ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9, pp.

1425–1431

Coking Pressure Control by Selective Crushing of High Coking

Pressure Coal

Seiji NOMURA,1) Takashi ARIMA,1) Atsushi DOBASHI2) and Kazuhide DOI3)

1) Nippon Steel Corporation, Environment & Process Technology Center, 20-1, Shintomi, Futtsu, Chiba, 293-8511 Japan.
E-mail: nomura.seiji@nsc.co.jp 2) Nippon Steel Corporation, Kimitsu Works, Kimitsu 1, Kimitsu, Chiba, 299-1141 Japan.
3) Nippon Steel Corporation, Oita Works, Nishinosu 1, Oita, Oita, 870-0992 Japan.
(Received on March 11, 2011; accepted on May 30, 2011)

Controlling coking pressure is one of the most important aspects of the cokemaking process, since
excessive coking pressure increases the force needed for coke cake pushing and in some cases leads to
operational problems such as hard pushes or “stickers,” causing wall damage. Against this backdrop, we
investigated the selective fine crushing of high coking pressure coal as a way to reduce coking pressure.
It was shown on a laboratory scale that the fine crushing of high coking pressure coal increases the per-
meability of the plastic coal layer, which decreases coking pressure (internal gas pressure). Based on the
basic investigation, we tried the fine crushing of high coking pressure coal at commercial cokemaking
plants, and it was confirmed during a long-term commercial-scale experiment that the fine crushing of
high coking pressure coal decreases coking pressure and decreases the maximum power current of coke
pushing. Thus, the selective fine crushing of high coking pressure coal is a promising way to reduce cok-
ing pressure and prolong coke oven life.

KEY WORDS: coking pressure; crushing; plastic layer; permeability; coke pushing.

decrease coking pressure is required in order to reduce coke

1. Introduction
During coal carbonization in a coke oven chamber, the
swelling of molten coal causes a load called “coking pres-
sure” on oven walls. Since excessive coking pressure
increases the force needed for coke cake pushing and in
some cases leads to operational problems such as hard push-
es or “stickers,” causing wall damage, one of the most
important aspects of the cokemaking process is to control
and reduce the coking pressure.1–11) With this in mind,
Nippon Steel has developed dry coal-charging processes for
cokemaking, such as CMC (Coal Moisture Control)12) and
DAPS (Dry-cleaned and Agglomerated Precompaction
System).13,14) With the coal moisture being reduced to 5–
6 mass% using CMC and 2–4 mass% using DAPS, the
advantages of less heat consumption for carbonization,
higher productivity, and better coke quality were gained.
Since a decrease in coal moisture leads to an increase in coal
bulk density in the coke oven chamber, which increases cok-
ing pressure to a great extent, it is quite important to control
the coking pressure during the dry coal charging processes.
We have reported on the coal blending theory to control
coking pressure and produce high-quality coke under high
coal charge bulk density in the dry coal charging process.15)
However, as coke ovens have been deteriorating recently, an
additional method to reduce coking pressure is needed.
Furthermore, since high coking pressure coal consists of
low-volatile-matter coal (high-rank coal), a method to use a
larger amount of high coking pressure coal as well as to
cake pushing force and increase coke yield.
The addition of inert material, such as coke breeze, and
the fine crushing of coal are known as one method to
decrease coking pressure,1) however, the former is not favor-
able since inert addition leads to the deterioration of coke
strength, and high strength coke is demanded for the stable
operation of large blast furnaces. On the other hand, the lat-
ter may improve coke strength,16,17) but the mechanism of
coking pressure decrease caused by fine crushing is unclear.
While, a report18) suggests that a decrease in coking pressure
with the fine crushing of coal observed in a top-charge mov-
able-wall pilot coke oven is caused by a decrease in bulk
density and that the fine crushing of coal increases coking
pressure under the same bulk density. Therefore, the fine
crushing of coal in order to reduce coking pressure has not
been positively used on a commercial scale.
In the current work, firstly we investigated the effect of
the fine crushing of coal on coking pressure under the same
coal charge bulk density through use of a test coke oven.
Then, we developed a method to measure plastic coal layer
permeability, which is considered one of the dominant fac-
tors of coking pressure, and investigated the effect of the
fine crushing of coal on plastic coal layer permeability.
Finally, based on the basic investigations, we tried the fine
crushing of coal in order to reduce coking pressure on a
commercial scale.

