| | | OK: 10.1002/srin.201000079 steel research int. 61 (2010) No. 7 CFD Benchmark for a Single Strand Tundish (Part I!) Hed. Odenthal” M, Javurek”, ti. Kirschen®, and N. Vogl") SMS Slemag AG, RAD Central Department, Dusseldor, Germany. 2 Johannes Kepler Univesily Linz, Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer, Linz, Austria. ®)RHI AG, Corporate RAD, Leoben, Austria * Corresponding author e-mail: hans-juergen.odenthal@ems-siemag.com Ina comparative benchmark nine participants ofthe German Steel Insitute VOEh working group “Flug Mechanios and Flud Simulation’ studied ‘he mel ow ina 16+ single-strand tundish. Starting wit a steady-state simulation ofthe mat flow, the transient How behaviour vos simulated tor fan idealized lle change involving a sudden jump in temperature and concentatian. In adltion, the separation of nor-melalic partces tothe ‘mel surface was examined, No guidoines and limitations were made regarsing the simulation strategy The predicted flow profiles, temperature ‘and concentration dstrbutions coincide with each thar within a good approximation, Systematic diferences in the transient temperature and {turbulence fel ere explained by the selection ofthe boundary condlion atthe free surface. All CFD programs reproduce the funéamental tow structure with a good degree of accuracy. The separation cate for non-metalic particles calculated onthe bass of the Lagrange Method are ‘greater than would be expected according to theory and measurement results abiained on the water mode Keywords: computational uid dynamics, tundish flow, CFD benchmark, turbulence modal, CFD boundary condition ‘Submitted on 28 Novemiser 2009, accepted on 16 April 2010 Introduction and Problem Definition This paper isan extension ofthe CFD benchmatk study on the steady-state flow in a water model (scale :1.7) of a 16-t single-strand tundish [9]. The water low was examined by ten participants from four universities and six industrial firms; the later include a CFD software manufacturer, The numerical results were compared with high-accurate laser Doppleranemometer measurements forthe water model and the correlation was very good In the present part of the CFD benchmark study, the numerical models are applied to the original full-scale tundish filled with liquid metal. n adition tothe Fguid melt flow, the melt temperature T and the carbon concentration ¢- should be calculated during an idealized ladle change, ‘The tundish geometry with the shroud tube (index sh) and the submerged entry nozzle (index SEN) are described! in the first part of the publication [9]. For the second benchmark, all material data of the stainless steal XSCrNi18-10 (material no. 1.4301) as well as the Audie boundary conditions forthe steady-state casting sequence ate fixed and shown in Table 1. As in the fist part of the benchmark, no limitations are made regarding the numetial rid, eg. the grid type, or the number of grid calls. All numerical constraints, e.g. solution strategy, turbulence ‘model including respective constants, consideration of the covering slag layer (single-phase or multi-phase, c.g steel/ slag), relaxation factors, and other model constants (Pers Scju) could be set at the participants own discretion, The extension of the tundish domain (shroud, SEN), the geometrical symmetry -the tundish has a mitror plane, thus only one half could be modelled using a symmetry boundary condition ~ as well asthe type of boundary condition at \wwnwsteelresearch-journal.com the melt interface could be chosen. This basic strategy was diseussed in detail and decided by all members of the working group prior tothe benchmark, and. should accentuate the competence and experience of the paric- ipans, However, no experimental reference data for the velocity, turbulence, temperature, or concentration dsti- bution of the tundish melt low are available because an adequate measurement technique does still not exist. For this reason, the current paper must be seen a5 modelling study and ean support other CFD users Al simulations which are to be carried out inthe second part of the benchmark relate 10 steady-state casting Conditions with the mass flow tha= thgey, though with Ta A Tspn and Com #Cc,sen. Three cases are to be dealt with by all patcipants, Figure 1 and Table 1 indicate the boundary conditions and material data required fr ths, Case 1 - Steady-state simulation. For the first section of the tasks, the steady-state flow and turbulence structure in the continuous-casting tundish are to be calculated fora case where the melt from the ladle enters the tundish with tng) = 38kg/s and Ty,= 150°C, The heat losses via the bottom and side-walls of the tundish as well as via the covering flux (slag) have been previously estimated at =7.6 kW/m? and 4,= —22 kW /m?. Heat losses via the shroud tube and submerged entry nozzle are neglected, Asa result of the heat losses, a lower mean