Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
I. INTRODUCTION
ONE of the difficulties in studying the effects of operational parameters on the initial solidification behavior of
steel in a continuous casting mold is the interdependence
among different variables. It is not always feasible to conduct controlled experiments on an industrial continuous caster
that will allow the effects of different operational parameters on the initial solidification of steel to be studied due to
practical constraints. Therefore, most of the information
developed on the formation of defects during the continuous casting of steels is collected under uncontrolled conditions. In the past, this constraint has led to the development
of different types of mold simulators to study various aspects
of continuous casting.
Mold simulators can generally be divided into four types
dip tests, static molds, dip simulators, and small-scale casters. The major issue in designing mold simulators is to ensure
that the apparatus and the experiment are a true simulation
of reality. This has led to the development of experimentspecific simulators that simulate the conditions in a casting
mold to different degrees. For example, to study the effects
of mold fluxes on the heat transfer between steel and a
copper mold, Machingawuta et al.[1] developed a dip-type
simulator specifically for that purpose. Another dip-type simulator was used by Bouchard et al.[2] to investigate the effects
of mold surface conditions on the heat-transfer rate and attendant surface quality of the cast product. These dip simulators involved chilled plates that were immersed into a molten
metal bath without any of the sophistication of continuous
caster systems, such as oscillation and shell extraction. The
dip simulators are very useful for determining fundamental
A. BADRI is with Shell Oil, Malaysia. T.T. NATARAJAN, Senior
Research Engineer, C.C. SNYDER, Senior Technician, and K.D. POWERS,
Project Analyst, are with the U.S. Steel Research and Technology Center,
Monroeville, PA 15140. F.J. MANNION, General Manager, is with U.S.
Steel, Slovakia. A.W. CRAMB is with the Department of Metallurgical
and Materials Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
15213. Contact e-mail: cramb@cmu.edu
Manuscript submitted February 4, 2004.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Mold Simulator
The mold simulator developed in this study is an inversetype mold, where the steel solidifies around the mold, instead
of the mold surrounding the solidifying steel. Figure 2 is a
schematic sketch of the mold simulator stage, which consists of several distinct modules to simulate the casting
process.
The different physical modules of the simulator include
the mold assembly, the extraction mechanism, the stabilization system, and the oscillation mechanism. The mold
assembly consists of a pair of grooved copper plates and a
stainless steel baffle that separates the inlet and outlet water,
as shown in Figure 3. In this work, the mold surface is flat
instead of cylindrical, and is constructed from actual mold
plates previously used at the U.S. Steel Gary Works. This
flat plate configuration has nickel plating on the hot face,
and the cold face is grooved with cooling channels. Figure 4
shows the assembly of a typical mold used in the mold simulator and the placement of the stainless steel baffle that
allows the circulation of cooling water. The assembled parts
are Tungsten inert gas (TIG)-welded to form a unit, after
which the unit is pressurized with water and checked for
leaks. Figure 5 shows the dimensions of the copper plates
and of the cooling grooves. Figure 5 also shows the location
of the meniscus with respect to the bottom of the mold and
the locations of thermocouples with respect to the meniscus.
The cooling water is fed into the mold from the cooling
water manifold, as shown in Figure 2.
In order to simulate continuous casting, the mold assembly is fitted with an extraction mechanism, which is fabricated from 6.25-mm-thick steel plates. The extractor pulls
the solidifying steel shell in the casting direction (downwards). This exposes liquid steel to the water-cooled copper mold at the meniscus and allows the formation of a new
steel shell. The extractor is designed so that only one face
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2Schematic sketch of the mold simulator stage.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
of the mold is exposed to the liquid steel, as seen in Figure 3. This allows a controlled exposure of the mold hot
face to the liquid steel while protecting the other faces of
the mold.
The process of solidification and extraction of the steel
shell displaces some liquid steel, and so the stabilization system moves the main stage upward with time to maintain the
liquid steel meniscus at a constant level (about 150 mm from
the bottom) with respect to the copper mold. All of the
sensor systems, data and control cables, and drive systems
are protected from the steel bath by a heat shield.
358VOLUME 36B, JUNE 2005
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d )
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
Fig. 9(Continued). Digital images showing the progress of the experiment.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10Mold and steel shell displacement and velocity during an experiment.
