ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8, pp.

1115–1127
Review
Comparison of Continuous Strip Casting with Conventional
Technology
Nikolai ZAPUSKALOV

Consulting, 6/29 Halstead st, Coorparoo, Qld 4151, Australia. E-mail: [email protected]
(Receiverd on October 28, 2002; accepted in final form on February 3, 2003 )

Increased competition and the need to decrease steel product prices has combined with other factors
such as growing salaries, increasing cost for electricity and raw materials to apply pressure to both mini and
integrated mills. To compete in the future market and to maintain market share, both mills will need to use
new efficient technologies capable of supplying steel strip products of high quality at low cost. Large invest-
ments in the development of strip casting process by the main world steel produces and plantmakers have
already occurred due to its huge potential to substantially reduce the investment cost of steel strip produc-
tion. Open literature on the continuous casting has been reviewed, with emphasis on strip casting of steel
as new generation of continuous casting technology and has covered the following topics: current trends in
production of steel strip; advantages of strip produced direct from the melt; strip casting process; strip quali-
ty; commercial strip casters and expenditure on research and development of the strip casting process.
KEY WORDS: continuous casting; strip casting; twin-roll casting, steel; near net shape casting; mini mill;
micro mill; review.

strip produced direct from the liquid steel; strip casting

1. Introduction
process; strip quality; commercial strip casters and expen-
The idea of strip casting belongs to H. Bessemer, a well- diture on research and development of the strip casting
known steelmaker who started from simple tests using two process.
hardened rolls and a small nine kilogram-capacity The definition of thin strip in this review is 0.1–5.0 mm
crucible,1) as shown in Fig. 1(a). A little later, in 1865 he thick. The technology of casting thicker strip13–15) as well as
obtained a patent for the strip casting of steel and iron2) as thinner strip (foils) with an “amorphous” and microcrys-
shown in Fig. 1(b). talline structure,16) is not the aim of this review. The review
The first commercial applications of the strip casting does not include a comprehensive review of patents.
process involved the production of small amounts of mate-
rials with relatively simple casting properties such as cast 2. Current Trends in Production of Steel Strip
iron. In 1934 to 1950 in the USSR this technique was suc-
cessfully applied for casting iron sheets intended for roof- Nowadays steel strip is made at two types of mills, differ-
ing.3–5) In 1950 J. Hunter and W. Lauener started to cast ing not only in size but also in production “philosophy”.17)
strips from aluminum and its alloys.6,7) The first type of the mills is the integrated mill with usu-
The thermal-physical properties of steel make the casting ally 3–5 million ton per year production capacity.18) Such
of steel strip a complicated task and large production runs mills are oriented to large consumers demanding high steel
are required to make the process profitable.8) That is why, quality as well as large tonnage. Location of the integrated
despite enormous efforts by researchers, the casting of steel mills is not bound with their consumers geographically. The
strip has only recently become feasible.9–12) technological basis of the integrated mills is the continuous
Literature based on business, scientific and research pub- casting of slab with thickness 200 mm19,20) as shown in
lications on the continuous casting has been reviewed, with Fig. 2. For obtaining strip with thickness of 3–20 mm, the
emphasis on strip casting of steel as new generation of con- slab has to run through a large number of processing steps.
tinuous casting technology and covers the following topics: Numerous operations of heating and rolling can rectify
current trends in production of steel strip; advantages of some defects inherent in the cast structure and produce
high-quality strip. But this production route has high asso-
ciated costs due to the powerful rolling and heating equip-
ment required and the labor intensive nature of the
process.22) This type of mill is profitable if the production
tonnage is several million ton per annum.8,23)
The second type of mill includes the mini-mills with pro-
duction capacity of 0.5–2.0 million ton per annum.18,24)
Such mills are located near the customers, who are not in
need of large tonnage and high steel surface quality re-
quirements. The technological basis of the mini mill is the
continuous casting of a thin slab with a thickness of ap-
Fig. 1. (a) Sketch of strip caster was drawn by H. Bessemer in proximately 50 mm19,25) as illustrated in Fig. 2. Thin slab
18561) and (b) his strip caster patented in 1865.2) casting reduces production costs by eliminating several pro-

1115 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

cessing steps such as hot rolling and intermediate heat- new mini mills27) (Fig. 3). This may lead to a partial loss of
ing.22,26,27) At such a mill the production process is com- the potential market for mini mills.
pact, easy to control and does not require large investment The other reason concerns the ever-growing application
in either equipment and personnel.26,27) However, along of electronics in the automotive industry35) and surface
with a shorter processing route, the possibilities of correct- coating material for steel products,36) which contaminate
ing potential defects of the cast slab are also decreased. steel scrap with deleterious impurities, such as copper and
That is why only steel of a certain chemical composition is tin that are difficult to remove36,37) (Fig. 4). The price of
suitable for the casting of a thin slab.28) The mini mill is steel scrap is estimated to increase by $8 per ton for each
found to be the most profitable when steel scrap can be reduction of 0.1% of residual impurities.38) Therefore, the
sourced from within a 200-km region around the mill and price for high quality scrap is likely to rise in the fu-
products can be sold in a vicinity of up to 500-km ra- ture.38,39) Since the mini mills product cost strongly depends
dius.29,30) The mini mill process is most suited to the pro- on the steel scrap price18,40) as illustrated in Table 2, this is
duction of ordinary grades of steel typically medium and likely to further retard investment in mini mills. Each of
low carbon steels and HSLA grades.31) The first mini-mill these reasons is motivating the development of a new gen-
was built in the USA by Nucor and SMS in 1989.32) eration of mini mills.
Year by year, the share of mini mills is growing,33) but in The owners of integrated mills are also investing heavily
the near future this growth may slow, due to the following in the development of new technology.18,41) Lately, the
reasons. structure of steel demand has undergone serious changes.
Currently more than half of the metallurgical equipment The competitiveness of steel producers depends a lot on
operating at large steel manufactures throughout the world product cost and the ability to make products satisfying
has been in use for over a quarter of a century34) see Table specific customer demands.42) In the conditions of large-
1. This equipment should be replaced in the near future. For scale production it is difficult to offer a wide range of steels
companies currently running integrated mills the modern- designed for individual and small consumers. The current
ization of existing equipment and processes allows more steel market demands a wide variety of steel grades with
rapid cost recovery then investing in the construction of different properties, surface appearance and geometry. This
is particularly true for stainless grades.43) Additionally, to-
day’s stainless steel producers are not able to offer their
products on a long-term basis and at fixed prices because of
a strong dependence on the prices of alloying elements such
as nickel and chrome, which regularly fluctuate.41,44) To sat-
isfy market demands, integrated steel mills require technol-
ogy advances that will allow the low-cost production of a
diverse range of small, high-quality lots.10,41)
Additionally, increasing substitution of light alloys in the
packaging, automotive and construction industries as alter-
native materials to steel have applied pressure to the steel
producers to reduce production costs to maintain market
share.18,35,45)
Thus increased competition and the need to decrease
steel product prices has combined with other factors such
as growing salaries, increasing cost of electricity and raw
materials to apply pressure to both mini and integrated
mills.17,46–48) To compete in the future market, both mills
Fig. 2. Strip manufacturing processes. (Update from Ref. 21).) will need to use efficient technologies capable of supplying

