nach oben

Erschienen in:

Open Access 2024 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

20. Decopperization by Utilization of the Filter

verfasst von : Xingwen Wei, Olena Volkova

Erschienen in: Multifunctional Ceramic Filter Systems for Metal Melt Filtration

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Patentsuche

Aus

Abstract

The current contribution aims to find the optimal method for removing dramp element copper from molten steel scrap. A special reactive ceramic coating on filter ceramic substrates based on ZnAl₂O₄ was reported as an effective material for the decopperization process. Therefore, the interaction between the molten copper containing iron Fe-Cu alloys and ZnAl₂O₄ as well with pure alumina were investigated by applying the sessile drop method at low oxygen partial pressure atmosphere. Furthermore, selenium was found to have a great affinity to copper for forming copper selenide, later on selenium was added to liquid Fe-Cu alloy to verify its decopperization efficiency.

20.1 Introduction

Steel scrap is a source of metal supplement, and its application should increase due to its advantages of environmental friendly. However, the insufficient recycling process led to the steel scrap usually contain copper as a common tramp element. Copper might be present in the steel scrap unintentionally, as well as it might be added to certain steels intentionally as an alloying element for reaching the required mechanical properties and increasing the corrosion effect [1‐4]. The negative impact of copper on the mechanical properties of steel, especially at surface treatment processes under high temperatures has been discussed for a long time [2, 5‐8]. The main difficulties for its solution are caused by the factors, including the lower melting point of copper (1083 °C) in comparison with iron (1538 °C) and an unlimited solubility of copper in liquid iron. According to the iron-copper phase diagram, no intermediate compound between iron and copper can be observed. Furthermore, iron has a stronger affinity to oxygen than copper. Thus the formation of copper oxides is difficult in the presence of iron.

Daehn et al. [9] presented how copper contamination would constrain future global steel recycling. Furthermore, Daehn et al. [10] and Sandig et al. [11] listed plenty of removal methods of copper from the steel scrap, including vacuum distillation and active filters. However, nowadays, no efficient method has been proposed for its solution. Table 20.1 summarized a bunch of methods that proposed in literatures.

Table 20.1

Decopperization methods

Researchers	Methods
Shimpo et al. [12]	Al₂S₃-FeS flux FeS + Cu = Fe + CuS
Cohen et al. [13]	Sulfide flux FeS + Cu = Fe + CuS
Savov et al. [14]	Evaporation of Cu
Nakazato et al. [15, 16]	Evaporation of Cu from iron silicon alloy and carbon saturated alloy
Yamaguchi et al. [17]	Fe-Pb-C
Zaitsev et al. [18]	Evaporation 100 Pa. 160 tons to 5 h
Wang et al. [19]	FeS: Na₂S: BaO = 40:20:40 Increase the S content of molten iron about 0.2%-0.42%
Labaj et al. [20]	The influence of copper content in Fe-Cu alloy on copper evaporation rate
Yamaguchi et al. [21]	Carbon saturated iron via Ag phase into B₂O₃ flux
Labaj et al. [22, 23]	Evaporation kinetic study for 0.509–1.518% copper in Fe-Cu alloy
Hu et al. [24]	FeO-SiO₂-CaCl₂ flux CaCl₂ + Cu₂O + SiO₂ → CuCl, Cu₃Cl₃(g) + CaO·SiO₂(s)
Uchida et al. [25]	NaCO₃-FeS flux FeS + Cu = Fe + CuS

Expect for the above mentioned methods, Wieliczko et al. [26] and Li et al. [27] stated the excellent efficiency of ZnAl₂O₄ spinel on the decopperization process through the formation and deposition of intermetallic Cu–Zn compound on Al₂O₃-ZnO-C materials, i.e., the carbon may reduce the ZnO oxide to Zn and O, then the released Zn would further react with Cu and forming Cu–Zn compounds that deposit on the surface of Al₂O₃. Moreover, Kim et al. [28] stated the formation of intermetallic compound Cu–Zn during the welding process between Zn coated steel and Cu electrode. The above-mentioned results indicate that ZnAl₂O₄ spinel might be a good solution for the decopperization.

