position angle) of the image acquisition
period, the theoretical shape of the burden surface calculated by the present distribution model is combined with the
infrared video images. The result is as follows:
Fig. 17 shows the theoretical burden surface (of ore) and corresponding infrared image during discharging. Fig. 17 (a) is
the theoretical shape of the ore burden surface obtained by one revolution of the chute with different inclination angles
with 1 m stock line. A is the area with strong gas ow. It can be seen from Fig. 17 that the shape of area A remains roughly
the same. In Fig. 17 (a), the ore in area B is distributed to the edge of the throat, which suppresses the development of gas
ow at the edge of the area. In Fig. 17 (b), the gas ow in area B is very weak with a black edge, indicating the calculation
result is consistent with the corresponding infrared image. This shape of burden surface occurs during discharging, at the
"initial stage" of gas ow development after each round of burden distribution. At this stage, the development of gas ow is
mainly inuenced by the ore burden surface. Statistics shows that this shape of burden surface displays in 15% of the images,
indicating that during 15% of the time the gas ow development is inuenced by the ore burden surface during discharging
(not including the burden distribution process). Fig. 18 shows the theoretical burden surface (of ore) and corresponding
infrared image during reloading. Statistics shows that during 15% of the time the gas ow development is inuenced by the
ore burden surface during reloading.
Fig. 19 shows the theoretical burden surface (of coke) and corresponding infrared image during discharging. In Fig. 19 (a)
in area A, the coke is distributed to the center when the rotary chute is distributing burden under a small inclination angle,
so that central coke charging is achieved. It is found by performing theoretical calculations on Fig. 19 (a) that the coke
in area B is relatively scattered, inuencing the gas permeability and suppressing the gas ow development. Fig. 19 (b)
shows that there are concaves in area B, indicating consistency between the calculated result and the actual result. This
shape of burden surface occurs during discharging, at the "late stage" of gas ow development after each round of burden
distribution. At this stage, the gas ow reacts fully with the ore. Due to the supporting role and good gas permeability of
coke, the coke burden surface plays a dominant role in the effects on the gas ow during this stage. Statistics shows that
this shape of burden surface displays in 15% of the images, indicating that during 15% of the time the gas ow development
is inuenced by the coke burden surface during discharging.
JID: APM
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
17
Fig. 18. Theoretical burden surface (of ore) and corresponding infrared image during reloading. (a) Theoretical ore burden surface. (b) Actual image.
Fig. 19. Theoretical burden surface (of coke) and corresponding infrared image during discharging. (a) Theoretical burden surface of coke. (b) Actual image.
Fig. 20 shows the theoretical burden surface (of coke) and corresponding infrared image during reloading. Fig. 20 (a)
shows that in area A the coke is distributed to the center when the rotary chute is distributing burden under a small
inclination angle and in area C the coke accumulates to cause sudden crossover of the gas ow. This is veried by Fig.
20 (b), where a large overow of gas occurs in area C. Statistics shows that this shape of burden surface displays in 15% of
the images, indicating that during 15% of the time the gas ow development is inuenced by the ore burden surface during
reloading.
Fig. 21 shows the infrared image under the combined effect of coke surface and ore surface. This process occurs at the
"intermediate stage" of gas ow development after each round of burden distribution. At this stage, the ore start to react
ARTICLE IN PRESS
JID: APM
18
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 20. Theoretical burden surface (of coke) and corresponding infrared image during reloading. (a) Theoretical burden surface of coke. (b) Actual image.
Fig. 21. The infrared image under the combined effect of coke surface and ore surface. (a) Discharging. (b) Reloading.
chemically with the gas ow and the gas ow is subject to the combined effect of coke and ore. Statistics shows that this
shape of burden surface displays in 40% of the images, 20% for discharging and 20% for reloading.
4.3. Analysis of the results of the burden distribution model and discussion
Fig. 22 shows the three-dimensional collision trajectory of ore during one revolution of the chute at an inclination angle
of 42.5 (22(a)), Coriolis acceleration (22(b), 22(d)) and velocity (22(c), 22(e)) of ore and coke at the exit. It can be known
from the gure that the three-dimensional collision trajectory caused a signicant change in the Coriolis acceleration of the
burden ow under different rotation angles of the chute, which inuences the velocity of the burden stream at the chute
exit, resulting in the "snakelike" segregation in the burden surface. The exit velocity of ore ranges from 4.29 m/s to 7.26 m/s
and the exit velocity of coke ranges from 3.88 m/s to 8.80 m/s. The range of coke is signicantly greater than that of ore,
leading to worse segregation in coke surface in Figs. 1721, which proves that the present analysis is correct.
4.4. Improvement measures
During the BF production process, discharging distribution can reduce the burden segregation to a certain extent but