Table 1. Crude steel capacity, utilization, age and replacement potential of existing steel production facilities.34)

© 2003 ISIJ 1116

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Fig. 3. Backward integration using existing hot and cold rolling

of integrated mill: (a) schematic view; (b) comparison of
return on investment of a new thin slab casting and
rolling facility and backwards integration of an existing
conventional rout of integrated mill. Where Investment
cost effectiveInvestment costCost savings for clos-
ing of slab storage, Number of years before return on in-
vestmentInvestment cost effective/(Cash cost savings
relativeSales bonus for improved product).27)

Fig. 4. Prediction for development of tin and copper

content of scrap in futures.36)

Table 2. The effect of scrap price on the cost of producing liquid steel (per ton of liquid steel).18)

1117 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

steel strip products of high quality at low cost. tainty and business risk associated with the commercial im-
plementation of the strip casting process. The business risk
is mainly bound with two issues: the strip quality, which is
3. Advantages of Strip Produced Directly from the
discussed below, and the operation cost. The success of the
Melt
strip casting technology in commercial application depends
The strip production costs increase steeply as the final on operating costs, which are likely to be higher than those
product thickness decreases and the initial slab thickness involved with traditional production routes, particularly in
increases.49) In the processing of a thin slab, the production the commercialization stages.22) Expected costs are summa-
costs start to increase dramatically if rolling a strip of thick- rized in Table 3. An accurate calculation of operation costs
ness below 1.2 mm.50) However the strip casting process al- is still difficult because of uncertainties in the life of key
lows strip to be produced at a thickness less than 1.8 mm at components of the caster such as ceramic materials and
a stable cost.50,51) rolls in full-scale commercial operations. In commercial ap-
Traditional casting machines with oscillation moulds are plication it is expected that the service life of ceramic mate-
unsuitable for the casting of thin steel strip. As the thin strip rials is no less than three consecutive heats each of them
solidifies rapidly52) it should be cast at higher speed, howev- 110-ton.12) The time required for changing the rolls is esti-
er as the speed increases, friction on the mould surface in- mated at no longer than 10 min.12)
creases greatly (Fig. 5) and defects like surface cracks may The accurate calculations of the production costs also de-
form.53–56) pend on the steel grade and its final application.
In the traditional casting methods the techniques of As for stainless steel, it is anticipated that one-ton of
mould oscillation and lubrication with slag at the steel will be US$50 to 150 cheaper in the case of casting
mould/slab interface are used to reduce friction. These strip compared to that of the casting of thin slabs.61) Money
techniques cannot be used for strip casting as oscillation re- is also saved due to lower transportation costs.51,61) In stain-
sults in marks on the surface and interactions with the slag less steel production, the ingot is typically cast at one plant,
may leave defects of a size comparable to the strip thick- delivered to another plant for rolling and after that returned
ness.56) for finishing.29,62)
By moving the mould at the same velocity as the strip, In the production of low-carbon (0.06 wt% C) cast strip,
friction problems can be removed. As the mould surface only US$20 to US$35 per ton can be saved by strip casting
moves together with the solidifying melt the friction be- compared to thin slab casting.61,63) Lower savings are attrib-
tween them is almost absent so the thin strip can be cast uted to a more efficient technological route and the produc-
with good surface quality.57–59) tion cycle is contained in one location. The savings that can
be made in strip casting are possible due to the higher con-
3.1. Economic Advantage centrations of residual impurities, and subsequently cheaper
The production of thin strip directly from the melt allows scrap, that can be tolerated in this process.63)
eliminating all process steps from the production route Because the slag is not applied, the melt comes into di-
leaving only cold rolling mills and a few finishing opera- rect contact with the roll surface and is solidified at a rela-
tions, as shown in Fig. 2. Shortening the process route re- tively high cooling rate64) (see Table 4). During solidifica-
duces investment cost by 4 to 10 times.22,26,60) Specific in- tion, the elements dissolved in the melt do not have enough
vestments per one ton of steel are expected to decrease by time to segregate, and therefore the concentration of resid-
40%, as compared with the conventional production ual impurities may be raised without any harmful effects on
process (continuous casting and downstream hot rolling).22) strip quality. In the case of the thin slab casting, for surface
However, as for any new technology, there is some uncer- cracks to be prevented, steel scrap is not to contain more
than 0.15 wt% Cu, and 0.015 wt% Sn.28) In the strip casting
scrap with 3.5 times higher concentration of Cu, up to
0.55%, and with 10 times higher concentration of Sn up to
0.16% can be tolerated.51)
3.2. Energy and Environment
Apart from economic savings, the new casting technique
is more energy efficient and has less environmental impact.
From semi-commercial application of the strip casting in
Krefeld (Germany) within the framework of the Eurostrip
project showed that the energy consumption per one ton of
product is 7.5-times lower (0.4 GJ) than in the conventional
continuous casting–hot rolling route (3.2 GJ).11) These find-
ings are tentative because they depend on geographic loca-
Fig. 5. Influence of casting speed on friction force between os- tion, production structure and steel grade mix. For example,
cillation mould and slab.53) the energy savings are 2 to 5 times more in the production

Table 3. Cost comparison for steel strip product with different routes.22)

© 2003 ISIJ 1118

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Table 4. General parameters of conventional slab, thin slab and strip casting.

