Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Transport and Deposition of Non-Metallic Inclusions in Steel Flows- A Comparison of Different Model Predictions to Pilot Plant Experiment Data
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Materials Science and Engineering.
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Materials Science and Engineering.
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Materials Science and Engineering.
KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Materials Science and Engineering.
2017 (English)In: Steel Research International, ISSN 1611-3683, E-ISSN 1869-344X, Vol. 88, no 12, UNSP 1700155Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Inclusion behavior during a ladle teeming process is investigated. A Lagrangian method is used to track different-size inclusions and to compare their behaviors in steel flows, solved by the realizable k-epsilon model with SWF (Standard Wall Function), realizable k-epsilon model with EWT (Enhanced Wall Treatment), and RSM (Reynolds Stress Model). The results show that inclusion tracking based on the realizable k-epsilon model with SWF to predict the steel flow does not agree with the data fromplant experiments. The predicted number of inclusions touching the wall shows almost no dependence on inclusion size. This is due to that the boundary layer is not resolved. The inclusion deposition predicted using the realizable k-epsilon model with EWT and the RSM model to predict the steel flow generally agrees with the experimental observations. However, the large size inclusion deposition is over-predicted when using the realizable k-epsilon model with EWT. More specifically, the prediction for 20 mu m inclusions is three times larger than that with the RSM. This is due to that this model cannot calculate the anisotropic turbulence fluctuations. In summary, the turbulence properties in the near-wall boundary layer are found to be very important for a good prediction on inclusion deposition.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley-VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, 2017. Vol. 88, no 12, UNSP 1700155
National Category
Fluid Mechanics and Acoustics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-220620DOI: 10.1002/srin.201700155ISI: 000417137300008Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85026291363OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-220620DiVA: diva2:1173478
Note

QC 20180112

Available from: 2018-01-12 Created: 2018-01-12 Last updated: 2018-01-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Ni, PeiyuanJonsson, Lage Tord IngemarErsson, MikaelJönsson, Pär

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ni, PeiyuanJonsson, Lage Tord IngemarErsson, MikaelJönsson, Pär
By organisation
Materials Science and Engineering
In the same journal
Steel Research International
Fluid Mechanics and Acoustics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf