Summer Internship PresentationJindal Steel & Power Ltd.

Angul, Odisha

Zorawar Singh Nandwal

Slag Handling System at JSPLDuration of the Project: 16th May 2016 – 22nd June 2016

1.5 minsLoading

the previously filled Slag Pot onto the

Kress3.17 mins

Removal of

filled Slag Pot

from under

the EAF

3 minsPlacing the Empty Slag Pot under the EAF

KRES

SRoad No. 8

Slag Atomizing

PlantSlag

DumpingSlag

Dumping

Offices

Slag

Du

mpi

ng

RAMP

Slag Handling Operation by Single Kress Carrier

8.28 mins

Moves towards the SAP

5.25 mins

Enters the Slag

area + Dumpin

g in Slag

Crushing Pit

1 minSpray

of Lime

1 minRemove

s the empty

Slag Pot

1.5 minLoads

the previous

ly emptied slag pot

5.23minMoves

towards SMS

Sl ag

Po t

Emp

ty

Slag

Po

t

EAF

Kress Carrier

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1110

15

20

25

30

35

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

30

26

2425

24 22

21

20

18

17

19

4%

9%

19%

24%

29%

34%

39% 44%

49%

54%

60%

PS Ball Generation Vs Slag Handling price (per ton of liquid steel)

Rate per Ton PS Ball generation%

Slag

Han

dlin

g Co

st R

s/to

n of

Ls

% o

f PS

Ball

Gene

ratio

n

PRESENT CONDITION

Costs Incurred- ₹5.21cr

As per ContractCosts Incurred-

₹3.27cr

Road No. 8

Slag Atomizing

PlantSlag

DumpingSlag

Dumping

Offices

Slag

Du

mpi

ng

RAMP

Slag Handling Operation by Both Kress Carriers

EAF

7

Is EcoMaister beneficial?PROS CONS

60% slag converted to PS Balls Avg. production of PS Balls is 4% since inception(WHY?)

40% slag crushed which can be used at JSPL More than 95% slag is crushed

Effective use of Slag Incurring losses( paying double amount per ton of Liquid steel)

Slag Dumped (FUTURE USE OF SLAG?) Slag piles up

Production of PS Balls Generates Income No substantial income at present

8

EcoMaister(Slag Handling Contract)

Yes

-Slag Atomizing?-Future use of

Slag?-Carrying Cost?

No

- New Contract?- In-house slag

handling?-PS Balls?

9

Problems• No atomizing possible due to unavailability of Kress Carrier; hence the high costs

• Maintenance of Kress Carrier not done by Certified Mechanics which leads to longer and consecutive breakdowns

• Road No. 8 and the path of the Kress Carrier is not clear; used by other vehicles

10

Alternative-I• Both the Kress carriers are made available at all times as shown in Animation-II

• This would decrease the losses by almost ₹1.94 crores per year and would also lead to 60% Atomizing & 40% Crushing as per contract

PS Ball Generation Earnings from PS Balls Production of PS Balls Income

(in crores) Slag Crushed Slag Crushing Rate Cost(in crores)

Difference(in crores

4% ₹ 125 20145.16 0.25 483483.8 113 5.46 (5.21)

60% ₹ 125 302177.4 3.77 201451.6 350 7.05 (3.27)

11

Alternative-II• Both the Kress carriers are made available at all times as shown in the animation.

• This would decrease the losses by almost ₹1.94 crores per year and would also lead to 60% Atomizing & 40% Crushing as per contract.

• But due to decreasing in-house demand of Crushed slag, the contract may be negotiated to increase the PS

Ball Production(to 80%) which would also increase the income. This would cut the losses by ₹3.82 crores.

PS Ball Generation Earnings from PS Balls Production of PS Balls Income

(in crores) Slag Crushed Slag Crushing Rate Cost(in crores)

Difference(in crores

4% ₹ 125 20145.16 0.25 483483.8 113 5.46 (5.21)

60% ₹ 125 302177.4 3.77 201451.6 350 7.05 (3.27)

77% ₹ 125 387794.33 4.84 115834.7 415 4.80 0.4

12

Alternative-III• No PS Balls Generation. Only Slag Crushing done at the rate of ₹113 per ton.