of stainless steel than in the production of carbon steel.61) batch size and delivery time.62)
An increase in the ratio of the surface-to-mass by over 40 The strip casting technology can also give advantages to
times (see Table 4) results in an intensive heat transfer to, the existing integrated mill. The strip casting process may
or from, the environment and fast cooling, or heating, of the be incorporated in an integrated mill which has an excess
cast strip. This circumstance permits the as cast strip to be steelmaking capacity to increase the range of steel
heated-up, if necessary, to the required temperature in a grades.72)
short time which additionally reduces the energy consumed So, the new process offers substantial possibilities for
for reheating and lowers steel loss due to scale.27,60,76,77) steel producers and consumers of steel flat products.
The elimination of several intermediate reheating opera-
tions and shorter reheating times allows a reduction in dele-
4. Strip Casting Process
terious gas emissions per one ton of cast steel: CO2 by 7
times (from 185 to 25 kg), NOx by 15 times (from 290 to Late in the 1980 s, out of the whole variety of strip cast-
10 g) and SO2 by 3 times (from 50 to 15 g).11) So, applica- ing methods based on a movable mould principal,24,80) two
tion of the strip casting technology allows a reduction in the techniques were selected for further research and develop-
total volume of deleterious emissions such as CO2, SO2, ment: feed of the melt to the surface of the rotating roll
NOx of between 70 and 90% in comparison with the con- (spinning technique) and casting into the gap between two
ventional process.78) rolls rotating toward each other (twin-roll casting tech-
nique).24,26,81–84) The main argument in favor of the single-
3.3. Strip Manufacturing–Industry Structure roll strip casting was the accumulated practical experience
Cast strip of 1 to 5 mm in thickness considerably short- obtained in the development of production steel strip with
ens the length and duration of the production process route amorphous or microcrystalline structure. But asymmetrical
see Fig. 2 and Table 4. Thus, according to the data,78) the crystallization and an inability to control the quality of the
production of strip, starting from casting till cooling, takes free surface of the cast strip in the single-roll, has seen this
no more than 15 min with a 60 to 150 m-long process line. technique become abandoned and main efforts focused on
A plant with such a short production route does not require the twin-roll technique.85) An extra advantage of the twin-
a large investment and is very flexible, easily adjusting for roll technique is the higher production rate against the sin-
different steel grades, which may be required in small lots. gle-roll technique.85) The productivity of the twin-roll caster
By numerous estimates, these advantages will stimulate the is estimated at about 0.5 million ton per annum.73) Param-
construction of a new type of mill, the micro mill.72,79) The eters of different casters are summarized in Table 5.
term and trademark of “Micro-MillsTM” have already been Figure 6 shows schematically the typical twin-roll caster
formally registered for the type of plant based on the strip and the controlled parameters of the casting process. The
casting process.12) It differs from the mini mill, which is steel melt flows through the ceramic nozzle to the gap be-
based on the continuous casting of thin slabs. The micro tween the rolls rotating toward each other. Side dams are
mills can produce steel of better quality with the same or used for forming the melt bath in the roll gap. In the
even lower price compared to the conventional thin slab process of the rolls rotation, a steel shell is being solidified
casting process. The flexibility of the process will make it adjacent each roll surface and the two shells meet and weld
possible to be more accurate in meeting individual cus- together before exiting the roll gap and as a result form the
tomer requirements in terms of steel grade composition, strip.

1119 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Table 5. Parameters of strip casters.

Fig. 7. Influence of the roll separation force on state of the cast-

ing process and the strip forward slip.71)
Fig. 6. Schematic view of strip caster with controlled parame-
ters.82)
is dependent on many variables,102) and may be greater in
For the shells to be welded, a roll separation force is ap- the backward direction than in the forward direction.117)
plied.57,114) Without the roll separation force, the shells are Too high a pressure causes excessive strip deformation
not welded and the molten steel flows through the roll gap and this is not desirable as it leads to segregation of low-
(Fig. 7). In the case of high roll separation force, like in the melting point elements that crystallize late in solidifica-
hot rolling process, the strip is deformed and forward slip tion.71,105)
appears71,115) (Fig. 7). In strip casting the temperature distri- The temperature of the molten steel for casting is kept as
bution across the strip is less even than that experienced low as possible for increasing the production rate70) (Fig. 8)
during hot-rolling. This results in higher deformation in the and reducing surface crack formation.118) However, it can
strip casting in comparison with conventional hot rolling be beneficial to control the temperature cycle of the melt
process.116) The rate of deformation in the casting direction prior to casting as it is possible to increase the strip quality

© 2003 ISIJ 1120

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Fig. 10. Relation between speed of strip casting and productivity

Fig. 8. Influence of melt superheat temperature on constant so-
of caster per hour, per meter of roll width. The thickness
lidification of shell growth.70)
of cast strip and casting speed are taken from
Shell thickness(Constant solidification) · (Solidification
data.9,11,75,91,108) The density of steel is accepted as 7.8
time).1/2
ton m3 from Ref. 120).

