4.7 Article

Structure characteristics and combustibility of carbonaceous materials from blast furnace flue dust

Journal

APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING
Volume 108, Issue -, Pages 1168-1177

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.08.020

Keywords

Thermogravimetric; Blast furnace flue dust; Carbonaceous structure; Kinetic models; Combustibility

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  2. Baosteel Group Co., LTD of Shanghai for the Key Joint Project [U1260202]
  3. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2012CB720401]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities [FRF-TP-15-063A1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The structure characteristics and combustibility of carbonaceous materials from gravitational dust and bag dust of hop pocket were investigated using laser particle size analyzer, scanning electron microscopy, X-ray Diffraction, polarization microscopy and thermogravimetric analysis. Simultaneously, coal char and pyrolyzed coke were used as comparison. The acid-washing process was performed to avoid the effects of inorganic matters and beneficiate carbonaceous materials in dust. Three representative gas-solid reactivity models, random pore model, volume model, and unreacted core model were applied to study kinetic parameters. Results showed that carbonaceous materials in dust were mainly originated from coke fines and those in bag dust of hop pocket presented a high reactivity, mainly attributed to its more disordered crystalline structure and higher porosity. It was concluded from kinetic analysis that volume model was the best model for simulating the combustion process. The activation energies of bag dust of hop pocket, gravitational dust and coke calculated by this model were 118.6 kJ/mol, 141.7 kJ/mol, 156.1 kJ/mol, respectively, indicating carbon in bag dust of hop pocket are easily reacted with oxygen and proving its high combustibility. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available