Model for Temperature Profile Estimation in the Refractory of

a Metallurgical Ladle
T.P. FREDMAN and H. SAXÉN

Modeling of the transient thermal state of metallurgical ladles is motivated by the need for estimating
the drop in temperature of the liquid metal in the ladle. On-line estimation of the state is required,
since the same ladle is used in a number of casting cycles with rapid changes in boundary conditions
for the temperature field, and the conditions in the current as well as previous cycles affect the
thermal state. Although a large number of methods for the numerical solution of conduction-diffusion
partial differential equations have been developed, there are still advantages to keeping thermal field
computations at a relatively simple level, in contrast to the situation in the design process of ladles,
where two-dimensional modeling may be required. Extensive computations under nonverifiable
boundary and initial parameter values are not especially suited for real-time simulation of industrial
processes. This article presents a novel approach to the solution of the one-dimensional transient
heat conduction problem applied to ladle linings, relying on classical analytical techniques in com-
bination with numerical methods. The performance of the model was validated by a comparison of
predictions to thermocouple measurements from the refractory of a steelmaking ladle during a cam-
paign of 26 casting cycles. Reasonable agreement between the measured and simulated variables
could be established, which demonstrates the feasibility of the approach.

I. INTRODUCTION Calculation of transient heat conduction is mostly done by

IN continuous casting, thermal control of liquid steel
plays an important role in product quality and ladle refrac-
tory life. A small difference between targeted and achieved
temperatures on teeming may have very negative conse-
quences for surface quality, cleanliness, tundish flow-
through, nozzles, casting schedules, energy economy, etc.
Tapping of a furnace, thereby filling the ladle with molten
metal, and emptying the ladle during the casting process
are, among foundrymen, referred to by the terms tapping
and teeming, respectively. The thermal state of the refrac-
tory lining of the ladle upon tapping affects the cooling of
the heat (the batch of liquid steel) until teeming. The tem-
perature drop of the heat is mainly caused by convective
heat transfer to the ladle refractory and partly from the free
surface of the bath. After teeming, when the hot inner walls
of the ladle are exposed to the surroundings, the radiative
and convective losses from the ladle lining are large. Thus,
the heat stored within the inner parts of the refractory when
the ladle is filled will be lost to the environment during the
period when the ladle is empty. In order to reliably estimate
the energy storage in the working lining, it is necessary to
know the temperature field in it before and after tapping
and teeming. Under industrial conditions, however, tem-
perature measurements are available only occasionally and
are often problematic due to high temperatures and a hostile
environment. Reliable measurement data on thermal con-
ditions within the ladle refractory are also difficult to pro-
duce, as process scheduling and geography move the ladle
around in the plant during the casting cycle. Therefore, one
has to resort to numerical estimation of needed variables.
T.P. FREDMAN, Research Scientist, and H. SAXÉN, Professor, are
with the Heat Engineering Laboratory, Åbo Akademi University, FIN-
20500 Åbo, Finland.
Manuscript submitted February 19, 1997.
numerical solution of the heat-conduction equation, espe-
cially for more complicated shapes and boundary condi-
tions, although analytical solutions for a number of simple
situations have been derived.[1,2] The problem is compli-
cated by the fact that industrial ladle linings consist of sev-
eral layers, with different material and thermal properties.
In addition, it is difficult to quantify the influence on the
boundary conditions for the field computation of factors
such as wear, sculling, slag attack, and metal penetration
into the refractory.
The aforementioned circumstances favor a simple model
capable of predicting major trends and changes in the heat
balance of the ladle refractory. The simplest approach
would be to formulate a statistical model for the energy
storage in the lining based on measurements of the steel
temperature drop for different process conditions. However,
such a model cannot be applied outside the original domain
of measurements and generally requires extensive data in
order to work reliably. A better approach seems to be to
reduce the geometry to one dimension and to calculate the
temperature profile in the radial direction within the refrac-
tory.[3] This can be done for a number of positions around
the ladle to produce an overall estimate of the heat storage
in the lining. The one-dimensional solution of the heat-con-
duction equation is easily done numerically by standard
methods, but these do not separate the dynamics of the field
from its geometry, as is the case with certain classical so-
lution methods assuming constant thermal properties and
boundary heat-transfer coefficients with varying tempera-
ture at the hot face, and, thus, do not provide as much
insight into the process. The solution of the heat-conduction
equation by various analytical techniques involves a Sturm–
Liouville eigenvalue problem,[4] which in the case of com-
posite media is fairly complicated, due to the discontinuous
coefficients of the governing differential equation. Ra-
mkrishna and Amundson[5] have given a convenient for-

