Ural Steel, Novotroitsk, Russia

E. A. Gribanov, Chief Engineer of Coke Production, e-mail: e.gribanov@uralsteel.com

A. Yu. Fuks, Chief Specialist in Sinter and Blast Furnace Production of the Technical Directorate, e-mail: ayf181073@mail.ru

Novotroitsk branch of the National University of Science and Technology MISiS, Novotroitsk, Russia
D. R. Ganin, Cand. Eng., Associate Prof., Dept. of Metallurgical Technologies and Equipment, e-mail: dmrgan@mail.ru

Students M. A. Vishnevsky, E. B. Dosov, A. A. Kultasova, V. A. Prokopova, V. S. Shevtsov, A. Yu. Sherstobitova took part in the work.

The metallurgical coke produced by JSC "Ural Steel", which is the main product of the coke production of the enterprise, contains a significant amount (up to 46.6%) of a large and fragile fraction +80 mm. Reducing the content of the +80 mm fraction in coke by 1.0% makes it possible to reduce the specific consumption of coke in blast furnaces by 0.2% and increase their productivity by 0.2%. It is possible to reduce the content of the +80 mm fraction in coke by making changes to its production technology, but these measures are costly and laborious. It is easier to solve this problem by using mechanical regrinding of the fraction +80 mm of coke. To reduce the content of the +80 mm fraction in coke, it is proposed to install screw-toothed crushers between conveyors K-1b and K-2b, as well as between conveyors K-1a and K-2a. The advantages of these crushers are the possibility of changing the center distance; low degree of regrinding of crushed product; maximum yield of products of a given size class; the possibility of obtaining a large degree of reduction of the crushed piece in one stage of crushing; the ability to work and run under the rubble; the possibility of removing non-crushable bodies from the process; absence of vibrations and dynamic loads on structures; relatively small overall dimensions; ease of installation. The cost of purchasing, transporting and installing auger-toothed crushers will amount to 130 million rubles and will pay off in less than two months.

1. Ganin D. R., Druzhkov V. G., Panychev A. A., Fuks A. Yu. Analysis of indicators and conditions for improving the work of the Ural Steel`s blast furnace shop. Chernaya metallurgiya. Byulleten nauchno-tekhnicheskoy i ekonomicheskoy informatsii. 2018. No. 2. pp. 46–54. DOI: 10.32339/0135-2018-12-46-54
2. Ganin D. R., Fuks A. Yu. Interrelation of gas-blown parameters of blast furnaces and the main quality indicators of coke in the conditions of JSC "Ural Steel". Chernye Metally. 2023. No. 1. pp. 4–7.
3. Ganin D. R., Fuks A. Yu. Analysis of the influence of coke quality on the production of pig iron in the conditions of JSC "Ural Steel". Chernye Metally. 2021. No. 2. pp. 4–9.
4. Gileva L. Yu., Kaplun L. I., Zagaynov S. A. Metallurgy of pig iron. Ekaterinburg : Izdatelstvo Uralskogo universiteta, 2021. 128 p.
5. Lyalyuk V. P. Technology of charge preparation in the production of high-quality coke for blast furnace smelting. Moscow; Vologda : Infra-Inzheneriya, 2020. 212 p.
6. Lyaluk V. P., Muchnik D. A., Kassim D. A., Shmeltser E. O. Quality of coke and prospects for blast furnace smelting. Moscow; Vologda : Infra-Inzheneriya, 2020. 229 p.
7. Guo J., Shen Y., Wang M., Kong J. et al. Impact of chemical structure of coal on coke quality produced by coals in the similar category. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis. 2022. Vol. 162. 105432.
8. Zhang W., Shi T., Zhang Q., Cao Y. et al. Coke texture, reactivity and tumbler strength after reaction under simulated blast furnace conditions. Fuel. 2019. Vol. 251. pp. 218–223.
9. Ghosh B., Sahoo B. K., Chakraborty B., Manjhi Das S. K. et al. Influence of coke structure on coke quality using image analysis method. International Journal of Coal Science & Technology. 2018. Vol. 5. pp. 473–485. DOI: 10.1080/197392699.2017.1340883
10. Liu L., Yang S., Liu S., Du W. et al. Prediction of coke quality based on improved WOA-LSTM. Journal of Chemical Industry and Engineering. 2022. Vol. 73, Iss. 3. pp. 1291–1299.
11. Kardas E., Pustĕjovska P. Quality of coke used in blast furnace process - Analysis of selected parameters. QPI. 2019. Vol. 1, Iss. 1. pp. 602–609.
12. Gu K., Wu Sh., Kou M., Zhou H. et al. Influence of coke qualite on main technical indexes of blast furnace. TMS 2018: 9^th International Symposium on High-Temperature Metallurgical Processing. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series. 2018. pp. 745–752. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-72138-5_71
13. Muchnik D. A., Babanin V. I. Possibilities for improving the quality beyond the coke furnace. chamber. Moscow: Infra-Inzheneriya, 2014. 368 p.
14. Tovarovsky I. G., Merkulov A. E. Standard assessment of the influence of blast furnace smelting parameters on coke consumption and productivity. Metallurgy of pig iron - challenges of the 21^st century: Proceedings of the VIII International Congress of Blast Furnace Engineers. Moscow : Izdatelskiy dom "Kodeks", 2017. pp. 111–122.
15. Vaisberg L. A., Kononov O. V., Ustinov I. D. Fundamentals of geometallurgy. Saint-Petersburg : Russkaya kollektsiya, 2020. 376 p.