1. Introduction
Iron smelting technology is primarily categorized into blast furnace ironmaking and non-blast furnace ironmaking, the former of which is the most commonly employed technology at present, offering advantages comprising technological maturity, high energy efficiency, scalability, and high production efficiency. Nevertheless, as the smelting process emits gases that increase the extent of atmospheric pollution, problems related to the blast furnace ironmaking process have become increasingly prominent, and its extremely high carbon emissions have become a critical constraint on progress toward achieving “net-zero emissions” targets [
1].
To reduce carbon emissions during the blast furnace ironmaking process, ironmaking technologies have been optimized and innovated, such as blast furnace top gas recycling technology [
2], oxygen enrichment and pulverized coal injection (PCI) [
3], coke oven gas (COG) injection technology [
4], enhanced sintering technology [
5], hydrogen-rich blast furnace technology [
6], and other blast furnace ironmaking technologies. In addition, Midrex [
7], HYL/Energiron [
8], coal-based direct reduction [
9], flash ironmaking [
10], Corex [
11], Finex [
12], HIsmelt [
13], Hlsarna [
14], and other non-blast furnace ironmaking technologies have been developed. Among them, the flash smelting ironmaking process, proposed by Sohn [
15], employs a “suspension ironmaking” method to decrease iron oxides in concentrate into ferrum (Fe). As a pivotal technology for modern intensified smelting in non-blast furnace ironmaking, the flash smelting ironmaking process eliminates the sintering, pelletizing, and coking steps traditionally required in blast furnaces, offering excellent performance in terms of its low energy consumption, low emissions (especially CO
2), and short process [
16].
The flash ironmaking process incorporates a complex multiphase heat and mass transfer process. The reactor used in the flash smelting process is mainly composed of a nozzle, reaction tower, settler, upward shaft, etc. The powder is generally injected into the reaction tower at high speed by the nozzle positioned at the top. The charge supply rate is 1~7 kg/h, with natural gas and oxygen flow rates of 25 m3/h and 20 m3/h, respectively.
As the material drops down, the temperatures of the reaction tower and the upward shaft increase to 1573 K, which is lower than that of the settler (1973 K). The high-temperature particles move in a downward motion in the reaction tower for 5~10 s and then fall into the settler for slag–iron separation and discharge. Simultaneously, the high-temperature flue gas is recycled after waste heat utilization, purification, condensation, and dehydration [
17]. To investigate the thermodynamic and kinetic properties of iron ore particles during this process, numerous experiments have been carried out over the past few years. Chen et al. [
18] examined the reduction kinetics of hematite concentrate particles (average particle size: 21 μm) with different partial pressures, within a temperature range of 1473 K to 1623 K. The results reveal that the reduction in hematite concentrate particles exceeds 90% in a pure carbon monoxide environment. Although the reduction rate is slower than that of hydrogen, it still suggests that carbon monoxide plays a role in the reduction in the hematite concentrate during the flash evaporation process. In addition, an experimental rate equation was obtained to predict the kinetics of carbon monoxide reduction in hematite concentrate particles. A theoretical basis was provided for the design of a new flash ironmaking reactor. Yang et al. [
19] investigated the reduction kinetics of FeO utilizing H
2-CO mixtures of varying compositions at temperatures of 873 K, 973 K, and 1173 K. The results indicate that at low temperatures, carbon deposition reactions disrupt the kinetic profiles, whereas reduction curves exhibit regularity as the H
2 content increases at 1173 K. Moreover, the reaction rate of CO is linearly correlated with its concentration. The increase in reaction temperature leads to a significant expansion of pores in the reduction products. At this temperature, the iron phase develops and grows adequately, and the sintering phenomenon becomes more pronounced. However, conventional experimental methods typically have limitations, such as high cost, and difficulty in predicting the thermodynamic behavior under high-temperature conditions.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has emerged as a powerful tool to predict gas–solid multi-physical field properties in flash ironmaking furnaces because of its efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Tan et al. [
20] developed a numerical simulation platform to explore the effects of ore-feeding methods and reduced gas composition on reaction efficiency in a pilot-scale hydrogen-based flash smelting furnace. The results illustrate that the feeding of gas and pellets from the same lance results in a strong exchange of momentum and energy, which leads to a rapid decrease in the velocity and temperature of the pellets and significantly affects the residence time of the pellets in the furnace. Increasing the hydrogen concentration is effective in reducing the residence time, but even at the highest hydrogen concentration, the minimum residence time exceeds 2.2 s. When the hydrogen concentration is increased from 50 Vol% to 100 Vol%, the ore processing capacity can be increased from 0.60 kg/s to 0.80 kg/s. Under these conditions, the reduction degree exceeds 90% and the overall utilization rate of the reducing gas reaches 24.10%. This indicates that increasing the hydrogen concentration in the reducing gas can significantly improve the efficiency of the flash furnace. Yang et al. [
21] proposed a novel counter-current descending reactor design to optimize the flash ironmaking process and predict gas–particle reaction flows by means of the CFD approach. This novel design exhibits higher degrees of reduction compared to co-current systems. At a gas flow velocity of 0.333 m/s, the counter-current reactor shows the highest gas utilization rate (35.7%) and reduction degree (74.5%). The high airflow rate results in a decrease in metal yield from 89.3% to 27.5%, but the reduction of fugitive particles increases. Cheng et al. [
22] simulated a flash ironmaking process using pulverized coal and iron concentrate as raw materials, revealing the flow regime, temperature, gas composition distribution, and particle trajectories inside the reaction shaft. Both the flow and temperature fields present symmetrical distributions, where the oxygen in the central region diffuses rapidly to form a bell-shaped distribution, while the temperature is distributed in a wing-like pattern inside the reactor tower, reaching a maximum value of 2615 K at 5 m below the top of the tower. At 6 m below the top of the tower, the oxygen concentration is almost zero, while the carbon monoxide concentration peaks. In addition, more than 95 % of the iron particles are formed between 1.2 and 7.7 s. Abdelghany et al. [
23,
24] modeled a large-scale bench reactor (LSBR) for flash ironmaking based on the partial combustion of iron concentrate and natural gas and studied the effects of oxygen/natural gas ratios, gas flow rates, and powder inlet positions on product gas composition, temperature, and magnetite concentrate reduction rates. The results demonstarte that the highest reduction rate of magnetite concentrate occurs at an oxygen-to-natural gas ratio of 0.8. Increasing the total gas flow rate raises the reactor temperature but reduces particle residence times. The percentage heat loss from the walls is minimized when the total gas flow is set at 1810 SLPM (nominal residence time of 4 s). At this point, the reactor achieves 99.9% metallization at 2/3 of its length. The results of the above studies have clarified the relevant mechanisms of flash ironmaking, thereby laying a theoretical foundation for the involvement of flash furnaces and the optimization of the smelting process. Nevertheless, in industrial applications, flash ironmaking technology involves a gas–particle two-phase high-temperature reaction flow, which implies that radiative heat transfer plays an important role in the reaction inside the reaction shaft. Among the CFD approaches, several radiation models, comprising the DO model [
25,
26], P-1 model [
27,
28], DTRM model [
29], etc., have been proposed and are commonly utilized. Among them, the DTRM model cannot be employed to predict the gas–particle systems. Moreover, the P-1 radiation model can be easily applied to complex geometries with curved coordinates and is easy to solve compared with the DO model with a low CPU requirement. Considering the computational cost, the P-1 radiation model was chosen for this study.
To fill this research gap, an industrial-scale hydrogen-based flash ironmaking reactor tower is taken into account to investigate the radiation characteristics of the gas–particle reaction process by means of the CFD technique. The reactions between the gas and particles inside the furnace are considered, together with a discussion of the influence of the spatial distribution of incident radiation, thermal conductivity, volume-absorbed radiation, etc., under different operating conditions.
4. Results and Discussion
In this section, the spatial distribution of radiative properties such as incident radiation, thermal conductivity, and volume-absorbed radiation within the reactor tower, as well as their variation trends along the axial and radial directions, is investigated. The data for the axial distribution diagrams are derived from the average values of the parameters at the same height, while the data for the radial distribution diagrams are obtained from the average values of the parameters at all heights at the same radial position.
Figure 6a–c present the spatial distribution of temperature, H
2O, and hydrogen, respectively. In the reaction tower, the distribution of temperature is high in the core region and low in the diffusion region. This is due to the high concentration of H
2 in the central region, which releases a large amount of heat when reacting with oxygen, resulting in a significantly higher temperature in the central region than in the diffusion region, which is the reason why the spatial distribution of hydrogen and temperature in the central region shows good agreement. Although the reaction between hydrogen and oxygen in the core region is more sufficient, the content of H
2O generated in the core region is relatively low due to the high content of hydrogen in this region, which results in the spatial distribution of H
2O being low in the core region and high in the diffusion region.
Figure 6d illustrates the axial distribution of the particle species under case 1. The figure clearly shows that the reduction process of iron oxides is quite thorough. Regarding Fe
2O
3, as the starting material of the reduction reaction, its content continues to decrease during the descent of the iron ore particles. The content of Fe
3O
4, as the intermediate product of the reduction process, shows a tendency to increase and then decrease with the height of the iron ore particles. When the height drops to 5.91 m, the content of Fe
3O
4 reaches the maximum value of 17.15%. The reason for this phenomenon can be explained that during the reduction of Fe
3O
4 to FeO, Fe
2O
3 is also concurrently continuously reduced to Fe
3O
4, and the rate of Fe
3O
4 consumption is higher than the rate of its production, resulting in a decrease in its content with the decrease in the height of the iron ore particles. FeO is one of the raw materials of the reaction as well as an intermediate product. Since both FeO and Fe
3O
4 play the role of intermediate products, their content changes in a similar trend: as the height of the iron ore particles decreases, the content of both shows a tendency to increase and then decrease. Since the raw material contains FeO initially, the change in its content is relatively small. When the height decreased from 6.6 m to 5.91 m, the content of FeO changed from 7.78% to 11.08%. In the range of the remaining height of the reaction tower, its content continued to decrease from 11.08% to 1.97%. Fe, as the final product of the entire process and the reduction reaction, gradually increased with the decrease in the height of the iron ore particles from the initial 0% to 70.12%.
Figure 7a illustrates the spatial distribution of the gas absorption coefficient inside the flash bath smelting furnace. The gas absorption coefficient is defined as a constant in this study and the exact values are shown in
Table 1. The regimented configuration of the reactor results in an approximately symmetrical distribution of the gas absorption coefficient along the radial direction. Notably, the asymmetrical distribution in the lower region of the apparatus is primarily attributed to geometric variations in this region and the diffusion of syngas in the positive
y-direction. The gas dispersion behavior and its compositional distribution cause a dramatic gradient in the absorption coefficient within the reactor. Specifically, the absorption coefficient in the radial central region is lower than in the diffusion zone due to the relatively low absorption coefficient of H
2 injected vertically downward through the central inlet of the furnace, while components with higher absorption coefficients (e.g., H
2O) are concentrated in the vicinity of the reactor walls.
Figure 7b reveals the axial distribution of the absorption coefficient of the gas phase. As the height decreases from 6.77 m to 6.14 m, the absorption coefficient under case 1 increases from 0.107 m⁻
1 to 0.128 m⁻
1. This can be explained by the decrease in the concentration of low-absorption components (H
2) and the increase in high-absorption components (H
2O) during the hydrogen oxidation combustion reaction. As the syngas undergoes downward movement from 6.14 m to 2.06 m, the reduction reaction between hydrogen and the iron ore particles moderates the generation rate of H
2O, leading to the gas-phase absorption coefficient decreasing from 0.128 m⁻
1 to 0.097 m⁻
1. Below a height of 2.06 m, fluctuations in the gas composition result in a trend in the absorption coefficient that first increases and then decreases. The radial distribution of the absorption coefficient is depicted in
Figure 7c, Under case 1, The absorption coefficient attained a trough value of 0.085 m
−1 at
y = 2.84 m, attributed to the high concentration of H
2 in the core region of the furnace. Furthermore, the difference in the lower iron oxide content of the feedstock under case 1 conditions resulted in a relatively minor change in the absorption coefficient compared to the other cases.
Volume absorption radiation, which refers to the portion of radiative energy absorbed and reduced while passing through a fluid medium due to the absorption effect of the medium, is visualized in
Figure 8. As shown in
Figure 8a, the distribution of volume absorption radiation within the reactor exhibits a pattern of low values in the central region but high values near the walls, attributed to the relatively small absorption coefficient in the core region. As a crucial indicator of the medium’s ability to absorb radiation, the absorption coefficient exhibits a high degree of coherence with the spatial distribution of volumetrically absorbed radiation, which can be calculated by using the following equation [
39]:
where
Qabs signifies the volume absorption radiation energy.
α denotes the absorption coefficient of the fluid medium.