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998—651


Fig. 1—Schematic representation of the ladle wall.
malism for the solution of the composite media diffusion
problem and criteria for self-adjointness of the differential
operator involved. Mikhailov et al.[6] give a method for
computer-aided solution of the eigenvalue problem for this
case.
The working lining of the ladle is in direct contact with
the steel, and since this lining layer has the largest volume,
most of the heat storage in the refractories can be explained
by the dynamics of it. Every time the ladle is filled or emp-
tied, the convection heat-transfer coefficient and mean tem-
perature inside the ladle change drastically, which changes
the temperature field of the working lining. Results reported
by various investigators[7–12] suggest that the temperature
field in the safety lining, insulation, and shell of the ladle
can be taken to be at steady state once the ladle has been
in use for a few cycles. Therefore, the present article pres-
ents the following simplified approach: a transient model
for the temperature evolution in the working lining is com-
bined with steady-state models for the outer lining layers
and the steel shell of the ladle. In the cylindrical geometry,
an analytical solution for steady conditions is straightfor-
ward. Field equations with relevant boundary conditions are
stated, and their formal solutions are presented. Some an-
alytical and numerical features of the solutions are outlined,
and a coupling condition for the layer boundaries is pro-
posed. For simplicity, the effect of simultaneous radiation
and convection heat transfer at the boundaries is considered
by an overall constant heat-transfer coefficient and a mean
temperature in the vicinity of the exposed hot face decaying
with time, when the ladle is empty. This approximation can
be motivated both theoretically and experimentally, as will
be demonstrated subsequently. For the case of a semi-infi-
nite solid with a power-law boundary condition, such as in
the case of radiation, asymptotic solutions for short and
long times can be obtained.[13] The nature of these are con-
sistent with pyrometer measurements of the hot-face surface
temperature for the ladle when empty, performed by Rut-
qvist et al.[14] In the example given, a realistic surface tem-
perature variation during the various stages of the ladle
cycle is adopted in order to describe the change of the
boundary condition at the hot face upon tapping and teem-
ing. Simulated temperature profiles are finally compared
with measurement data from the refractory of a steelmaking
ladle, showing reasonable agreement.
II. THE PROBLEM
Consider a simplified representation of the ladle, depicted
in Figure 1. Heat transfer by conduction from the hot face
of the ladle wall through the lining layers is to be consid-
ered with a one-dimensional geometry. The radial distance
from the symmetry axis of the ladle is, thus, kept as the
652—VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998
only independent spatial variable. The dynamic behavior of
the temperature field in the multilayer wall is approximated
by a quasi-steady-state model, i.e., heat storage in the outer
layers (safety lining and shell) is neglected and only the
dynamics of the innermost layer are taken into account.
Considering that the working lining, customarily, in this
type of application is at least twice as thick as the other
layers, it has a Fourier number at least 4 times smaller in
magnitude. Consequently, a correspondingly weaker damp-
ing of the oscillation in temperature at the hot face will
take place in the working lining than in the other lining
layers. In addition, for a typical oscillation period on the
order of 1 hour and material property values common for
refractories, the amplitude will be damped at the interface
between the working and safety linings to below 10 pct.[15]
The quality of the approximation improves if the ladle has
been in use for a number of cycles, so that the outer lining
parts are thermally ‘‘soaked.’’ The periodic increase and
decrease in heat transfer with tapping and teeming, together
with the buffering capacity of the ladle wall, then make
steady state a good approximation for the outer layers. All
material and thermal properties are regarded as constant
within each layer; a case with variable material properties
can be handled by introducing dummy layers into the
model. In most industrial applications, the lining of the la-
dle consists of bricks and mortar supported by the steel
shell. Keeping in mind the possibility of incomplete thermal
contact, it is convenient to allow for heat-transfer resis-
tances at the layer boundaries. Finally, the ambient air tem-
perature and mean bulk temperature of the liquid steel are
assumed to be known.
III. MODELING
A. The Principal Solution
The heat-conduction problem for a finite region, subject
to the previous idealizations and presumptions, can be for-
mulated as (cf., Figure 1)
a
1 ] T (r, t )
(i)
]t
5
1 ]
r ]r @ r
]r #
] T (r, t )
, i 5 1, . . . , N [1]
] T (r, t )

2k (i) 5 h (ri21) [Ti21 2 T (ri21, t)] [2]
]r r
i21
] T (r, t )

2k (i) 5 h (ri) [T (ri, t ) 2 Ti] [3]
]r r
i
T (r, 0) 5 f (r ) [4]
Equation [1] constitutes a differential energy balance for a
radial element of the ladle wall, where a is the thermal
diffusivity and its superscript denotes the material layer
number. Hence, layer 1 is the working lining and layer N
is the ladle shell. The boundary conditions for Eq. [1] are
determined in Eqs. [2] and [3], where subscripts refer to
boundary surfaces of the material layers. In Eq. [2], the heat
flux outward from the ladle symmetry axis is proportional
by a heat-transfer coefficient (h) to the difference between
the surrounding and boundary temperatures at the inner
boundary. Equation [3] applies to the outer boundary in a
similar way to Eq. [2], only with an opposite sign for the
right-hand side. Finally, since the energy balance in Eq. [1]
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
contains dynamics in the form of a storage term, the initial
d cj (r)
condition of Eq. [4] is necessary for the temperature field.
An analytical solution of Eqs. [1] through [3] for the
k (i)
dr  r
i21
5 h (ri21) cj (ri21) [14]

steady-state case, denoted by the subscript st, is straight-

d cj (r)
forward, and can be expressed compactly as 2k (i)
dr  5 h (ri) cj (ri) [15]

@ #
r
Ti21 i

st (r) 5 [ln (r)

T (i)
It should be noted, however, that the surroundings temper-
atures (Ti) can change with time, which is why Eq. [5] can
be termed a ‘‘quasi-steady-state’’ temperature profile. The
coefficient matrix in Eq. [5] is determined by the geometry
and boundary condition parameters, according to
1] C (i) [5]
Ti
The solution of Eqs. [13] through [15], as well as the der-
ivation of an expression for the time function Aj(t) in Eq.
[12], are routine tasks of analytical heat-conduction theory
described in detail in standard textbooks.[2] Therefore, only
an outline of the procedure is presented here. Equation [13]
is seen to have the form of a Bessel differential equation,
so the general solution of Eqs. [13] through [15] can be
expressed as a linear combination of Bessel functions of

@ #
c (i)
11 c 12
(i)
order zero.
C (i) 5
c (i) c 22
(i) cj (r) 5 D(mj) J0 (mjr) 1 Y0 (mjr) [16]
21
[6]

@ #
k (i)
The constant D is a function of the eigenvalue mj and is,
21
2 1 ln ri21 1 together with the eigenvalues, determined by the boundary
ri21 h (ri21) conditions of Eqs. [14] and [15]. If Eq. [16] is inserted into
[
k (i) Eqs. [14] and [15], a condition for linear independence for
1 ln ri 1 the functions on the right-hand side of Eq. [16] is
ri h (ri)

@
h (ri21)J0 (mj ri21) 2 mj k (i) J1 (mj ri21)
det
With a general stationary solution available, the transient h (ri)J0 (mj ri) 1 mj k(i) J1 (mj ri)
problem of Eqs. [1] through [4] can be split up into a steady
[17]
state and a transient (subscript tr) solution,

#
h (ri21)Y0 (mj ri21) 2 mj k (i) Y1(mj ri21)
T (r, t) 5 Ttr (r, t) 1 T st(i) (r) [7]
50
which, after inserting Eq. [7] into Eqs. [1] through [4], is h (ri)Y0(mj ri) 1 mj k (i) Y1 (mj ri)
seen to be governed by the system
Given Eq. [17], the eigenvalue-dependent constant in the

a
1 ]Ttr (r, t)
(i)
]t
5
1 ]
r ]r @ ]T (r, t)
r tr
]r # [8]
wave function is
mj k (i) Y1 (mj ri21) 2 h (ri21) Y0 (mj ri21)
D(mj) 5 [18]
]Ttr (r, t) h (ri21) J0 (mj ri21) 2 mj k (i) J1 (mj ri21)
k (i)
]r r
i21
5 h (ri21) Ttr (ri21, t) [9]
Computation of the spectrum (set of eigenvalues {mj, j 5
1, 2, . . .}) requires solution of the transcendental equa-
]Ttr (r, t)

tion.*[17] An efficient algorithm for this was designed, mak-
2k (i) 5 h (ri) Ttr (ri, t) [10]
]r r
i *For this type of equation, the solutions are nonalgebraic numbers; i.e.,
they cannot be expressed as zero points of an arbitrarily high-order
Ttr (r, 0) 5 f (r) 2 T st(i) (r) [11] polynomial with integer coefficients.
The system in Eqs. [8] through [11] can be solved with ing use of the asymptotic formula for high-order eigenval-
standard analytical methods.[2,16,17] The approach adopted ues given by Mikhailov and Özisik.[17] Furthermore, using
here is to solve* the system by expansion into the orthog- elementary variational calculus to estimate the lowest order
*It can be shown that the differential operator on the left-hand side of eigenvalue (refer to Pryce[18]) yielded good initial guesses
Eq. [1] has a set of eigenfunctions, cj(r), forming a complete orthonormal for the entire spectrum. After picking a suitable trial func-
basis, which is why the series Eq. [12] is convergent and ‘‘well behaved.’’ tion for the lowest order eigenfunction, the following esti-
mate for the lowest eigenvalue was obtained:
onal basis functions

Ttr (r, t) 5
`

Σ c (r) A (t)
j51
j j [12]
m̃0 5 = 2
*rrii21 c˜0 (r) [(r c˜' (r))'] dr
0

*rrii21 r c˜ 02 (r) dr
[19]

where the prime symbol denotes the spatial derivative. The

where the wave function cj(r) is a solution of the associated
asymptotic behavior of higher order eigenvalues produced
Sturm–Liouville eigenvalue problem, arising in various ar-
initial guesses according to the formula
eas of mathematical physics.
pj
d
dr @ r
d cj (r)
dr # 1 r m 2j cj (r) 5 0 [13]
m̃j 5
ri 2 ri21
, j≥1 [20]

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998—653

 `

Σ [B (f 2 T
As a result, when Newton–Raphson iteration was used for
numerical solution of Eq. [17], convergence to sufficient T(r, t) 5 j 0 b1 (1))] (t) cj (r)
j51
accuracy could be achieved within five iterations. The time
function in Eq. [12] can be computed with the expression 1 T0 b 1(1) (r) [27]
* ri
rTtr (r, 0) cj (r) d r `

Σ [B b
ri21
Aj (t) 5 e 2a(i)m 2j t
*rr r c j2 (r) d r
i
i21
[21] 1 T1 b (1) {
2 (r) 2
j51
j
(1)
2 ] (t) c j (r) }
The mathematical properties of the Bessel functions permit Using Eq. [27], it is possible to evaluate the slope of the
the integrals in Eq. [21] to be done analytically with the time-dependent temperature field analytically at any time,
help of the formulas in the Appendix. assuming that the processes of summation and differentia-
tion may be interchanged. Thus, at each time, Eqs. [22] and
B. Coupling of the Individual Solutions for the Layers [23] can be assembled to a system of linear algebraic equa-
tions in the unknown boundary temperatures, which can be
At each boundary between the material layers, the tem- solved by standard methods. If computational speed can be
perature has to be calculated before the solutions in Eq. [7] sacrificed, it would also be possible to retain the dynamics
can be used. For the overall temperature field to comply of the outer lining layers. These would then have individual
with the first law of thermodynamics, it is necessary to temperature profiles of the form of Eq. [27].
impose continuity of the heat flux throughout the ladle wall. For instance, a refractory with one working (dynamic)
Thus, the conditions that must be satisfied are and one safety lining layer (stationary) would yield the 2
]T (r, t) ]T (2) 3 2 system
 
st (r)

@
2k (1) 5 2k (2) [22]
]r ]r 11 1 c 12 } 2 k
k (2) {c (2) 3
(2) (1)
r r
1 1

]T (i) ]T st(i11) (r)

{ db (1)
2 (r)

dr
2
`

Σ [B b
j51
j
(1)
2 ] (t) d cdr(r)
j
}
 
r5r1
st (r)
2k (i)
5 2k (i11) ,
]r r ]r r
k (2)
{c (2)
11 1c } (2)
12
i i [23]

#
i 5 2, . . . , N 2 1
These constitute a system of linear equations in the un- 11 1 c 12 }
k (2) {c (2) (2)

known boundary temperatures T1, . . . , TN21, provided the [28]

temperature gradients of each material layer at every
11 1 c 12 } 2 k
k (2) {c (2) 11 1 c 12 }
{c (3)
(2) (3) (3)
boundary can be expressed as a linear function of the
boundary temperature. For the material regions at steady
state, this can be done easily by using Eq. [5], but for the
time-dependent temperature field in layer 1, the matter of
satisfying Eq. [22] at each time instant is not straightfor- 3 @# T1
T2
5
ward. Complication is due to the subtraction in Eq. [11] of

@ #
the steady-state part of the field from the transient and use `
of this initial value in the integral transform of Eq. [21].
Defining, in analogy with Eq. [21], the operator
k (1) Σ [B (f 2 T
j51
j 0 b 1(1))] (t) cj (r1) 1 k (1) T0 b 1(1) (r1)

*rr r f (r) cj (r) dr

i k (3) {c 11
(3)
1 c 12
(3)
} T3
[B f ] (t) [ e 2a (i) m 2
jt
i21
[24]
*rr r c 2j (r) dr
j
i
i21

it is seen that the time-dependent temperature field can be C. Thermal Contact Resistances between Adjacent Lining
expressed as Layers
`

T (r, t) 5 Σ [B f ] (t) c (r) 1 T

j51
j j
(1)
st (r)
[25]
The contact resistances between the lining layers have
been included in the model as heat-transfer coefficients for
`
narrow gaps between the material layers. These can be ap-
2 Σ [B T
j51
j
(1)
st (r)] (t) cj (r) proximated with dummy material layers in which no stor-
age of heat takes place; refer to Mikhailov et al.[6] and
Mikhailov and Vulchanov,[19] where similar approaches
Applying Eq. [5] to the first layer, one can define
were proposed. In such a layer, the temperature profile, dis-
T st(1) (r) 5 [T0 T1] @ b (1)
1 (r)
b 2(1)(r) # [26]
regarding axisymmetry, is linear. Thus, a relationship be-
tween the coefficient, the width, and the heat conductivity
of the dummy layer can be found from the analogy follow-
[ [ln (r) 1] C (1)
@# T0
T1
ing from the boundary conditions of Eqs. [2] and [3],
k (i21)
i
' h (ri ) [29]
which transforms Eq. [25] into a linear equation in the li
boundary temperature T1, at coordinate position r1.
which can be used to estimate the coefficients at the bound-