362VOLUME 36B, JUNE 2005
Fig. 11Schematic sketch of an expected steel shell from a mold simulator run.
ate the differences between different grades of steel. Furthermore, the shells obtained from mold simulator runs are
compared with industrial samples. This is an important step
because it reveals whether the cast shells are in fact representative of industrial cast slabs. The surface profile of the
solidified steel shell can be analyzed in conjunction with the
measured temperatures to obtain insight into the solidification history of the shell surface. Such an analysis is the main
topic of a subsequent article.[17]
Typical temperature traces, as recorded by thermocouples
just above and below the meniscus, are shown in Figure 13.
The thermocouples below the meniscus measure higher temperatures because of the direct contact of the mold surface
with the liquid steel, and they also register the variations in
temperature due to mold oscillation. The temperature traces
measured by all of the thermocouples have roughly the same
form. The initial temperature of the mold is ambient temperature. As the mold is immersed into the liquid steel bath,
the temperature rises. However, as the mold enters the bath
and the liquid steel begins to solidify on the hot face, there
is also an increase in the resistance to further heat transfer,
which results in a decrease in the temperature measured by
the thermocouples. During the extraction phase of the casting process, the temperature rises as the mold is exposed to
fresh liquid steel at the meniscus, and the oscillation in temperature reflects the changing position of the mold with
respect to the meniscus. At the end of the casting stage, the
mold is withdrawn from the liquid steel and the thermocouples show a rapid decrease in mold temperature.
Figure 14 shows typical temperature traces measured by
all of the thermocouples during the casting stage of an ultralow carbon grade of steel. The labels 5.25F, 5.25B, etc. refer
to the locations of thermocouples. The numeric value denotes
the distance of the thermocouple from the bottom of the mold
Fig. 12Example of a mold flux film (left) and steel shell (right) from an ultra-low carbon steel trial.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
carbon
manganese
silicon
sulfur
nitrogen
Ultra-Low
Carbon Steel
Peritectic
Steel
Medium
Carbon Steel
0.0046
0.46
0.11
0.0089
0.0057
0.065
0.95
0.22
0.0075
0.0047
0.175
1.17
0.31
0.027
0.0069
6.3
1.3
12.7
Fig. 15Temperatures measured by thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of an ultra-low carbon steel grade.
Fig. 16The heat flux calculated using the temperature data from the thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of an ultra-low carbon steel
grade.
Fig. 13Thermocouple temperature traces during immersion and casting
of steel using the mold simulator.
(a)
Fig. 19Temperatures measured by thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of a peritectic steel grade.
(b)
Fig. 17(a) Photograph and (b) measured profile of shell surface for an
ultra-low carbon steel grade.
seen that this grade of steel has peaks that are rounded between
oscillation marks. Furthermore, the oscillation marks in the
ultra-low carbon grade can be described as being composed
of peaks and subpeaks. In other words, each oscillation mark
is bracketed by these sharp peaks, and within each oscillation
mark, there is an irregularity referred to here as a subpeak.
Figures 18 through 20 show the temperature and heat flux
graphs for the peritectic grade of steel. Figure 21 is a contact profile measurement of the surface of the steel shell cast
by the mold simulator. The surface profile measurement
indicates that this particular grade of steel has several plateauMETALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 20The heat flux calculated using the temperature data from the thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of a peritectic steel grade.
an average baseline component and a time-varying component. The time-varying component of the heat flux has a
magnitude approximately 10 pct of the average baseline
(a)
Fig. 23Temperatures measured by thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of a medium carbon steel grade.
(b)
Fig. 21(a) Photograph and (b) measured profile of shell surface for a
peritectic steel grade.
366VOLUME 36B, JUNE 2005
Fig. 24Heat flux calculated using the temperature data from the thermocouples at the meniscus during solidification of a medium carbon steel
grade.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
(a)
(b)
Fig. 25(a) Photograph and (b) measured profile of shell surface for a
medium carbon steel grade.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 27(a) Comparison of surfaces of ultra-low carbon steel from the narrow face of a slab and the shell from the mold simulator. (b) Comparison of
surface profiles.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 28(a) Comparison of surfaces of peritectic steel from the narrow face of a slab and the shell from the mold simulator. (b) Comparison of surface
profiles.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the United States Steel Corporation and
the former Bethlehem Steel Corporation (now part of ISG)
for their financial support of this project. Additionally, we
thank G. Biddle, J. Sadecky, and R.C. Evans for their assistance with apparatus design and construction. In addition,
the authors deeply appreciate the assistance of Falcon
Foundries in welding the copper mold plates.