cannot completely solve the center offset of burden surface and the "snakelike" segregation caused by the tangential Coriolis
force. Therefore, the following improvement measures are presented:
Add a center discharge valve between the Y tube and the centering tube to effectively solve the center offset of burden
surface and the "snakelike" segregation, as shown in Fig. 23. For this, we have established the burden distribution model
for the center discharge valve to obtain the theoretical burden surface of ore (as shown in Fig. 24 (a)) and the theoretical
burden surface of coke (as shown in Fig. 24 (b)). Compared with the theoretical burden surface as shown in Figs. 1721 of
the original draft, the theoretical burden surface of the center discharge valve is uniform and free of segregation.
JID: APM
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
19
Fig. 22. Coriolis acceleration and velocity of ore and coke at the exit. (a) Three-dimensional. (b) Coriolis acceleration of ore. (c) Velocity of ore collision
trajectory. (d) Coriolis acceleration of coke. (e) Velocity of coke.
Fig. 23. Center discharge valve.
5. Conclusions
A mathematical model for burden distribution in blast furnace with parallel hoppers, which is a hybrid model integrating
a collision model calculating the energy dissipation coecient of particles by simulation, hydrodynamic model, 3D collision
trajectory, Coriolis force model and drag force model, is validated with test data of actual blast furnace with parallel hoppers
before blowing-in and scene photos of the worn chute.
1 The model is validated with model and drag force model, is validated with test data of actual blast furnace with parallel
hoppers (such as burden impact point and worn chute). The results show that the model predicts the radius of impact
point with a high accuracy and the predictions agrees with the actual BF operation and eld situation. The model is able
to provide real-time guidance for BF burden distribution.
JID: APM
20
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[m3Gsc;August 1, 2016;10:47]
Fig. 24. Theoretical burden surface. (a) Theoretical burden surface of ore. (b) Theoretical burden surface of coke.
2 Different gas ow proles are formed at different development stages after the burden distribution is nished. During the
"initial stage" which accounts for 30% of the total time of gas ow development, the development of gas ow is mainly
inuenced by the burden surface of ore. During the "intermediate stage" which accounts for 40% of the total time, the
development of gas ow is inuenced by both the burden surface of ore and the burden surface of coke. During the "late
stage" which accounts for 30% of the total time, the development of gas ow is mainly inuenced by the burden surface
of coke.
3 The main reason causing the "snakelike" segregation in the burden surface of bell-less top with parallel hoppers is: the
three-dimensional collision trajectory caused a signicant change in the Coriolis acceleration of the burden ow under
different rotation angles of the chute (the range in total Coriolis acceleration for chute inclination angle of 42.5 is 1.36
3.01 m/s2 for ore and 0.364.40 m/s2 for coke), which inuences the velocity of the burden stream at the chute exit. The
segregation in the burden surface can be reduced by adding a center discharge valve.
References
[1] T.Z. Ren, X. Jin, H.Y. Ben, C.Z. Yu, Burden distribution for bell-less top with two parallel hoppers, J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 13 (2006) 1417.
[2] P.Y. Du, S.S. Cheng, Z.J. Teng, Research of snakelike deviation in the burden distribution of a parallel-hopper bell-less top, J. Univ. Sci. Technol. Beijing
33 (2011) 479485.
[3] Y.C. Liu, Burden Distribution in Blast Furnace, The Metallurgy Industry Press, Beijing, 2005.
[4] J. Xu, S. Wu, M. Kou, L. Zhang, X. Yu, Circumferential burden distribution behaviors at bell-less top blast furnace with parallel type hoppers, Appl.
Math. Model. 35 (2011) 14391455.
[5] Y.C. Liu, Method of even burden distribution for bell-less top with parallel hoppers, Iron Steel 28 (4) (1993).
[6] H.P. Zhu, Z.Y. Zhou, R.Y. Yang, A.B. Yu, Discrete particle simulation of particulate systems: theoretical developments, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007)
33783396.
[7] H.P. Zhu, Z.Y. Zhou, R.Y. Yang, A.B. Yu, Discrete particle simulation of particulate systems: a review of major applications and ndings, Chem. Eng. Sci.
63 (2008) 57285770.
[8] G.G. Coriolis, Mmoire sur les quations du mouvement relatif des systmes de corps, J. Ecole Polytech. 15 (1835) 144154.
[9] S. Nag, V.M. Koranne, Development of material trajectory simulation model for blast furnace compact bell-less top, Ironmak. Steelmak. 36 (2009)
371378.
[10] J. Qiu, Z. Gao, J. Zhang, H. Guo, W. Chun-long, K. De-wen, Simulation of burden trajectory in a bell-less top blast furnace, Chin. J. Process Eng. 11 (2011)
368375.
[11] Z.J. Teng, S.S. Cheng, G.L. Zhao, Research of the center of the burden surface for a bell-less top blast furnace with parallel hoppers, Chin. J. Iron Steel
Res. 26 (2014) 510.
[12] Q.C. Sun, G.Q. Wang, The Introduction of Particulate Material Mechanics, Science Press, Beijing, 2009.
[13] E. Mariotte, Trait du mouvement des eaux et des autres corps uides, E. Michallet, Paris, 1686.
[14] A. Haider, O. Levenspiel, Drag coecient and terminal velocity of spherical and nonspherical particles, Powder Technol. 58 (1989) 6370.
[15] K. Yoshimasa, J. Takao, J. Tadatsugu, A. Yo-ichi, I. Takanobu, Investigation of bell-less charging based on full scale model experiments, Trans. ISIJ 24
(1984) 799807.