temperature is obtained in the tundish melt. From the energy balance Tinsen e(TseyTaa) = a4 Ai a the temperature difference obtained between the outlet and inlet of the tundish becomes ATseayaa=—4,64K. In © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 529steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 ‘Table 1, Predefined melt propertios for the staniess steo! XS GiNit8-40 {material no. 14301) and process data for the 16 tons ‘singla-sand tundish ‘Notation Symbol Vai Deaniy pinkgin? _[-omes-T 86124) Dynamic viscosity win kghins) | 5975-10 eat conde in Win KD) o Specific eat expacy in tke &) 185 “Thermal expansion Bin ik 1355-107 couteien ‘Surfin tension ain Nim 137 Goothcient oF difsion Dinas a0 igus tomperatre Tigi ik) | 467 1740) Solis emporture Taine) | MBTCTIOY “Tanah mel volume Vian’ 225 “Tunis boom Tength Liem 3a Tun Boom width By in o7e “Tansh mel fl level him 80 Gravy ain oni ‘Votumesie Raw ate for Vansey ins sat stoady state easing Mass ow ae for Ths in kgs 38 teady-tate casting Theoretical mean Now Tins 0077 velocity hog He und ‘Mean fow velocity Ta in mis ry inside the shroud “Theorstcl residence Tine ih 0 fine ofthe mel Reynolas wanber Re 1030 Froude number fr 2310 Process Metallurgy Eq, (1), nays is the mass flow in steady-state casting, c is the specific heat capacity of the melt and q, is the heat flow density on the wall surface Aj, The right-hand side of the equation represents the sum of all heat flows. Free convection as a result of temperature gradients is disregarded at this point because fluid flows with free ‘convection often have a transient character. This frequently causes convergence problems in a Reynolds-averaged steady-state CFD simulation, Transient fluid flow phenom tena were considered in case 2 of the presented benchmark. ‘Typical flow quantities are evaluated, such as the location of the recirculation atea or the backflow velocity of the melt, as, performed and presented in the first part of the benchmark, Case 2- Transient simulation. The flow and tempera- ture field for the steady-state solution, calculated under section I of the tasks, acts asthe starting condition for the subsequent next part ofthe tasks, the transient simulation. Buoyancy effects resulting from temperature gradients are now taken into consideration. To simulate the ladle change, an idealized, abrupt jump in temperature from Ty) = 1773 K to 1793 K is assumed atthe shroud tube (step input). At the same time, the carbon content of the new ladie melt is increased from c,n=0 fo 1%. This ‘corresponds to the idealized assumption of no time delay ‘occurring between the ladles. In reality, of course, a pause of up to several minutes is necessary until the empty ladle is replaced by a full one. Inthe intervening period, the tundish filling level drops down since the casting process is normally continued. Upon start of pouring of the new Jadle, the tundish is then fist restored to its original filling level at an inereased pouring rate [3]. Since the modelling, of this would be too elaborate for the benchmark, the process has been simplified accordingly. ‘Altogether, (= 1260 of real process time are to be simulated, This corresponds toa dimensionless time of = 3 with 0 = 1/1. Here, i = V/Vasen = 420 s is the theoretical residence time ofthe melt inthe tundish and V is the tundish ‘volume for filing level H. For the evaluation criterion, use is rade of the response signal for the temperature Tiss = 0) 4, Steady-state simulation 2, Transient simulation 3; Simulation of particle separation 1=0-12608 n= 98 KOS ola Tan 1520°C (1799 6) “po= 2000 kai de 4, 20, 60, 90.165 ym, five classes of pantcies Figure 1. Predefined boundary conditions forthe rumericaly simulated benchmark cases 530 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Heel > eee ei Tees Cam Band wwnn.steelresearch-journal com anProcess Metallurgy and of the carbon concentration ¢,, = (8) at the outlet of the submerged entry nozzle. These values are analysed at defined points in time Orin Ossi Osor and Osx, Case 3 - Particle separation. Inthe third section ofthe tasks, examination is made of the separation behaviour of oxidic inclusions, this being a critical process as regards product quality in metallurgical process engineering and the subject of theoretical and experimental work for several years now [3, 4, 7, 10). The inclusions are considered to ‘be spherical particles with the density py = 3000 kg/m’ in the five size classes dy = 1, 30, 50,90 and 165 ym, For the sake cof simplicity, the inclusion simulation is based on the results of ease 1 involving the steady-state solution without a jump in temperature and concentration at the tundish inlet Inpacts ofthe particles on the flow are not considered since the absolute mass portion of particles is very low. Likewise disregarded are effects such as particle agglomeration, formation of inclusions due to slag