Table 5).
Larger diameter rolls have a deeper bath melt pool, a
higher capacity to absorb heat and increase the production
rate.88) Additionally the length of the deformation zone be-
tween the rolls increases with the roll diameter and this cre-
ates a more stable casting process.102) However the upper
diameter of the rolls is limited by the practicalities of de-
signing a ceramic nozzle to deliver the melt. Additionally,
the higher the diameter of the rolls the larger and more ex-
pensive are the ceramic side dams necessary for containing
the melt. The analysis of the commercial casters shows that
there is still no consensus on the optimal roll diameter.
Castrip uses rolls of 0.5 m in diameter while Nippon prefers
1.2 m and Eurostrip 1.5 m (see Table 5).
Analysis of the actual roll surface material and roll sur-
face micro topography used in the commercial scale casters
is not possible at present as it is a commercially sensitive
features of the caster design which determines not only the
productivity of the caster but also contributes to the total
quality of the cast strip. The available information on the
roll surface features published in the open literature result
from fundamental or general studies and is reviewed below.
The ceramic side dams whose life and price affect the
profitability of the caster are one of the most expensive
components of the caster.121) The dam should be tight
against the roll ends, wear-resistant, sustain an enormous
temperature gradient between the cold roll end and liquid
steel. Boron nitride-based ceramics have been found to be
the most suitable material.122,123)
Fig. 9. Effect of liquid steel preparation by temperature cycle (a)
and (b) on segregation across strip thickness, strip surface
roughness and internal stress in as cast strip.119) Area of 5. Strip Quality
hysteresis cycle is used as indication of internal stress.
The bigger area represents the higher internal stress. Casting strip of thickness 1–2 mm leaves almost no pos-
sibility for additional treatments to rectify its quality, more-
by decreasing segregation and internal stresses in the over, additional processing can eliminate all the economic
strip119) (Fig. 9). advantages of the strip casting process.124) For these rea-
The productivity of a strip caster depends on casting sons, the requirements on the surface quality, geometry and
speed and the thickness of the strip. The analysis of the properties of the cast strip are high.64) The high casting ve-
available data for commercial scale casters plotted as locity and rapid solidification demand an accurate control
productivity versus casting speed is shown in Fig. 10 of any process parameters because even slight deviations
which gives a regression relation of Productivity–Casting lead to a substantial deterioration of the strip quality.
speed0.5.
The scattering of the data from the average linear fit may 5.1. Surface Cracks
be explained by differences in the roll diameter, the surface In continuous casting practices it is known larger heat
coated material and the roll surface micro-topography (see fluxes drastically increase the possibility of surface crack-

1121 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Fig. 11. Influence of heat flux in mould on longitudinal surface

cracks obtained for low (0.05 wt% C) and middle
(0.11 wt% C) carbon steel.125)

Fig. 13. Submerged nozzle.134)

Fig. 14. Influence of thickness of the roll sleeve on total roll de-
Fig. 12. Relation between crack length per unit area of strips and flection and the shape of the strip profile.112) The result-
roll surface roughness for casting in argon and nitrogen ing roll deflection is calculated as: (Resulting roll de-
atmospheres.108) flection)(Bending deflection)(Thermal deflection).

ing by induced additional internal stress during solidifica- roll separation force is one of the measures used to prevent
tion.125) The critical heat flux, which, if exceeded, causes surface cracks.99,105)
cracks on low- and middle-carbon steel strip, is indicated in 5.2. Uneven Strip Thickness
Fig. 11. During casting the rolls are not uniformly heated, chang-
As mentioned previously, slag is not required as a lubri- ing their initial profile.112) At operating temperature the roll
cant in the strip casting process. Although slag reduces fric- profile has to be stable and shaped to ensure uniform thick-
tion at the roll surface, it increases the heat flux to levels ness of strip with minimum irregularities and good flatness.
several times the critical level shown in Table 4. This in- A correctly designed roll profile combined with a water-
creases the difficulty of ensuring high-quality strip from the cooled roll sleeve of an optimal thickness and material, per-
strip casting process. mits thickness irregularities to be minimized3,110,112,135) as
The problem can be solved by a combination of mea- shown in Fig. 14.
sures.126) Selection of a coating material100,127) in combina- Another reason for irregularities in thickness is due to
tion with a special roll surface roughness,64,108,126,128) roll the different heat transfer conditions at the side dams com-
separation force129) and a protective atmosphere108,130) per- pared to the central part of the roll. This causes more irreg-
mit heat flux and internal stress to be lowered and made ularities in the thickness at the strip edges.64) To rectify the
more uniform. Different materials based on nickel, chrome strip geometry a hot rolling mill is installed in line before
or ceramics92,126) are applied as coatings. The effect of the the coiler and the strip edges are trimmed as shown Fig. 15.
roll surface roughness and the protective inert atmosphere Table 6 gives the tolerances of the cast strip thickness re-
on the appearance of surface cracks is shown in Fig. 12. quired according to standards in various countries for hot
Turbulent flows131) and ripples on the melt surface132) rolled products. To be an acceptable alternative to hot
may cause cracks on the strip surface. The nozzle must be rolling, strip casting must produce products that meet or ex-
designed to lower the amplitude of surface waves133) as ceed these standards.
shown in the design of the submerged nozzle134) in Fig. 13.
The ceramic nozzle must also be inert with respect to the 5.3. Strip Flatness
melt otherwise surface defects will appear.64) Reducing the The out of the cast strip flatness may be characterized by

© 2003 ISIJ 1122

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Fig. 15. Main strip casters: (a) The basic component of BHP-IHI caster136) used by CASTRIP. (b) Eurostrip.87) (c)
Nippon Steel Corporation and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.137)

Table 6. Thickness and flatness variation of as cast strip in comparison with standard tolerance requirements for different countries.
Data for as cast strip taken for low carbon steel with strip width 1 345 mm.136)

(A/S)100%, where (A) is the amplitude of a strip devia- the cast strip.136) The strip flatness is improved by cold
tion from the flat surface and (S ) is the wavelength. The out rolling with tension applied by the coiler.136)
of flatness may be caused by uneven thermal and structural
changes taking place in the strip during crystallization and 6. Commercial Strip Casters
cooling and non-uniform plastic deformation in the roll
gap. Table 6 gives the flatness of the hot-rolled product re- For the last twenty years different steelmaking companies
quired in various standards. As for surface thickness these have been developing the strip casting technology. Some
standards must be within the capabilities of the strip casting projects were stopped and others united in order to reduce
process. Deterioration of strip flatness after hot rolling oc- finical expenditure. The companies’ cooperation and the
curs due to non-uniform deformation across the width of status of the projects are presented in Fig. 16.

1123 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

Fig. 16. Company collaboration and status of projects138) (Nippon Yakin Kogyo Co. Ltd. named as Nippon).

Table 7. Properties of a strip obtained through conventional and cast strip technological routes.

