Document aJGeD3wjeyk7zX8paX3Eje97Y

I // September 5 1963 MEMORANDUM Blast Furnace (Stack linings and inwall coding) Refering to Ken Haley's letter dated July 18, 1963* McKee have given us their comments under date of August 2?, 1963 in reply to our questions to them August 1, 1963 on blast furnace shell cooling and the use of high density refractories in blast furnace linings. We believe these points partially cover Ken Haley's questions both on the cooling and refractory phases. We have great respect for Mr. Bill Colli son and believe his conclusions to be well founded, although further discussion among the Armco furnace people would appear to be in order. WFrkb Attachments cc: V/. Danneclcer K. Haley H. Holiday D. S. Holstein N. Kurfiss E. Marshall H. B. Nicholson T* Olt D. C. Osborne J* Poast P. Shroth WiUTiam 'Fredericks Blast Furnace and Coke Plant Engineer PURPLE AKE-002357 SS ....... ARTHUR G.M?KEE & COMPANY ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS * CAAlf Af'.'-is* '/MACC.O .*. /ElANCV . ' ' *7 . j f. e a i c r V>CE **t*iCC*** rNoiN(c<t<xo ; ; . M(Ult`D<vi1i'ON -V 3 3 00 CyFSTf'H AVENUE CLEVELAND, OHIO August 2'/, 1963 Mr.' William Fredericks Blast Furnace and Coke Plant Engineer Armco Steel Corporation Middletown, Ohio . NEW YORK Orrfc* `io.focKtrtvirR pca/a CNdiNC t fi.kjo *r<CC UNlON.Ntvv .(**( v DIVISION ENGINEERING AUG 2 8 1963 M Ml a'* HJ........ g*g......... tfUi... Subject:' Blast Furnace Cooling - McKee Reference: N-4390 Dear Bill: t With reference,to your letter of August 1, 1963 regarding cooling for the blast furnace Btacks, ve submit the following conwent6. McKee has not participated in any investigative work with. , V'- . regardto the- relative merits of conventional versus outside shell ' , cooling for the blast furnace stack. All of our installations.have. used cooling plates set in the brick work with the exception of-.;the Middletown furnace and Hamilton No..2. - Enclosed are some comments prepared by Bill Collison, formerly; Manager of Operations at Z.ug Island, in which he lists some of the -: I possible advantages and disadvantages using outside cooling.. He has also included some notes in connection with the use of mullite. ... and high alumina .brick that were obtained from Mr. H. M. Kraner .- of Bethlehem Steel. ' , We trust that the above information will be helpful to you and ' If you have any further questions, please advise. Yours very truly,' ARTHUR G. McKEE & COMPANY JFB:gtf Inc. cc: Mr. B. B. Frost (v/encls.) J. F. Baler - PURPLE AKE-002358 Armco - N-45>90 Middletown Blast Furnace Shell Cooling Although inwall cooling plates are the commonly aocepted method of cooling inwalls, shell cooling has certain advantages: (1) Full coverage and good rate of heat transfer under favorable conditions. Spray cooling has been used to cool local hot spots in which lining failure had occured despite inwall cooling plates. (Plates were probably too widely spaced). (2) No problems of packing coolers and gas leakage around ooolers * (3) Sound inwall without interruptions for cooling plates; reduced tendency to leak hot stack gases into space between lining and shell. (i|.) }fo water leakage into furnace because of cooling plate failure. (!>) No cooling plates being pulled into furnace because of lining failure. It would seem that lining wear will' cause this problem more readily with, the thin lining. (6) Installation cost is lower. Cooling plates should be closely spaced with thin lining. Disadvantages: (1) Scale formation under.some circumstances, reducing heat transfer and upsetting water distribution. (2) Difficulty of getting good water distribution with shell Irregularities. (3) Splash and spray problems, especially with strong winds, and attendant ice problems in freezing weather. (4) Total loss of cooling on low water pressure unless a second spray pipe is placed at lower level. Second spray pipe may be desirable to properly cover lower stack. (5) Insertion of many "stub" cooling plates in considerable areas of lining failure has provided cooling and anchorage for "wall make-up" and made possible continuation of fur nace campaign in several instances. AKE-002359 < z- - Mullite and High Alumina Refractories Test installations of mullite and high alumina brick, both in the area above the mantel and just below stock line armor have been made by Bethlehem. These installations were made with the hope that the abrasion resistance and strength of these materials would justify the increased cost. Spalling and carbon monoxide resistance at the stock line are not expected to significantly be better. Resistance to slag attack and heat at the mantel may be better. In view of attack by volatilised alkali salts in laboratory experiments, there is concern about deterioration due to alkalis. Mr. H. M. Kraner, Associate Director of Research Ceramics, for Bethlehem, supplied this information. At this time there is no clear justification for the additional cost of mullite or high alumina refractories over super duty brick. W. H. Collieon 8/14/63 PURPLE AKE-002360 ' . -I'/.ARMCO;.Armco Division v/tv. **y v^v' > . *'-. r Kr'* Prank .jBaior, VlbVi Pr**id$nt -.; . A; 01 MoK#*'-Cop<tnjr;,.v' < 'iV "2600 Cb*t%r Street .(< Auguot ` XV . .i96i V * V ,, ., --V \A* * mp r . I I, .................. f - jV-:;--' ; - : . >;. ... PURPLE AKE-002361