entrapment, re-entrap- ment of inclusions that have already floated out, as well as erosion and adherence to refractory walls. Here also, no restrictions were stipulated as regards the CFD model, use cane made both ofthe Euler-Lagrange methods (e.g. DPM. ~ Diserete Phase Model) and the Euler-Euler methods (c.g. Drifflax Model and Mixture Model) with any desired settings. The particles must be added uniformly distributed overthe shroud tube erosssection. On the wal the particles are reflected, while at the free surface they ate tapped, Figure 1. For Euler-Euler models, an arbitrary concentration is applied in the shroud tube, For the benchmark participants the task at hand is to determine the proportion of particles transported into the submerged entry nozzle, for all classes of particle diameters, i.e. to determine the particle concentration ce sry/¢e. in relation tothe inet. For simpler evaluation, in the case of the Euler-Lagrange methods, the same number of particles is used forall particle classes. Results OF the ten participants in the benchmark for the water ‘model [9], eight were taking part in the present case, and a new participant joined: ‘¢ ANSYS Continental Burope, Darmstadt ‘© Corus - R&D Technology Department, Iimuiden © RHIAG - Corporate R&D, Leoben ‘¢ SMS Siemag AG - R&D Central Division (two partic pants), Ditsseldor? © WIKKI GmbH, Braunschweig © Johannes Kepler University Linz - Institute for Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer © RWTH Aachen University - Institute for Industrial Furnaces and Heat Engineering ‘© Martin-Lunher-University Halle-Wittenberg - Institute for ‘Mechanical Process Engineering, Al users modelled the complete tundish geometry, ic. nobody used the geometrical symmetry to model only one \wonsteelresearch-journal.com steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 half ofthe tundish, with the number of rid cells fluctuating between 0,38 million cells (User 9) and 1,90 million cells (User 5). Gambit (4x), keem (4x) und SnappyHexMesh (1x) ‘were used for the grid generation, To check the grid quality, common criteria were used, such as aspect ratio, equiangle skewness, equisize skewness, etc. [2]. The CED programs used were, once again, ANSYS FLUENT (4x), OpenFOAM (Gx), CFX (Ix) and Lag3¢/Fastest 4.0 (1x). In this context, the interesting feature is that all participants retained the grid that they used in the first part of this study and performed a scale-up of the geometry. For the CFD solver, User 4 changed from ANSYS FLUENT to OpenFOAM. The individual settings used by the participants for the numerical simulation are indicated in Table 2 Case 1 - Steady-state simulation. Figure 2 shows the results of the four different CFD programs, For Users 2, 3,5 and 8 the steady-state flow structure is shown in the central section (y/B)=0) and cross-section (x/L; =0.5) of the tundish and the distribution of the turbulence intensity tu = y/2/3k/|0\| is shown in the central section, User 2 models only the submerged part of the shroud tube, whereas in the remaining three cases the entire length is considered. Since User 3 has not performed any steady-state simulation, the current velocity and turbulence structures atthe point in time t= 600 sare presented in Figure 2. The results for User 5 are based on the mean values of @ transient simulation. None of the participants models the cover slag layer, for ‘example by using a VoF multi-phase approach The four different CFD programs calculate comparable flow structures. Because buoyaney effects are not considered incase 1, the fandamental met flow structure is very simila to those of the water model. The shroue jet enters the tndish with ty = 1.491, is redirected at the bottom and flows "upward along the side walls at y/B = + 0.5 andthe front wall atx/Ly = 0, The dominating flow isa pair of counter-rotating vortices induced by the shroud jet. The centres of these vortices can be found at 2/H1=0.5 and y/B)=£0.35. The high momentum shroud jet serves as energy source for the vortices. An amount of melt flows below the free surface from both side-walls toward the xz-symmetry plane of the tundish and is deflected toward the bottom, cf, [8, 9}. Alin all, only slight differences in results are found among all benchmark participants. ‘Thus, for example, the x- and 2z-position ofthe recirculation area is predicted inmore or less the same way by all participants At the free surface of the melt, User 3 und User 8 apply a symmetry condition. This boundary condition implies that the gradients of the tangential velocities u, v, the turbulent kinetic energy k, the dissipation rate, and the temperature T along the normal coordinate z as well as the normal velocity ware equal to zero ay © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 531Process Metallurgy mere i steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 {(g)4@) ba 01 Gupuoone uonypuce