Five commercial-scale casters have been built for esti- In March 2000, Nucor joined BHP-IHI and established
mating the process feasibility and evaluating techno-eco- Castrip Limited Liability Company (Castrip LLC), with
nomic parameters: BHP-IHI (Australia), Nippon Steel- Nucor and BHP each owning 47.5% and 5% owned by
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Japan), Myosotis (France), IHI.12) Having obtained the first license from Castrip, in
Acciai Speciali Terni (Italy) and Eurostrip (Germany). spring 2002 Nucor completed the construction and started
Three of the casters are being intensively prepared for full- production operations of cast strip in Crawfordsville,
scale commissioning: Castrip (USA), Eurostrip (Germany) Indiana, USA.
and Nippon Steel–Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Japan). The basic component of BHP’s caster Fig. 15(a) were
dismantled and delivered from Australia, to the USA. A
6.1. Castrip 110-ton electric arc furnace (EAF) is used for steel melting.
Broken Hill Proprietary Ltd., (BHP), an Australian steel- The plant is designed for production of carbon steel and
maker, and Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries (IHI), a stainless strip. To develop the strip casting process, Nucor
Japanese machine-builder, have studied strip casting since is going to spend an additional US$100 million.12) The tar-
1989.75) In 1995 a full-scale machine for casting carbon get of Castrip is to ensure the stability of cast strip produc-
steels was constructed in Port Kembla, Australia. For test- tion quality firstly for carbon steel and later for stainless
ing properties, parts of the cast strip were cold rolled to steel. The main application of the low-carbon steel strip is
0.42 mm, coated with 55%AlZn and applied as roofing in for roofing, tanks, power unit boxes, furniture frames, etc.
housing as well as for the production of square 2525, At present the Castrip technology is protected by 1 500
5050 mm and round 21.3–88.9 mm-diameter tubes.75) patents worldwide.72) After the technology is proven, the
Table 7 presents the properties of the cast strip from low- company intends to sell it and will continue to invest in
carbon steel. technology to cast wider and thinner strips.139)

© 2003 ISIJ 1124

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

6.2. Eurostrip was estimated at ¥11 billion141) ($110 million63)).

In September 1999, after several years of independent For technological improvements, in 2000 Nippon Steel
R&D on strip casting, Thyssen-Krupp Steel, Usinor and and POSCO, a Korean company, which has long been car-
Voest Alpine Industrieanlagenbau established Eurostrip, a rying similar studies, formed an agreement to share in the
European company11,79) (see Fig. 15(b)). The companies research and development of strip casting technology.142)
task is to develop a commercial technology for stainless
6.4. SMS Demag and MAIN AG/MTA, Danieli
and carbon steel strip casting.11) A strip casting shop was
built at the Krupp Thyssen Nirosta plant in Krefeld, In August 2000, an agreement on the start of construc-
Germany.41) The plant produces stainless steel and has no tion of a full-commercial scale caster for the production of
hot rolling facilities. Therefore the strip casting shop is in- stainless and carbon steel strip was signed between SMS
corporated as a missing link in the production route be- (Germany) and MAIN AG/MTA (Switzerland).143)
tween the steelmaking and cold rolling shops.87) There has been substantial interest in the strip casting
Eurostrip has a second commercial-scale caster located process by a variety of supporting industries that would
in Terni, Italy, which is used for developing the casting of benefit from the large scale commercialization of the new
carbon and silicon steels.86,87) Before the merger with technology. For example Danieli, a large manufacturer of
Thyssen-Krupp, Acciai Speciali Terni (AST) and Centro plant equipment has indicated their interest and the first in-
Sviluppo Materiali (CSM), a research institution in Terni, dustrial strip caster for carbon and stainless steel with a ca-
Italy, carried out investigations using this commercial-scale pacity of 0.6–0.7 million ton per annum is being built at
caster.89) The strip casting fundamentals are being studied ABC (Italy).144)
using a laboratory caster located in Aachen University of
Technology (RWTH), Aachen, Germany.11) 7. Expenditure on Research and Development of Strip
Early in 2003 it is planned to bring the Krefeld mill to Casting Technology
the full capacity with a production rate of 0.4 million ton
per annum.86,87) Currently more than 1 000 patents protect A substantial reduction of deleterious emissions and en-
the Eurostrip technology.78) The properties of the cast stain- ergy savings in the replacement of traditional technology
less strip are presented in Table 7. The stainless steel strip with strip casting process is expected. The new technology
will be used for kitchenware and sinks. is actively supported by several national governments with
the help of state organizations: European Coal and Steel
6.3. Nippon Steel Corporation and Mitsubishi Heavy Community (ECS) in Europe, US Department of Energy in
Industries the US, and The Canadian National Research Council in
Nippon Steel Corporation, a steelmaker, and Mitsubishi Canada. It must be noted that governments provided finan-
Heavy Industries, a machine-builder, have pursued a R&D cial support only at early R&D stages, which involved fun-
program aimed at casting stainless steels since 1985.95) In damental investigations. A transition from pilot to commer-
1997, a commersial machine for casting of austenitic stain- cial production in the conditions of stiff competition and
less steel was constructed at Nippon Steel’s Hikari Works large potential profits has resulted in companies carrying
(Japan)140) (Fig. 15(c)). In 1998, the casting unit reached a out independent, self-funded research projects and restrict-
capacity of 20 000 ton per month.63) In 1996 the project cost ing access to any results. Table 8 illustrates the sources of

Table 8. Expenditure on research and development of strip casting technology and share of government support.