I represents the radiation intensity. Additionally, α is the manual input value, while
Qabs and
I are computationally calculated output values. Under the case 1 condition, as the height decreases from 6.77 m to 6.14 m, the increased steam concentration enhances the gas-phase absorption coefficient, leading to a significant augment in volume absorption radiation from 112,421.98 W/m
3 to 132,841.11 W/m
3 (
Figure 8b). When the height further decreases to 2.06 m, the volume absorption radiation demonstrates a declining trend. This is because of the reduction reaction between H
2 and iron ore particles, which slows the generation of steam, thereby reducing both the absorption coefficient and volume absorption radiation. In the radial direction, the lowest volume absorption radiation for arbitrary operating conditions occurs in the core region. At
y = 2.84 m, the minimum volume absorption radiation under the case 1 condition can be observed, with a value of 89,364.6 W/m
3. This can be explained by the lower absorption coefficient in the core region compared to the diffusion region. The differences between the case 1 condition and the other four conditions are primarily due to variations in the raw material composition.
Incident radiation is defined as radiant energy incident from all directions on a specific point or control volume. The incident radiation can be calculated by Equation (11):
where
is the incident radiation.
is the refractive index of the medium.
is the Stefan–Boltzmann constant.
is a user-defined radiation source. In this study,
is defined as zero.
is a computed output value, while
and
are manual input values.
Figure 9a illustrates the spatial distribution of incident radiation within the reactor. The highest incident radiation intensity appears in the central region of the furnace, followed by the near-wall region, while the lowest incident radiation intensity is symmetrically distributed on both sides of the nozzle along the axial centerline. This is attributed to the dense distribution of iron ore particles scattered around the central axis, which absorb significant heat during reduction reactions, resulting in local temperature drops that affect incident radiation. The low incident radiation near the nozzle is due to heat exchange between the freshly introduced low-temperature ore particles and the high-temperature gas phase. When the height decreases from 6.77 m to 4.77 m, the incident radiation intensity considerably increases from 1,019,068.78 W/m
2 to 1,090,361.81 W/m
2 (
Figure 9b). The variation in the height interval 6.14 m ≤
h ≤ 6.77 m is ascribed to the increase in temperature, while the increase in the range of 4.77 m ≤
h ≤ 6.14 m is due to a decrease in the absorption coefficient. As the height further decreases, particularly in the range of 4.77 m to 2.4 m, the reduction reaction of iron ore absorbs heat, lowering the furnace temperature and gradually reducing the incident radiation intensity to 1,061,935.48 W/m
2. In the lower altitude range, the incident radiation intensity under the case 1 condition illustrates a distinctly different distribution pattern compared to the other four conditions. Specifically, in the height range of 0.25 m ≤
h ≤ 2.4 m, the incident radiation intensity under the case 1 condition continues to rise, reaching 1,086,711.31 W/m
2, whereas in the other four conditions, it increases and then decreases. The large difference in the trends is primarily due to the sufficiently reduction reactions of iron ore particles for case 1. Compared to cases 3, 4, and 5, the variations in case 2 are especially pronounced, mainly because of its higher concentrations of CaO, SiO
2, and Al
2O
3, which have lower absorption coefficients than iron ore. The radial distribution of incident radiation in the reactor for cases 2–5 exhibits a pattern of high- and low-intensity values in the core and diffusion regions, respectively, with the low values concentrated near the central axis, as shown in
Figure 9c. This phenomenon is also related to the distribution of iron ore particles around the central axis and the temperature reduction caused by their reduction reactions. The differentiation of case 1 from the other cases in terms of raw materials results in lower values of incident radiation in the core region, leading to a different distribution from that of cases 2–5.
Figure 10a demonstrates the spatial distribution of radiation temperature in the apparatus. The central region along the radial direction has the largest temperature, while in the diffusion zone, the temperature initially decreases and then increases with increasing distance from the central axis. It is noted that the heat is absorbed by the high concentration of iron ore around the central axis during reduction reactions, thus reducing the incident radiation in the diffusion zone.
Figure 10b illustrates the axial distribution of radiation temperature. As the height decreases from 6.77 m to 4.77 m, the enhanced incident radiation of the gas phase results in the radiation temperature increasing from 1447.9 K to 1479.59 K. In the range of the height of 4.77 m to 2.4 m, the persistent heat-absorbing reduction reaction of the iron ore powder particles reduces the radiation temperature to 1470.65 K. At the bottom of the reactor, the differences in radiation temperature between the case 1 condition and the other four conditions are primarily caused by variations in incident radiation.
