TEAM 3

Index
1. Our Take on the Problem Statement
2. Abstract
3. Global Survey
4. Average Throughput Calculations
5. Scoring and Process Selection
6. Our Solution
7. Process Flow Diagram
8. Design of Lab-Scale Facility
9. Feasibility
10. Annexures
11. References

Our Take on the Problem Statement

From the Problem Statement provided, we understand that the primary issue of a steel
plant in Eastern India is the increase of Quinoline Insoluble (Q.I.) content in the Clarified
Coal Tar, obtained after processing the coke oven gas in the by-product section of the plant.
However, it has been noted that the cause of the increase in Q.I. content could not be
attributed to a single entity of the by-product section of said steel plant. We believe that the
cause of increase in the Q.I. content might be due to a possible change in coal charge fed into
the coke battery. However, one cannot be certain if that is the reason and hence, we proceed
to work on the solution without making any assumptions as to what is causing the increase in
Q.I. content.
We also understand from the Problem Statement, that a limited amount of Q.I. content
is desirable as it is believed that a small amount of Q.I. content enhances binding ability of
the tar pitch which aids in the manufacture of electrodes. It is also stated that excessive Q.I.
content (>9% w/w) is undesirable.
The Problem Statement also suggests some conventional procedures that are often
used to remove Q.I. particles viz. Electro-Coagulation, Demulsification and Centrifugation.
The problem statement encourages us to either use these techniques or look beyond these
processes while developing a solution of the problem.
The problem statement states the classification of Q.I. into primary Q.I. and tertiary
Q.I. The definition of primary Q.I. has been provided while the definition of Tertiary Q.I. was
not mentioned. It was mentioned that tertiary Q.I. caused high ash content and needed to be
removed. The problem statement also mentions that the amount of primary Q.I. needs to be 79% for the production of carbon electrodes and hence, a need for enhancement of primary
Q.I. content. However, it is of prime importance to mention here that the enhancement
of primary Q.I.s will most probably be done in the electrode processing industry during
the production of coal tar pitch and not in the steel plant by-products section.
Thus, following the problem statement, we aimed at making changes in the current
set-up to ensure that the Q.I. content in the saleable tar was around 5%.
Finally, the key takeaways from the problem statement are that it demands us to fulfil
the following:
i. Suggest changes to the current by-products section to reduce the Q.I. to around 5%.
ii. Focus more on the removal of tertiary Q.I.s rather than primary Q.I.s.
iii. Survey the procedures used worldwide to reduce Q.I.s in coal tar.
iv.
Choose the best procedures to use for the removal of Q.I.s in this case.
v. Design the new equipment required for the solution, if any.
vi.
Design a lab-scale set-up to determine the efficiency of Q.I. removal from the method
suggested by us in this solution.

Abstract
As the industrial world works its way towards excellence, the focus on competitive
advantage has increased now more than ever. Every industry aims to provide its customers
with something that gives it a comparative edge over its competitors. Similar is the case in
the problem statement, wherein the Steel Plant hopes to regain its competitive advantage of
providing high quality coal tar with low ash forming solid materials, known as Quinoline
Insolubles or Q.I.s.
In our attempt to solve the challenge faced by the industry, we have worked hard,
scanning through tons of patents, amounting to an uncountable number of pages. Research
papers on separation techniques of Q.I.s in coal tar, methods of increasing efficiency of
Electrostatic Precipitators, methods for increasing the efficiency of Decanter Centrifuges
were all studied upon. Countless methods on solvent extraction, cyclone separation,
dehydration and demulsification were thoroughly gone through and the most common, most
innovative and most feasible solutions selected to be represented in this literature for the
Global Survey of Q.I. reduction techniques.
Modified Cross-Flow Circulating Filtration was used in Japan. Hydrocyclones and
Swirl Tubes were used to affect separation in China. Patents under corporations of the United
States of America, Canada, Russia and Europe all contained varying techniques of solvent
extraction of Q.I.s in the form of -resins.
In our solution to this problem, we suggested a minor improvement in the decanter
centrifuge to avoid abrasion of the centrifuge wall, causing unnecessary pressure drop, thus
decreasing the separation efficiency of the said equipment. Addition of a modified solvent
extraction technique to treat the clarified tar further to remove tertiary Q.I.s while retaining
the useful primary Q.I.s. The economics of the solution was also worked upon and we figured
out that the pay-back time of the newly installed process is less than 3 months. The
laboratory scale model was developed and an Aspen simulation for the same was designed
and run to show the effectiveness of removal of Q.I.s from tar samples taken from the byproduct plant.

