Mould heat transfer and continuously cast billet quality with mould flux lubrication Part 2 Quality issues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With many billet producers adopting mould powder lubrication, there is a need to clarify the gains in quality that can be achieved with this practice. Over the past three decades considerable research has been conducted to establish the relationship between mould behaviour and defect formation for billets continuously cast with oil lubrication, but little has been done to compare oil cast billets with powder cast billets. In this study, conducted at a Canadian minimill, four faces of a copper mould were instrumented with thermocouples and mould temperatures and billet quality were monitored with mould powder lubrication during casting of 208 × 208 mm billets. In the first part of this two part series (in Ironmaking & Steelmaking No. 1 2000), the results of the mould heat transfer analysis and the influence of variables were presented, together with a comparison between oil and powder lubrication. In the present paper, Part 2, billet quality is examined in detail. The difference in turbulence at the meniscus between oil and powder lubrication is established, and the need to tune mould level sensors when switching to mould powders is demonstrated. Previous work has shown that mould level fluctuations have a strong influence on defects such as offsquareness and transverse depressions, both of which are markedly reduced when casting with mould powders. The inherent stability of the meniscus is improved when employing mould powder lubrication and a submerged entry nozzle. Furthermore, the significant reduction in mould heat transfer at the meniscus, when mould powders are employed, particularly for medium carbon steels has been shown to correlate well with the observed reduction in offsquareness. The paper also elucidates the reasons for the reduction, and in most cases, elimination of transverse depressions in B–Ti grades when casting with mould powders. The mechanism of longitudinal depression formation and subsurface cracking observed in many of the powder cast, medium carbon billets has also been established.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".