ArSpunog saepns ea ‘Quarsues) z ese Pu \ww.steelresearch-journal.com © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 532 aesProcess Metallurgy ) Votocity distribution ‘steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 ) Turbulence intensity distribution User 2: FLUENT 625, Realzable hs mode entre wal eaten, etonles wal, SIMPLE, PRESTO, QUICK seme Figure 2. Case 1) Fuld flow structure and b) turbulence intensity dstiaution in the centre plane (yy vith 27 9K/10 In general, a wall is defined by the no-slip wall condition U¥,W= 05 ke, T = fl vall fuetion). @) The wall shear stress ty = (Bui/Axi), is caleulated by the logarithmic law-of-the-wall and is used to determine the production of turbulent kinetic energy K in the turbulence model. Inthe case of a frictionless wall or rather afree-sip wall the conditions are au fa av me T= f(wall function). ‘While the conditions for the velocity components are the same for both symmetry and free-slip wall condition, they are ‘www.steelresearch-journal.com © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Wein! 0} and the cross plane ul ~0.5); different for the turbulent dissipation rate and the temper- ature (ef Eq, (2)and Eq, (4)). In FLUENT, itisnot possible to link a heat flux to a symmetry condition so that a frictionless wall or rather free-slip wall must be used in this case. In OpenFOAM, there is the possibility to couple the free- slip condition for the velocities with the symmetry condition for the turbulence values at the free surface, see e.g. User 8in Table 2 aw a = f (wall function), au User 3 who applied the symmetry condition, Eq, (2), and User 8 who applied the coupled condition, Eq, (5), calculatesteel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 excessively high tu values below the free surface. As already discussed in [9], the symmetry condition predicts too high turbulence values below the free melt surface. Anyway, rnone of the listed boundary conditions for the steady-state single-phase simulation do match the melt flow behaviour close to the free surface. Itis open to question if a transient ‘multiphase simulation based on the VoF (Volume of Fluid) method to consider the melting cover-slag layer will be able to yield better results, In this context, itis well known that the turbulence formulation at the phase interfaces still involves major problems. Figure 3 shows the wall and surface temperature in the case of the steady-state simulation. Unfortunately, no clear temperature data are present for User 3 (Lagid/Fastest 4.0) and User 5 (CFX). For this reason, both users are replaced ‘and Figure 3 now shows the results for Users 1, 2, 4 and 8. Process Metallurgy For User 1, User 2 and User 4 an asymmetrical temper- ature distribution can be recognised at the wall and on the surface, whereas User 8 calculates an almost symmetrical temperature distribution. The asymmetrical temperature fields are based on the asymmetrical velocity fields, which themselves originate from the selection of the boundary condition forthe free melt surface, User 1, User 2 and User model the free surface in the turbulence model as a frictionless wall, which results in a lower turbulence at the surface and, furthermore, in other areas of the tundish as well. Conversely User3,andalso User8, applies symmetry condition which induces a significantly higher surface turbulence, Higher turbulences cause a higher heat transfer from the melt flow to the tundish wall, which is also the reason for the higher level ofthe surface temperatures in the cease of User 8, er: AUEAT 8228 SST mth slew nn, etfs wa, PSO, yc wen, 2° er uid 4 tT.) Tod on 022 a ‘ar 2 FLUENT 8328, Rouble marc wll ne eos al SPL, PRESTO, QUICK ce 4 hor 4 OpnFONM 4 Sts mod st at rs, 4 - treaty, 2 br pe. 2 cr - or: OpegFONM 1,51 oi eat eos ee etme fork and PO. 2" Oe UP, es as 4 & Figure 3. Case 1 - Temperature distribution (T ~Tyq)/(Tan— Tie) atthe tundish walls andthe free suriace 534 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim \ww.steelresearch journal.comProcess Metallurg | research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 f) mars PO] scream i | i i I be 5 i i i r i hon ts fon | i i , 1) 4 ail i nl i oe by vis, 2H on a Figure 4, Case 1- Dimensionless positon ofthe recirculation centre for the steady-state simulation; with L,=8.14m, By=0.78m, H=0.80m, With regard to the convergence behaviour, the steady- state simulation of the melt flow in the tundish must be considered as a problem factor because in reality the melt flow is always transient because of turbulence. Here, the convergence behaviour depends essentially on the treatment of the fice surface. The experience of the benchmark participants shows that the steady-state simulation with treatment of the free surface as a symmetry plane converges rapidly and stably. If, on the other hand, frictionless wall, see Equations (3-5), is selected for the