CN103952503A - Establishment method of blast-furnace injected pulverized coal cost performance evaluation model - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention discloses an establishment method of a blast-furnace injected pulverized coal cost performance evaluation model, belonging to the technical field of blast furnace ironmaking, and solving the optimization and selection problems of blast-furnace injected pulverized coal. The model can be used for evaluating the cost performance of blast-furnace alternative fuels such as semi coke, carbocoal, biomass char, waste plastic and tires. A conception that pulverized coal can provide effective utilization caloric value for a blast furnace is proposed based on the combustion reaction behavior of pulverized coal in the blast furnace. Eight indexes influencing the real heat supply of coal powder and four indexes influencing the injection cost can be determined, and a blast-furnace injected coal/alternative fuel cost performance evaluation model can be established. The model is convenient to calculate, and has important guidance significance to the optimization and selection of the on-site blast-furnace injected coal. In addition, the model also can be used for changing corresponding indexes and evaluating other types of alternative fuels.

Description

A kind of establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model

Technical field

The present invention relates to a kind ofly for the evaluation of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance, belong to technical field of blast furnace ironmaking.

Technical background

Steel industry has entered low margin age at present, and between enterprise, Cost Competition is more and more fierce.Pulverized coal injection is that modern blast furnace smelting significantly reduces production costs, one of important measures of increasing economic efficiency.The research that numerous researchers are mainly devoted to the aspects such as coal-to-coke replacement, wind-warm syndrome, oxygen enrichment, catalyticcombustion improves the utilization ratio of blast-furnace coal powder.But the sexual valence of the relevant coal pulverized coal injection in blast furnace when research of economy is less.

Investigator adopts method qualitatively mostly, directly compares coal dust properties, and comprehensive evaluation, provides the cost performance sequence of coal dust.The method theoretical property is not high, and subjective impact is larger, and conclusion lacks certain cogency.Some scholars, by setting up various fuzzy mathematical models for blast furnace coal optimized choice, have better science in recent years, but are still worth discussion for the setting of weight.And need data volume large, be not suitable for enterprise procurement department and use.For true reflection pulverized coal injection practical situation, probe into a kind of simple pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model, this invention has proposed a kind of cost performance evaluation model based on pulverized coal injection into blast furna effective supply heat.This model convenience of calculation, has important directive significance to the optimized choice of on-the-spot blast furnace injection coal.

Summary of the invention

The establishment method that the object of the invention is to a kind of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model of science, provides a kind of method of calculation for the buying of blast-furnace coal powder economy.

Object of the present invention is achieved through the following technical solutions: a kind of establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model is as follows:

(1) coal dust cost performance evaluation model is mainly based upon coal dust effective supply heat (Q _e) and winding-up cost (P _e) in two indexs; Coal dust effective supply heat (Q wherein _e) comprise 8 sub-indexs, i.e. ash oontent and composition (A), air dried basis water-content (M _ar), sulphur content (S), relative combustion rate (R _c,i), carbon element content (C _ar), oxygen element content (O _ar), protium content (H _ar), net calorific value (Q _net.ar); Winding-up cost (P _e) comprise 4 indexs, the coal price (P of Ji Jin factory _i), mobility (LI), grindability index (HGI), outer water-content (M _f);

(2) best price/performance ratio of pulverized coal injection in blast furnace refers to optimum proportion between Fine coal performance and coal dust price; For this reason, set up the cost performance index K based on coal dust effective supply heat;

K=effective supply heat/winding-up cost, kJ/ unit;

Wherein, effective supply heat (Q _ecarbon incomplete combustion heat release * relative combustion rate-water-gas reaction heat dissipation-hydrocarbons decompose heat dissipation in)=coal dust-ash content forms slag and takes heat-desulfurization heat dissipation out of;

Winding-up cost (P _e)=butt price+powder process price+conveying price;

(3) by model, calculate the cost performance K value of the Coal rank of same metamorphic grade, the cost performance gap that comparative analysis K value size just can quantitative evaluation difference injection coals; K value is larger, and injection coal cost performance is higher, and K value is less, and injection coal cost performance is lower; Accordingly, can realize the optimized choice of coal.

