P

u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat
furnace
J. Harish and P. Dutta*
This paper presents a computational model for heat transfer in direct fired pusher type reheat
furnaces for heating steel billets prior to plastic working. Radiation, which is the dominant mode of
heat transfer in the furnace chamber, is modelled in a detailed manner. The model incorporates
several features of radiation heat transfer that are typical of reheat furnaces, such as non-grey
participating gas in the chamber and specular/diffuse reflection off the furnace surfaces.
Radiation heat transfer in the furnace chamber and conduction within the billets are modelled
using the finite volume method (FVM). Convection heat flux on the billets is calculated using
correlations from the literature. Overall, the model is capable of predicting the radiative heat flux
distribution within the furnace, as well as the resulting temperature distribution within the billets as
they pass through various zones in the furnace. Several key process parameters have been
identified, and their effects on the heating process of the billets are studied.
Keywords: Steel billets, Pusher reheat furnaces, Heat transfer, Modelling
List of symbols
A area
a
k
, b
1
, b
2
constants for finding non-grey gas properties
b source term
C
p
specific heat capacity
D
eq
equivalent diameter
h convective heat transfer coefficient
I radiation intensity
k thermal conductivity
K number of gases
L
m
mean beam length
m mass flow rate of fuel air mixture
^
n unit normal vector
p pressure
q heat flux
r position vector
s distance
S(~rr,
^
s) source term
^
s angular direction
t time
T temperature
u velocity in x direction
x, y coordinate directions
a absorption coefficient
b attenuation
D difference
e emissivity
W(
^
s
l
,
^
s) phase function
k absorption coefficient
m coefficient of absolute viscosity
V solid angle
s scattering coefficient
s
c
StefanBoltzmann constant
r density
Subscripts
b black body
C centreline
c convection
g gas
max maximum
r radiant
ambient
Superscripts
d diffuse
l incoming direction
l9 outgoing direction
s specular
Introduction
Furnaces for heating steel billets prior to plastic working
such as rolling and forging are called reheat furnaces.
Accordingly, there are pre-forming reheat furnaces and
post-forming reheat furnaces. In pre-forming reheat
furnaces, the temperature in the steel billet should
ideally be uniform, as required by most subsequent
operations. In practice, however, this temperature
uniformity is not easily achievable. Usually, the billet
is heated to a prescribed temperature in a furnace, and
the process is so designed that the deviation from the
prescribed temperature does not exceed a certain limit.
Reheat furnaces are classied according to the
subsequent operational requirement, the method of
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore 560012, India
*Corresponding author, email: Pradip@mecheng.iisc.ernet.in
2005 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining
Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 16 September 2003; accepted 6 January 2005
DOI 10.1179/174328105X23923 Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2 151
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
billet transfer through the furnace, as well as by the
thermal boundary conditions. One of the most widely
used reheat furnaces is the pusher type reheat furnace,
which is the focus of the present study. Figure 1 shows a
sketch of a pusher type furnace and the various zones in
it. The orientation of the billets is transverse to their
displacement direction. The billets are placed one after
another without any gap, and moved by means of a
pusher mechanism. They slide over xed skid bars in the
heating zone and a stationary hearth in the soaking
zone.
With reheat furnaces, it is important to note that heat
transfer takes place by all three modes, occurring
simultaneously. At the elevated temperatures encoun-
tered in these furnaces, radiation is the dominant mode
of heat transfer to the billets.
1
Radiation heat transfer
depends on the surface temperature of the billet, furnace
roof temperature, participating gas in the furnace, and
the physical properties of the billet and roof material.
Given the complex geometry of the furnace, roof
temperature variation along the furnace length, gas
properties, and other complexities, an analytical solu-
tion in not feasible, and hence computational modelling
is required.
A number of methods have been used in the past for
modelling a reheat furnace. Ramamurthy et al.
2
devel-
oped a system model of an indirectly red continuous
furnace to predict fuel consumption. The net radiation
exchange was calculated using the radiosity method,
assuming that the gases in the furnace were non-
participating. Conduction heat transfer in the load was
assumed to be one dimensional. Tucker and Lorton
3
used the zonal method