In addition, copper anode slime is a by-product that contains the soluble impurities Cu, Se, Au, etc., and insoluble impurities such as Cu₂Se, etc. [29]. The high content of selenium in the anode slime is the source for the main selenium production in the world [30]. Moreover, Kilic et al. [30] reported that Cu₂Se is also a remaining phase of copper in anode slimes after the decopperization process. Instead of Cu₂Se phase, there are many various copper selenide, including Cu₂Se, Cu₃Se₂, CuSe, etc. More types of copper selenides can be found in the work of [31]. In the work of [32], selenium was found to form Cu₂Se and CuSe particles in the liquid iron containing Cu and Se.

The unclarified copper filtration possibility of the ZnAl₂O₄ material, the urgency of finding an efficient decopperization method, and the possibility of selenium in the decopperization process led to the current investigation aim to test these possible approaches for the copper removal from the steel scrap. In the present work, ZnAl₂O₄ substrates were contacted with the liquid Fe-Cu alloys. At meanwhile, pure alumina substrates were contacted with the liquid Fe-Cu alloys for the comparison. Furthermore, selenium was added into the liquid Fe-Cu alloys at 1600 °C to verify its decopperization efficiency.

20.2 Experimental Procedure

20.2.1 The Preparation of Fe-Cu Alloys

A cold crucible induction melter (KIT) (LINN High Therm GmbH) was applied to produce Fe-Cu alloys. The in-detailed description of KIT is reported elsewhere [33]. Armco iron and pure copper (99.999%), and graphite powder were used as primary materials for the sample’s preparation.

20.2.2 The Preparation of Preparation of ZnAl₂O₄

Pure ZnO (90/RS Carl Jäger, Hilgert, Germany) and Al₂O₃ (Martoxid®MR70, Martinswerk, Bergheim, Germany) were used as the raw materials to prepare the ZnAl₂O₄ substrates. The raw materials were mixed in a molar ratio of 48 mol-% Al₂O₃ and 52 mol-% ZnO. The prepared granules were pressed to substrates (diameter of 50 mm and a thickness of 5 mm) and further sintered. Afterward, the substrates were ground and polished on one side. The XRD investigations showed the complete conversion of Al₂O₃ and ZnO to ZnAl₂O₄ reaction products.

The interaction experiment between Fe-Cu alloys and ZnAl₂O₄ substrates were conducted in a hot stage microscope under an argon protective gas (99.999% Ar containing 2–3 ppm oxygen). The Fe-Cu alloy samples with a cylindrical form (height of 8 mm and diameter of 7.5 mm) were prepared, then etched with HCl and H₂O (HCl/H₂O = 1:1) mixed solution to ensure the cleanness of the Fe-Cu alloys. The conducted experiments are summarized in Table 20.2. More detailed experimental information including the schematic illustration of the sessile drop method was already reported elsewhere [34].

Table 20.2

The conducted experiments [34]

Fe-Cu (wt%)	ZnAl₂O₄ (min)	Al₂O₃ (min)
0.5% Cu, 40 ppm C	90	90
0.5% Cu, 0.5% C	90	90
1% Cu, 40 ppm C	90	90
1% Cu, 0.5% C	90	90
10% Cu, 40 ppm C	90

20.2.3 Selenium

The experiments with the selenium addition were conducted in an induction furnace (MFG40) under an argon protective gas (99.999% Ar containing 2–3 ppm oxygen). The heating rate of the MFG 40 furnace was 20 K/min and the average cooling temperature is around 175 K/min to 300 °C by directly turning off the generator. An in-detailed description of MFG 40 is described elsewhere [35]. Selenium powder (with a purity of 99.9%) and a secondary metallurgical slag were separately added into the liquid Fe-Cu alloy (130 g) through a quartz tube. Fe-Cu alloy with a 1 wt% of copper content was selected for the experiments.

First, around 1 g of selenium powder was added to the liquid Fe-Cu alloys after 5 min holding time at 1600 °C. The holding time was to ensure the fully melting of the alloy samples. Then, if the slag was necessary to be introduced into the liquids, 3 g of a high alumina secondary metallurgical ladle slag was added to the liquid alloy after 5 min of selenium’s addition. The selection of the secondary metallurgical ladle slag was taken the consideration of its viscosity and the solids phase distribution. In general, the slags with the lower viscosity has a higher particle removing efficiency. On the other hand, the formation of the copper and selenium particles locate along with the solid particles which have a high melting point was noticed. Therefore, the slag with the chemical composition as shown in Table 20.3 was selected. The phase distribution of the slag and its T_liq (°C) _calculated were predicted with the aid of FactSage 7.2 (FToxid, FTmisc, liquid slag solution phase and pure solids). The holding time after the slags addition was also settled as 5 min. The experimental procedure is depicted in Eq. (20.1). The chemical analysis of the prepared slag before the experiment was analyzed by applying the X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF; Bruker AXS S8 Tiger, Bruker AXS GmbH, Karlsruhe, Germany), as shown in Table 20.3.