Coal dust sprays into blast furnace will decompose (being hydrocarbons decompose) through fugitive constituent, water-gas reaction, and fugitive constituent burning, fixed carbon burning, desulfurization, a series of processes such as ash content slagging, are accompanied by many thermo-negative reaction in this course.In blast furnace, after coal dust firing, final product is CO, N ₂, H ₂; Therefore the effective supply heat of coal dust in blast furnace should be carbon incomplete combustion calorific value deduction coal dust in coal dust decomposition heat, water-gas reaction is hot, the heat after desulfurization heat dissipation, slagging heat.General coal dust calorific value is measured and has been comprised that hydrogen burning emits heat, but in fact coal dust is in blast furnace, hydrogen is not oxidized, that is to say, hydrogen richness is high, the heat contribution of burning before air port is not improved, so the coal dust effective supply heat reaction final product that hydrogen participates in while calculating is hydrogen the heat release of not burning.

Described winding-up cost=butt price+powder process price+conveying price.Blast furnace injection coal is all to spray into blast furnace through fine grinding with after being dried, so powder process cost, conveying cost and raw coal water content must be considered.It should be butt price, conveying price and the powder process price sum of injection coal that blast furnace blowing becomes.

Further, the coal dust low heat value in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model is measured, calculates according to national standard or calculates according to Men Jielie Prokofiev experimental formula:

Q _net.ar=339C _ar+ 1031H _ar-109 (O _ar-S _ar)-25.1M _ar, kJ/kg; C wherein _arrepresent carbon element content, H _arrepresent protium content, O _arrepresent oxygen element content, S _arrepresent element sulphur content, M _arrepresent air dried basis water-content;

Carbon incomplete combustion heat release (Q in described coal dust _r) method of calculation be:

Q _r=(10C _ar/ 12) 125.4, kJ/kg; C _arrepresent carbon element content;

Described water-gas reaction heat dissipation be that water in coal dust reacts absorbed heat method of calculation with C are: m wherein _arrepresent air dried basis water-content;

Described hydrocarbons decompose heat dissipation (Q _doc) calculation formula is:

$Q_{\mathrm{doc}}=(Q_C+Q_{\mathrm{CO}}+Q_{H_2})-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}=(10\·C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\·O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\·408.8+(10\·O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\·283.4+5\·H_{\mathrm{ar}}\·242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}},\mathrm{kJ}/\mathrm{kg}$ , Q wherein _crepresent the heat that carbon burning is emitted, Q _cOrepresent the heat that CO burning is emitted, represent the heat that combustion of hydrogen is emitted, C _arrepresent carbon element content, H _arrepresent protium content, O _arrepresent oxygen element content, Q _{net, ar}represent net calorific value;

Described ash content forms slag and takes heat (Q out of _a) method of calculation are:

wherein A represents ash oontent in coal, and C (t) represents the specific heat capacity of slag at t temperature, t ₁represent slag temperature, t ₀represent coal dust ash initial temperature, W _mgOrepresent content of magnesia in blast furnace slag, the content that represents aluminum oxide in blast furnace slag, R represents blast furnace slag basicity, quantity of slag S _ashcalculating need to consider suitable blast furnace slag basicity and MgO/Al ₂o ₃ratio, COMPREHENSIVE CALCULATING goes out a quantity of slag; Q _ffor slagging heat;

Described desulfurization heat dissipation (Q _s) method of calculation are: l wherein _s=nC _s, in formula, S represents sulphur content, C _srepresent sulfur capacity, n represents correction factor, H _srepresent often to remove the heat that 1kg sulphur need to consume.

Further, the relative combustion rate (R in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _c,i) can calculate according to following two kinds of situations: $R_{c,i}=R_{a,i}/\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}>R_{a,i});$ $R_{c,i}=1(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}<R_{a,i});$ Wherein represent the pre-average burning rate of evaluating coal of survey, R _a,irepresent i kind burning of coal rate detected value; Coal combustion rate (R _a,i) can adopt acquisition in two ways: first method is that coal combustion rate adopts differential thermal equipment to detect, and takes 10g air dried basis coal dust, puts into differential thermal balance, at 20 ℃/min of temperature rise rate, under air atmosphere, detects the rate of combustion of coal dust in the time of 600 ℃; Second method is utilized blast furnace coal injection simulated experiment apparatus, measure the rate of combustion of differing temps, then release the rate of combustion under theoretical combustion temperature, theoretical combustion temperature and rate of combustion have relation, so just become an iteration, iteration is obtained rate of combustion, then is brought in the calculation formula of relative combustion rate; Treatment process by relative combustion rate makes the combustion efficacy of coal dust more press close to situation in the actual stove of blast furnace.

Further, the powder process price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _m) calculate in accordance with the following methods: electricity price/standard grindability index+standard coal power consumption * unit of powder process price=(standard grindability index-grindability index * correction function) * standard coal power consumption * unit electricity price,

P _m=[(HGI _s-HGI _rμ)/HGI _s] ECEP+ECEP, μ=f (M _t, d, t), HGI wherein _sexpression standard grindability index, HGI _rrepresent to measure coal grindability index, EC represents standard power consumption, EP representation unit electricity price, and μ is correction function, M _tthe full water-content of raw coal, d raw coal median size, t grinding machine temperature; In actual production process, the original water content of raw coal, initial particle size, mill built-in temperature all can affect the output of grinding machine, therefore need on the basis of laboratory test results, revise by the grindability index to coal.These method of calculation are creationary connects the grindability index of coal dust and powder process cost, and is regarded as a part of expense of winding-up cost, contributes to the cost situation under the different ature of coal conditions of comprehensive assessment.

Further, the butt price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _d) calculate in accordance with the following methods: P _d=P _i/ (100-M _f), M wherein _frepresent outer water-content, P _irepresent the coal price into factory; Conveying price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _i) calculating in accordance with the following methods: coal dust is carried price=(standard flow sex index-fluidity index) * standard load volume * unit cost/standard flow sex index+standard load volume * unit cost, i.e. P _i=[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s] CGCP+CGCP.The transportation performance of coal dust is poorer, and the load volume of required consumption is larger, and carrier gas cost is higher.Need the conveying characteristic of coal dust and breeze blowing cost to combine the cost situation under the different ature of coal conditions of comprehensive assessment herein.

Further, the heat of the effective supply in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model (Q _e) calculate in accordance with the following methods:

$\begin{array}{c}{Q}_e=\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-\left(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}124.5\right)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}-\\ \{S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f\}-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}.$

Further, the winding-up cost (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _e) according to below

Method is calculated: P _e=P _i/ (100-M _f)+{ [(HGI _s-HGI _r. _μ)/HGI _s] ECEP+ECEP}+{[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s] CGCP+CGCP}.

Cost performance index K value in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model is calculated in accordance with the following methods:

$\begin{array}{c}K=\left\{\begin{array}{c}\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}\&times;124.5)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}\\ S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R,\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}\right\}\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}{P}_i/(100-M_f)+\left\{\right[({\mathrm{HGI}}_s-{\mathrm{HGI}}_r\&CenterDot;\mathrm{\&mu;}/{\mathrm{HGI}}_s)\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}+\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}\}\\ +\left\{\right[({\mathrm{LI}}_s-{\mathrm{LI}}_r)/{\mathrm{LI}}_s]\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}+\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}\}\end{array}\right\}.\end{array}/$

Preferably, can to its decomposition heat calculation formula, revise according to the chemical composition of the alternative fuel such as junked tire, according to the processing of the alternative fuel such as junked tire, flouring technology, its powder process price is revised, this model can directly apply to the cost performance evaluation of the alternative fuel such as junked tire.