1125 © 2003 ISIJ

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

funding for the development of the strip casting process. 18) R. M. Cyert and R. J. Fruehan: The Basic of Steel Industry,
The total cost of the studies, inclusive of fundamental but Meeting the US Industry Faces the 21st Century, US Department of
Commerce Office of Technology Policy, Pittsburgh, (1996), 62.
indirectly connected research, is somewhat higher. For in-
19) E. Schulz, D. Ameling, B. Gerstenberg, E. Hoffken, K. H. Peters
stance, in the European Union alone, in the period from and R.W. Simon: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 13 (1990), No. 5, 32.
1986 to 1999, through the ECS, about US$18 million138,147) 20) M. M. Wolf: 75th Steelmaking Conf. Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA,
was spent on strip casting, 20% of the whole budget of (1992), 83.
US$89 million allocated for the entire R&D related to cast- 21) M. Tsukigahora, H. Sakaguchi, K. Sasaki, S. Suzuki, T. Kato and
ing, including fundamental R&D147) (for easier conversion M. Tanigawa: The Hitachi Zosen Tech. Rev., 54 (1993), No. 2, 2.
22) C. Hendricks: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 18 (1995), No. 3, 42.
US$1=C1). 23) W. Bald, G. Kneppe, D. Rosenthal and P. Sudau: Steel Times Int., 24
(2000), No. 5, 16.
24) A. Trupiano: Metall. Ital., 89 (1997), No. 7–8, 31.
8. Conclusion 25) T. Watanabe: Tetsu-to-Hagané, 88 (2002), No. 3, 107.
Increased competition and the need to decrease steel 26) J. P. Birat, R. Steffen and S. Wilmotte: European Commission
Technical Steel Research, EUR 16671 en (1995), 198.
product prices has combined with other factors such as
27) A. Flick, G. Lettmayr, A. Wagner and A. Bumberger: Steel Times
growing salaries and the increasing cost for electricity and Int., 24 (2000), No. 3, 17.
raw materials to apply pressure to both mini and integrated 28) S. L. Wigman and M. D. Millett: Scanijet VI; 6th Int. Conf.
mills. To compete in the future market and to maintain mar- Refining Processes, MEFOS, Lulea, Sweden, (1992), 1.
ket share, both mills will need to use new efficient tech- 29) P. Nilles: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 17 (1994), No. 3, 46.
nologies capable of supplying steel strip products of high 30) B. V. Molotilov, A. A. Brodov and V. I. Matorin: Steel in
Translation, 27 (1997), No. 9, 1.
quality at low cost. Large investments in the development 31) J. Aylen: Steel Times, 229 (2001), No. 7–8, 227.
of strip casting process by the main world steel produces 32) H. Malinowski: Steel Times, 217 (1989), No. 11, 600.
and manufacturers of plant equipment have already oc- 33) D. Ameling: Stahl Eisen, 120 (2000), No. 9, 27.
curred due to its huge potential to substantially reduce the 34) H. Wiesinger: Steel Times, 228 (2000), No. 8, 299.
investment cost of steel strip production, which is now at a 35) C. Fine, R. Clair, J. Lafrance and D. Hillebrand: The US Auto-
stage of industrial implementation for the production of mobile Manufacturing Industry, US Department of Commerce
Office of Technology Policy, USA, (1996), 102.
stainless and low-carbon steels 36) K. Noro, M. Takeuchi and Y. Mizukami: ISIJ Int., 37 (1997), 198.
The technology is well suited for micro mills, which can 37) L. Savov and D. Janke: Metall., 52 (1998), No. 6, 374.
produce steel strip of composition required by individual 38) J. J. Poveromo: Proc. of Gerald Heffernan Int. Symp. on Innovative
customers. Comparatively small investments, flexibility and Technology for Steel and Other Materials, CIM, Montreal, Canada,
the low environmental impact nature of the new technology (2001), 39.
39) J.-P. Birat: Rev. Métall., Cah. Inf. Tech., 98 (2001), No. 1, 19.
permits it to be introduced in regions with relatively small
40) S. Millman: Steel Times, 228 (2000), No. 1, 20.
resources of raw materials, for example, in regions which 41) R. Barrett: Met. Bull. Monthly, 369 (2001), September, 18.
have sufficient supplies of metallic scrap. The strip casting 42) J.-P. Birat: Ironmaking Steelmaking, 28 (2001), No. 2, 152.
technology can also give advantages to the existing inte- 43) A. Otto: Symp. Stainless Steel in Architecture, The European
grated mill. The strip casting process may be incorporated Stainless Steel Development Association, Berlin Germany, (2000),
in an integrated mill, which has an excess steelmaking ca- 2.
44) H. Pariser: Met. Bull. Monthly, 369 (2001), September, 12.
pacity to increase the range of steel grades.
45) T. Smith: Steel Times, 217 (2001), No. 5, 168.
46) R. Vondran: Steel Times, 227 (1999), No. 8, 303.
REFERENCES 47) C. P. Manning and R. J. Fruehan: JOM, 53 (2001), No. 10, 36.
48) H. Mueller: Steel Times Int., 26 (2002), No. 7–8, 46.
1) H. Bessemer: J. Iron Steel Inst., (1891), 1. 49) I. M. Pavlov: Theory of Rolling, Metallurgizdat, Moscow, (1950),
2) H. Bessemer: US Patent 49053, July 25, (1865). 610.
3) V. V. Gusev: Liteinoe Proizvodstvo, (1952), No. 11, 5. 50) S. Buchanan: Met. Bull. Monthly, 363 (2001), March, 10.
4) S. Shiozawa, T. Kusakawa and Y. Matsuura: Sosei to Kako, 1 51) J. Vaugh and D. Varcoe: SEAISI Quarterly, 30 (2001), No. 1, 46.
(1960), 99. 52) D. Senk, B. Engl, O. Siemon and G. Stebner: Steel Res., 70 (1999),
5) M. Cygler and M. Wolf: Iron Steelmaker, 13 (1986), No. 8, 27. No. 8–9, 368.
6) W. E. Stephens and G. R. Vassily: Light Metals 1971, The 53) T. Koyano, O. Terada, S. Uchida and M. Ishikawa: Proc of the 69th
Metallurgical Society, New York, (1971), 535. Steelmaking Conf., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (1986), 449.
7) D. Altenpohl and P. J. Uggowitzer: Aluminium, 77 (2001), No. 10, 54) M. Suzuki, H. Mizukami, T. Kitagawa, K. Kawakami, S. Uchida
754. and Y. Komatsu: ISIJ Int., 31 (1991), 254.
8) M. M. Wolf: BHM, 145 (2000), No. 1, 35. 55) M. M. Wolf: BHM, 145 (2000), No. 7, 270.
9) K. Yanagi, K. Sasaki, K. Yamamoto, H. Takeuchi and H. 56) M. Suzuki, M. Suzuki and M. Nakada: ISIJ Int., 41 (2001), 670.
Nakashima: Mitsubishi Heavy Ind., Tech. Rev., 33 (1996), No. 1, 57) J. P. Birat, P. Blin, J. L. Jacquot, P. Riboud and B. Thomas: Rev.
26. Metall., Cah. Inf. Tech., 86 (1989), No. 11, 919.
10) S. Watanabe: Nippon Steel Tech. Rep., 71 (1996), October, 1. 58) R. Fukase, A. Nomura and H. Kato: Japanese Patent JP3-128149,
11) H.-U. Lindenberg, U. Albrecht-Fruh, M. Walter, R. Capotosti, G. (1991).
Stebner and D. Senk: Forum-Technische Mitteilungen Thyssen 59) J. C. Yoon, H. K. Moon, J. T. Duncombe and M. Rushforth:
Krupp (English Edition), (2000), December, 20. METEC Cong. 94 2nd European Continuous Casting Conf., 6th
12) R. Wechsler: Steel Times, 229 (2001), No. 1, 23. Int. Rolling Conf., Düsseldorf, Germany, (1994), 435.
13) A. J. Hulek and O. Harrer: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 3 (1997), 84. 60) B. Lindorfer, K. Schwaha, J. Spiess and G. Houze: Steel Times, 221
14) R. Nystrom, W. Reichelt and M. Dubke: Scand. J. Metall., 29 (1993), No. 7, 304.
(2000), No. 3, 93. 61) T. Bagsarian: New Steel, 14 (1998), No. 12, 56.
15) K. Schwerdtfeger, K.-H. Spitzer, J. Kroos, P. Funke and K.-H. 62) A. Ritt: New Steel, 16 (2000), No. 1, 20.
Hower: ISIJ Int., 40 (2000), 756. 63) J. Isenberg-O’Loughlin: Thirty-Three (33) Metal Producing, 36
16) H. Jones: Rapid Solidification of Metals and Alloys, The Institute (1998), No. 12, 20.
of Metallurgists, London, (1983), 83. 64) W. Blejde, R. Mahapatra and H. Fukase: Belton Memorial Symp.
17) H. Wiesinger: Iron Steelmaker, 24 (1997), No. 12, 33. Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (2000), 253.