654—VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B

aries, given measurements of the gaps between the lining
layers. Direct measurement of thermal resistances is diffi-
cult, as it would require temperature measurement sensors
very precisely located on the two material surfaces at a
boundary. Customarily, some type of mortar, for which the
thermal conductivity can be estimated, is used to attach
successive material layers. Then, given the average aperture
between the layers, the analogy in Eq. [29] permits esti-
mation of the thermal resistance, a practice used in the ex-
ample of Section IV.
D. Hot-Face Temperature for the Empty Ladle
In contrast to the situation when the ladle is filled, a
significant decrease in temperature near the hot face takes
place during empty periods between the end of casting and
tapping. At a number of steel plants, measurements of this
temperature drop have been undertaken.[14,20]
This temperature variation can be included in the model
by introducing time variation into the mean ambient tem-
perature inside the ladle (T0), with a constant overall heat-
transfer coefficient. Subsequent to casting, the exposed
glowing hot face frequently has some amount of scull
(metal residue) attached to it and transfers heat to the en-
vironment predominantly through radiation. Consequently,
the thermal boundary layer can be expected to be insignif-
icant and the hot-face temperature to be in virtually perfect
contact with T0.
Bleistein and Handelsman[13] outline an asymptotical so-
lution of the one-dimensional heat-conduction problem in
a semi-infinite solid exposed to a nonlinear boundary con-
dition, in the form of a power-law dependence of heat flux
on the boundary temperature. In this special case, the so-
lution can be adapted to describe heat transfer at the hot
face of the empty ladle, with radiation heat transfer domi-
nating. The final asymptotic forms are arrived at by writing
the solution temperature field in the form of a nonlinear
integral equation which is expanded asymptotically. For
‘‘short’’ times, the temperature has the time dependence
T0 (t) 2 T0 (0) } 2=t , t↓0 [30]
whereas, for ‘‘long’’ times, one can establish the time de-
pendence
1 ln t
T0 (t) 2 T0 (`) } 1 , t ↑` [31]
=t t =t
A comparison of the reported measurements[14,20] showed
consistency with the theoretical predictions of Eqs. [30] and
[31]. Therefore, the function T0(t), having the properties of
Eqs. [30] and [31] and conforming to the reported experi-
mental data, depicted in Figure 2, was chosen for use in
the simulation example of this work. In the case of insuf-
ficient knowledge of hot-face conditions, intermediate time
properties can also be used as simulation tuning parameters,
since this boundary condition tends to be a major factor of
uncertainty in this type of modeling task.
E. Computational Algorithm
Step 1. Prescribe the total number N 2 1, the material
properties of the lining layers, and the constant heat-transfer
coefficients. Initialize the geometry, {ri, i 5 0, . . . , N}, set
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 2—The temperature T0 of the boundary condition [2], as a function
of time elapsed since the end of casting, by the ladle hot face.
the time to zero (t 5 0), determine the maximum number
of eigenvalues to compute, i.e., how many terms to include
in the series solution of Eq. [12], and initialize the temper-
ature profile T(r, 0) 5 f(r).
Step 2. Compute the matrix C(i) and the coefficients
@ b (i)
1 (r)
b (i)
2 (r)
# for each material layer, as well as their spatial
derivatives, @
d b (i)
1 (r)
d r b (i)
2 (r)
#
Step 3. Solve Eq. [17], for the eigenvalue spectrum {mj,
j 5 1, 2, . . .}, numerically, e.g., by Newton–Raphson it-
eration, after having computed the initial values {m̃j and j
5 1, 2, . . .} from Eqs. [19] and [20]. This requires sub-
routines for computation of the Bessel and Neumann func-
tions J0 and J1 and Y0 and Y1, respectively.
Step 4. Compute D(mj) from Eq. [18] and the wave func-
dc (r)
tion cj(r) from Eq. [16]. Calculate the derivative j .
dr
Step 5. Read in the elapsed time since the previous tem-
perature distribution of the ladle wall, specify the load
status of the ladle during this period, and find the correct
temperature T0, either as a constant value for molten metal
or as a value for air, from Figure 2, by the hot face.
Step 6. Compute the time function Aj(t) from Eq. [21].
Compute the transient temperature profile Ttr(r,t) and the
overall profile T(r,t).
Step 7. Apply the operator Bj, defined in Eq. [24], to the
spatially varying functions f(r) 2 T0b11(r) and b12 (r).
Step 8. Assemble a linear equation system, e.g., similar
to that in Eq. [28], in the unknown boundary temperatures
from the results of the previous steps, and solve it.
Step 9. Substitute the result of step 8 back into Eq. [7]
to obtain the complete temperature profile for the ladle wall.
Step 10. Set f(r) 5 Ttr(r, t) 1 T(1)
st (r) and go to step 5.
IV. ILLUSTRATION OF THE MODEL
A steelmaking ladle with a two-layer refractory, of di-
mensions given in Table I, was fitted with six thermocou-
ples approximately 1.3 m above the bottom, at positions
VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998—655
 Table I. Parameter Values for the Monitored Ladle[12,21]*

