## 1 Introduction  
Although the iron and steel industry has made significant progress in recent years, it still has a potential of reduction of approximately 20% in energy consumption and emission generation depending on high fossil fuel consumption [1, 2]. Wasted thermal energy at 800-900 \({}^{\circ}\)C from conventional iron and steel factories has promising potential for electricity generation using various energy conversion methods [3]. In addition, it will reduce CO\({}_{2}\) emissions and increase overall efficiency. Waste heat recovery systems (WHRS), which are essential applications for strategic energy distribution, can significantly reduce energy consumption and emissions. Depending on the temperature level, waste heat sources can be divided into three categories such as low-grade waste heat (less than 230 \({}^{\circ}\)C), medium-level waste heat (between 230 and 650 \({}^{\circ}\)C) and high-grade waste heat (more than 650 \({}^{\circ}\)C) [4, 5, 6]. In this context, waste heat must be converted using appropriate energy conversion systems considering temperature ranges. This situation necessitates the use of multiple and sequential systems for energy conversion [7, 8]. The temperature ranges of the systems vary according to the type of working fluid in the systems, the investment costs, the size of the equipment used in the systems and the economic ranges of the electricity generation costs. In addition, the efficiency ranges of the systems and the combined thermal efficiencies should also be considered. Therefore, to minimize energy production costs, determining the operating temperature ranges of the systems, optimizing the equipment dimensions, and investment costs, power outputs and thermal efficiency are among the intensively studied subjects today. Various methods can be used for waste heat recovery methods, such as steam Rankine cycle (SRC), Kalina cycle (KC), organic Rankine cycle (ORC), Brayton cycle (BC) and CO\({}_{2}\) cycle. Depending on the operating conditions, such as temperature, pressure, mass flow rate and type of heat source, combined systems are intensively employed in recovering heat from waste heat to generate electricity and decrease fuel consumption and emissions [9]. For instance, [PERSON] et al. [10] aimed to produce synthetic fuel by hydrogenating captured CO\({}_{2}\) using moderate waste heat rejected from an iron and steel production facility and investigated its thermodynamic and economic feasibility. They used the KC to generate electricity and provide heat from the CO\({}_{2}\) capture plant (CCP). The electricity generated from the systems was used by the PEM electrolyzer and all power-consuming components of the facility. KC showed the highest efficiency at a 488 \({}^{\circ}\)C turbine inlet temperature and 65% ammonia fraction. The facility's fuel production efficiency reached 19% at the cost of 532 $/tons methanol. [PERSON] et al. [11] developed a new WHRS in their studies. They used the Rankine systems to generate power from slag waste heat, using a high level of waste heat, and used ORC and absorption refrigeration systems for gradual heat recovery; they also made a thermodynamic, thermoeconomic and environmental analysis of the facility they designed and tried different working fluids that can be environmentally friendly for the ORC systems. As a result of their work, a significant amount of electricity has been produced from ORC. The energy efficiency of the facility was calculated as 37.66%. [PERSON] et al. [12] presented an integrated system design for hydrogen production at high pressure by utilizing steel furnace waste heat in their studies. The integrated system consists of a hydrogen compression system and a copper chlorine system. They obtained the electrical energy required for the system from the Rankine cycle and simulated the system with ASPEN Plus V9. Energy and exergy efficiencies were calculated as 38.2% and 39.8%, respectively. [PERSON] et al.