© 2003 ISIJ 1126

 ISIJ International, Vol. 43 (2003), No. 8

65) H. Legrand, J. M. Damasse, M. Espenhahn, R. W. Simon and G. 87 (1990), No. 4, 351.

Stebner: THERMEC 97 Int. Conf. on Thermomechanical 104) A. Girgensohn, A. R. Buchner and K. Tacke: Ironmaking Steel-
Processing of Steels and Other Materials, TMS, Warrendale, PA, making, 27 (2000), No. 4, 317.
(1997), 2. 105) A. R. Buchner and J. W. Schmitz: Steel Res., 63 (1992), No. 1, 7.
66) M. Wolf: Steel Times Int. (Contibuous Casting Supplement), 19 106) J. T. Choi, H. T. Chung, W. S. Kim and H. K. Moon: 83rd
(1994), No. 3, 4. Steelmaking Conf., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (2000), 29.
67) R. W. Simon, D. Senk, C. Mollers, H. Legrand, L. Vendeville and J. 107) H. K. Moon, C. M. Park, H. N. Cheong, C. G. Lee and T. Kang:
M. Damasse: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 3 (1997), June, 78. Proc. Merton C. Flemings Symp. on Solidification and Materials
68) M. Wolf and W. Kurz: Proc. Int. Conf. on Solidifacation and Processing, TMS, Warrendale, PA, (2001), 507.
Casting of Metals, The Metal Society, London, (1977), 287. 108) D.-Y. Choo, S. Lee, H.-K. Moon and T. Kang: Metall. Mater. Trans.
69) J. K. Brimacombe and I. V. Samarasekera: Iron Steelmaker, 21 A, 32A (2001), 2249.
(1994), No. 11, 29. 109) A. L. Robson, J. Wilkinson and G. L. Thompson: METEC Cong.
70) H. Fukase, W. J. Folder and W. Blejde: European Patent 94 2nd European Continuous Casting Conf., 6th Int. Rolling Conf.,
EP0627275, (1994). Düsseldorf, Germany, (1994), 443.
71) Y. Fujita, H. Sato, T. Kitagawa, S. Nishioka, Y. Tsuchida and A. 110) G. L. Thompson, S. R. Higson and P. J. Longdon: European
Ozeki: ISIJ Int., 29 (1989), 495. Commission Technical Steel Research, EUR 18608 en, (1998), 49.
72) P. Campbell and R. L. Wechsler: Heffernan Symposium, Ontario, 111) B. V. Molotilov, N. M. Zapuskalov and V. T. Timofeev: Steel USSR,
Canada, (2001), 201. 21 (1991), No. 12, 565.
73) P. Campbell, W. Blejde, R. Mahapatra and G. Gillen: 59th 112) N. Zapuskalov and M. Vereschagin: ISIJ Int., 38 (1998), 1107.
Electrical Furnace Conf. and 19th Process Technology Conf. Proc., 113) J. D. Hwang, H. J. Lin, W. S. Hwang and C. T. Hu: ISIJ Int., 35
ISS, Warrendale, PA, (2001), 727. (1995), 170.
74) Anonymous: Steel Times, 228 (2000), No. 7, 256. 114) H. Litterscheidt, R. Hammer, C. Schneider, R. W. Simon, D. Senk,
75) W. Blejde, R. Mahapatra and H. Fukase: METEC Cong. 99, VDEh, R. Kopp and B. Hehl: Stahl Eisen, 111 (1991), No. 2, 61.
Düsseldorf, Germany, (1999), 176. 115) M. S. Boichenko, I. M. Pavlov, A. A. Korolev, J. M. Bokshitskii and
76) O. Kubaschewski and B. E. Hopkins: Oxidation of Metals and S. I. Irodov: Metall., (1940), No. 5, 11.
Alloys, Butterworths, London, (1962), 319. 116) N. M. Zapuskalov: Dissertation, TSNIICherMet, Moscow, (1992),
77) K. Brown and M. Assefpour: Steel Times, 221 (1993), No. 12, 524. 163.
78) Thirty-Three (33) Metal Producing, 40 (2002), No. 1, 18. 117) K. Miyazawa, T. Choh and M. Inoue: J. Jpn. Inst. Met., 46 (1982),
79) T. Bagsarian: New Steel, 16 (2000), No. 12, 18. 944.
80) T. Kusakawa: Trans. Iron Steel Inst. Jpn., 26 (1986), B-123. 118) S. K. Ray, B. Mukhopadhyay and S. K. Bhattacharyya: ISIJ Int., 36
81) A. W. Cramb: Iron Steelmaker, 15 (1988), No. 7, 45. (1996), 611.
82) J. P. Birat and R. Steffen: Metall. Plant Technol. Int., 14 (1991), No. 119) N. M. Zapuskalov, B. V. Molotilov, G. A. Srebrianskii and S. S.
3, 44. Golovanenko, Russian Patent N 1799674, (1993).
83) J. K. Brimacombe and I. V. Samarasekera: Moden Steel Processing, 120) A. Jablonka, K. Harste and K. Schwerdtfeger: Steel Res., 62 (1991),
39th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conf., Hamilton, Ontario, No. 1, 24.
Canada, (1989), 104. 121) T. Kuster: New Steel, 12 (1996), No. 11, 68.
84) J. P. Birat: Ironmaking Steelmaking, 14 (1987), No. 2, 84. 122) B. R. Marple, S. Poudrette and F. G. Hamel: 75th Steelmaking
85) N. Jacobson, B. Hollinger and H. Fredriksson: Scand. J. Metall., 22 Conf. Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (1992), 353.