Global Survey
Before we proceed to conduct the global survey of Q.I. reduction, we need to
understand the constituents of Q.I. material. E. O. Ohsol et al.[1] states that Q.I.s are materials
that are the insoluble residue left after extraction of the coal tar or pitch with a large excess of
Quinoline at 80OC. and comprises primarily coal dust, breeze, inorganic matter, graphitic
carbon, amorphous carbon and organic high polymers and macromolecules.
Therefore, we have worked to include processes which not only remove Q.I. from the
coal tar, but also focussed on de-ashing methods for Coal Tar so that ash-forming tertiary
Q.I.s are handled. Of the many processes surveyed, some worth mentioning are:
1. Removal of Quinolone Insolubles and Ash using Electrostatic Fields
In this method described by Q. Cao et al, [2] Q.I. and ash can be effectively
removed on applying an electrostatic field of 2.25x 10^5 V/m on an oil dissolved
mixture of coal tar. This method of treatment has a low energy consumption
(1/12th of that of centrifugal methods) and completely strips coal tar of Q.I.
(primary and tertiary). While this may be suitable for the production of needle
coke and carbon fibres, primary Q.I. is desired for binder coke production which
is the primary drawback. High labour intensive tasks such as fine screening and
filtering at 140-200oC and low recovery rates (70%) are additional setbacks to this
method.
2. Solvent Extraction of Q.I. using Benzene
As mentioned in the U.S. Patent document, US3147205 by E. O. Ohsol et al,
Benzene as a solvent dissolves most of the components of coal tar such as toluene,
xylenes, naphthalenes, pyridines, etc. By the application of super-atmospheric
conditions (120-200oC and 35-300 psig), benzene becomes an even better solvent
and dissolves organic macromolecules and some of the Q.I. as well, leaving
behind a residue containing only coke breeze, amorphous carbon and inorganics.
Benzene is then separated from the residue and distilled to leave behind pitch
which valuable for binder pitch production.
3. Removal of Ash Forming Salts using High Pressure CO2[3]
Washing of coal tar with water and compressed CO2 gas promotes the formation
of an aqueous phase containing dissolved salts. These salts are highly undesirable
in the manufacture of electrodes, since they not only form additional slags but also
increase the consumption of anode. Water containing these salts can be decanted
off to obtain coal tar. The advantage of this method is that once washing is carried
out, all chlorides (NaCl and NH4Cl) and more that 50% of zinc salts (ash forming
constituents) are removed, while valuable primary Q.I.s remain in coal tar. Once
water is depressurized, zinc sulphides precipitate out and water can be recycled.