The invention has the beneficial effects as follows: the present invention can be used for pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation calculation, this evaluation model has considered coal dust at high furnace interior effective supply heat and winding-up cost, by a large amount of theoretical analysises, obtain the method for calculation of coal dust various heats in stove, and combine the creationary method of calculation of coal dust effective supply heat and the method for calculation of breeze blowing cost of having proposed with blast furnace actual environment.On this basis, pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model has been proposed.By sexual valence ratio index K value, be easy to draw the sexual valence ratio of different injection coals, and provide the cost performance sequence of Coal rank, obtain the coal of economy the best.This model convenience of calculation, each evaluation of estimate diversity factor of predicting coal is larger, easily evaluates, and the optimized choice of on-the-spot blast furnace injection coal is had to important directive significance.

Specific embodiments

Embodiment below in conjunction with concrete embodiment further describes in detail foregoing of the present invention again:

First, set up pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model:

(1) coal dust cost performance evaluation model is mainly based upon coal dust effective supply heat (Q _e) and winding-up cost (P _e) in two indexs; Coal dust effective supply heat (Q wherein _e) comprise 8 sub-indexs, i.e. ash oontent and composition (A), air dried basis water-content (M _ar), sulphur content (S), relative combustion rate (R _c,i), carbon element content (C _ar), oxygen element content (O _ar), protium content (H _ar), net calorific value (Q _net.ar); Winding-up cost (P _e) comprise 4 indexs, the coal price (P of Ji Jin factory _i), mobility (LI), grindability index (HGI), outer water-content (M _f);

(2) best price/performance ratio of pulverized coal injection in blast furnace refers to optimum proportion between Fine coal performance and coal dust price; For this reason, set up the cost performance index K based on coal dust effective supply heat;

K=effective supply heat/winding-up cost, kJ/ unit;

Wherein, effective supply heat (Q _ecarbon incomplete combustion heat release * relative combustion rate-water-gas reaction heat dissipation-hydrocarbons decompose heat dissipation in)=coal dust-ash content forms slag and takes heat-desulfurization heat dissipation out of;

Winding-up cost (P _e)=butt price+powder process price+conveying price;

(3) by model, calculate the cost performance K value of the Coal rank of same metamorphic grade, the cost performance gap that comparative analysis K value size just can quantitative evaluation difference injection coals; K value is larger, and injection coal cost performance is higher, and K value is less, and injection coal cost performance is lower; Accordingly, can realize the optimized choice of coal.

Specifically carry out as follows:

1, coal dust technical analysis detects according to national standard CB212-91, obtains air dried basis ash content, fugitive constituent, the moisture of coal.

2, coal dust ultimate analysis detects according to GB GB476-91, obtains C, the H of air dried basis, the content of O, S.

3, coal dust grindability index, according to GB GB/T2565-1998, adopts Ha Shi can grind instrument and detects.

4, coal dust calorific value detects, calculates low heat value or calculate according to experimental formula according to GB GB213-87: Q _net.ar=339C _ar+ 1031H _ar-109 (O _ar-S _ar)-25.1M _ar;

5, the heat Calculation that the water in coal dust reacts absorbed with C is as follows:

$Q_{H_{2}O}=\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}\&times;124.5\mathrm{kJ}/\mathrm{kg};$

6, in coal dust, hydrocarbons decompose Heat consumption calculation is as follows:

$Q_{\mathrm{doc}}=(Q_C+Q_{\mathrm{CO}}+Q_{H_2})-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}=(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+(10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}},\mathrm{kJ}/\mathrm{kg}$

7, in coal dust, ash content forms slag to take heat Calculation out of as follows:

$Q_A=S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R,\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f;$

8, the desulfurization heat dissipation in blast furnace of the sulphur in coal dust is calculated as follows under Model Selection fine fodder high pressure direct motion working of a furnace condition, n value is 2.8, and basicity of slag is 1.2.