The material in this paper is intended for general information only. Any use of this material in relation to any specific application should be based on independent examination
and verification of its unrestricted availability for such use,
VOLUME 36B, JUNE 2005369
(a)
(b)
Fig. 29(a) Comparison of surfaces of ultra-low carbon steel from the narrow face of a slab and the shell from the mold simulator. (b) Comparison of
surface profiles.
Fig. 30Distribution of oscillation mark pitch measurements for an ultralow carbon steel grade.
Fig. 31Distribution of oscillation mark depth measurements for an ultralow carbon steel grade.
and a determination of suitability for the application by professionally qualified personnel. No license under any United
States Steel Corporation patents or other proprietary interest
REFERENCES
1. N.C. Machingawuta, S. Bagha, and P. Grieveson: Steelmaking Conf.
Proc., ISS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, 1991, vol. 74, pp. 163-70.
2. D. Bouchard, F.G. Hamel, J.P. Nadeau, S. Bellemare, F. Dreneau, D.A.
Tremblay, and D. Simard: Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 2001, vol. 32B,
pp. 111-18.
3. H. Tomono, P. Ackermann, W. Kurz, and W. Heinemann: Solidification Technology in the Foundry and Cast House, The Metals Society,
Warwick, 1983, Book 273, pp. 524-31.
4. P.J. Wray: Metall. Trans. B, 1981, vol. 12B, pp. 167-76.
5. D.K. Stemple, E.N. Zulueta, and M.C. Flemings: Metall. Trans. B,
1982, vol. 13B, pp. 503-09.
6. Y. Nishida, W. Droste, and S. Engler: Metall. Trans. B, 1986, vol. 17B,
pp. 833-44.
7. I.G. Saucedo: Continuous Casting, vol. 9, Initial Solidification and
Strand Surface Quality of Peritectic Steels, ISS-AIME, Warrendale,
PA, 1997, pp. 131-41.
8. M. Suzuki, H. Mizukami, T. Kitagawa, H. Kawakami, S. Uchida,
and Y. Komatsu: Iron Steel Inst. Jpn. Int., 1991, vol. 31 (3),
pp. 254-61.
9. J. Savage and W.H. Pritchard: J. Iron Steel Inst. London, 1954, vol. 178,
pp. 269-77.
10. S.N. Singh and K.E. Blazek: J. Met., 1974, vol. 26 (10), pp. 17-27.
11. K.E. Blazek, I.G. Saucedo, and H.T. Tsai: Steelmaking Conf. Proc.,
1988, vol. 71, ISS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, pp. 411-21.
12. H. Yasunaka, T. Mori, H. Nakata, F. Kamei, and S. Hanada: Steelmaking
Conf. Proc., ISS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, 1986, vol. 69, pp. 497-502.
13. A. Matsushita, K. Isogami, M. Temma, T. Ninomiya, and K. Tsutsumi:
Trans. Iron Steel Inst. Jpn., 1988, vol. 28 (7), pp. 531-34.
14. S. Itoyama, H. Tozawa, T. Mochida, K. Kurokawa, T. Matsukawa, and
K. Sorimachi: Iron Steel. Inst. Jpn. Int., 1998, vol. 38 (5), pp. 461-68.
15. A.B. Badri: Ph.D. Dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh,
PA, 2003.
16. J.V. Beck: IHCP1D: A Program for Calculating Surface Heat Fluxes
from Transient Temperatures Inside Solids, Version 5.31, Beck Engineering Consultants Company, Houston, TX, 1997.
17. A.B. Badri, T.T. Natarajan, K.D. Powers, C.C. Snyder, F.J. Mannion,
M. Byrne, and A.W. Cramb: Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 2005, vol. 36B,
pp. 373-83.
18. A.W. Cramb and F.J. Mannion: Steelmaking Conf. Proc., ISS-AIME,
Warrendale, PA, 1985, vol. 68, pp. 349-59.