1425 © 2011 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9

crushed (crushing after blending). The crushing conditions

2. Laboratory-scale Investigation
for internal gas pressure measurement tests are shown in
2.1. Experiment Table 3. The coal-crushing grain size was controlled by
2.1.1. Measurement of the Internal Gas Pressure in a Test adjusting the rotation speed of the test crushing machine. A
Coke Oven sample of –1.5 mm 100% was prepared by sieving crushed
The properties of the coal used in the laboratory-scale test coal with a 1.5 mm-size screen and by crushing +1.5 mm
and commercial-scale test are shown in Table 1. Coal A, fractions repeatedly. Moreover, in tests 3 and 4, a +1 mm
Coal B, and Coal C are high coking pressure coals, and the fraction of crushed Coal B was used.
maximum internal gas pressure measured in the test coke The prepared coal was then charged at a bulk density of
oven6) was 170 kPa, 370 kPa, and 50 kPa, respectively 850 dry kg/m3 in an electrically heated pilot coke oven
(where each single coal was crushed –3 mm 85% and (420 mm wide, 600 mm long, and 400 mm high15)) and was
charged at a bulk density of 850 kg/m3). carbonized for 18.5 hours under heating conditions equiva-
The blend design for the internal gas pressure measure- lent to the flue temperature of 1 250°C in an actual coke
ment tests are shown in Table 2. In tests 1–4, each single oven. The internal gas pressure was measured at the oven
coal was crushed into a desired grain size and then mixed width center (210 mm from the oven wall), the oven length
(crushing before blending). In tests 5 and 6, coal was mixed center, and 120 mm from the oven sole, using stainless steel
according to a blending ratio, and then the blended coal was tube probes (inner diameter 1 mm and outer diameter
2 mm).6) Previous experiments in our laboratory showed
Table 1. Coal characteristics. that there was a good correlation between the internal gas
pressures measured in this way and the coking pressure
Proximate Gieseler Ruhr Petrographic measured with a movable wall pilot oven.
Analysis Plastometry Dilatometry Analysis
Coal Log 10 (Max. Total Mean Total
Ash (db) VM (db) 2.1.2. Measurement of Plastic Coal Layer Permeability
Fluidity/ Dilatation Vit. Ref. Inerts
(%) (%)
ddpm) (%) (%) (vol.%) In order to investigate the effect of coal particle size on
the plastic coal layer permeability, the permeability was
A 11.3 17.1 1.30 42 1.67 25.9
measured using the apparatus shown in Fig. 1.19,20) A given
B 9.4 18.3 1.26 55 1.61 18.9 amount of a coal sample was charged in a constant volume
C 9.5 19.3 2.33 95 1.52 26.6 cell and carbonized with the expansion of the coal being
D 9.7 21.4 2.07 35 1.39 37.6
restricted. The permeability was then evaluated by measur-
ing the pressure drop caused by forced inert gas flow
E 9.8 21.7 1.21 21 1.35 35.3
through the plastic coal layer.
F 8.8 24.0 2.96 113 1.20 37.1 The reactor tube is made of stainless steel and the dimen-
G 6.7 33.2 4.13 194 0.93 21.9 sion of the space where the coal sample is charged is 10 mm
H 7.4 33.4 4.00 154 0.93 19.4
in diameter and 10 mm in length. In order to keep the coal
I 9.4 35.6 2.09 29 0.77 26.8 Table 3. Crushing conditions for internal gas pressure measure-
J 10.2 36.9 2.65 32 0.70 30.2 ment tests.