4
for absorbing, emitting and non-
scattering homogeneous gas, to predict radiative heat
transfer in a reheating furnace. They investigated the
effects of non-grey combustion products, but did not,
however, accurately couple the temperature distribution
in the load and refractories with heat transfer from the
combustion gases. Chapman et al.
5
developed a math-
ematical system model for direct red continuous reheat
furnaces. The convective heat transfer rate to the load
and refractory surfaces was calculated using existing
correlations. Radiative heat exchange within the furnace
was calculated using the zonal method. Barr
6
developed
an approximate procedure suited for online temperature
control of a pusher type furnace. A long furnace
assumption was made and temperature distribution in
the longitudinal section of each billet was found.
Conduction heat transfer was solved using an implicit
nite difference method and the radiation heat transfer
was calculated using the zonal method. Altschuler et al.
7
developed both ofine and online models of the pusher
type furnace. The problem was divided into the load
problem and the radiation problem for the purpose of
analysis. The zonal method was used to calculate the
radiation heat transfer and a nite volume approach was
used to calculate the conduction heat transfer in the
load.
The present paper aims at applying a nite volume
method (FVM) based numerical procedure for model-
ling the transient and steady state heat transfer in a
reheat furnace. The method solves for the overall heat
transfer by modelling radiation heat transfer in the outer
domain (furnace chamber) and conduction in the inner
domain (billet), while accounting for convective heat
transfer by the use of a correlation. The work mainly
involves application of the FVM to accurately model
radiation heat transfer in a reheat furnace, since a major
part of the heat transfer to the billets in the furnace
chamber is due to radiation from the roof and
1 (a) Pusher type furnace; (b) billet positioning within the furnace
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
152 Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
combustion gases. The present method is fairly exible
and can incorporate several features such as participat-
ing non-grey medium, specular and diffuse reection by
the furnace surfaces and complex furnace geometry.
Heat transfer model of the furnace
The equations governing the heat transfer in the reheat
furnace, both within the billets and in the furnace
chamber, are presented in this section. The geometrical
features of a typical pusher type furnace are detailed
rst, along with the assumptions used to develop the
mathematical model.
The longitudinal section of the furnace is considered
for analysis. The furnace is fuel red and oriented
indirect heating is considered. Here, the burner ames
are directed on to the roof of the furnace and the load, in
turn, is heated by radiation from the roof. The load is
placed one after another without any gap between the
adjacent load segments and hence it forms a continuous
layer of metal extending the entire length of the furnace.
From a heat transfer point of view, this amounts to
having a single continuous slab, if no contact thermal
resistance is assumed between the adjacent billets. The
billets are considered to be long in the direction
perpendicular to the plane of the paper, and hence only
two dimensional heat transfer is considered in the xy
plane.
First, the conduction heat transfer within the billet is
modelled. Since the billets lined one after another are
considered to be a single slab moving with a velocity u
(as a result of pushing), the Fourier heat conduction for
this case can be written as
rC
p
LT
Lt
~
L
Lx
k
LT
Lx
_ _
z
L
Ly
k
LT
Ly
_ _
{rC
p
u
LT
Lx
(1)
The boundary condition on the load exposed to the
combustion products and the furnace roof is
{k
LT
Lx
surface
j ~q
r
zq
c
(2)
where, q
r
and q
c
are the radiation and convection heat
uxes, respectively.
In the absence of complete gas ow details, full CFD
modelling of convective heat transfer inside the furnace
may not be any more accurate than using standard
convective correlations from literature. In addition, it
has been reported in the literature that radiation is the
dominant mode, accounting for as much as 90%, of heat
transfer to the billet. Hence, small inaccuracies in the
calculation of convective heat ux will not make any
signicant difference in calculating the total heat ux on
the billets. For this reason, an accurate and elaborate
numerical method (the FVM) has been adopted to
calculate radiation heat ux on the billet, whereas, a
standard correlation is used for calculating convective
heat ux.
The convection heat ux can be expressed as
q
c
~h(T{T
?
) (2a)
where h is the convective heat transfer coefcient T is the
surface temperature of the billet at any given location
and T

