Influence of Geology on CSR (Coke Strength After Reaction With C02)
David E. Pearson
David E. Pearson & Associates Ltd.,
4277 Houlihan Place, Victoria, British Columbia, V8N 3T2
ABSTRACT
Although drum strength has historically been the coke quality
parameter, more recently, coke reactivity and strength after
reaction with C02 have become the principal criteria by which coals
are selected to make blast furnace coke. Typical western Canadian
medium volatile, Inertinite-rich coking coals produce cokes that
are among the world's best in this test. Vitrinite reflectances of
1.0 to 1.6%, inertinite contents of >30%, alkalinity indices of
<1.0, high ash-fusion temperatures >2700'F, 1500'C, and low
fluidity, all appear to be contributing agents. As yet however,
there is no universally applicable prediction formula.
INTRODUCTION
CSR, or coke strength after reaction with C02, has become
the more important means of evaluating the quality of coking coal
and of controlling blast furnace performance within Pacific rim
steel-producing countries, and is now a principal criterion by
which coals are selected to make blast furnace coke. The purpose
of this paper is to describe the various methods used to predict
CSR and from them determine the geological factors which appear to
influence CSR values.
In the late 1960's, Nippon Steel Corporation deliberately
cooled and dissected three blast furnaces in an attempt to better
understand the physical and chemical changes that take place in
the thermal transformation of coke during its passage through the
furnace. On this journey, coke undergoes a reduction in size
caused by mechanical and thermal stresses, and gasification by C02
and H20. There is at the same time a decrease in drum strength,
and an increase in reactivity. Cokes which have high reactivity to
C02 have low CSR'S, and vice versa. Cokes that have inherently
higher drum strengths and lower reactivity to C02 are therefore
desireable (Figure 1), and it has been demonstrated by NSC that to
maintain trouble-free operation at large blast furnaces, CSR's
should be maintained above 57 (Ishikawa, 1982).
A relationship between coal rank and the reactivity of coke
to C02 (measured by weight loss), has been documented in studies
using small numbers of samples (Schapiro & Gray, 1963; British
Carbonization Research Assoc. 1978). These studies showed that
|
Figure 1.
Relationship between CSR and Drum strength D30/15 (Ishikawa, 1982)
|
cokes from high volatile- and low volatile-coals suffered greatest
weight loss, and that those from medium volatile coals were the
least reactive. Subsequent coke microscopy studies have correlated
the reactivity to the texture of the coke; fine mosaic carbons
(from high volatile coals) and ribbon-like carbons (from low
volatile coals) are more reactive than coarse-mosaic carbon forms
(from medium volatile coal). Although a correlation between coke
reactivity and coal rank had been established for a number of
years prior to the advent of strength tests on reacted coke, a
rigorous investigation of the geological factors which affect coke
reactivity and strength from the perspective of the parent coals
was not done until the 1980's.
COKE REACTIVITY & STRENGTH TEST
In the Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC) CSR test, 240 kg of
wharf coke is reduced to 10 kg which is then crushed and screened
|
Figure 2.
Schematic of CSR apparatus.
|
to 20±1 mm. A 200 g sample of this coke is placed in the reaction
tube, and after heating to I,IOOOC in N2 gas flow, a switch-over
to C02 is made. The reaction is sustained for two hours. After
cooling and weighing the reacted coke to determine reactivity
(CRI), a strength test is performed in an I-shaped drum. After 30
minutes at 20 rpm in the I-shaped drum, the coke is screened on a
9.52mm sieve and the weight of the material remaining on the sieve
is measured for CSR. The apparatus is shown diagrammatically in
Figure 2.
The following values are quoted:
CSR = (Weight of residue on sieve after reaction * 100) / Weight of material after reaction
CRI = (Amount of weight change * 100) / Weight of material
The Kobe Steel method for determining coke reactivity is
precisely the same as NSC'S. However, for the strength test, Kobe
Steel uses an I-shaped drum that is only 700mm in length (versus
1700mm), in which the reacted coke is tumbled for 20 minutes at 30
rpm and then screened on a 10mm sieve. As a result of the modified
equipment, Kobe Steel's Reaction Strength Index (RSI) is slightly
different from NSC's CSR value. To obtain the equivalent RSI, add
10 units to a CSR value (RSI = CSR+10).
CSR PREDICTION TECHNIQUES
Because determination of coke reactivity (CRI) and CSR (or
RSI), is an expensive, time-consuming, two-stage procedure, in
which the coal must first be carbonized, and the resulting coke
tested, several prediction techniques have been developed using
charaterstics of the parent coals. However, the usefulness of
these prediction methods has been questioned (Valia 1989), and as
yet, there is not a universally acceptable prediction technique.
NIPPON STEEL CORPORATION METHOD
In 1980, NSC published a model for predicting CSR (Hara et
al.), based on vitrinite reflectance and Inertinite content
(Figure 3). The NSC diagram shows that CSR increases with
increasing reflectance up to a value of about 1.4%, and that for
|
Figure 3.