turbulence model at the free surface, the steady-state simulation will converge only as far as a certain degree and will then show an unstable behaviour. On observing the velocity and temperature close to the surface in this caleulation phase, it can be recognised that these magnitudes vary around a symmetrical solution, ie. complete convergence cannot be attained for the steady-state simulation, It should also be observed that in the case of two-equation turbulence models, a low turbulence is synonymous with a low turbulent viscosity and a low turbulent thermal conductivity As a consequence of this, large-scale, slow vortices are simulated which cannot be dealt by the two-equation turbulence models owing to the familiar preconditions relating to their derivation (fully curbulent flow, molecular viscosity negligible in relation to the turbulent viscosity, local isotropic turbulence [5)). ‘The boundary condition that mostly influences the steady- state Solution is the treatment of the free melt surface. If FFigure 5. Caso 1 -Dimencionless positon of the maximum backtow velocity fo the steady-slate simulation; with =3.14m,8,=0.78m, H=080m, «5,8 frictionless wall according to Equation (4) is used, the turbulence will be dampened in extensive tundish regions. Slow, large-scale vortices arise which are no longer resolved by the turbulence model. In this context, it must be revived that two equation turbulence models ean not be applied to resolve the transition area between turbulent and laminar flow. In this case it is better to use the ku-SST SAS model suggested by Menter [5] orto perform a large-eddy simulation (LES) Figure 4 shows the postion of the recirculation centre, 1more or less in the middle ofthe tundish, and close to the bottom. Due to the lack of measurement data, the calculated x=, and z-positions have been normalized with the bottom length Ly =3.14m, the bottom width B; = 0.78m, and the elt fill level H= 0.80. All users evaluate the postion of the recirculation centre in the middle section at y/B, =0. User I calculates thatthe recirculation area is far tothe back in the tundish, io. close to the SEN, whereas User? indicates its position as being in the font region, In the water rode! benchmark, the positions were normalized in the form (xcep ~ xupaY/Li, see Figure 6 in [9]. Table 3 pow recaleulates these results and compares them with the current melt flow. The basis is the position of the recirculation centre predicted by all participants. It can be seen that both, mean values and RMS values are nearly identical for the water and for the melt flow simulation. Figure 5 represents the position of the maximum back- flow velocity in the recirculation area of the tundish, as ‘Table 3. Case 1 - Comparison between benchmark | (water mode) andbenchmark I (al tunis); dimensionless position of the recirculation ccenire forthe steady-state simulation; the mean value and the RIMS value are calculated rom the CFD resulls of all patcparts. ‘Benehmatk pant 119] ‘Benchmark pat I Real und (eale 1) ‘Water model tudsh (sale 1:17) My = 1847) 2H (=047Im) Mb (y= 3.1400) 2 (H=0.800m) Mean valve 0498 a8 oso or RMS value ‘oot 00% 008 fr) “wor Figure a ‘wwwsteelresearch-journal.com @ 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 535steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 Figure 6. Case 1 - Dimensionless backllow voloiy w/t for the steady-state simulation; wih = 0.0077 m/s. has been defined in the first part of the benchmark, ef. [9] ‘This position is located above the centre of recirculation. Figure 6 indicates the maximum backflow velocity prevailing there, which has been standardised with the theoretical, mean flow velocity of the melt through the tundish of u = 0.0077 m/s. It is difficult to analyse the flow field by characteristic points, e.g. the recirculation centre or the maximum backflow velocity and its location in the tundish. The User 7: FLUENT 12.0.7, SST kw model, automatic wall treatment, Coupled, body forced weighted, 1" upwind a) Temperature distribution T 01 = 0.95 (t; = 400 s) Process Metallurgy Figure 7. Case -horizortaluveloctycomponentinaverticalsection through the contre ofthe recirculation rogin. predicted points do not only depend on the simulation itself but also on the post-processing method. The detection of the maximum backflow velocity and its location, e.g. i at the participant discretion. This might be a reason for the variations in Figure 5 and Figure 6. In Figure 7 the horizontal u-velocity is plotted versus the vertical z-component. The velocity profile was evaluated on 4 vertical cut-section through the centre of the recirculation region. The profiles are similar to those of Figure 8 in the "* order b) Carbon concentration ¢. 