is the temperature of the gas layer immediately

adjacent to the billet. The convective heat transfer
coefcient h for a surface exposed to the combustion
gases is calculated using the relation given by Lebedev
and Sokolov:
8
h~0
:
175
:
mD
eq
Am
_ _
0
:
75
k
D
eq
_ _
(2b)
where D
eq
is the equivalent diameter, A is the surface
area of the roof, m is the viscosity, and k is the
conductivity of the gas.
The equation for calculating radiative heat ux q
r
is as
follows:
q
r
~k
_
4p
I(r,
^
s)dV{s
c
T
4
_
_
_
_
(2c)
The radiation intensity I is obtained by solving the
equation of transfer for radiation, where scattering,
absorption and emission are all signicant. The equation
of transfer for a grey medium can be written as
dI(r,
^
s)
ds
~{b(r)I(r,
^
s)
..
attenuation
z S(r,
^
s)
..
augmentation
(3)
where
b(r)~ k(r)
..
absorption
z s(r)
..
outscattering
(3a)
S(r,
^
s)~k(r)I
b
(r)
..
emission
z
s(r)
4p
_
W(
^
s
l
,
^
s)I(r,
^
s
l
)dV
l
..
inscattering
(3b)
Equation (3) indicates that radiant intensity I changes as
it passes through a distance ds due to attenuation of
intensity by absorption and outscattering, and augmen-
tation of intensity through gas emission and inscattering
from all directions.
Furnace boundary conditions
To solve the transfer equation (3), the boundary
conditions used are described as follows. The radiation
energy leaving any bounding opaque surface consists of
two components; emission due to the temperature of the
surface and reection of incoming intensities from the
ame or other parts of the furnace. This can be written
as
I(r,
^
s)~e(r)I
b
(r)z
r(r)
p
_
^
s
0 :
^
nv0
I(r,
^
s
0
)
^
s
0
:
^
n

dV
0
(4)
The bounding surface includes the roof and end walls of
the furnace, and the load surface. In equation (4), r is
the reectivity of the surface. Reection from a surface
can be either diffuse or specular, or both, depending on
surface properties. Most real surfaces reect both
diffusely and specularly. Hence, the reectivity is given
by r5r
d
zr
s
for a real surface, where, r
d
and r
s
are the
diffuse and specular reectivities, respectively.
The weighted sum of grey gases approach is used to
model the effect of non-grey gases in the furnace
chamber. In this method, the non-grey gas is replaced
by a number of grey gases, for which the heat transfer
rates are calculated independently. The total heat ux is
then calculated by adding the heat uxes of the grey
gases after multiplying with certain weight factors. Thus
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2 153
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
the equation of transfer becomes
dI
k
ds
~{(k
k
zs)I
k
zk
k
a
k
I
b
z
s
4p
_
WI
k
dV
l
(5)
where
I~