• This alternative would lead to piling up of slag and would not generate income.

Slag Crushed Slag Crushing Rate Cost(in crores)

503629 ₹ 113.00 5.69

13

Alternative-IV• Proposing new Slag Crushing rates upon negotiation so as to achieve equal cost (per ton of

liquid steel) at each rate.

Slag Crushing Rate(Actual)113113131154168183200221245273

308

Slag Crushing Rate(Proposed)6077

104118135155175205238273

308

Difference533627363328251670

0

Rate Per Ton17171717171717171717

15

Rate Per Ton2626242524222120181715

PS Ball generation%

4%9%

19%24%29%34%39%44%49%54%59%

14

Options?

• EcoMaister turns out to be the least expensive out of all 3. Also these are 2012(for Vista Mining and M/S K.Rao) costs and would have increased in today’s date.

• The new contracts will include expenses and would also take considerable time to begin operations

ContractorsSlag Qty(tons/year) 5,03,629 5,03,629 5,03,629Slag Crushing Rate(₹/ton) @ 90-100% 113 220 286

Remarks: Additionalmonthly charges of ₹ 37 lacs

₹14.4 crM/S K.Seshagiri Rao & Co.

₹5.69 cr ₹11.07 crEcoMaister Vista Mining

15

Current Status of Ecomaister Operation in Angul

• Average generation of PS ball is only 4% of slag generated against 60% forecasted

• JSPL incurring Higher cost per ton of Liquid Steel due to lower amount of PS ball generation

• Currently we are paying approx. Rs 30 per ton of LS whereas it can be Rs 19 per ton if we make 60% PS Ball (We are considering only Slag Crushing & PS ball Generation costs).

16

Why Less generation of PS Ball?• Kress Carrier non availability, Frequent Break down of Kress carrier

• Due to Double Slag pot operation they are not getting time for making PS Ball

• AC of Kress in not working due to which Kress operators are not willing to make PS Ball

• With Single Slag Pot Operation, Slag Pot are filled 100% with Slag & there are chances of reactions in slag which can spill & can damage the Kress. So we wait to cool down the slag.

• Due to Crushed Slag Requirement in Phase 1- B, We stopped PS Ball generation for some time

• Most of the time single Kress carrier in operation

17

Is it possible to Make PS Ball in current situation?

• It is possible to make the PS ball with current single Slag Pot operation provided Kress carrier is properly maintained. Will try to make PS ball during next campaign.

• With BF operation, we don’t know whether the PS Ball generation is possible or not. Currently at Raigarh we are not able to make PS ball from BF slag.

Operations with Ecomaister Operation with 100% Slag Crushing (Other than Ecomaister)

60% slag converted to PS Balls & 40% slag crushed which can be used at JSPL.We have made 22% PS ball in the month of June’15, 17% in July’15 & will try to maximize in next campaign.

Total Slag quantity to be crushed

Ecomaister will buy back PS ball from JSPL @ 225 per Ton PS Ball not Available for Sale

Converted PS Ball Ecomaister will buy back & only crushed quantity to be handled/disposed

No PS ball generation. 95% Slag to be disposed

In case we are doing 100% crushing & no PS ball generation then we have to pay Rs 113 per ton for Crushing as per current contract with Ecomaister

Offers received in 2012 from M/s Vista Mining (Rs 220 per Ton + 37 Lacs/month fixed Cost) & from M/s K.Seshagiri Rao (Rs 286 Per Ton) for Slag Crushing. Cost are Higher as compared to Ecomaister. Current rates may be higher than above mentioned rates

All ready in operation If we go for new contract, we need to do civil & Structural work which may require CAPEX. Also Mobilization time would be atleast 4 to 5 month 18

Operations

19

Conclusion• We recommend to continue with Ecomaister contract

• In case we want to go with 100% Crushing of Slag then also cost per ton for Ecomaister will be lower than other two contractors in considerations. Kindly also note that for crushing we have not taken any current offers.