(1993), No. 2, 75. 123) P. Fournier and F. Platon: Wear, 244 (2000), 118.
86) M. Walter, G. Stebner, J. M. Damasse, P. Tolve and G. 124) K. Shibuya and M. Ozawa: ISIJ Int., 31 (1991), 661.
Hohenbichler: Steel Times Int., 25 (2001), No. 7, 33. 125) S. Hiraki, K. Nakajima, T. Murakami and T. Kanazawa: 75th
87) H.-U. Lindenberg, J. Henrion, K. Schwaha and G. Vespasiani: Stahl Steelmaking Conf. Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (1994), 397.
Eisen, 121 (2001), No. 12, 97. 126) A. Buchner and H. Zimmermann: Steel Res., 73 (2002), No. 8, 327.
88) H. Legrand, U. Albrecht-Fruh and A. Flick: 85th Steelmaking Conf. 127) A. Sanz: Surface and Coating Technology, 146–147 (2001), 55.
Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA, USA, (2002), 211. 128) L. Strezov and J. Herbertson: ISIJ Int., 38 (1998), 959.
89) P. Tolve, R. Tonelli, R. Capotosti and G. Hohenbichler: THERMEC 129) M. Ha, J. Choi, S. Jeong, H. Moon, S. Lee and T. Kang: Metall.
’97 Int. Conf. on Thermomechanical Processing of Steels and Mater. Trans. A, 33A (2002), 1487.
Other Materials, TMS, Warrendale, PA, (1997), 2. 130) T. Mizoguchi, K. Miyazawa and Y. Ueshima: Tetsu-to-Hagané, 80
90) A. Mascanzoni, J. M. Damasse and G. Hohenbichler: Steel Times (1994), No. 1, 36.
Int., 25 (2001), No. 8, 45. 131) H. Yasunaka, K. Taniguchi, M. Kokita and T. Inoue: ISIJ Int., 35
91) H. Legrand and G. Martel: Steel Times, 226 (1998), No. 3, 104. (1995), 784.
92) J. M. Damasse, D. Themines and L. Vendeville: Rev. Métall., Cah. 132) S. Tanaka, I. Suichi, S. Ogawa, T. Furuya, K. Sasaki and K. Yanagi:
Inf. Tech., 97 (2000), No. 1, 43. 75th Steelmaking Conf. Proc., ISS, Warrendale, PA, (1991), 809.
93) T. Furukawa: New Steel, 10 (1994), No. 10, 42. 133) R. P. Tavares and R. I. L. Guthrie: Can. Metall. Q., 37 (1998), No.
94) Steel Times, 227 (1999), No. 4, 128. 3–4, 241.
95) K. Yanagi, K. Yamamoto, H. Takatani, K. Sasaki, Y. Wakiyama, H. 134) European Patent EP0515075B1, (1992).
Takeuchi, H. Nakashima, S. Tanaka, M. Yamada and Y. Yamakami: 135) R. Tonelli, L. Sartini, R. Capotosti and A. Contaretti: METEC
METEC Cong. 94 2nd European Continuous Casting Conf. 6th Int. Cong. 94 2nd European Continuous Casting Conf., 6th Int. Rolling
Rolling Conf., Düsseldorf, Germany, (1994), 423. Conf., Düsseldorf, Germany, (1994), 20.
96) M. Yukumoto and H. Yamane: ISIJ Int., 35 (1995), No. 6, 778. 136) W. Blejde, R. Mahapatra and H. Fukase: Iron Steelmaker, 27
97) S. Miyake, H. Yamane, M. Yukumoto and M. Ozawa: ISIJ Int., 31 (2000), No. 4, 29.
(1991), 689. 137) T. Tanaka: CAMP-ISIJ, 15 (2002), 208.
98) M. Mohri, K. Onishi, K. Yamada and N. Nishinae: THERMEC ’97 138) E. Luiten, Ph.D. Thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, (2001), 300.
Int. Conf. on Thermomechanical Processing of Steels and Other 139) R. Wechsler: IISI-35 Conf., International Iron and Steel Institute,
Materials, TMS, Warrendale, PA, (1997), 2. (2001) (from www.castrip.com).
99) D. Senk, G. L. Thompson, W. Bleck, P. Vicente, R. Kopp and R. 140) T. Furukawa: Am. Met. Mark., 106 (1998), No. 217, November, 3.
Steffen: European Commission Technical Steel Research, EUR 141) Anonymous: Iron Steel Eng., 73 (1996), No. 4, 77.
19364 en, (2000), 132. 142) R. McCulloch: Met. Bull. Monthly, 370 (2001), No. 10, 10.
100) J. C. Grosjean, J. L. Lacquot, J. M. Damasse, H. Litterscheidt, D. 143) Steel Times, 228 (2000), No. 10, 354.
Senk and W. Schmitz: Iron Steelmaker, 20 (1993), No. 8, 27. 144) Steel Times Int., 26 (2002), No. 4, 26.
101) H. Fiedler and M. Jurisch: Stahl Eisen, 111 (1991), No. 2, 79. 145) Steel Times, 228 (2000), No. 11, 387.
102) M. Badowski, L. Hentschel, R. Kopp, W. Schmitz and D. Senk: 146) C. S. Kuo: Minerals Yearbook, Vol. 3, International Minerals
Steel Res., 72 (2001), No. 1112, 484. Statistics and Information, Korea, (1994), 713.
103) D. Senk, C. Schneider and R. Kopp: Rev. Métall., Cah. Inf. Tech., 147) J. Ball: Ironmaking Steelmaking, 27 (2000), No. 2, 91.

1127 © 2003 ISIJ