K
k~0
I
k
(5a)
subject to the boundary condition
I
k
~a
k
I
b
, at s~0 (5b)
This expression is the equation of transfer for a grey gas
with constant absorption coefcient k
k
, but with a black
body intensity I
b
for the medium as well as the surfaces
replaced by a weighted intensity a
k
I
b
.
The intensity eld must be determined for k50,1,2,
K, using any standard solution method. The results are
then added to give the total intensity, and hence, the
radiative heat ux K is the number of grey gases
considered. Taylor and Foster
9
have derived three term
and four term mixed grey gas models for non-luminous
combustion products of natural gas and fuel oil. In these
models, k
k
is assumed to be independent of temperature
and the full temperature dependence is carried by the
coefcients a
k
. These are generally expressed as low
order polynomials of T
g
the gas temperature. In the
present work, we assume a linear dependence on T
g
.
Computational model
As shown in the previous section, calculations of the heat
uxes q
r
and q
c
(appearing in equation (2)) require a
knowledge of billet surface temperature distribution at all
times. The billet surface temperature, in turn, needs to be
calculated by solving the conduction heat transfer
equation (1), which requires q
r
and q
c
as boundary
conditions. Clearly, the calculations of the radiation heat
transfer in the furnace chamber and the solution of the
heat conduction equation within the billet are coupled.
Hence, radiation heat transfer in the furnace chamber and
conduction within the billets must be solved iteratively.
To facilitate modelling of radiation and conduction heat
transfer, the solution domain (reheat furnace) is divided
into two parts, an outer domain (furnace chamber) and
an inner domain (billet/slab). Both the radiation and
conduction heat transfer modes, which make up the
major segments, are modelled using nite volume
methods. In addition, the convective heat ux on the
billets is calculated using the billet surface temperature
and the furnace gas temperature. Convection heat
transfer coefcient h is calculated using existing correla-
tions. The two submodels, along with the convection heat
ux calculation, are then appropriately linked for the
overall modelling of the furnace.
To facilitate the solution of equation (3), a discretisa-
tion equation is formulated using the FVM. The FVM
for modelling radiation heat transfer, as detailed in Chai
et al.
10
, is used here. The objective of the FVM is to
calculate the intensity at each node I associated with
each discrete solid angle, as this can conveniently be
used to calculate any other related quantity, such as the
heat ux.
Conduction heat transfer in the billets, as formulated
in equation (1), is solved iteratively according to the
nite volume formulation described in Patankar.
11
Case study
The computational model was rst validated against
numerical results available in the literature. For this
purpose a pusher type furnace with a varying roof
prole, as described in Krivandin and Markov,
12
was
considered. This case is chosen for validation as it
includes many of the furnace parameters considered in
the present model, and it can also be used to test the
capability of the code to handle complex geometry and
multiblock systems. The furnace geometry and the
location of various zones are shown in Fig. 2a. Here,
only the top half is shown as the furnace is symmetric
about the load centreline. The heating is due to radiation
heat transfer from the hot combustion gases to the load.
The pre-heating zone is further divided into subzones
and the gas temperature is taken to be uniform in these
subzones. The temperature prole of the gases in
different zones is shown in Fig. 2b. Using the same data
as in Krivandin and Markov,
12
calculations are per-
formed with the present computational model and the
results are compared with those in the literature. From
Fig. 2c, it can be observed that there is good agreement
between the steady state surface temperature prole
predicted by the present model and that predicted by
Krivandin and Markov
12
using empirical relations.
For the present analysis, typical furnace geometry and
furnace conditions are chosen. The geometry chosen
here is shown in Fig. 1, which closely resembles that
described in Barr.
6
The corresponding roof temperature
prole in different zones is shown in Fig. 3. The gas
temperature is taken to be the same as that of the roof
all along the furnace length but is assumed to be uniform
in the vertical direction. In the soaking zone, the billets
move over a stationary hearth. The hearth is assumed to
be adiabatic and hence there is no heat transfer between
the hearth and the billets. Thermophysical properties of
the billet are taken from Brandes
13
(data for mild steel).
Other data related to this particular furnace are given
in Table 1. In the subsequent discussions, simulations
based on the parameters listed in Table 1 will be referred
to as the base case.
The temperature of the billets all along the furnace
was calculated. Figure 4 shows the temperature varia-
tion of the top, bottom, and centre of the billets along
the furnace length. The top surface temperature, as
observed, increases gradually in the heating zone and
decreases in the soaking zone. The billet centre
temperature is less than the bottom surface temperature
in the heating zone. However, in the soaking zone,
as there is no heating from the bottom, the centre
temperature becomes more than the bottom tempera-
ture. The corresponding difference between T
top
and T
C
keeps increasing as long as there is a corresponding rise
in roof and gas temperatures. As the roof and gas
temperatures stabilise, the billet surface temperature
rises gradually while that of the centre increases rapidly
due to conduction within the billets. As the billets come
near the hot knuckle, the net radiation heat ux
increases, due to the proximity of the knuckle to the
billet surface and also because of the change in the view
factor. This leads to a higher surface temperature,
leading to the sudden jump in temperature seen in
Fig. 4. The temperature difference DT between the billet
centre and surface also increases due to this increase in
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
154 Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
heat ux. As the billets move into the soaking zone, the
surfaces encounter lower roof and gas temperatures, and
the net heat uxes reduce substantially. Hence the billet