$$\begin{aligned} & {\text{Alloy}}\xrightarrow{{20\,{\text{k}}/\min }}{\text{liquid}}\,{\text{alloy}}\,{\text{at}}\,1600\,{^\circ }{\text{C}}\xrightarrow{{5\,\min }} \\ & {\text{Se}}\,{\text{addition}}\xrightarrow{{5\,\min }}{\text{slag's}}\,{\text{addition}}\xrightarrow{{5\,\min }}{\text{cooling}} \\ \end{aligned}$$

(20.1)

Table 20.3

The composition of used slag in wt%

CaO	Al₂O₃	SiO₂	MgO	Fe₂O₃	MnO	T_liq, (°C)_calculated
30.11	42.71	15.08	11.08	0.92	0.09	1705.03

The chemical composition of the Armco iron and Fe-Cu alloys was measured by the spark spectrometer Foundry-Master UV (Oxford Instruments). Bruker G4 Ikarus and Bruker G8 Galileo combustion analyzers were applied to determine the S, C, and O values. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in combination with Energy-Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDX) were used for morphology and chemical composition analyses (Ultra55, Zeiss NTS GmbH). After the contacting experiments, for ZnAl₂O₄ case, the solidified iron sample together with ZnAl₂O₄ substrate were embedded into resin epoxy and perpendicularly cut for the cross sectional analysis. Solidified slag was separated from Fe-Cu alloy for the SEM/EDX analysis.

20.3 Results and Discussion

20.3.1 ZnAl₂O₄ Substrate

Figure 20.1 presents two types of interaction mechanism between Al₂O₃, ZnAl₂O₄ substrate, and Fe-Cu alloys. Al₂O₃ substrate and Fe-Cu alloys showed a non-reactive system with (0.5 wt% C) and slight amount of carbon (40 ppm C). The chemical composition of the Fe-Cu alloys was summarized in Table 20.5, copper was found to be remarkably reduced in both cases. It is well known that copper has a great evaporation rate [14]. The copper evaporation mechanism is divided into the following three stages (1). Copper transfer from the bulk of the liquid phase to the interface; (2). Copper evaporation from the liquid metal surface; (3). Transfer of the copper vapours from the interface to the core of the gaseous phase.

As mentioned in previous investigations, the copper evaporation is the reaction of first order [14, 22, 36]. The Eq. (20.2) [14] was used to determine the value of the total mass transfer coefficient based on the measured experimental data and the apparent evaporation rate constant ${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}$. ${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}$ is the main kinetic characteristic of evaporation process.

$${\ln}\frac{\%[\text{Cu}]}{\%{[\text{Cu}]}_{o}}=-\text{k}_\text{Cu}\cdot \frac{\rm{A}}{\rm{V}}\cdot \text{t}$$

(20.2)

where %$[{\text{Cu}}]$—denote content of ${\text{Cu}}$ in the melt (wt%), %${[{\text{Cu}}]}_{{\text{o}}}$—initial content of ${\text{Cu}}$ (wt%), ${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}$—apparent evaporation rate constant (${\text{m}}\cdot {{\text{s}}}^{-1}$), ${\text{A}}$—free surface of melt exposed to vacuum (${{\text{m}}}^{2}$), ${\text{V}}$—volume of melt (${{\text{m}}}^{3}$) and ${\text{t}}$—treatment time (${\text{s}}$). As shown in Eq. (20.2) the copper evaporation degree is related to the evaporation free surface. In the present experiments, the liquid Fe-Cu alloy droplet delivered a noticeable free surface for the evaporation process.