• We are able to make 22% PS ball in the month of June’15 (2nd Month of Ecomaister commissioning) & most of the reasons for low production of PS Ball attributes to JSPL

20

Forecasting the Price & Production of Steel in India

Duration of the Project: 23rd June 2016 to 10th July 2016

21

Methodology• Determine the purpose of Forecast• Establish a Time Horizon• Select a forecasting technique• Gather and Analyze Data• Prepare the Forecast• Monitor the Forecast

22

Steel WPI

23

Data Set of Year 2006

Month Coal WPI Ore WPI Power WPI Exchange Rate OIL (/barrel) SteelWPI GDP Growth Rate Oxygen WIPJan-06 117.6 139.7 116.1 43.925 60.61 92.7 2.50% 105.1Feb-06 117.6 133.8 116.9 44.275 58.95 93.7 2.50% 105Mar-06 117.6 132.4 117.3 44.5 60.01 95.3 2.50% 105Apr-06 117.6 159 117.6 44.9 67.06 102.6 2.50% 104.2May-06 117.6 168.6 118.5 46.305 67.33 96.8 2.50% 104.2Jun-06 117.6 170 121.5 45.88 66.90 95 2.50% 104.1Jul-06 117.6 171.6 122.5 46.5 71.29 97 1.40% 101.4Aug-06 117.8 177.2 122.9 46.48 70.87 96.9 1.40% 101.4Sep-06 117.8 176.3 123.6 45.91 60.94 98.7 1.40% 101.4Oct-06 117.8 178.3 123.4 44.92 57.26 101.6 3.30% 101.4Nov-06 117.8 178 122.6 44.6 57.80 100.2 3.30% 101.2Dec-06 117.8 173.2 120.3 44.115 60.34 99.3 3.30% 101.4

24

Correlation Analysis

Coal WPI Ore WPI OIL (/barrel) Oxygen WIP SteelWPI Exchange Rate GDP Growth Rate Power WPICoal WPI 1Ore WPI 0.912167 1OIL (/barrel) 0.477987 0.618205332 1Oxygen WIP 0.313904 0.21759252 -0.230769345 1SteelWPI 0.916126 0.911594943 0.650676775 0.191298209 1Exchange Rate 0.72184 0.654145884 -0.006383516 0.708318552 0.588240789 1GDP Growth Rate -0.24189 -0.241024359 -0.127596292 -0.049824481 -0.326560474 -0.177815847 1Power WPI 0.878741 0.883481282 0.464592324 0.492227941 0.848830135 0.848800878 -0.168619866 1

25

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.949227R Square 0.901032Adjusted R Square 0.897589Standard Error 8.997077Observations 120

ANOVAdf SS MS F Significance F

Regression 4 84750.81658 21187.70415 261.7465586 9.19983E-57Residual 115 9308.951336 80.94740292Total 119 94059.76792

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%Intercept 47.02339 7.383412548 6.368787928 4.05826E-09 32.39826945 61.64850796 32.39826945 61.64850796Coal WPI 0.520472 0.071653545 7.263733399 4.83452E-11 0.378540367 0.662404133 0.378540367 0.662404133Ore WPI 0.040212 0.015014634 2.678209979 0.008485795 0.010471242 0.069953441 0.010471242 0.069953441Power WPI 0.372332 0.084142979 4.424993628 2.20425E-05 0.205661098 0.539003192 0.205661098 0.539003192Exchange Rate -1.20426 0.214326405 -5.618802717 1.36076E-07 -1.628797145 -0.779718427 -1.628797145 -0.779718427

Regression StatisticsStrength of the Linear

Relationship

The points that fall on regression

line

Adjusts the number of

terms in the model

Estimate of the error

26

ForecastRegression Equation

Month Coal WPI Iron Ore WPI Power WPIExchange Rate$Steel WPI Real WPI VarianceNov-15 189.8 340.1 177.9 66.462 145.68 139.9 -0.0413Dec-15 189.8 306.8 176.8 66.208 144.24 137 -0.0528