Parameters ri h (ri) Ti k (i) c (i)

p r (i)
(i \ Units) (m) [W/(m2 K)] (7C) [W/(m K)] [J/(kg K)] (kg/m3)
0 1.2 2000 1550 / variable 36 / 0.024 780 / 1000 7020 / 1.293
1 1.355 3000 variable 2.5 1500 3400
2 1.42 300 variable 1.8 1200 2100
35N 1.44 40 20 45 460 7800
*Properties for specific materials are superscripted, i 5 0 denoting the molten steel or air inside the ladle and i 5 N the ladle shell. Geometric
positions are subscripted, r0, being the distance from the ladle symmetry axis to the hot face. Properties marked ‘‘variable’’ are subject to calculation
during the simulations, and in positions containing dual entries, the larger ones correspond to liquid steel and the smaller ones to air.

Fig. 3—Thermocouple configuration in the ladle refractory.

Fig. 5—Simulated and measured temperatures at thermocouple locations

during the measurement campaign. The dashed lines correspond to
simulated values and the solid lines are measurements from thermocouples
1 through 6, declining in the temperature level.

lines in Figure 5 show the measurements logged from the

Fig. 4—Durations of time periods with the ladle filled and empty. The
campaign begins with a 1 h filled period. Every ladle cycle consists of
two time periods, one with the ladle filled (dark bar) and one with the
ladle empty (light bar), of varying lengths during the campaign.
depicted in Figure 3. The thermocouples, placed inside the
working and safety linings, were at equidistant positions
with respect to their neighbors. The signals from the ther-
mocouples were logged every 4 minutes for the 26 heats
of the campaign. Unfortunately, the thermocouple (no. 1)
closest to the hot face fell out after 15 hours, but the other
five remained intact for the entire campaign. The distribu-
tion of durations with the ladle filled and empty over the
60-hour campaign is shown in Figure 4. Here, the abscissa
shows elapsed time from the beginning of the campaign
and the ordinate shows the lengths of each of the two sep-
arate time periods in every ladle cycle, the black bars in-
dicating periods with the ladle filled and the white ones
periods with the ladle empty. In each cycle, the ladle was
assumed to be filled between tapping and the factual mo-
ment when 50 pct of the ladle capacity was cast. Corre-
spondingly, the empty time is the time elapsed between this
moment and the tapping of the following cycle. The solid
thermocouples throughout the campaign.
Model parameter values used in the simulations are given
in Table I, with the material properties adapted from Ref-
erence 12, where a similar lining configuration was used.
The values of the material properties, as well as the thermal
resistances, were subject to minor adjustments in order to
improve agreement between the simulated and the observed
temperatures. This applies particularly to the specific heat
of the working lining layer, which, in our case, had a dif-
ferent chemical composition.[21] The boundary configura-
tions considered at the inner wall were a time-dependent
temperature near the hot face with a constant heat-transfer
coefficient for the empty ladle and a constant temperature
and heat-transfer coefficient for the filled ladle. Since the
presented model only aspires to describe changes in thermal
state at a specific height within the ladle wall, tapping and
casting will be modeled as instantaneous events. When the
model is to be used for predicting steel temperature drop,
a number of positions at various heights, as well as on the
bottom of the ladle, can be subject to simulation in order
to obtain an estimate of the total heat loss from the steel
through the lining. Losses from the steel/slag surface can
be calculated separately. For the convection coefficient at
the ladle refractory hot face and the bulk temperature of
the melt, the first value applies to the full ladle, while the
second value, here for simplicity to be of the same mag-
nitude, applies to the empty ladle. The ambient temperature

656—VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B

Fig. 6—The initial temperature profile for the measurement campaign used
in the simulations.
Fig. 7—Simulated temperature profiles in the ladle refractory during the
first six ladle cycles of the measurement campaign. Solid lines show the
lining thermal state just before the ladle is emptied and dashed lines the
state just before it is filled. Note the thermal stabilization occurring in the
safety lining and ladle shell.
in the foundry was taken to be constant, 20 7C. Refractory
wear at the hot face of the working lining was qualitatively
considered in the simulation simply by reducing the thick-
ness of this layer twice during the campaign.
The simulation starts from a given initial thermal state
for the ladle with air of 400 7C at the inside wall and air
of 20 7C at the outside wall, using relevant convection co-
efficients.[22] This initial temperature profile is shown in
Figure 6. First, steel is ‘‘tapped’’ into the ladle instantly,
and the inside temperature and convection coefficient take
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 8—The simulated temperature profiles in the refractory with
corresponding thermocouple measurements prior to teeming and to
tapping for the first six ladle cycles of the measurement campaign.
on the higher values in Table I. After the first holding time
(of 62 minutes; cf., Figure 4), the first teeming, which is
also assumed to be instantaneous, takes place and the tem-
perature and heat-transfer coefficient are shifted to the
lower values. This procedure is repeated through all cycles
of the campaign. Figure 7 depicts the extreme temperature
profiles in the lining during the first six cycles. The profiles
correspond to the conditions prior to teeming (solid lines)
and tapping (dashed lines). Consequently, the solid curve
of each cycle corresponds to the ladle wall thermal state
obtained after an elapsed period of time, denoted by one of
the filled bars of Figure 4, during which the ladle has been
filled. Conversely, the dashed profiles exhibit the state sub-
sequent to a time period when the ladle has been standing
empty, denoted in Figure 4 by a light bar. The gradual
increase in the energy content of the refractory is readily
observed, as well as the drop in temperature of approxi-
mately 50 7C at the inner surface of the steel shell. This
drop is caused by the thermal contact resistance used in the
model. A further observation that can be made is that it
takes about five cycles to soak the refractory thermally.
This can be seen partly from the lack of change in the
temperature profile in the safety lining and shell in the last
two cycles of Figure 7 and partly from the stability of the
measurement signals tc4, tc5, and tc6 in Figure 5 after the
first five cycles (or about 13 hours). The quasi-steady-state
approximation of the outer layers naturally causes a too-
rapid increase in the temperatures of these layers, as can
also be observed from the initial stages of Figure 5, but this
effect is only momentary. A closer view of the situation is
provided by Figure 8, which illustrates the simulated and
the measured results for the extreme temperature profiles,
VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998—657