K 9.6 35.8 1.39 0 0.69 45.9 Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6
L 7.3 36.3 2.29 40 0.68 26.9 Crushing-blending Blending-crushing
M 8.7 34.9 1.06 5 0.65 24.2 Coal B Coal C Coal B Blended coal
–3 mm 85% –3 mm 85% +1 mm 100% –3 mm 70%
Table 2. Blend design for internal gas pressure measurement tests. –3 mm 95% –3 mm 95% –3 mm 75% –3 mm 80%
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 –3 mm 95% –3 mm 90%
B 25 25 25 25 25 –1.5 mm 100% –1.5 mm 100%
C 50 Other coals (–3 mm 85%)
D 25 25
E 25 25
F 50 25
G 25 25
H 25 25
I 25 25
J 25
K 25
L 25
M 25
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 Fig. 1. Plastic coal permeability test apparatus.

© 2011 ISIJ 1426

 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9

Fig. 2. Particle size distribution of Coals B and C (tests 1–4).

volume constant during carbonization, the expansion of the

coal sample was restricted by sandwiching it between two
wire mesh plates with a 0.15 mm sieve, which were fixed
using inner tubes. Five reactor tubes could be set in an elec-
tric furnace at the same time, and a thermocouple was
placed in the center reactor tube to control the temperature.
After placing the four reactor tubes with the coal sample
into the furnace, the reactors were connected to the gas sup-
ply lines at the bottom and N2 was forced to flow at a con-
stant flow rate of 10 cm3/min (equivalent to a linear velocity
of 2 cm/s), controlled by a mass flow controller. The upper
end of the reactor was open to the atmosphere and connect-
ed to a vent. The sample was heated from room temperature
Fig. 3. Particle size distribution of blended coal (test 5).
to 300°C at 10°C/min and from 300–600°C at 5°C/min.
Changes in pressure with time were measured using a pres-
sure gauge placed between the reactor tube and the mass
flow controller. High coking pressure Coal A and Coal B
(coal particle size –2.8 mm, –1.5 mm, –1.0 mm, –0.6 mm,
–0.3 mm, and –0.15 mm) were used, and the bulk density
was 800 dry kg/m3.

2.2. Results and Discussion

2.2.1. Effect of the Fine Crushing of Coal on Coking Pres-
sure
The particle size distribution of Coal B and Coal C are
shown in Figs. 2 and 3, respectively. The coal was crushed
to a desired level. The relationship between the weight-aver-
age particle size and internal gas pressure is shown in Figs.
4, 5 and 6, with the particle sizes of Coal B or Coal C on
the x-axis in tests 1–4 and that of the blended coal on the x- Fig. 4. Effect of mean particle size of Coals B and C (in tests 1–4)
axis in tests 5 and 6. It is clear that the fine crushing of high and blended coal (in tests 5 and 6) on internal gas pressure.
coking pressure coal decreases internal gas pressure. In
addition, not only the selective fine crushing of high coking
u = –(K/μ )·(ΔP/L)............................ (1)
pressure Coal B and Coal C (crushing before blending, in
tests 1–4) but also the fine crushing of blended coal includ- where u [m/s] is the superficial velocity, K [m2] is the per-
ing Coal B and Coal C (crushing after blending, in tests 5 meability coefficient, μ [Pa·s] is the gas viscosity, L [m] is
and 6) reduces internal gas pressure. the length of the layer, and ΔP [Pa] is the pressure drop. The
permeability, K, can be obtained by assuming μ as has been
2.2.2. Effect of the Fine Crushing of Coal on Plastic Coal reported;19,20) however, here we used ΔP to represent perme-
Layer Permeability ability, since the lower ΔP is, the higher the permeability of
The relationship between superficial velocity and perme- the layer.
ability through a packed bed is described as follows accord- Figure 7 shows the changes in the pressure drop of Coal
ing to Darcy’s law: B during the permeability test (hereinafter referred to as