surface temperature decreases while the centre tempera-
ture keeps increasing, as shown in Fig. 4. The tempera-
ture distribution within the billet at different sections of
the furnace is shown in Fig. 5.
Since a reheat furnace can be designed for heating
billets of various cross-sections, various materials and a
range of production rates, a parametric study is
conducted by varying these factors. For various
combinations of parameters, the heat ux and tempera-
ture are compared with those of the base case.
Effect of billet cross-sectional area
Simulations were performed for two other billet cross-
sectional areas. The comparison was done with all other
conditions remaining the same. The aim here was only
Table 1 Input data for pusher type furnace
Property Value
Billet
Dimension 0?1360?13610 (m
3
) (w6t6d)
Billet speed 0?002 m s
1
Residence time 2?5 h
Emissivity e
Billet 0?8
Refractory 0?8
Gas
H 0
:
175
:
mDeq
Am
_ _
0
:
75
k
Deq
_ _
W m
2
K
1
K 0?28610
23
6T
0
.
81
W m
1
K
1
m 4?1610
27
T
0
.
666
kg m
1
s
1
m 2?778 kg s
1
2 Validation of present model: (a) furnace geometry described in Krivandin and Markov; (b) gas temperature prole
along the furnace; (c) comparison of the nal top surface temperature prole along the furnace
3 Temperature prole of roof in different zones of
pusher type furnace
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2 155
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
to examine the effect of billet dimension on the
temperature distribution inside the billet. The other
cross-sectional areas considered were 0?10 m60?10 m
and 0?15 m60?15 m. This is analogous to modelling the
temperature distribution for various Biot numbers
associated with the billets.
Figure 6 compares the top surface temperatures of the
billets as it traverses the furnace, and Fig. 7 compares
the corresponding centreline temperatures along the
furnace length. As expected, the rate of increase of
surface temperature reduced with increase in billet
thickness. A similar reduction of temperature rise was
observed for the centre temperature. The nal surface
temperature and centre temperature also reduced with
increase in cross-sectional area.
a entry; b middle of heating zone; c middle of soaking zone; d exit from furnace
5 Temperature contours in billets at different sections in furnace. e
billet
50?8, e
roof
50?8, v50?002 m s
1
(base congura-
tion: axes units are in m and all temperatures in uC
4 Temperature variations of top, bottom, and centre of
billets along furnace
6 Top surface temperature proles along furnace for var-
ious billet cross-sections
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
156 Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
The temperature difference (between billet centre and
surface) increased in the heating zone for all three cases
and reduced in the soaking zone. The exit temperature
difference increased with increase in billet thickness.
Hence, there is more temperature uniformity in thinner
billets for the same furnace conditions and residence
time. The heat ux is higher for thicker billets, as the
surface temperature of the billets at any given section is
less than that of a thinner one. The heat ux on the
bottom side for the 0?1 m thick billet goes to a negative
value as there is heating of the billets from the top. This
leads to a higher bottom surface temperature due to
conduction through the billet thickness. The tempera-
ture of the bottom surface, as a result, becomes so high
that there is a net heat ux out of the billet. For this
reason, thin billets need not be kept in the heating zone
for the same duration as thick billets.
Effect of residence time
The duration of heating for any given billet cross-
sectional area has to be decided beforehand, as the nal
temperature distribution in the billet changes with
residence time in the furnace. This also leads to scope
for optimisation of production rate for any given billet
size. The residence time of the billet was varied and the
effect on the temperature distribution inside the billet
studied. The residence time was changed by changing
the traversing speed of the billets in the furnace. The
effect on a 0?1360?13 m
2
billet was studied for three
different velocities: 0?003 m s
1
, 0?002 m s
1
, and
0?001 m s
1
, while all other conditions remained the
same. This amounted to having residence times of
6000 s, 9000 s and 18 000 s, respectively.
Figure 8 compares the top surface temperature
distribution along the furnace for these cases. As can
be observed, the surface temperature increased rapidly
in the initial portion of the furnace for lower billet
speeds. This led to higher temperature difference
between the top and the centre of the billets in the
heating zone, as observed in Fig. 9. But as the billets
moved towards the edge of the heating zone and then
into the soaking zone, this temperature difference
increased sharply for higher billet speeds. This is
because, at high speeds, only the top surfaces of the
billets are heated and there is not enough residence time
for heat diffusion to take place within the billets. The
surface temperature at the exit increased with decrease in
billet speed. The proles in Fig. 10 show that the heat
ux is always high in billets with high velocities as the
time for heating is less and hence, the surface
temperature is correspondingly lower.
Effect of load emissivity
The effect of change in emissivity of the load was studied
with two other emissivity values: e
L
50
.
5 and e
L
50?3.
Figure 11 shows the variation of load surface tempera-
ture with load emissivity. The remaining furnace
parameters correspond to the base furnace congura-
tion. As e
L
increases, large amounts of radiant energy
are absorbed at the load surface, resulting in higher load
surface temperatures. The load is cold relative to the
temperature of the gas and that of the roof. With
increase in emissivity, the load surface temperature
rapidly approaches the temperature of the gas and that
of the roof, as shown in Fig. 9. It can be observed that
7 Billet centreline temperature prole along furnace for
various billet cross-sections
8 Top surface temperature prole along the furnace for
various traverse speeds
9 Difference between the top surface and centre tem-
peratures along the furnace for various billet traverse
speeds
10 Total heat ux on the top and bottom surfaces for
various billet traverse speeds
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2 157
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