Fig. 9—The simulated temperature profiles in the refractory with
corresponding thermocouple measurements prior to teeming and to
tapping for ladle cycles 11 through 16 of the measurement campaign.
i.e., prior to teeming and tapping (cf., Figure 7, description
given previously), of the six first ladle cycles. Here, the
profiles of each cycle are shown in two separate subfigures,
together with the thermocouple readings (*), prior to teem-
ing and tapping, at the positions depicted in Figure 3. Fig-
ure 9 gives the corresponding illustration of the conditions
during six later cycles. The cycle number is indicated on
top of each subfigure. Note that the readings of the inner-
most thermocouple, tc1, have been omitted as it had gone
out of order. At this stage, the modeling error introduced
by the steady-state assumption for the outer layers is no
longer of importance.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A model for estimation of temperature profiles in the
composite layer refractory of a metallurgical ladle has been
presented. The model is based on the assumption that the
outer lining layers are in a quasi-steady-state, while the
working layer is in a fully transient state. Analytical solu-
tions for the one-dimensional temperature fields of the in-
dividual layers, on the basis of the classical theory of heat
conduction, have been assembled. The resulting system of
linear equations was solved numerically, yielding the tem-
peratures at the material boundaries. It should be noted that
the coefficients of the equations depend explicitly on time.
Given the boundary temperatures, the individual solutions
were combined to form an overall temperature profile for
the ladle wall at any desired time.
In comparison to a purely numerical scheme of calculat-
ing the temperature field of a multilayer wall, the approach
suggested here may appear algebraically elaborate and in-
658—VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998
volved, but it has a few major advantages over the numer-
ical approach. First, as Eq. [12] indicates, the time and
space variables are completely separated, which means that,
at a desired time, only one field computation is required to
give the relevant result. Iteration is needed only when com-
puting the eigenvalues for the Sturm–Liouville problem,
and these can be readily computed for a number of different
situations (hot-face temperatures, heat-transfer coefficients,
extent of wear, etc.) once and for all before the start of
simulation. The fact that the mathematical expressions are
in closed form facilitates fast computation and use of ana-
lytic expressions for the heat storage in the working lining,
by which the heat loss from the liquid steel can be esti-
mated.
The comparison of the model output with experimental
data, carried out in Section IV, illustrates the feasibility of
the adopted approach. Rather than achieving exact agree-
ment between the measurements and simulation, it is im-
perative that the model be able to predict changes in the
heat content of the ladle refractory. Future work will be
concentrated on applications of the model in the steelmak-
ing process and possibilities of updating the model param-
eters on the basis of available temperature measurements.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to Rautaruukki Raahe
Steel (Raahe, Finland) for providing data from the mea-
surement campaign. The financial support by Tekniikan Ed-
istämissäätiö and the Academy of Finland is gratefully
acknowledged.
APPENDIX
The following indefinite integrals, [A1] through [A5],
have been adapted from Watson.[23] They are useful for cal-
culating analytical expressions for the time function of Eq.
[21], in cases with initial temperature distributions of the
steady-state form of Eq. [5] and in cases with the more
general dynamic-state initial field. The formulas [A1]
through [A3] are valid for the Neumann function Y, as well.
*rJ 0 (m r) d r 5
r
J (m r)
m 1
[A1]
*J 1 (m r) d r 5 2
J1 (m r)
m
[A2]
*rJ 2
0 (m r) d r 5
r2 2
2
{J 0 (m r) 1 m 2 J 21 (m r)} [A3]
*rJ 0 (m r) Y0 (l r) d r
r {m J1 (m r) Y0 (l r) 2 lJ0 (m r) Y1 (l r)}
5 [A4]
m2 2 l2
* rJ 0 (m r) Y0 (m r) d r 5
r2
2 0
J (m r) Y0 (m r) [A5]
In the equations, the index 1 denotes Bessel and Neumann