02 = 1.90 (tz = 800 5) .86 (ty = 1200 s) \ Figure 8. Case 2 ~ a) Temperature distribution and b) carbon concentration inthe centre plane (yBy =0) for tee dimensionless tines 0; Tig =1740K, Tas = 1740K, Tan = 179K, Goan = 1 536 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim \wonw.stoolrosearch-journal.comProcess Metallurgy steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 first part of the benchmark [9], but now the deviation between the results is higher. For z<0.2m the velocities are comparable while for z > 0.2m the variations between the users increase, A reason for this behaviour as derived from the boundary condition in the first part of the benchmark could not be found. Furthermore, a comparison between the numerical results and experimental data is not possible, Case 2~‘Transient simulation, Figure 8 shows examples of the results of transient CED simulation by User 7. The representation shows the progression of the temperature T and of the carbon concentration ¢ in the central section at three points in time following the opening of the ladle at ty =0. The temperature of the melt atthe inlet ofthe tundish remains constantly T,,= 1793 K. The carbon concentration is likewise constant at cz,,= 1. It can be recognised that even after 8 =2.86 a homogeneous temperature distribution inthe tundish has still ot been reached, whereas the carbon distribution is already homogeneous by this time. Figure 9 shows the progression of the standardised temperature (Tex ~The)/(Tay— Th) at the outlet of the tundish asa function of the dimensionless time 0, The local temperature at the outlet has been standardised with the liquidus temperature Tyg=1740K and with the inlet temperature Tyy=1793K: Under the specified boundary conditions, the value (Ten ~Thg)(Tau,~ Tig) =0.9127 is obtained for @ — 0. In general, the concentration curves from the different users are relatively close together despite of minor differ- ‘ences in the flow field as stated in Figure 2 and Figure 7. ‘Obviously, the concentration curve doesnot so much depend ‘onthe flow structure ast isin fuid flows with strong mixing However, User 11 starts the transient simulation with too low temperature difference between the outlet and inlet of ATsrx.ay = ~1.90K compared withthe theoretical inna pean -Ta) Ta) Figure 9. Case 2-Dimensioniss temperature (Tsen —Ti(Tan~ Tu) at tho outlet of the SEN as a function of the dimensionless time 6 Tew = (Taen~ TiTon=Tie)= 0.9127 1s obtained for 0-30 with Tig= 1740 and Tan 179K, \wonu.steetresearch journal.com Figuro 10. Caso 2 ~ Dimensionless tomperatue (Toey~ Tan ~ TiattheoutotottheSENas afunctonotthroe dimensionless ines ith T= 1740, Ty = 1798 value of ATssn.an = —4.64K. At high 0 values, all temper ature progressions become similar to one another except the simulation of User 3 who starts with the correct AT sen.sh but obviously assumed a wall heat lux tht is too high Figure 10 represents the previously indicated progression of the outlet temperature (Tipsy ~ Thq)/(Tyy — Thig) at three given points in time, Whereas even greater deviations occu, above all between User | and User 9, for 8= 0.238 owing to the differing starting conditions, the results become more and more approximate to each other as the residence time increases. The characteristic outlet temperature of the melt at the tundish outlet is predicted by the participants with a high degree of accuracy, Tn a similar manner to the temperature behaviour described, Figure 11 shows the progression of the stand- andised carbon concentration (Cast ~ Ceo)Gzsn—Cea) at the outlet of the tundish, At the point in time tp =0 the carbon concentration in the tundsh isc» = O everywhere. Contrary to the usual manner of procedure for physical simulations at Figure 11. Caso 2 - Dimensionless carbon concentration (Cex oGaiy~cz)attheoutletotthe SENasafunetionotthedimensionless time 0; with Gans 1 nd 9 = 0. © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim $37steel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 tne water model, i. injection ofa limited quantity of colour tracer in the form of a pulse input, ef. (9) a step input is realized in the numerical simulation. The euve progression Shoven represents, in mathematical terms, the cumlative fimetion of the pulse input signal [11]. A scalar transport equation, eg. forthe carbon concentration ea, is usally Superimposed on the steady-state solution of the flow field and solved separately, which results in the saving of computer time, Due t0 the transient character of case 2, the transport equation had to be solved together with the remaining equations, The progression of the carbon concentation over time was simulated by all participants with a good fevel of precision, Slight devitions occurred only with User 11, but reasons for this behaviour could not be found ‘A similar statement is valid also forthe characteristic dimensionless times Bnir/M¥noo 85%/ Biro» Osor/®ineo and 8052¢/@ncos Which have been determined on the basis of the abrupt change in earbon concentration cat the inlet (sh) of the tundish, see