4. Cross Flow Filtration using Membranes

Referring to a German patent, DE69511045D1[4], a continuous Q.I. containing
liquid tar feed is introduced at higher pressure than the permeate in a series of
cross-flow filter membranes that gives a product having increased Q.I.
concentration and concurrently, a Q.I. free liquid tar product.
Particles larger than the membrane pores do not pass through the membrane and
hence, are rejected. In cross-flow filtration, feed flows parallel to the surface of
membrane creating shear forces that keep this layer thin, while the filter cake does
not continuously accumulate with time and the permeation flux reaches a
substantially constant value. Chemical stability of the membrane helps ceramic
membranes to be resistant to a wide range of organics and thermal stability helps
in undiluted tar operation (high temperature operation i.e., >80 C.) which is
required to reduce the viscosity of a tar to attain practical filtration.
5. Viscosity Modification to Enhance Solid Separation in Decanting Centrifuge
As the schematic provided by the Steel Company indicates the presence of a
decanting centrifuge, we worked to figure out ways to enhance the separation of
dense ash particles from the tar phase. Otto Houwens patent on the Method for
calculating the turbulence factor for decanter centrifuge [5] suggests that a low
viscous fluid helps in the easy separation of solids from liquids in a centrifuge.
Viscosity modification techniques of tars comprise of heating a stream of gas and
a stream of tar and then mixing them before passing the mixture through an
orifice. The mixture is introduced in a reaction chamber where fine droplets of oil
interact with a turbulent gas stream, producing a low viscosity fluid. This fluid
when passed through the decanting centrifuge causes easy separation of ash and
mineral particles, thus reducing to an extent, Q.I. content in the coal tar.
6. Solvent Extraction using Organic Solvents such as NMP
In this process for the separation of quinoline insoluble components, coal tar pitch
is treated with an organic solvent[6] and the insoluble components are thereafter
separated; the improvement involved comprises the selection of a coal tar pitch
with a softening point, greater than 60 C. Here, we use multiple solvents among
which at least one is a solvent with paraffinic characteristics and one is a tar
solvent, at temperatures between 200 270 C. Mixing of the pitch with solvents
can be done in two ways. In the first case, pitch is mixed directly with the mixture
of solvents. An alternative is to first treat the pitch with the tar solvent at an
elevated temperature and the paraffinic solvent is added later to the affect the
separation of Q.I.-components. This process can selectively remove - resins
(which are mostly Q.I. components) without altering the state of - resins
(content of compounds of soluble in quinoline, insoluble in toluene). By this
method it is possible to obtain a pitch with an essentially uniform share of
resin and very small share of - resins (Q.I.) as desired.

7. Solvent Extraction followed by Centrifugation

A few Brazilian literatures such as the one by A.T. Gontijo et al [7] state that the
dilution of coal tar by coal-tar derived organic oils as solvents followed by
physical separation has been found to be most efficient in the process of removing
Q.I. The process suggests that the coal tar be digested with the said solvent at an
elevated temperature of 90 95oC under constant stirring followed by semicontinuous centrifugation at a high rpm and final distillation at 300oC to remove
any remaining solvent which gave rise to good quality coal tar with reduced Q.I.
content. This process is particularly efficient considering the fact that Q.I. matter
removable using both chemical and physical techniques can be removed.
8. Process of de-ashing coal using multiple centrifuges
Extraordinarily high solid and high ash coal tar are subjected to centrifugation at
very high G forces to reduce ash, Q.I. and other solids levels to produce a coal tar
suited for use in the production of coal tar pitch[8].
The process includes subjecting ash-containing initial coal tar to multiple
centrifugation. A first centrifuge of low G force provides an intermediate tar. It is
then subjected to a solids-ejecting, disk-stack centrifuge at a centrifugal force of
about 5000 G's. The first fraction is recovered from the centrifuge which provide a
finished coal tar with the desired characteristics.
Additional centrifuges can also be used depending upon the quality of coal tar
used.
9. Treatment of Coal Tar using Surfactants
Samuel Cukiers patent, US4395326[9] suggests that water and Q.I. in coal tar are
believed to be associated with each other to form the dispersed phase of a stable
emulsion. Therefore, the use of a surfactant derived from a long chain alkyl group,
mixed with coal tar is employed to promote the separation of the aqueous phase
from tar, carrying along with it Q.I. particles. This separation can be achieved by
allowing the mixture to settle down by means of a decanter, after which a portion
of the water is bled off. Thus, fresh surfactant must be added to replenish its
concentration before being returned for treatment.