27

Trend Analysis

Month January February March April May June July August September October November DecemberSteelWPI 92.7 93.7 95.3 103 97 95 97 96.9 98.7 101.6 100.2 99.3

Month

Stee

l WPI

28

Production of Steel

29

Data Set of Year 2006 Month Coal Production Iron Ore DRI Per Capita Consumption SteelWPI Steel BFIJan-06 38.32 15.18 1.12 0.0037491 92.7 4.05 2.47Feb-06 36.9 14.00 1.04 0.0035413 93.7 3.83 2.26Mar-06 43.82 16.74 1.22 0.0038974 95.3 4.22 2.5Apr-06 31.53 14.572 1.28 0.0037360 102.6 4.05 2.19May-06 33.23 14.741 1.31 0.0037778 96.8 4.10 2.31Jun-06 31.92 12.625 1.25 0.0037458 95 4.07 2.3Jul-06 30.7 11.149 1.27 0.0038150 97 4.15 2.27Aug-06 29.2 10.767 1.22 0.0037463 96.9 4.08 2.26Sep-06 29.2 11.655 1.29 0.0036870 98.7 4.02 2.25Oct-06 33.59 13.342 1.39 0.0039026 101.6 4.26 2.44Nov-06 36.4 14.882 1.3 0.0038798 100.2 4.24 2.4Dec-06 39.49 17.526 1.35 0.0040033 99.3 4.38 2.59

30

Correlation Analysis

Coal Production Iron Ore BFI Per Capita Consumption SteelWPI SteelCoal Production 1Iron Ore 0.002283031 1BFI 0.534169775 -0.443777514 1Per Capita Consumption0.622289042 -0.459039294 0.858798884 1SteelWPI 0.563059929 -0.396906758 0.737148741 0.870459764 1Steel 0.623620448 -0.470126798 0.878543526 0.997893463 0.878297942 1

31

Regression StatisticsSUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.999106061R Square 0.99821292Adjusted R Square 0.998107798Standard Error 0.042920619Observations 109

ANOVAdf SS MS F Significance F

Regression 6 104.9569931 17.49283218 9495.726235 9.9327E-138Residual 102 0.187902309 0.001842179Total 108 105.1448954

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%Intercept -1.139630765 0.048677698 -23.4117638 8.11181E-43 -1.236182747 -1.043078782 -1.236182747 -1.043078782Coal Production 0.001528748 0.000685771 2.229237877 0.027991285 0.000168523 0.002888972 0.000168523 0.002888972Iron Ore -0.005423609 0.001654337 -3.278417297 0.001428158 -0.008704979 -0.002142238 -0.008704979 -0.002142238BFI 0.129239564 0.013028938 9.919424312 1.22796E-16 0.103396727 0.1550824 0.103396727 0.1550824DRI 0.029752951 0.015156437 1.963057051 0.052362718 -0.00030977 0.059815672 -0.00030977 0.059815672Per Capita Consumption 1265.240636 20.00996738 63.23051968 1.22473E-83 1225.550961 1304.930312 1225.550961 1304.930312SteelWPI 0.001405903 0.000286964 4.899231641 3.62801E-06 0.000836711 0.001975095 0.000836711 0.001975095

32

Forecast• Regression EquationMonth Coal(MT) Iron Ore(MT) BF(MT) DRI(MT) Per Capita Consumption(/MT) Steel WPI Steel(MT) Real Production VarianceDec-15 58.37 11.52433 4.78 1.71 0.005724 162.20 7.0241 7.07 0.006496Jan-16 62.9 11.55000 4.76 1.51 0.005605 144.8 6.8468 7.41 0.076009Feb-16 60.1 11.60650 4.78 1.50 0.005590 139.90 6.8182 6.94 0.01755

33

Trend Analysis

January January January January January January January January January January3.7

4.2

4.7

5.2

5.7

6.2

6.7

7.2

7.7

8.2

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Month

Stee

l (M

T)

Month January February March April May June July August September October NovemberDecemberSteel 4.05 3.83 4.22 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.08 4.02 4.26 4.24 4.38

34

Questions?

35

Thank you!