Figure 12. The dimensionless time @ has been normalized by the theoretical dimensionless residence time Bios = #/fyey = and tooo according to Table 1, The figure also contains the mean and the RMS values. For example, the magnitude Onin characterises that dimen- sionless time ut which arise in the cg concentration can be registered forthe rst time at the outlet (SEN) ofthe tunis ‘The current Govalue i8 linked with the time-dependent and spatially evolution of the melt flow structure s0 that the variation between the different users increases with progressive process ime. Case 3 - Particle separation, The numerical setups used by the participants in Case 3 are compared in Table 4, Allusers who participated in this part of the benchmark used a Lagrangian model, and User 2 additionally applied the Bulerian drift-flux model. The simulations were performed with FLUENT, CFX and Lag3d/Fastest, but none of the Figure 12. Case 2-Characterisicdmensioles te yn based ‘onthe change ocarbonconsentraion over tie; mean ae and FOS vale (0./Operaus i Bie = {thn = 1 and loo = VV =4208. 538 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Process Metallurgy participants using OpenFOAM in Cases | and2 participated inCase 3 Figure 13 shows the benchmark simulations for Case 3, the fraction ¢,sin/Gpan Of particles tha ae transported into the SEN with respect to the particle concentration in the shod (sh) is ploted as a fanetion of the partite terminal rising velocity up. In addition, the corresponding particle dinmeter dy for the five particle sizes eonsidered can be found on the abscissa also, The relation between diameter and terminal rising velocity was calculated by assuming the equilibrium between buoyancy and drag force using the Morsi-Alexander drag law [6], soe Table 5. Tm addition tothe simulation results, the theoretical curve describing cp sewn. in the ease of an optimal particle separation afier Katfinann et al. (3, 4] i also shown in Figure 13. Thistheory implies that the particle concentration fraction in the SEN becomes ep senicrsn= 100% if the particle size approaches zero, because very small particles tannot be separated by the fluid flow. While experimental results in (7, 10] performed on tundish water-models agree ‘with this theory, most ofthe benchmark simulation results do not. The smallest particles (@y= yum) reach particle eoneentration fractions in the SEN of only pss! nan = 10 t0 47% - instead of nearly 100% - except in the results for User 2, who did not use a particle turbulence ‘model forthe Lagrangian model and used a Eulerian model, respectively. User 7 also did not use a particle turbulence model for the Lagrangian model but chose a number of ‘maximum steps per particle trajectory that is too Tow and feuses too many incomplete trajectories; this drastically influences the result. All other users chose higher limits and thus had nearly no incomplete trajectories, which implies that all the particles that do not reach the SEN are separated at the fee surface of the tundish, The results for User 1 and User 9 seem to be identical, although different flow turbulence models and grids were used. ‘The reason for the predominant over-prediction of the particle separation of small particles by the Langrangian Simulations might be the use of the particle turbulence model. The influence of the turbulence eddies on the particles is modelled with randomly generated flow velocity ffuctuations. These virally generated Muctuations may be inconsistent with the turbulent eddy size near the almost lat surface which becomes zero in the viinity ofthe surface. AS ‘consequence, the fluctuation velocities may transport even the smallest particles through the surface Time load, ‘The complete time expenditure for the second part of the benchmark, shown in Figure 14, consists ‘of the times for pre-processing (mean value for all participants: 14h), computer time (mean value: 147h), ‘and post-processing (mean value: 8h). On average, there fore, approx. three working days for manpower plus an additional computing capacity of around six days must be budgeted for such a problem, The computer time is highly «dependent on the computer type, on the parallelization and ‘on the CFD model, cf. also Table 2 ‘www.steeiresearch-journal.comstool research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 Process Metallurgy spon Easy ease (ress reupa ner) 20 Tana ze ‘(uoueiedss epised) ¢ ose uone|nus Bul 10} SuoNpUGD AuepunoG G40 U9EOUDIES “PEL, 539 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ‘won steelresearch-journal.comsteel research int. 81 (2010) No. 7 Pale soparatin not pose ac, Rou t Patel concerti factlon eye! Se g in EZ — Parl trminal sing eae vn ms Patil motor ym Figure 13. Dimensionless particle concentration Crsen /Ozan at the outlet (SEN) ofthe tundish. Figure 14, individual time load for the CFD process. ‘Table 5. Particle diameter dp and