On the other hand, a strong reaction was observed between the ZnAl₂O₄ substrate and Fe-Cu alloys, especially when the carbon content in the Fe-Cu alloys was high. A representative sample after the contact between ZnAl₂O₄ substrate and liquid Fe-Cu (1 wt%)-C (0.5 wt%) Fe-Cu alloys is presented in Fig. 20.2. The liquid Fe-Cu alloy spread on the ZnAl₂O₄ substrate while a reaction layer was formed, as pointed in Fig. 20.2 a. Figure 20.2b indicates a cross section analysis between the substrate and solidified Fe-Cu alloy. A copper gradient was detected from the contact interface to the inside of the ZnAl₂O₄ substrate. Copper content was found to reduce from the interface to the inside of the ZnAl₂O₄ substrate. This phenomenon indicates a copper diffusion process. Figure 20.2c presents a morphology with a higher magnification, a massive of pores and ZnO oxides were detected. The intermetallic of copper and zinc was not detected after the present investigations. Moreover, the newly formed reaction layer contains a bunch of elements, including Al, Fe, Zn, Mn, Si, and O. However, Cu was not detected in the layer, as presented in Fig. 20.3. Figure 20.4 presents the morphology of the cross-sectional area after the interaction between Fe-10 wt% Cu and ZnAl₂O₄ substrate. According to the EDX analysis and the elements ratio (see Table 20.4), a significant amount of compounds (containing Cu and Zn) were observed to be scattered in the interacted area. Moreover, copper was also found to diffuse into the substrate.

Table 20.4

The possible compounds at the cross sectional between Fe-10 wt% Cu and ZnAl₂O₄ substrate

Positions	Cu and Zn ratio	Possible compositions
a	$\frac{{\text{Cu}}}{{\text{Zn}}}=\frac{{\text{x}}}{{\text{y}}}=\frac{79.35}{3.47}=21.14$	Diffusion of Fe-Cu molten alloy
b	$\frac{{\text{Cu}}}{{\text{Zn}}}=\frac{{\text{x}}}{{\text{y}}}=\frac{0.46}{3.24}=0.142$	ZnAl₂O₄
c	$\frac{{\text{Cu}}}{{\text{Zn}}}=\frac{{\text{x}}}{{\text{y}}}=\frac{7.65}{11.02}=0.694$	Cu₅Zn₈
d	$\frac{{\text{Cu}}}{{\text{Zn}}}=\frac{{\text{x}}}{{\text{y}}}=\frac{8.12}{12.67}=0.641$	Cu₅Zn₈

The oxygen contents in the Fe-Cu alloys were raised after the interaction between liquid Fe-Cu alloy and ZnAl₂O₄ substrates as shown in Table 20.5. The raised oxygen content in the Fe-Cu alloys was caused by the ZnAl₂O₄ that reduced by the carbon presented in the alloys. The re-oxidized ZnO powder was then collected in the experimental chamber. On the other hand, the raised oxygen might affect the evaporation of copper. The ways in which oxygen in iron melts may influence the evaporation of the solute elements copper are:

Table 20.5

Chemical composition of Fe-Cu alloys after the interaction experiments

Wt%	C	Si	Mn	Al	O	Cu wt%	Cu loss (%)
0.5% Cu Al₂O₃	40	58	16	36	72	0.382	23.4
0.5% Cu ZnAl₂O₄	15	138	13	41	423	0.411	17.6
1% Cu Al₂O₃	40	91	15	55	80	0.718	28.2
1% Cu ZnAl₂O₄	13	77	13	28	559	0.908	9.2
0.5% C 0.5% Cu Al₂O₃	0.516 wt	50	27	38	51	0.35	25.0
0.5% C 0.5% Cu ZnAl₂O₄	14	50	13	38	252	0.321	31.3
0.5% C 1% Cu Al₂O₃	0.457 wt	50	15	45	62	0.757	24.3
0.5% C 1% Cu ZnAl₂O₄	18	66	13	46	301	0.722	27.8

Adsorbing at the free surface of the melt and hinders evaporation
Reducing the partial vapour pressure of Cu $({{\text{e}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}^{{\text{o}}}=-0.05)$
Reacting with the alloy and forms an oxide slag layer which acts a barrier to this evaporation
Causing Marangoni type of flow at the melt surface which is beneficial to the refining process

Oxygen is a surfactant, it collects on the liquid Fe-Cu alloys surface to balance the surface energy between atmosphere and liquid. In addition, the surface accumulated oxygen blocks the free sites for metal-gas reactions. In other words, the surface located oxygen prevents the copper evaporation to atmosphere. Furthermore, a few ppm of oxygen can significantly reduce the surface tension value [37]. Thereby, the effect of oxygen on the free evaporation rate constant of copper from liquid iron was suggested to be expressed by assuming Langmuir’s ideal adsorption isotherm: [34, 38]

$$\text{k}_\text{Cu}^\text{e}=\text{k}_\text{Cu}^\text{eo}(1-{\theta}_\text{O})$$