b
y

M
a
n
e
y

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

(
c
)

I
O
M

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
t
d
the temperature difference is less at exit for higher e
L
.
Near the exit, since the load temperature is close to the
temperature of the gas and roof, the heat transfer rate is
low. This makes the temperature prole atten out. For
low emissivities, the load absorbs less energy at the
entrance. At the exit of the furnace, since the load
surface temperature is not as high as it was for the case
of high emissivity, the heat transfer rates from the hot
gases and from the roof are higher.
Conclusions
A computational method to model a pusher type reheat
furnace in a detailed manner has been presented in this
paper. Procedures based on nite volume methods were
used to model conduction heat transfer in the billets and
radiation heat transfer in the furnace chamber.
Combustion gas in the furnace chamber is modelled as
non-grey by using the weighted sum of grey gas model.
A parametric investigation was carried out involving the
various parameters affecting the heat transfer. It was
found that load emissivity plays an important role in the
overall heat transfer in the furnace. With increase in
billet emissivity, the nal average temperature of the
billets increases and better temperature uniformity is
achieved. Hence, this property (emissivity) must be
accurately determined before modelling the radiation
heat transfer in a reheat furnace. It was also observed
that there is an optimum residence time in a furnace for
any billet with a given cross-sectional dimension. Very
long residence time decreases the temperature difference
between the centre and surface of the billet and may lead
to lower thermal stresses in the heating zone. With
increase in the billet cross-sectional area, both nal
surface temperature and centre temperature reduce.
References
1. A. N. Minaev, S. I. Reshetnyak and I. G. Butenko: Steel USSR,
1983, 13, 417418.
2. H. Ramamurthy, S. Ramadhyani and R. Viskanta: Proc. 3rd
ASME/JSME Thermal Engineering Joint Conference, 1991, 205
215.
3. R. J. Tucker and R. Lorton: Proc. Inst. Chem. Eng., 1983, 2, 1035
1046.
4. H. C. Hottel and E. S. Cohen: J. Am. Inst. Chem. Eng., 1958, 4, 3.
5. K. S. Chapman, S. Ramadhyani and R. Viskanta: Metall. Trans. B,
1991, 22B, 513521.
6. P. V. Barr: Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 1995, 26B, 851869.
7. E. Altschuler, P. Marino and A. Pignotti: Proc. 4th ISHMT/ASME
Heat and Mass Transfer Conf., Pune, India, January 2000, 3747.
8. V. I. Lebedev and V. A. Sokolov: Glass Ceram., 1976, 33, 352354.
9. P. B. Taylor and P. J. Foster: Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 1974, 17,
15911605.
10. J. C. Chai, H. S. Lee and S. V. Patankar: AIAA J. Thermophys.
Heat Transfer, 1994, 8, 419425.
11. S. V. Patankar: Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow, 41; 1980,
Washington, DC, Hemisphere.
12. Krivandin, V. A. and Markov, B. L.: Metallurgical furnaces;
1980, Moscow, Mir Publishers.
13. E. A. Brandes: Smithells metals reference book, 1983, London,
Butterworth and Co.
11 Comparison of billet top surface and centre tempera-
tures for various values of load emissivity (eps)
Harish and Dutta Heat transfer analysis of pusher type reheat furnace
158 Ironmaking and Steelmaking 2005 VOL 32 NO 2