9, the relative combustion rate in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation:

$R_{c,i}=R_{a,i}/\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}>R_{a,i});$ $R_{c,i}=1(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}<R_{a,i}).$

10, the powder process price in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation: the grindability index 80 of the domestic tafelberg of Model Selection coal is as standard grindability index, and electricity price is with domestic 0.55 yuan/kWh.Standard power consumption according to certain domestic power consumption 12.12kWh/t of Steel Plant as injection coal.Electricity price/standard grindability index+standard coal power consumption * unit of powder process price=(standard grindability index-grindability index * correction function) * standard coal power consumption * unit electricity price; P _m=[(80-HGI _rμ)/80] 12.120.55+12.120.55.

11, the butt price in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation:

P _d＝P _i/(100-M _f)。

12, the conveying cost (P in injection coal cost performance evaluation model _i) calculate in accordance with the following methods: Model Selection standard flow sex index is 60, and standard load volume is 25m ³/ t, carrier gas price is 0.1 yuan/m ³, specific algorithm is P _i=[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s] CGCP+CGCP.

13, the effective supply heat in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation:

$\begin{array}{c}{Q}_e=\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-\left(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}124.5\right)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}-\\ \{S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f\}-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}.$

13, the winding-up cost in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation:

P _e＝P _i/(100-M _f)+{[(HGI _s-HGI _r·μ)/HGI _s]·EC·EP+EC·EP}+{[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s]·CG·CP+CG·CP}。

14, the cost performance index K value in injection coal cost performance evaluation model is according to following method of calculation:

$\begin{array}{c}K=\left\{\begin{array}{c}\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}\&times;124.5)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}\\ S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R,\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}\right\}\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}{P}_i/(100-M_f)+\left\{\right[({\mathrm{HGI}}_s-{\mathrm{HGI}}_r\&CenterDot;\mathrm{\&mu;}/{\mathrm{HGI}}_s)\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}+\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}\}\\ +\left\{\right[({\mathrm{LI}}_s-{\mathrm{LI}}_r)/{\mathrm{LI}}_s]\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}+\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}\}\end{array}\right\}.\end{array}/$

15, table 1 is Coal rank performance detection data and evaluating:

16, table 2 is according to the performance evaluation index of the Coal rank of computation model calculating:

By calculation result, obtain, the K value of Coal3 is maximum, and this coal cost performance is the highest; The K value of Coal4 is minimum, and this coal cost performance is minimum.Coal cost performance ranking results is: coal3>coal6>coal8GreatT.Grea T.GTcoal5>coal7>coal1GreatT. GreaT.GTcoal2>coal4.

The foregoing is only preferred embodiments of the present invention, not in order to limit the present invention, all within ideals and principles of the present invention, any modification of making, be equal to replacement, improve, all should be included in protection scope of the present invention.

Claims (9)

1. an establishment method for pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model, is characterized in that:

(1) coal dust cost performance evaluation model is mainly based upon coal dust effective supply heat (Q _e) and winding-up cost (P _e) in two indexs; Coal dust effective supply heat (Q wherein _e) comprise 8 sub-indexs, i.e. ash oontent and composition (A), air dried basis water-content (M _ar), sulphur content (S), relative combustion rate (R _c,i), carbon element content (C _ar), oxygen element content (O _ar), protium content (H _ar), net calorific value (Q _net.ar); Winding-up cost (P _e) comprise 4 indexs, the coal price (P of Ji Jin factory _i), mobility (LI), grindability index (HGI), outer water-content (M _f);

(2) best price/performance ratio of pulverized coal injection in blast furnace refers to optimum proportion between Fine coal performance and coal dust price; For this reason, set up the cost performance index K based on coal dust effective supply heat;

K=effective supply heat/winding-up cost, kJ/ unit;

Wherein, effective supply heat (Q _ecarbon incomplete combustion heat release * relative combustion rate-water-gas reaction heat dissipation-hydrocarbons decompose heat dissipation in)=coal dust-ash content forms slag and takes heat-desulfurization heat dissipation out of;

Winding-up cost (P _e)=butt price+powder process price+conveying price;

(3) by model, calculate the cost performance K value of the Coal rank of same metamorphic grade, the cost performance gap that comparative analysis K value size just can quantitative evaluation difference injection coals; K value is larger, and injection coal cost performance is higher, and K value is less, and injection coal cost performance is lower; Accordingly, can realize the optimized choice of coal.