(20.3)

where ${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}^{{\text{e}}}$—free evaporation rate constant of Cu on the surface of liquid iron (${\text{m}}\cdot {{\text{s}}}^{-1}$). ${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}^{{\text{eo}}}$—free evaporation rate constant of Cu on the surface of oxygen free liquid iron (${\text{m}}\cdot {{\text{s}}}^{-1}$). ${\theta}_{{\text{O}}}$—degree of surface coverage by absorbed oxygen ($\theta_{{\text{O}}}$ ≤ 1).

$${{{\text{K}}}_{{\text{O}}}^{{\text{Cu}}}\cdot {\text{a}}}_{{\text{O}}}=\frac{{{{\theta}}}_{{\text{O}}}}{(1-{{{\theta}}}_{{\text{O}}})}$$

(20.4)

where ${{\text{K}}}_{{\text{O}}}^{{\text{Cu}}}$—adsorption equilibrium constant of oxygen on the surface of liquid iron. ${{\text{a}}}_{{\text{O}}}$—activity of oxygen in liquid iron. Combination of Eqs. (20.3) and (20.4) gives the free evaporation rate of Cu on the surface of liquid iron.

$${{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}^{{\text{e}}}=\frac{{{\text{k}}}_{{\text{Cu}}}^{{\text{eo}}}}{(1+{{{\text{K}}}_{{\text{O}}}^{{\text{Cu}}}\cdot {\text{a}}}_{{\text{O}}})}$$

(20.5)

$${\Upsilon }_{{\text{Fe}}-{\text{O}}}={\Upsilon }_{{\text{Fe}}}-{\text{RTIn}}(1+{{\text{K}}}_{{\text{O}}}^{{\text{Cu}}} {{\text{a}}}_{{\text{O}}})$$

(20.6)

where ${\Upsilon }_{{\text{Fe}}}$ and ${\Upsilon }_{{\text{Fe}}-{\text{O}}}$ are the surface tension of the iron and oxygen containing iron. The value of ${{\text{K}}}_{{\text{O}}}^{{\text{Cu}}}$ was reported as 110 in the Eq. (20.6) by Lee [39].

$${\Upsilon }_{{\text{Fe}}-{\text{O}}}=1.890-0.299{\text{In}}(1+110\,{{\text{a}}}_{{\text{O}}})$$

(20.7)

According to the Eqs. (20.3)–(20.7), the high oxygen content might reduce the copper evaporation in the Fe-Cu alloys. With the presence of carbon in the alloys, carbon reduced the oxygen content in the melts and consequently enhanced the copper evaporation.

Based on the archived experimental results, the Cu and Zn compounds were only detected in the case of Fe-10 wt% Cu alloy. However, with the low percent of Cu alloy, the compound was not detected. Therefore, the experimental results indicate that the ZnAl₂O₄ based material could not be used as a decopperization approach. In contrary, the ZnAl₂O₄ based material may reduce the copper evaporation process by introducing the oxygen into liquid Cu containing alloys.

20.3.2 The Effect of Selenium

The Addition of Selenium

Figure 20.5 presents the detected oxides with the corresponding EDX analysis (see Fig. 20.5(1)). The newly formed oxides were detected on the surface of alumina particle, which is located on the surface of the solidified Fe-Cu alloy after the selenium addition. According to the EDX analysis, the newly formed oxides contain a significant percentage of Cu and Se, it may indicate the formation of copper selenide compound. Moreover, the copper selenides in the present case revealed a hollow form, as arrow pointed in Fig. 20.5b. This phenomenon was probably caused by the high evaporation rate of Se [40]. After the selenium addition, around 7 wt% Cu was reduced in the experiment. The formation of copper selenide was considered as the main reason for the copper reduction.

The Addition of Selenium and Slag

As shown in Fig. 20.6a, solidified slag strongly adhered to the Al₂O₃ crucible. The Fe-Cu alloy surface was fully oxidized. During the experiments, the liquid alloy was shortly explored to the air when Se and slags were added to the liquid alloy. A spherical iron oxide is presented in Fig. 20.6b, with a greater magnification, a massive of Cu and Se containing particles was detected on the iron oxides as shown in Fig. 20.6 c. Furthermore, copper selenides were detected in the side of slags located along with oxides particles, as shown in Fig. 20.6d, see Fig. 20.6(1). Besides this, EDX reveals the particles consisting of Al, Fe, Mg, and O. Based on the EDX analysis, the possible oxide particles were Al₂O₃, FeAl₂O₄, and MgAl₂O₄. After the addition of Se and slag, around 12 wt% of Cu was reduced.