functions of order 1. When the computation is started from
a temperature field of the form of Eq. [5], an additional
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
formula is needed for the logarithmic term arising from Superscripts
axisymmetry, (i) material layer number
; initial guess
* r ln r J0 (m r) d r
1 REFERENCES
5 {r ln r J (m r) 2 * J1 (m r) d r} [A6]
m 1
1. H.S. Carslaw and J.C. Jaeger: Conduction of Heat in Solids, 2nd ed.,
Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 1959, chs. VIII
which can be readily obtained with partial integration and and IX.
use of [A1] and [A2]. In applications where the Bessel 2. A.V. Luikov: in Analytical Heat Diffusion Theory, J.P. Hartnett, ed.,
functions are not system-supported, the user may have to Academic Press, New York, NY, 1968.
design his own subroutines for these. This can be done by 3. H. Pfeifer, F.N. Fett, H. Schäfer, and K.-H. Heinen: Stahl Eisen.,
using the polynomial approximations with errors for J0, J1, 1984, vol. 104, pp. 59-67.
4. P.M. Morse and H. Feshbach: Methods of Theoretical Physics, Part
Y0 and Y1, given in Abramowitz and Stegun.[24] I, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY, 1953, ch. 6.
5. D. Ramkrishna and N.R. Amundson: Chem. Eng. Sci., 1974, vol. 29,
pp. 1457-64.
NOMENCLATURE 6. M.D. Mikhailov, M.N. Özisik, and N.L. Vulchanov: Int. J. Heat Mass
Aj time function Transfer, 1983, vol. 26, pp. 1131-41.
b1,2 coefficients in Eq. [22] 7. J.W. Hlinka, A.W. Cramb, and D.H. Bright: Proc. 68th Steelmaking
Conf. of AIME, 1985, vol. 68, pp. 35-47.
Bj integral transform defined by Eq. [20] 8. M. Kitamura, S. Kawasaki, S. Kawai, K. Kawai, and K. Miyake:
cp specific heat Trans. Iron Steel Inst. Jpn., 1993, p. 23.
C coefficient matrix for steady-state solution 9. C.E. Tomazin, E.A. Upton, and R.A. Wallis: Iron Steelmaker, 1986,
C, D coefficient function of the wave function, June, pp. 28-34.
10. R.L. Minion and C.F. Leckie: Proc. 69th Steelmaking Conf. of AIME,
Eq. [16] 1986, vol. 69, pp. 335-43.
f initial temperature distribution 11. A. Perkins, T. Robertson, and D. Smith: Scaninject IV Conf., Luleå,
h heat-transfer coefficient Sweden, June 1986.
J0,1 Bessel function of order zero or one 12. Y.S. Koo, T. Kang, I.R. Lee, Y.K. Shin, and H.Y. Gal: Proc. 72nd
k heat conductivity Steelmaking Conf. of AIME, 1989, vol. 72, pp. 415-21.
13. N. Bleistein and R.A. Handelsman: Asymptotic Expansions of
l experimental value of the gap between two Integrals, Dover Publications Inc., New York, NY, 1986, pp. 152-53
lining layers and 175-76.
N number of layers in the wall, including the 14. S. Rutqvist, D. Bergman, and B. Olika: Scand. J. Metall., 1990, vol.
shell 19, pp. 146-52.
15. G.E. Myers: Analytical Methods in Conduction Heat Transfer,
r radial coordinate McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, 1971, pp. 222-24.
t time 16. M.N. Özisik: Boundary Value Problems of Heat Conduction,
T temperature International Textbook Co, Scranton, PA, 1968.
Y0,1 Neumann function of order zero or one 17. M.D. Mikhailov and M.N. Özisik: Unified Analysis and Solutions of
Greek symbols Heat and Mass Diffusion, Dover Publications Inc., New York, NY,
1994, pp. 111-13.
a 5 (k/rcp) thermal diffusivity 18. J.D. Pryce: Numerical Solution of Sturm-Liouville Problems, Oxford
l, m eigenvalue University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 1993, p. 76.
r density 19. M.D. Mikhailov and N.L. Vulchanov: J. Comput. Phys., 1983, vol.
c wave function 50, pp. 323-36.
20. C.E. Grip: Ph.D. Thesis, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå,
Subscripts Sweden, unpublished research.
i material boundary number 21. H. Nevala: Rautaruukki Raahe Steel Ltd., Raahe, Finland, personal
j eigenvalue index communication, 1996.
st steady state 22. R.B. Bird, W.E. Stewart, and E.N. Lightfoot: Transport Phenomena,
tr transient state John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1960, ch. 13.
23. G.N. Watson: A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed.,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1952, ch.
5.
24. Handbook of Mathematical Functions, 9th printing, M. Abramowitz
and I.A. Stegun, eds., Dover Publications Inc., New York, NY, 1970,
section 9.4.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B VOLUME 29B, JUNE 1998—659