Average Throughput Calculations

Since it was mentioned in the Problem Statement that the steel plant was situated in
the eastern part of India, we adopted the SAIL Steel plant of Rourkela and all the calculations
and designs following this section in the report are based on the Rourkela Steel Plant.
The capacity of Rourkela Steel Plants Coking unit is 3500 T/day [10]. Following the
coke flow diagram given in the problem statement, we end up with a coal tar throughput of
58.5 T/day.

Fig 1. Coke Flow Chart and Distribution

Hence, all our calculations are based on a capacity of 58.5 tonnes per day. Although
this step is not necessary, we find it compelling to include it in the report as it provides the
robustness required for the selection of the best process for the separation of Q.I. from coal
tar. The process selection can very easily be done without the need to quantify the capacity
and throughput of the equipment being used. However, we felt it would provide better
understanding of the feasibility and economic aspects of the selection criteria if a tangible
quantity is put forward rather than generalizing the solution.
Having this in mind, we can now proceed towards the criteria for the selection of the
best process for Q.I. reduction from coal tar. Assuming that the cost per kg of the tar is
around Rs. 30, the revenue generated per day by the sale of coal tar is close to Rs. 18,00,000.
Keeping a margin of around 50%, the average operating cost must not exceed Rs. 9,00,000
per day which gives us a good amount of freedom to select the best process among the
processes shortlisted in the report.
As we proceed to figure out the best procedure for the removal of Q.I. we can have a
good idea as to how much is an acceptable operating cost that can be afforded, given a
process is finalized.

Scoring and Process Selection

The following criteria were considered while scoring the various processes so as to
select the best process. However, some criteria were more important than others. For
example, a process with a huge capital cost but small operating costs is always better than a
process with a small capital cost and a large operating cost. Hence, weightages were allotted
to the different criteria and a final scoring was done. The criteria along with its weightages
are as follows:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.

Capital Cost,
Operating Cost,
Efficiency,
Scalability and Capacity,
Power Requirement,
Waste Generated,
Operating Time,
Product Specification,
Space Requirement,

weightage of 1
weightage of 2
weightage of 1
weightage of 1
weightage of 1
weightage of 0.5
weightage of 2
weightage of 2
weightage of 0.5

Each process was evaluated with respect to these criteria and relatively graded
accordingly. The final score was calculated by multiplying the score in each criterion with its
weightage and summing them together.

Table 1. Scoring of processes.

As can be seen above, the scoring for High Pressure CO2 separation as well as Benzene
solvent extraction have high scores compared to others. Therefore, our solution will focus
majorly on these two processes to remove Q.I. content from tar.

Our Solution
The solution to this problem statement requires addressing the following issues:
1. Reduction of Tertiary Q.I. solids which include mineral matter and coal solids,
without significantly affecting the desired Primary Q.I. solids.
2. Abrasion of equipment caused by the presence of Tertiary Q.I. solids, reducing capital
expenditures down the line.
For this, we propose a combination of 2 methods discovered in the global survey of Q.I.
reduction processes:
1. Ash removal using Water and Supercritical CO2
Given that tertiary Q.I. solids are a major concern due to their abrasive nature
(damaging equipment downstream), the first step involves the washing of coal tar
with water and compressed CO2. This is achieved by inserting coal tar and water into
a high pressure vessel along with the pumping of compressed CO2 (at 100 bar).
A residence time of 3 hours not only results in the removal of ash constituents like
zinc sulphides and oxides but the presence of water also dissolves salts like
ammonium chloride and sodium chloride which are known to corrode distillation
columns. The mixture water and CO2 is then depressurized and condensed to recover
water, which is sent to a treatment facility, and CO2 both of which can be recycled.
The coal tar obtained from the bottom now has reduced quantity of ash.
2. Solvent Extraction of Coal Tar using Benzene
Now that we have a coal tar devoid of most of the tertiary Q.I. solids, it is safe to
perform an extraction of desirable coal tar constituents. Under normal atmospheric
conditions, benzene dissolves most of the constituents of coal tar, however, upon
raising this pressure to about 300 psig, benzene dissolves most organic
macromolecules and some quinolone insoluble as well.
This operation, performed in an extraction column under pressure leaves behind a
residue that consists of coke breeze, graphitic and amorphous carbon and inorganics.
After the separation of this high density residue in a decanter, benzene is distilled off
from the extract to recover a high value coal tar.
This series of steps ensures that the coal tar obtained is completely ash free and is suitable for
the manufacture of carbon electrodes.
Although the above procedure ensures that equipment downstream is not eroded by solids,
precautionary measures can be employed to protect high value equipment, namely, the
decanter centrifuge. The decanter centrifuge scroll is most vulnerable and requires the use of
abrasion protection materials which can be melted and fused directly such as a nickel or
cobalt alloy using an oxy-acetylene gas torch in a manner similar to welding.
[Refer Annexure 2 for 3D Rendering]

