A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study on Physical Refining of Steel Melts by Filtration
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper deals with a computer simulation of fluid dynamics in the steel melting process by filtration. As it is a model as such, it must be treated, that is, the theory must be compared with reality and this is done. It is a very complete work with some good graphics and that abuses the equations, some trivial.
It must be corrected:
Page 2, paragraph 5: Indicate that it is a CFD
Page 2. Section 2.1. S.Ali et al.; indicate the reference
Page 3: indicate that it is pct. Explain it in %
Page 3. Paragraph 3.1. remove Computational Fluid Dynamics and leave CFD, this should be clarified on page 2.
Page 5, last paragraph: indicate reference
All the equations must be cited in the text and delete some, there are too many
The references do not adapt to the standards of the journal.
Regarding the manuscript Manuscript ID: metals-2386851 Title: Computational Fluid Dynamics Study on Physical Refining of Steel Melts by Filtration Authors: Shahin Akbarnejad *, Dong-Yuan Sheng, Pӓr Göran Jönsson
and following his instructions I answer the questions:
1. What is the main question addressed by the research? The paper deals with a computer simulation of fluid dynamics in the steel melting process by filtration.
2. Do you consider the topic original or relevant in the field? Does it address a specific gap in the field? The idea is good but since it is a simulation, it remains something non-experimental
3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material? In relation to what is known about the subject, it provides the possibility of creating an experimental model that develops the simulation
4. What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered? Page 2, paragraph
5: Indicate that it is a CFD Page 2. Section 2.1. S. Ali et al.; indicate the reference Page 3: indicate that it is PCT. Explain it in % Page 3. Paragraph 3.1. remove Computational Fluid Dynamics and leave CFD, this should be clarified on page 2. Page 5, last paragraph: indicate reference All the equations must be cited in the text and delete some, there are too many 5. Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? and do they address the main question posed? if they are suitable
6. Are the references appropriate? The references do not adapt to the standards of the journal. 7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures. It is a very complete work with some good graphics and that abuses the equations, some trivial.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Good day!
Thank you very much for your feedback and comments. We have updated the manuscript.
For the details kindly find the attached file.
With regards
Shahin Akbarnejad
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Page 1
Among all of the non-metallic inclusions, deposition of alumina inclusions in tundish nozzles is believed to cause reduced molten steel pouring rate and nozzle blockage [10,11,20,22,23,26] while teeming the tundish from steel melts during castings.
Please specify that:
problems always arise not in the Ladle Shroud ( LS) but in Submerged entry nozzle ( SEN)
alumina problems remain even after SI-Ca wire or pure Ca wire is intentionally added to form Calcium Aluminates
Page 2
A steel charge containing 0.012 pct. C, 0.04 Ni and 12 to 20 pct. ppm of oxygen was heated to 1600 ± 10˚C in an argon filled furnace dome. Once melted, at this temperature and at ordinary pressure the product of wt% C and wt% O2 is much higher and it would be difficult even under argon pressure shielding that value.
See for instance Doctoral Thesis: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:8766/FULLTEXT01.pdf
|
Table 2. Steel and Alumina Inclusion properties. Material |
Density [kg.m-3] |
Dynamic viscosity [Pa.s] |
Temperature [K] |
||
|
Steel* |
6975 |
5.2E-03 |
1873 |
||
|
Alumina |
3900 |
N/A |
|||
It is a serious problem of any CFD simulation to consider a fixed value of viscosity of iron and not to include a simple Arrhenius behaviour for the viscosity of iron or even for the viscosity of steel, which is normally not available but in a few cases. The viscosity could then be modeled by extrapolating Arrhenan viscosity in the undercooled liquid regime or simply using an extrapolation of the old ISIj result by Masazumi Hirai
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/isijinternational1989/33/2/33_2_251/_article
See:
the old work by Battezzati and Greer
Calphad based approach by Sridar Seetharaman
And more recent data assessment by Mark Assael and his group on both viscosity and density
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Good day!
Thank you very much for your feedback and comments. We have updated the manuscript.
For the details kindly find the attached file.
With regards
Shahin Akbarnejad
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The work has improved a lot. Now it can be accepted as presented.