1427 © 2011 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9
Fig. 5. Effect of –3 mm % of Coals B and C (in tests 1–4) and
blended coal (in tests 5 and 6) on internal gas pressure.
Fig. 6. Effect of –1 mm % of Coals B and C (in tests 1–4) and
blended coal (in tests 5 and 6) on internal gas pressure.
Fig. 7. Changes in pressure drop in permeability test (ΔP) with
temperature.
“ΔP”), with temperature. As temperature increases, ΔP
starts to increase and shows a peak (ΔPmax). Then, it decreas-
es as the temperature approaches the resolidification tem-
perature. The temperature range over which ΔP appears is
nearly equivalent to the plastic temperature range of Coal B
(softening temperature 454°C to resolidification tempera-
ture 507°C in a Gieseler fluidity test), and ΔPmax decreases
as the particle size becomes finer. As shown in Fig. 8, the
fine crushing of high coking pressure Coal A and Coal B
increases the permeability of the plastic coal layer. This
shows that the decrease in internal gas pressure caused by
© 2011 ISIJ
Fig. 8. Effect of coal particle size on maximum pressure drop
(ΔPmax) measured in permeability test rig.
Fig. 9. Coal crushing plant.
the fine crushing of high coking pressure coal could be
ascribed to the increase in the permeability of the plastic
coal layer.
3. Commercial-scale Investigation
3.1. Using Larger Amounts of High Coking Pressure
Coal by Fine Crushing It
Based on the basic investigations, we trialed the fine
crushing of high coking pressure coal at the Kimitsu coke-
making plant (No. 4 and No. 5 coke oven batteries, 184
chambers in total, oven width 430 mm, length 15 700 mm,
and height 6 500 mm). This plant is equipped with four
crushers, and each crusher has eight coal hoppers as shown
in Fig. 9. One crusher was used only for crushing high cok-
ing pressure Coal B, and Coal B was crushed finely by
increasing the rotation speed of the crusher.
Before starting a long-term experiment, a batch test was
carried out where blended coal, including finely crushed
Coal B, was charged in several coke oven chambers. In this
test, the internal gas pressure was measured at the oven
width center below a charging hole by inserting stainless
steel tube probes (inner diameter 1 mm and outer diameter
2 mm) with a “guide” bar through a hole in the oven door.
Firstly, –3 mm of Coal B was increased from 85% to 93%,
and the blending ratio of Coal B was kept constant at 6%.
As shown in Fig. 10, the fine crushing of high coking pres-
sure coal decreased internal gas pressure and decreased the
maximum power current of pushing. Secondly, –3 mm of
1428
 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9

Fig. 10. Effect of particle size of high coking pressure coal B on

internal gas pressure and maximum power current of
pushing in an actual coke oven chamber.

Fig. 11. An increase in the blending ratio of high coking pressure

coal B by the fine crushing of the coal.

Coal B was increased from 85% to 93%, and the blending

ratio of Coal B was increased from 6% to 10%. As shown
in Fig. 11, the fine crushing of high coking pressure coal
allowed for the blending of larger amounts of high coking
pressure coal without any influence on coke pushing perfor-
mance. Fig. 12. Changes in the blending ratio of high coking pressure coal
B, –3 mm % of blend coal, –0.3 mm % of blend coal, the
Based on the batch test result, a long-term test for the fine mass of charged coal in a coke oven chamber, maximum
crushing of high coking pressure coal was carried out in two power current of pushing and DI15015.
coke oven batteries with 184 chambers. The target of the
grain size of high coking pressure Coal B was –3 mm >90%
(the result was –3 mm 93–96%). The working rate of the
coke oven was 125%, the flue temperature at the top was
1 130°C, and the moisture of the charged coal was 4.0%.
The blending ratio of Coal B was increased from 6% to 10%
during the test period, as shown in Fig. 12. In order to main-
tain coke strength (DI15015), as the blending ratio of Coal B
increases, the blending ratio of the coal other than Coal B
was slightly adjusted in such a way that the weighted-
average of the volatile matter (VM), maximum fluidity (log
MF), and total dilatation (TD) was 26.1%, 2.1, and 66%,
respectively. As a result, coke strength (DI15015) was kept
nearly constant, as shown in Fig. 12. As shown in Fig. 13,
–3 mm% of the blended coal increased by increasing the Fig. 13. Relationship between the blending ratio of high coking
pressure coal B and –3 mm % of blend coal.
blending ratio of the finely crushed Coal B, while –0.3 mm%
of the blended coal increased by increasing –3 mm% of the
blended coal, as shown in Fig. 14. In addition, there had blended coal, as shown in Fig. 15. Moreover, there had been
been a concern that fine crushing might lead to a decrease another concern that fine crushing might lead to an increase
in charged coal bulk density; however, the amount of in carbon deposits on the coke oven chamber walls21) and
charged coal showed little change against –3 mm% of the thus would worsen coke pushing performance; however, the