Process Flow Diagram

Laboratory Scale Investigation Facility

The laboratory scale investigation facility designed in this report can be used to
investigate not only the reduction in Q.I. content of the tar, but also the reduction of ash
content after the preliminary process of hi-pressure CO2 extraction.
In the laboratory scale facility, we used an autoclave as a suitable alternative for a
pressure vessel since they are designed to handle very high pressures of up to 3000 psi (g).
However, the more expensive pressure vessel can be used as well. The decanter centrifuge
has been modelled using a laboratory centrifuge and decanters have been replaced by
manually decanting the upper phase by tilting and pouring out the top phase. The final
filtration method has been modelled by use of filter papers in funnel arrangement. The
extraction column in the benzene extraction method was again replaced by an autoclave since
it satisfied all requirements of a laboratory scale extraction unit.
The ash content was evaluated using European Standard DIN51719 wherein 1 gram
of the sample is placed in a crucible and heated at a rate of 5K/min till the temperature
reached 106oC under nitrogen atmosphere. The sample is then heated at a rate of 5 K/min till
the temperature reaches 550oC under oxygen atmosphere. The sample is heated for 30-60
minutes at the same temperature. The remaining content is weighed and reported as the ash
content.
The Q.I. content was evaluated using ASTM D4746[12] wherein the tar is dissolved in
quinoline at 75oC and filtered through a porcelain filtration crucible with a medium porosity
bottom at a pressure in the range of 10-30 psi(g) using nitrogen. The sample is washed in hot
quinoline until clear, followed by acetone and dried. The portion of the tar remaining in the
crucible is defined as Q.I. fraction.
The procedure used to simulate the process is as follows. The following apparatus will
be required for setting up the investigation facility.
i. Stirrable Autoclave
ii. Compressor
iii. Centrifuge
iv.
Beaker
v. Liebigs Condenser
vi.
Round bottomed Flask
vii.
Electrical Heater
viii. Centrifuge tubes
ix. Water Pump
x. CO2 Cylinders
xi. Digital Weighing Scale

Procedure:

A 0.5 kg sample of clarified tar from the decanter centrifuge is taken for investigation.
The sample is divided into two parts. 400g of the sample is taken aside and the
remaining sample is used to evaluate its Q.I. content and ash content.
o Let them be Q1 and A1 respectively.
This sample is used to evaluate the initial Q.I. content and ash content.
400 g of the sample is then mixed with 500g of water in a beaker and placed in an
autoclave.
The autoclave is heated to 150oC and pressurized to 100 bar using CO2 and stirred for 3
hours.
The autoclave is depressurized by venting off the CO2 and the phases are separated
using a laboratory centrifuge at 4000 rpm for 10 minutes and the top phase is drawn off.
The bottom layer is removed from the tube and 50g of this sample is separated and the
ash content is measured.
o Let the ash content be A2.
The 350g fraction is taken in a fresh beaker and mixed with 1.2 parts (420g) of benzene.
The beaker is again placed in the autoclave and heated to 158oC while asserting a
pressure of 80 psi(g) for 2 hours.
The beaker is then taken out and either centrifuged or filtered using a filter paper. The
cake of the filtration process or the palette from the centrifuge tube is then analysed for
Q.I. content.
o Let the Q.I. content be Q2.
The Q1 and A1 values are compared with Q2 and A2 respectively to judge the
effectiveness of the process.