NSC's 1980, CRS-prediction model.
|
each reflectance level, the highest CSR's are obtained at an
optimum inertinite content. It also shows that with increasing
values of vitrinite reflectance, the resulting cokes will have
lower CSRs.
Although this diagram suggests that Western Canadian coking coals
produce high-CSR cokes, it also implies that at any reflectance
level the optimum CSR values would be produced by coals with
inertinite contents of 15-25%, typical of Pennsylvanian-age coals.
Careful study of the diagram using a variety of coals of different
rank and provenance confirms that it cannot correctly predict the
CSR of cokes based only on petrographic data. For example, the
Australian coal, Blackwater, from south Queensland, has a
vitrinite reflectance of 1.04%, and an inertinite content of
39.0%. According to the NSC prediction such a coal should produce
a coke with a CSR of about 50. The actual value of CSR for this
coal is 32 (NSC, 1982).
Later studies by NSC have suggested that deviation from the
predicted pattern of Figure 3, is caused by the catalytic nature
(chemical composition) of the ash, and variation of coking
properties, principally fluidity (Ishikawa, op cit., Sakawa 1982).
in these studies, "refractory ash" enriched in acid oxides, Al203
and SiO2, was less reactive than "catalytic ash" typically
enhanced in basic oxides Fe2O3, CaO and MgO, or alkalis NaO & K20.
The chemistry of coal ash is characterized by the "alkalinity
index", where,
A.I. = ash content (%) * [(mol(%) of basic components in ash) / (mol(%) of acid components in ash)]
KOBE STEEL METHOD
According to Kobe Steel's studies (Yoshida & Hoshino 1984),
the factors which affect RSI are:
- Coke texture (a function of rank)
- Chemistry of coal ash (= maximum fluidity)
- Amount/size of coke pores
From regression analysis of parent coals Kobe Steel's prediction
formula is:
RSI = 70.9(Romax) + 7.8(log max. fluidity) - 89[(Fe2 + K2O + Na2O + CaO) / (SiO2 + Al2O3)] - 32
BHP AUSTRALIA
Despite the Japanese studies, Australian researchers at BHP
have produced another regression equation better suited to
Queensland and New South Wales coals (Coin, Pers. Comm., 1985).
The following equation of predicted-CSR versus measured-CSR on 52
coals and cokes has a correlation coefficient of 0.92.
CSR = 133.8 - 15.56 * BI - 3.1 * VM + 8.5 * LMF + 0.22 * INERTS
where, BI the Basicity Index, is = (Fe2 + K2O + Na2O + CaO) / (SiO2 + Al2O3)
DISCUSSION
Data from the NSC prediction technique has been redrawn in
Figure 4, with CSR as the independent variable, in a diagram that
includes ASTM coke strength data. This figure shows that among
coals that produce cokes of ASTM stability 50-60, typical U.S.
coals (Inertinite contents of <25%) have CSR's of 50-63. In marked
|
Figure 4.
CRS Prediction compared with coke strength data.
|
contrast however, typical western Canadian coals (Inertinite
contents of >30%) that produce the same strength cokes, have CSR's
of 50-70+. In addition, coals strongly enriched in Inertinite
(>45%), with vitrinite reflectances of 1.2% to 1.4%, and
typically referred to as "weak coking" coals, have predicted CSR's
equivalent to those from U.S. premium medium volatile coals. The
figure also shows that the once-premium Pocahontas low volative
coals have CSR's of 30-50, some 20 points lower than low-volatile
Canadian equivalents.
Ishikawa's 1982 plot of CSR versus Drum Strength D130/15 (Figure
1.) confirms this interpretation. From his figure it can be seen
that, U.S. coals with DI30/15's of >92 have CSR's of 15-55. In
marked contrast, all western Canadian and some Australian coals
with similar DI30/15's are shown to have CSR's of >59. The diagram
confirms that for a blend of coking coals designed to produce a
CSR in excess of 57, high-CSR Canadian and Australian coals will
form the principal component, to which will be added small amounts
of the lower-CSR coals. The so-called "weak coking coals" although
individually very rich in Inertinite with low DI30/15's (<90),
have good CSR'S, and from the perspective of blending are superior
to coals of higher DI30/15 but with low CSR'S.
The Canadian coal industry can take some pleasure in reading that
our coking coals are now seen to be superior to U.S. equivalents
(Goscinski et al 1985), after decades of being subjugated by
misunderstood "high semifusinite contents". But what are the
underlying reasons for apparently similar cokes behaving so
differently in reactivity tests? The principal differences between
the U.S. coals and western Canadian coals are rank, maceral
composition, and mineral matter type (Pearson 1980), which
together explain most of the observed variations.