1429 © 2011 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9
Fig. 14. Relationship between –3 mm % and –0.3 mm % of blend
coal.
Fig. 15. Relationship between –3 mm % of blend coal and the mass
of charged coal in a coke oven chamber.
Fig. 16. Relationship between the blending ratio of high coking
pressure coal B and maximum power current of pushing.
maximum power current of the pushing showed little
change against the blending ratio of Coal B, as shown in
Fig. 16. As described above, it was confirmed during the
long-term commercial-scale experiment that the fine crush-
ing of high coking pressure coal allows for the blending of
larger amounts of high coking pressure coal without any
influence on coke pushing performance.
3.2. Decreasing the Maximum Power Current of Coke
Pushing by Fine Crushing High Coking Pressure
Coal
Furthermore, we tried the fine crushing of high coking
pressure coal at the Oita cokemaking plant (No. 1 and No.
© 2011 ISIJ
Fig. 17. Changes in –3 mm % of coal A, –0.3 mm % of coal A, the
mass of charged coal in a coke oven chamber, maximum
power current of pushing and DI.
2 coke oven batteries, 156 chambers in total, oven width
440 mm, length 15 800 mm, and height 5 925 mm). This
plant is equipped with three crushers, and each crusher has
six coal hoppers. One crusher was used only for crushing
high coking pressure Coal A, and Coal A was crushed finely
by increasing the rotation speed of the crusher. The working
rate of the coke oven was 121%, the flue temperature at the
top was 1 145°C, and the moisture of the charged coal was
4.5%. The blending ratio of Coal A was kept constant at 4%
during the test period. The grain size of high coking pressure
Coal A was changed from –3 mm 82% to –3 mm 96% step-
by-step, as shown in Fig. 17. The blend composition was
kept nearly the same during the test period, and the weight-
ed-average of volatile matter (VM), maximum fluidity (log
MF), and total dilatation (TD) were 27.2%, 1.8, and 41%,
respectively. As shown in Fig. 18, the fine crushing of Coal
A increased –0.3 mm% of Coal A. Further, the amount of
charged coal showed little change against –3 mm% of Coal
A, as shown in Fig. 19. As shown in Fig. 20, it was con-
firmed during the long-term commercial-scale experiment
that the fine crushing of high coking pressure coal decreased
the maximum power current of coke pushing.
Despite these results, fine crushing may result in a
decrease in charged coal bulk density, which can lead to a
decrease in productivity and the deterioration of coke
1430
 ISIJ International, Vol. 51 (2011), No. 9
Fig. 18. Relationship between –3 mm % and –0.3 mm % of high
coking pressure coal A.
Fig. 19. Relationship between –3 mm % of high coking pressure
coal A and the mass of charged coal in a coke oven cham-
ber.
Fig. 20. Relationship between –3 mm % of high coking pressure
coal A and maximum power current of pushing.
strength. Further, an increase in fine coal particles caused by
fine crushing may result in an increase in carbon deposition
on coke oven walls, leading to an increase in the maximum
power current of coke pushing, hard pushes, and “stickers.”