corresponding terminal sing velocity up according to Morsi and Alexander (6) yin pins 1 ~o 30 0.008 30 0.001 0 0003 6s 001 ‘Summary In the first part of the CFD benchmark, the steady-state flow in a downscaled water model of a 16-t single-strand tundish was simulated by ten members of the German Stee! Institute VDEh working group “Fluid Mechanics and Fluid 540 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Go. KGaA, Weinheim Process Metallurgy Simulation” [9]. The CFD results showed a good agreement ‘with laser-Doppler anemometer measurements. in the second part of the CFD benchmark, nine participants extended the numerical simulation to the hot melt flow in the 16-t single-strand tundish. The work to be ‘done consisted of three parts: (1) steady-state simulation of the melt flow, (2) transient simulation of the melt flow during, ladle change with an assumed change of the temperature and carbon concentration, and (3) simulation of ‘the separation of non-metallic particles to the slag-steel-inter- face. The extension of the numerical models from the water flow to melt flow required several restrictions due to the ‘uncertain tundish conditions in steelworks. For example, the ‘decreasing melt level during ladle change was neglected and the change in melt temperature and carbon concentration ‘was assumed to be an instant step. Despite the lack of further Timitations, all benchmark participants chose a symmetry oF wall boundary formulation for the melt-slag interface, thus real casting conditions were not represented. Although the ‘overall melt flow patterns agreed well in all calculated results, the individual and freely-selectable boundary conditions induced remarkable differences of specific flow phenomena, For example, the symmetry boundary condition induced high turbulence below the free melt surface, a high hheat transfer towards the melt-slag interface, but at the same time, the velocity field was more symmetric "The time-dependent courses of the temperature and carbon concentrations during ladle change were similar ‘and indicate the robustness and reliability of solving a scalar transport equation, ‘Simulations of the particle distribution and separation were performed using five particle size classes between Tym and 165 ym, For the smallest particle size the simulation resulted in concentration fractions between 10% and 47% at the outlet (SEN) in contrast to theory and water mode! tests where nearly 100% was expected. The overestimation of the particle separation indicates that the formulation of the particle turbulence model in near-wall regions is probably inappropriate and needs to be improved in CFD programs. Much more work is needed before realistic modelling of the transient turbulent melt flow in a tundish is obtained. Furthermore, significant improvements of measurement strategies and technologies are necessary to validate ‘simulations in the field of metallurgy. However, the benchmark without any restrictions of the modelling strategy illustrates that CFD simulations do result in comparable flow pattems when basic rules are considered. ‘The present work is to be seen as guideline and help for CFD. engineers when setting up numerical models in the field of ‘metallurgical fluid flows. References [1] M.M.Collr, DB. Love BV, Pai Proceedings of the Steelmaking Conference, TMS, Warrendale, PA, 1997, p. 313 [2] FLUENT 120 User's Gude, 2008 ‘www.steelresearch-journal.comProcess Metallurgy [51 M, Javorek: String von Fist ond ‘Transport von Ein schlossen in ener Suh Stanggussunlage, Doctoral Thess Jahunnes Kepler Universitat Linz, 2006, Tramer Verlag, ISBN 9783-85487. oe [41 B. Kaufinan, A. Niedermayt,H, Sale, A, reve: Separation of nonmetallic particles in tunlishes. Steel Research, 64 (1993), No. 4, 203-209 [5} F Meter Turbulence and hoot ransfr, ANSYS Conference & 26 ‘CADFEM Users Meeting, Dans, 2008, [61 S.A. Moni, A. J, Alexander An investigation of particle tage tories in tworphase flow ssstoms. J. Fluid Mechanics, $5 (1972), No. 2, 193, 171 HL Nakajima, F Sebo, S. Tanaka, 1. Dunia, D4. Haris, RAL {Guthie On the separation of non-metallic inclusions rom tenses wwzsteelresearch journal com i) 1 Ho) iy steel research i . 81 (2010) No. 7 in comtnuows casing operations «a water model sy, Pre. ofthe Sielmaking Conference TMS, 1986 p. 705 rnd. physical simulation of tundish uid low phenomens. Steel Research TInt, 74 003), No. 1, 44-55, Hi. Odenhal, M.lavurek, M. Kirschen: CED benchmark fora single strand tindish (part), Stel Research nt. 80 (2009), No.4, 2274, ‘A. Ricken, M. Warzecha, R. Koitsch, M. Pavlik, H. Pheif Particle Disteibuion and Separation in continuous casting tund Ish, Steel Research In, 80 (2008), No. 8, 568-574 Y. Sabai 7. Emi: Criteria for water modeling of melt ow and inclusion removal in contisuous casting tundishes. ISL) Int, 36 (1996), No.9, 1166 © 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 541