Figure 10c presents the radial distribution of radiation temperature. Except for case 1, the other four conditions exhibit symmetrical distribution patterns, where the largest radiation temperature appears in the core region of the furnace, whereas the radiation temperature in the vicinity of the reactor walls is slightly higher than in other regions. However, under case 1, the radiation temperature shows a unique distribution pattern, i.e., lower temperature in the core region and higher temperature at the sides. Specifically, the radiation temperature for case 1 drops to a minimum of 1458.91 K at the vertical position
y = 2.6 m. This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that the iron ore powder particles can carry out the reduction reaction sufficiently under the condition of specific ore composition, while the incident radiation intensity in the core region is low, which together results in the above radiation temperature distribution characteristics.
Combining the distribution characteristics of incident radiation and radiation temperature, it is obvious that the areas with higher values of both are concentrated in the center. Accordingly, it can be reasonably deduced that reducing the diameter of the reactor tower will effectively improve the heating efficiency of iron ore particles, which is expected to increase the production output.
Thermal conductivity, which is a fundamental physical property of matter, characterizes the extent to which a material is capable of conducting heat through a unit area per unit temperature gradient and per unit time. The spatial distribution of gas phase thermal conductivity exhibits a prominent high-center and low-sides pattern, as shown in
Figure 11a. This distribution characteristic correlates with the high-central and low-side temperature gradient observed along the radial direction inside the furnace.
Figure 11b illustrates the variation in gas phase thermal conductivity at different heights. As the height decreases from 6.77 m to 5.44 m, the thermal conductivity of the gas phase increases significantly from 15.55 W/m·K to 118.21 W/m·K. This is primarily owed to the high-temperature distribution in the upper regions of the reactor, which intensifies molecular thermal motion and enhances heat transfer efficiency. However, as the height further decreases from 5.44 m to 0.625 m, the gas phase thermal conductivity decreases gradually from 118.21 W/m·K to 52.79 W/m·K, resulting from the phase transformation of iron ore particles during the reaction process. In the lower region of the furnace, the gas phase thermal conductivity exhibits an anomalous rising trend. Specifically, as the height decreases from 0.625 m to 0.25 m, the increasing syngas temperature leads to the gas phase thermal conductivity increasing from 52.79 W/m·K to 83.66 W/m·K.
Figure 11c depicts the radial distribution of gas phase thermal conductivity inside the furnace. In the radial direction, the high and low gas phase thermal conductivity of the gas phase can be observed in the core region and in the vicinity of the furnace wall, respectively. Notably, In particular, the gas phase thermal conductivity peaks at
y = 2.84 m (150.5 W/m·K), which is attributed to the high-temperature distribution in this region.
Volumetric emission radiation, defined as the radiative energy emitted from within a medium due to thermal radiation effects, is introduced in this section to characterize the complex gas–particle multiphase reaction flow in the apparatus. This variation can be described utilizing the Stefan–Boltzmann law [
40], as shown in Equation (12):
Here,
Qem represents the volumetric emission radiation energy.
σ denotes the Stefan–Boltzmann constant.
ϵ and
T are the emissivity and absolute temperature of the medium, respectively. Additionally,
σ and
ϵ are the manual input values, while
Qem and
T are computationally calculated output values. In the vicinity of the nozzle, the ambient temperature iron ore particles injected as feed material reduce the volumetric radiation of the gas phase (
Figure 12a). As the height decreases, the reactor temperature gradually increases, particularly in the core region. This temperature variation causes variation in the absorption coefficient, thereby influencing volumetric radiation.
Figure 12b depicts the axial distribution of the volumetric radiation. When the height decreases from 6.77 m to 5.44 m, volumetric radiation increases gradually from 116,005.97 W/m
3 to 167,951.86 W/m
3, attributed to the limited heat exchange process between the low-temperature feed material and the high-temperature syngas. As the height further decreases to 3.72 m, volumetric radiation increases drastically to 561,612.73 W/m
3 due to significant increases in temperature and absorption coefficient. Within the range of 1.68 m ≤
h ≤ 3.72 m, volumetric radiation decreases from 561,612.73 W/m
3 to 325,640.67 W/m
3 with decreasing height. This decline is a result of the heat absorption by reduction reactions, which reduce the gas-phase temperature and thereby affect both the absorption coefficient and volumetric emission radiation. When the height decreases further to 0.25 m, volumetric radiation gradually rises, reaching 548,746.74 W/m
3. This can be explained that the iron ore particles have almost completed the heat-absorbing reduction reaction to iron while the hydrogen still continues to react with oxygen to release heat, raising the temperature in the furnace. The radial distribution of volumetric radiation exhibits a high-center, low-sides pattern, as shown in
Figure 12c. Owing to the high-temperature atmosphere in the core region, a peak of the volume emitted radiation with a value of 395,017.72 W/m
3 can be observed at
y = 2.84 m, while the low-temperature distribution on both sides results in a distribution of low-volume emitted radiation. Among the five operating conditions, case 1 has a significantly lower peak due to the efficient absorption of heat during the sufficient reduction reaction between the iron ore particles and the hydrogen.