Effectiveness of the process can then be defined as:

=

12
1

100 %

The Q.I. content can be measured as:

Qi =
Where:

Wsc
Wc
Wf

=
=
=

100 %

Weight of Sample + Crucible

Weight of Empty Crucible
Final Weight of Crucible

The ash content can be measured as:

Ai =
Where:

Wf
Wi

=
=

100 %

Final Weight of sample

Initial Weight of sample

Feasibility
Any practical solution to a problem has to be feasible. We believe that the most
important criteria to evaluate a solution to a problem is its feasibility.
The feasibility study for this solution will focus on 5 main areas: Technical,
Economic, Legal, Operational and Scheduling.
Technical Feasibility:
To establish the technical feasibility of our solution, we need to examine the new
equipment which would be commissioned. We would also examine the human
resource, expertise and other possible factors that could affect the successful
implementation of the solution.
In our case, the new equipment being commissioned are: i) Pressure Vessel, ii)
Extraction Column, iii) Decanter, iv) Distillation Column.
Calculations mentioned in Annexure -3 state that all the raw materials required have
a ready market and are easily available in the market. For instance, our pressure
vessel, extraction column and distillation column need to be fabricated using Carbon
Steel Sheets of 61mm, 28mm and 10mm thickness, all of which are available with
local and international suppliers and can be procured within a timeframe of 4 weeks.
The vessels themselves can be manufactured by fabricators all over India.
The newly commissioned equipment requires the recruitment of specialist personnel
to ensure smooth operation. Alternatively, the controls systems can be automated
and operated remotely.
Economic Feasibility:
As mentioned in the problem statement, there is a risk of huge losses if the Q.I.
content in the tar is above 9%. The capital cost of our proposed solution is around
Rs. 20,00,000. As estimated earlier in the report, the revenue by tar sales is close to
Rs. 18,00,000 per day. Provided that the changes suggested by us improve the
marketability of our product and results in a modest 5% increase in selling price,
that would amount to an increase of Rs. 90,000/day in revenue due to sale of tar.
With the daily operating cost coming to Rs. 56,500/day and assuming an interest
rate of 8%, the breakeven time is around 2 months from the date of
commissioning. Refer Annexure -1 for detailed break-up.
Moreover, the proposed solution aims at removing the tertiary Q.I, hence reducing
the maintenance cost by reducing damage to all other equipment due the abrasive
property of tertiary Q.I.s.

Legal Feasibility:
An area of around 1000 sq.ft would be required for which no additional land would
be acquired. Therefore, there are no possible conflicts with respect to land
ownership.
Water treatment plant is present in the steel plant and CPCB guidelines must be
met.
Operational Feasibility:
Although there are better solvent extraction methods for the removal of Q.I.s from
coal tar, they are mostly not feasible for the reason that they remove all the primary
and secondary Q.I.s which are desirable. David R Balls experiment[11] suggests
that blending of tar pitches is undesirable and usually results in inferior quality of
pitches.
In our proposed solution, we intend to use Carbon-dioxide gas which can be
procured from the coke over gas which contains around 2% of CO2 which amounts
to 1,638 Nm3/day which suffices our requirements. Moreover, our procedure
ensures that the primary Q.I.s are not affected, which makes the coal tar desirable.
The solvent used in our solution, Benzene is relatively cheaper and easily
recoverable compared to the solvent mentioned in the Problem Statement N-methyl
2-Pyrrolidone.
Schedule Feasibility:
The time required for the completion of this project would be two and a half
months. The breakeven time is around 60 days. Hence, there will be no major setbacks and thus, the project would be feasible.
Having discussed all the facets of the feasibility study, we can now conclude that the
suggested solution to the problem statement is feasible in all aspects and one of the most
innovative and efficient method of removing Q.I.s from coal tar.