A Model For Burden Distribution and Gas Flow Distribution of

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Model For Burden Distribution and Gas Flow Distribution of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Applied Mathematical Modelling 0 0 0 (2016) 120

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Mathematical Modelling

A model for burden distribution and gas ow distribution of

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Acceleration of the burden with respect to the Y tube (m/s2 )

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Chute angle (rad)

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Fig. 2. Structure diagram of the throttle valve opening.

Fig. 3. Force model of burden moving in the Y tube.

side length of the projection L is as follows:

cos 8 D < L < cos 8 D

The velocity of burden owing out of the Y tube, V2 , is:

(V1 cos )2 + 2g(cos + 1 sin )LY .

t0 = (V2 V1 cos )/a.

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Fig. 4. Collision of burden on the centering tube.

2.3.2. Collision model of burden stream and the centering tube

vsn = (1 )n nV2 sin ( )

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

t10 = (1 )Dh /vs0

vs = vsn = (1 )n nV2 sin ( ).

2.4. Three-dimensional collision trajectory of the burden in the rotary chute

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

where 1 = 2 (t0 + t1 + t2 ), t2 = Ry /v s and Ry =

x2l0 + y2l0 + Dh /2.

= vxl sin + vh cos ,

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

v 0 = vyl cos 0 vh sin 0 sin ,

2.5. Coriolis force model of burden moving in the rotary chute

sin + R cos sin

( dtdl ) +(R ddt )

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Fig. 9. Kinematic analysis of the burden dropping in the freeboard.

Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of the drop height.

[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin ) .

V5x = (Vl sin + V sin cos ) cos + V cos sin

[l sin + R(1 cos ) cos ] + (R sin )

l sin + R(1 cos ) cos

H = h0 + R(1 cos ) sin ,

where h0 = h + l0 l cos e/ sin and h = h1 + h2 .

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

F = Cd Ag (V + Vg )2 /2, a = 3Cd g (V + Vg )2 /4s d

Cd can be calculated from Eq. (44) [14]:

where coecients c1 , c2 , c3 and c4 are functions of the particle sphericity .

2 =1 + 2 t3 + arctan (Y /(X +x0 ) ) ,

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Fig. 12. Theoretical three-dimensional collision trajectory and actual situation.

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

zr cos = yr1 sin (zr1 zr0 ) cos ,

Fig. 15. A single frame.

Fig. 16. Image ltered by mean lter.

4.1. Gas ow distribution

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

Fig. 23. Center discharge valve.

L. Shi et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 000 (2016) 120

You might also like