There is agreement between all researchers that reactivity
correlates with coke texture, which in turn, is related to the
rank of the parent coal. There is also agreement that elevated
levels of base oxides act as catalysts in the reaction with C02.
However, beyond this level of understanding, regression analyses
dictate the inclusion of unlikely parameters in prediction
formulae. For example, western Canadian coals are notorious for
low fluidities, yet individually they produce cokes with some of
the highest CSR's in the world. By contrast, the highly fluid U.S.
medium volatile coals Pittston and Sewanee have CSR's of only 45
and 49 respectively. Does a low fluidity therefore correlate with
a high CSR?
Higher fluidity, in general, correlates with lower carbon-bearing
inertinite macerals, and more of the hydrogen-bearing reactive
macerals, vitrinite and liptinite, together with a change of
mineral matter from dominantly kaolinitic clays to calcite and
pyrite. Inertinite-rich coals, with kaolinitic clay and quartz as
dominant minerals, have refractory coal ash with basicity indices
of <=0.1. Inertinite-poor coals with pyrite (iron-bearing) and
calcite (calcium-bearing) mineralogy, are enriched in the basic
oxides, and have basicity indices of >=0.35. Typically,
Inertinite-rich coals have such an excess of refractory acidic
oxides that high ash fusion temperatures are common (>2700'F,
1500'C). Among Inertinite-poor coals, there are sufficient basic
oxides that ash fusion temperature are reduced (<2570'F, 1400'C).
These observations show that fluidity, to some extent, correlates
with an increase in the base/acid ratio (or basicity index).
Because NSC have shown that the amount of ash, as well as its
chemistry, is significant, the alkalinity index is probably a
better measure of the catalytic effect of coal ash than the
basicity index. Figure 5. shows a contoured scattergram of twenty
five Canadian and Australian coals plotted in terms of vitrinite
reflectance and alkalinity index, where, A.I. = Ash (%) x B.I., or,
A.I. = ash content (%) x (wt (%) of basic components in ash) / (wt (%) of acid components in ash)
Despite the limited data available, the diagram is an
improvement over the original NSC diagram. It is reasonably
accurate for inertinite-rich coals with alkalinity indices (AI's)
of <=1.0, but with only fair reliability for coals with AI's >=1.0
and Rols <1.3%.
|
Figure 5.
CSR prediction by RoMax, alkalinity index & ash.
|
Since the chemistry of the peatswamp environment, which
ultimately controls the coalseam mineralogy and the hydrous nature
of coals, is a function of pH, future research into CSR prediction
may focus on a predictive technique using vitrinite reflectance,
ash content, and a proxy for pH. The pH proxy could be, for
example, the Hydrogen Index (or hydrocarbon generative capacity)
of a coal, derived from RockEval analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
- correlations exist between coal rank and coke reactivity,
and in a general way this can be used to predict CSR.
- Coal mineralogy, and specifically the alkalinity index of
ash provides information on the catalytic or refractory nature of
chemical constituents in the ash, and can dramatically change a
rank-only prediction of CSR.
- A negative correlation may exist with Gieseler fluidity,
such that reduced fluidity imparts higher CSR'S. Why this should
be so is not fully understood.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. W.R. Leeder is thanked for reviewing an early draft of the
manuscript
REFERENCES
- British Carbonization Pesearch Assoc. (1978) : A study of the
reactivity of vitrain cokes in relation to their optical
anisotropy. No 59. 18p.
- Goscinski, J.S., Gray, R.J. and Robinson, J.W. (1985): A review of
American coal quality and its effect on coke reactivity and
after reaction strength of cokes; Journal of Coal Quality v.
4, pp.35-43, pp. 21-29.
- Hara, Y., Mikuni, O., Yamanoto, H. and Yamanaki, H. (1980): The
assessment of coke quality with particular emphasis on
sampling technique; Ln: Blast Furnace Coke: Quality, Cause
and Effect. Lu, W.K. (Ed), McMaster University. pp. 4-1-4-38.
- Ishikawa, Y. (1982) : Relationship between coke behavior in the
lower part of a blast furnace and blast furnace performance;
18th Iron & Steel Smelting Research Symposium, Tohoku
Univ.(In Japanese) English Transl. - CANMET LilDrary, Ottawa.
- Nippon Steel Corporation (1982): Unpublished data or) imported coal
quality. In Japanese.
- Pearson, D.E. (1980): The quality of western Canadian coking coal;
Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Bulletin v.73,
pp.70-84.
- Schapiro, N. and Gray, R.J. (1963): Relation of coke structure to
reactivity; Blast Furnace and Steel Plant, pp. 273-280.
- Valia, H.S. (In Press) : Predicting coke strength after reaction
with C02 from coal analysis.
- Yoshida, H. and Hoshino, K. (1984): Kobe's coal quality evaluation
and control especially from standpoint of RSI; Kobe Steel
Ltd., Mineral Resources Research Dept.
|