ANNEXURE

Annexure 1
Estimation of Capital Cost & Operating Cost
Capital Cost:
Item
Gas Compressor

Specification
Power Requirement = 22 KW
Capacity = 25 Nm3/hr

Price (INR)
1000000

CO2 Extraction Column

O.D. = 2.026 m
I.D = 1.9 m
Thickness = 63 mm
Height = 4.1 m

500000

Benzene Extraction Column

O.D = 1.756 m
I.D = 1.7 m
Thickness = 28 mm
Height = 3.5 m

170000

Distillation Column

O.D. = 1.52 m
I.D. = 1.5 m
Thickness = 10 mm
Height = 8 m
No. of Trays
Tray Spacing

60000

Decanter (1 Quantity)

Capacity = 2-35 Nm3/hr

Power Requirement = 20 KW
Dimensions
(L*W*H)=1850*1250*1750

150000

Piping and Instrumentation

Total

100000
19,80,000

Operating Cost per day:

Utility
1. Electricity
2. Water
3. Benzene make up
4. CO2 Conditioning
5. Labour
Total

Quantity
70 kW
10 TPD
0.5 TPD

Price
10000
500
26000
10000
10000
56,500

Annexure 2
3D Rendering of Proposed Scheme

Fig: Schematic depicting Pressure vessel, Extraction column, Distillation Column,

Condenser and Decanter

Annexure 3
Process Equipment Design
Calculation of shell thickness
From WEBSITE FOR STATIC EQUIPMENT CALCULATION link and the book
Introduction to Chemical Equipment Design, B. C. Bhattacharyya we have calculated:
Shell & Hemispherical Head for CO2 Extraction Column:
Carbon Steel
63mm thickness
1.9m I.D
Shell & Hemispherical Head for Distillation Column:
Carbon Steel
10mm thickness
1.5m I.D
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

No. of lugs = 4
Load on lug = 9651 kg
Lug width = 150 mm
End radius = 150 mm
Hole size = 30 mm
Lug thickness = 66 mm
Material = GR 300 ; Mild Steel AS3678
Continuous weld size = 10 mm

For given temperature, pressure and flow rate conditions.

References
[1] E. O. Ohsol et al,"Upgrading Coal Tar." U.S. Patent 3,147,205, issued Sept. 1, 1964.
[2] C. Qao et al, "A novel method for removing quinoline insolubles and ash in coal tar pitch
using electrostatic fields, 2011.
[3] H. Beneke et al, Novel Method for Extraction of Salts from Coal Tar and Pitches. U.S.
Patent 4,871,443A, issued Oct. 3, 1989.
[4] German Patent number DE 69511045 D1, Durchgehendes Verfahren, zur Quinoline
unlsbaren Konzentrationserhhung eines flssigen Teers, whrend der gleichzeitigen
Herstellung eines Quinoline unlsbaren freien Teers.
[5] O. Houwen, Method for calculating the turbulence factor for a decanting centrifuge.
U.S. Patent 20060003881 A1, issued Jan. 5, 2006.
[6] J. Stadelhofer et al, Process for the separation of quinoline insoluble components from
coal tar pitch. U.S. Patent 4259171A, issued Mar. 31, 1981.
[7] A.T. Gontijo et al. The study of Q.I. extraction from coal tar pitch using coal tar derived
oils as solvent in centrifugal process
[8] E. S. Griggs, Process for De-ashing coal tar, U.S. Patent 5534137A, issued July 9, 1996
[9] S. Cukier, Treatment of Coal Tar Emulsions, U.S. Patent 4395326A, issued Jul 26,
1983.
[10] Webpage at www.sail.co.in/rourkela-steel-plant/about-rourkela-steel-plant
[11] D. R. Ball, The influence of the type of Quinoline Insolubles on the quality of Coal Tar
binder pitch, Carbon, 16(3), pp-205-209.
[12] ASTM D4746, Standard Test Method for Determination of Quinoline Insolubles (QI) in
Tar and Pitch by Pressure Filtration.