It is thus necessary to pay attention to these issues in order
to carry out coking pressure control by the selective crush-
ing of high coking pressure coal on a commercial scale. As
1431
a method to treat an increase in fine particles caused by fine
crushing, the DAPS process13,14) is suitable since fine coal
particles are dry-classified and agglomerated during this
process.
4. Conclusions
In order to control and reduce coking pressure, we inves-
tigated the selective fine crushing of high coking pressure
coal.
(1) The fine crushing of high coking pressure coal
increases the permeability of the plastic coal layer, which
decreases coking pressure (internal gas pressure).
(2) It was confirmed during a long-term commercial-
scale experiment that the fine crushing of high coking pres-
sure coal decreases coking pressure and decreases the
maximum power current of coke pushing.
It was proved both on a laboratory scale and on a com-
mercial scale that the selective fine crushing of high coking
pressure coal is a promising way to reduce coking pressure
and prolong coke oven life.
REFERENCES
1) R. Loison, P. Foch and A. Boyer: Coke Quality and Production,
Butterworth Publications Ltd., London, (1989), 353.
2) J. Tucker and G. Everitt: 2nd Int. Cokemeking Cong., Vol. 2, IOM,
London, (1992), 40.
3) G. C. Soth and C. C. Russell: Trans. AIME, 157 (1944), 281.
4) C. C. Russell, M. Perch and H. B. Smith: AIME Blast Furnace, Coke
Oven and Raw Materials Proc. 12, the American Institute of Mining,
Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, New York, (1953), 197.
5) W. Rohde, D. Habermehl and V. Kolitz: Ironmaking Conf. Proc., 47
(1988), 135.
6) S. Nomura and K. M. Thomas: Fuel, 75 (1996), 801.
7) R. Alvarez, J. J. Pis, M. A. Diez, A. Marzec and S. Czajkowska:
Energy Fuels, 11 (1997), 978.
8) S. Nomura and T. Arima: Fuel, 80 (2001), 1307.
9) J. F. Gransden, M. A. Khan and J. T. Price: Ironmaking Conf. Proc.,
44 (1985), 305.
10) J. F. Gransden, M. A. Khan and J. T. Price: Ironmaking Conf. Proc.,
47 (1988), 155.
11) F. Huhn, F. Strelow and W. Eisenhut: Cokemaking Int., 4 (Special)
(1992), S38.
12) S. Wakuri, M. Ohno, K. Hosokawa, K. Nakagawa, Y. Takanohashi,
T. Ohnishi, K. Kushioka and Y. Konno: Ironmaking Conf. Proc., 45
(1986), 303.
13) Y. Nakashima, S. Mochizuki, S. Ito, K. Nakagawa, K. Nishimoto and
K. Kobayashi: 2nd Int. Cokemeking Cong., Vol. 2, IOM, London,
(1992), 518.
14) S. Tanaka, K. Okanishi, A. Kikuchi and Y. Yamamura: Ironmaking
Conf. Proc., 56 (1997), 139.
15) S. Nomura, T. Arima and K. Kato: Fuel, 83 (2004), 1771.
16) Y. Miura, T. Yamaguchi, T. Nishi and Y. Yone: J. Fuel Soc. Jpn.,
60 (1981), 771.
17) Y. Kubota, S. Nomura, T. Arima and K. Kato: ISIJ Int., 48 (2008),
563.
18) O. P. Brysh and W. E. Ball: Research Bulletin 11, Institute of Gas
Technology, Chicago, (1951).
19) K. Miura and K. Nishioka: Cokemaking Int., 4 (1992), No. 1, 45.
20) M. D. Casal, E. Diaz-Faes, R. Alvarez, M. A. Diez and C. Barriocanal:
Fuel, 85 (2006), 281.
21) T. Nakagawa, T. Suzuki and I. Komaki: Int. Cong. Sci. Technol.
Ironmaking and Ironmaking Conf. Proc., 57 (1998), 1041.
© 2011 ISIJ