Physical and Numerical Study on Right Side and Front Side Gas Blowing at Walls in a Single‐Strand Tundish
The compromise between inclusions removal by small bubbles and proper agitation of fluid flow in tundish by gas blown is challenging. The single‐strand tundish without flow control devices (bare tundish) is used to study the effects of side‐wall gas blowing on the flow field. The water model, partic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Steel research international 2024-09, Vol.95 (9), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The compromise between inclusions removal by small bubbles and proper agitation of fluid flow in tundish by gas blown is challenging. The single‐strand tundish without flow control devices (bare tundish) is used to study the effects of side‐wall gas blowing on the flow field. The water model, particle image velocity measurement and computational fluid dynamics simulation are used to study bubble behavior, fluid flow field, and tracer transport. A large horse shoe vortex and a short circuit flow at the bottom are formed in the bare tundish. Gas blowing at the outlet‐side wall of the tundish creates multiple vortices in the right‐side region, with blowing rate and position greatly influencing the surface flow within the tundish. Gas blowing at the front‐side wall creates a large spiral vortex, agitating the fluid in the tundish and improving the flow field. Increasing the blowing rate strengthens the vortex in the right region, but raising the blowing position affects surface flow and creates a counterclockwise flow toward the shroud. In all schemes, gas blowing at a low position on the front‐side wall with a small gas flowrate is the optimized scheme which shows the smallest dead volume and enhances surface flow.
In this article, the flow field in a bare tundish is studied, and the possibility of side‐wall gas blowing is explored. The flow fields under different blowing positions, heights, and gas flowrates are compared. Side‐wall blowing schemes generate a more complex flow field, effectively addressing the problem of stagnant regions in the tundish. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1611-3683 1869-344X |
DOI: | 10.1002/srin.202400037 |