Figure 13a presents the spatial distribution of the particle absorption coefficient within the furnace. The absorption coefficient in the vicinity of the nozzle is appreciably higher than in other regions, while this variable in the core region is lower than that near the wall, indicating that the particles are primarily distributed in the region adjacent to the central axis. Moreover, in the region where the reactor shaft intersects with the settler, a noticeable gradient variation in the particle absorption coefficient can be observed, attributed to the dispersive behavior of the particles entrained by the high-velocity jet.
Figure 13b illustrates the distribution of the particle absorption coefficient with respect to the height in the reactor. In the upper region of the reactor (6.77 m ≤
h ≤ 6.14 m), the particle absorption coefficient significantly decreases from 8.13 m
−1 to 1.44 m
−1. This is due to the dispersive behavior of the particles entering the reaction shaft reducing the concentration of particles per unit volume, suppressing the gas-phase fluid and particle radiation intensity, which is manifested as a reduction in the absorption coefficient on a macroscopic scale. As the particles continued to descend (6.14 m ≤
h ≤ 2.06 m), the particle absorption coefficient increased from 1.44 m
−1 to 6.1 m
−1, which is ascribed to the variation in the primary phase composition of the particles as a result of the reduction reaction of the iron ore particles in this region. Conversely, in the lower part of the reactor (0 m ≤
h ≤ 2.06 m), the particle absorption coefficient decreases from 6.1 m
−1 to 2.56 m
−1, which can be explained by the reduced particle concentration after entering the settler. Notably, the variation in the particle absorption coefficients for the five conditions in the region
h ≥ 2.4 m exhibits a high degree of consistency. In other regions (
h < 2.4 m), the performance of case 1 appeared dramatically dissimilar to that of the other four cases, because of the lower Fe
2O
3 and higher FeO content in the former compared to the latter.
Figure 13c plots the radial distribution of the particle absorption coefficient. The particle absorption coefficient gives an oscillatory trend of increasing and then decreasing with increasing
y-axis coordinate values, followed by increasing yet again. For case 1, at
y = 2.83 m, the particle absorption coefficient reaches its peak value of 8.54 m
−1. Further examination of the 3.79 m ≤ y ≤ 4.74 m region reveals that the particle absorption coefficients for case 1 are essentially stabilized, and the increasing trend is by no means significant. However, for the other four conditions, the particle absorption coefficient exhibits a noticeable increase in the same region. This discrepancy is due to the insufficient reduction reaction of the iron oxides, leading to an increase in the particle absorption coefficient as the
y-axis coordinate increases in the 3.79 m ≤
y ≤ 4.74 m region.
The particle scattering coefficient is a vital parameter in radiation models, describing the scattering capacity of particles to radiation.
Figure 14a visually presents the spatial distribution of the particle scattering coefficient in the furnace, which exhibits a pattern similar to that of the particle absorption coefficient, attributed to the shared dependence of both coefficients on the intrinsic properties of the material. Moreover, the values of the scattering coefficient are consistently lower than those of the absorption coefficient, proving the quantitative difference between the two variables. The axial distribution of the particle scattering coefficient is demonstrated in
Figure 14b. Within the height range of 6.77 m ≤
h ≤ 6.14 m, the particle scattering coefficient decreases dramatically from 0.09 m
−1 to 0.016 m
−1. While the particles continue descending to 2.06 m, the scattering coefficient increases from 0.016 m
−1 to 0.068 m
−1. In the lower region of the furnace (0 m ≤
h ≤ 2.06 m), the scattering coefficient decreases from 0.068 m
−1 to 0.028 m
−1. This segmented variation along the axis reveals the complex behavior of the scattering coefficient at different heights. The radial distribution of the particle scattering coefficient inside the furnace is similar to that of the particle absorption coefficient, as shown in
Figure 14c. The peaks of both variables are observable at
y = 2.83 m, where the peak of the particle scattering coefficient is 0.095 m
−1. This further confirms the intrinsic connection between the spatial distribution of particle scattering and absorption characteristics, as well as their law of being driven by co-factors.