2. the establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model according to claim 1, is characterized in that: the coal dust low heat value in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model is measured, calculated according to national standard or calculates according to Men Jielie Prokofiev experimental formula:

Q _net.ar=339C _ar+ 1031H _ar-109 (O _ar-S _ar)-25.1M _ar, kJ/kg; C wherein _arrepresent carbon element content, H _arrepresent protium content, O _arrepresent oxygen element content, S _arrepresent element sulphur content, M _arrepresent air dried basis water-content;

Carbon incomplete combustion heat release (Q in described coal dust _r) method of calculation be:

Q _r=(10C _ar/ 12) 125.4, kJ/kg; C _arrepresent carbon element content;

Described water-gas reaction heat dissipation be that water in coal dust reacts absorbed heat method of calculation with C are: m wherein _arrepresent air dried basis water-content;

Described hydrocarbons decompose heat dissipation (Q _doc) calculation formula is:

$Q_{\mathrm{doc}}=(Q_C+Q_{\mathrm{CO}}+Q_{H_2})-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}=(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+(10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}},\mathrm{kJ}/\mathrm{kg}$ , Q wherein _crepresent the heat that carbon burning is emitted, Q _cOrepresent the heat that CO burning is emitted, represent the heat that combustion of hydrogen is emitted, C _arrepresent carbon element content, H _arrepresent protium content, O _arrepresent oxygen element content, Q _{net, ar}represent net calorific value;

Described ash content forms slag and takes heat (Q out of _a) method of calculation are:

wherein A represents ash oontent in coal, and C (t) represents the specific heat capacity of slag at t temperature, t ₁represent slag temperature, t ₀represent coal dust ash initial temperature, W _mgOrepresent content of magnesia in blast furnace slag, the content that represents aluminum oxide in blast furnace slag, R represents blast furnace slag basicity, quantity of slag S _ashcalculating need to consider suitable blast furnace slag basicity and MgO/Al ₂o ₃ratio, COMPREHENSIVE CALCULATING goes out a quantity of slag; Q _ffor slagging heat;

Described desulfurization heat dissipation (Q _s) method of calculation are: l wherein _s=nC _s, in formula, S represents sulphur content, C _srepresent sulfur capacity, n represents correction factor, H _srepresent often to remove the heat that 1kg sulphur need to consume.

3. the establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model according to claim 1, is characterized in that: the relative combustion rate (R in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _c,i) can calculate according to following two kinds of situations: $R_{c,i}=R_{a,i}/\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}>R_{a,i});$ $R_{c,i}=1(\stackrel{\&OverBar;}{R}<R_{a,i});$ Wherein represent the pre-average burning rate of evaluating coal of survey, R _a,irepresent i kind burning of coal rate detected value; Coal combustion rate (R _a,i) can adopt acquisition in two ways: first method is that coal combustion rate adopts differential thermal equipment to detect, and takes 10g air dried basis coal dust, puts into differential thermal balance, at 20 ℃/min of temperature rise rate, under air atmosphere, detects the rate of combustion of coal dust in the time of 600 ℃; Second method is utilized blast furnace coal injection simulated experiment apparatus, measure the rate of combustion of differing temps, then release the rate of combustion under theoretical combustion temperature, theoretical combustion temperature and rate of combustion have relation, so just become an iteration, iteration is obtained rate of combustion, then is brought in the calculation formula of relative combustion rate; Treatment process by relative combustion rate makes the combustion efficacy of coal dust more press close to situation in the actual stove of blast furnace.

4. the establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model according to claim 1, is characterized in that: the powder process price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _m) calculate in accordance with the following methods: electricity price/standard grindability index+standard coal power consumption * unit of powder process price=(standard grindability index-grindability index * correction function) * standard coal power consumption * unit electricity price,

P _m=[(HGI _s-HGI _rμ)/HGI _s] ECEP+ECEP, μ=f (M _t, d, t), HGI wherein _sexpression standard grindability index, HGI _rrepresent to measure coal grindability index, EC represents standard power consumption, EP representation unit electricity price, and μ is correction function, M _tthe full water-content of raw coal, d raw coal median size, t grinding machine temperature; In actual production process, the original water content of raw coal, initial particle size, mill built-in temperature all can affect the output of grinding machine, therefore need on the basis of laboratory test results, revise by the grindability index to coal.

5. the establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model according to claim 1, is characterized in that: the butt price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _d) calculate in accordance with the following methods:

P _d=P _i/ (100-M _f), M wherein _frepresent outer water-content, P _irepresent the coal price into factory; Conveying price (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _i) calculating in accordance with the following methods: coal dust is carried price=(standard flow sex index-fluidity index) * standard load volume * unit cost/standard flow sex index+standard load volume * unit cost, i.e. P _i=[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s] CGCP+CGCP.

6. according to the establishment method of the pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model described in any one in claim 1～3, it is characterized in that: the effective supply heat (Q in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _e) calculate in accordance with the following methods:

$\begin{array}{c}{Q}_e=\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-\left(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}124.5\right)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}-\\ \{S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f\}-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}.$

7. according to the establishment method of the pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model described in claim 1 or 4 or 5, it is characterized in that: the winding-up cost (P in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model _e) in accordance with the following methods

Calculate: P _e=P _i/ (100-M _f)+{ [(HGI _s-HGI _rμ)/HGI _s] ECEP+ECEP}+{[(LI _s-LI _r)/LI _s] CGCP+CGCP}.

8. according to the establishment method of the pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model described in any one in claim 1～7, it is characterized in that: the cost performance index K value in described injection coal cost performance evaluation model is calculated in accordance with the following methods: $\begin{array}{c}K=\left\{\begin{array}{c}\{(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12)\&CenterDot;125.4\}\&times;R_{c,i}-(\frac{10\&times;M_{\mathrm{ar}}}{18}\&times;124.5)-\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}(10\&CenterDot;C_{\mathrm{ar}}/12-10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;408.8+\\ (10\&CenterDot;O_{\mathrm{ar}}/16)\&CenterDot;283.4+5\&CenterDot;H_{\mathrm{ar}}\&CenterDot;242.0-Q_{\mathrm{net},\mathrm{ar}}\end{array}\right\}\\ S_{\mathrm{ash}}(A,R,\frac{W_{\mathrm{MgO}}}{W_{{\mathrm{Al}}_2{O}_3}})\&CenterDot;{\&Integral;}_{t_0}^{t_1}C\left(t\right)\mathrm{dt}-Q_f-\{\left(S\right)\&CenterDot;\frac{L_s(C_s,n)}{L_s(C_s,n)+1}\&CenterDot;H_s\}\end{array}\right\}\\ \left\{\begin{array}{c}{P}_i/(100-M_f)+\left\{\right[({\mathrm{HGI}}_s-{\mathrm{HGI}}_r\&CenterDot;\mathrm{\&mu;}/{\mathrm{HGI}}_s)\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}+\mathrm{EC}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{EP}\}\\ +\left\{\right[({\mathrm{LI}}_s-{\mathrm{LI}}_r)/{\mathrm{LI}}_s]\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}+\mathrm{CG}\&CenterDot;\mathrm{CP}\}\end{array}\right\}.\end{array}/$

9. the establishment method of pulverized coal injection into blast furna cost performance evaluation model according to claim 1, it is characterized in that: can to its decomposition heat calculation formula, revise according to the chemical composition of the alternative fuel such as junked tire, according to the processing of the alternative fuel such as junked tire, flouring technology, its powder process price is revised, this model can directly apply to the cost performance evaluation of the alternative fuel such as junked tire.