20.4 Conclusion

In the present work, ZnAl₂O₄ materials was interacted with the Fe-Cu alloys with and without of presence of carbon to test its decopperization possibility. For the comparison, pure Al₂O₃ has also interacted with the liquid Fe-Cu alloys. The experimental results showed no formation of any compound between copper and zinc. ZnAl₂O₄ substrate was found to be strongly reduced by the presence of carbon in the Fe-Cu alloys. On the other hand, pure Al₂O₃ substrate revealed a complete non-reactive system. Copper was mainly reduced through its evaporation process.

With the introducing of selenium into the liquid Fe-Cu alloy at 1600 °C. Copper selenium was detected at the surface of oxide, which is located on the surface of the solidified Fe-Cu alloy. Furthermore, a secondary metallurgical slag was added into the liquid Fe-Cu alloy after 5 min of adding selenium. More copper was found to vanish from the liquid Fe-Cu alloy. Copper selenide particles were later detected along with the oxides which contains complex elements of Al, Fe, Mg, and O. Selenium addition to the liquid Fe-Cu alloy exhibited a decopperization possibility.

Acknowledgements

The investigation was supported by the DFG (German Research Foundation), Project-ID: 169148856-SFB 920, subprojects C01 at the Technical University Bergakademie Freiberg. The authors are grateful for the financial support and helpful discussions. Furthermore, the authors are very grateful for the technical support from Dr.-Ing. Thilo Kreschel for chemical analysis, Ms. Ines Grahl for samples preparation, Dr.-Ing. Armin Franke for morphology analysis, Mr. Marcus Block, and Peter Neuhold for the alloys preparation.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Vorheriges Kapitel Registration of Filtration Efficiency of Active or Reactive Filters in Contact with Steel Melt in a Steel Casting Simulator

Nächstes Kapitel Interactions Between Molten Iron and Carbon Bonded Filter Materials

Z.Y. Cheng, J. Liu, Z.D. Xiang, J. Jia, Y.J. Bi, Intermetallics 120, 106747 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intermet.2020.106747CrossRef

S.-J. Kim, C.G. Lee, T.-H. Lee, C.-S. Oh, ISIJ Int. 42, 1452–1456 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.42.1452CrossRef

M. Ferhat, A. Benchettara, S. Amara, J. Fundam. Appl. Sci. 6, 92 (2015). https://doi.org/10.4314/jfas.v6i1.8

Y.-W. Jang, J.-H. Hong, J.-G. Kim, Met. Mater. Int. 15, 623–629 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12540-009-0623-5CrossRef

C. Manque, Tramp elements and steel properties: a progress state of the European project on scrap recycling. Rev. Métallurgie. 95, 433–442 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1051/metal/199895040433CrossRef

R. Boom, R. Steffen, Steel Res. 72, 91–96 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.200100090CrossRef

Y. Kondo, Mater. Sci. Forum 696, 183–188 (2011). https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.696.183CrossRef

K. Shibata, S.-J. Seo, M. Kaga, H. Uchino, A. Sasanuma, K. Asakura, C. Nagasaki, Mater. Trans. 43, 292–300 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.43.292CrossRef

K.E. Daehn, A. Cabrera Serrenho, J.M. Allwood, Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 6599–6606 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00997

10.

K.E. Daehn, A.C. Serrenho, J. Allwood, Mater. Trans. B. 50, 1225–1240 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-019-01537-9CrossRef

11.

E.F. Sandig, D. Chebykin, V.V. Prutchykova, O. Fabrychnaya, O. Volkova, Mater. Sci. Forum 959, 145–160 (2019). https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.959.145CrossRef

12.

R. Shimpo, O. Ogawa, Y. Fukaya, T. Ishikawa, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 28, 1029–1037 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-997-0057-8CrossRef

13.

A. Cohen, M. Blander, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 29, 493–495 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-998-0129-4CrossRef

14.

L. Savov, D. Janke, ISIJ Int. 40, 95–104 (2000). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.40.95CrossRef

15.

H. Ono-Nakazato, K. Taguchi, Y. Seike, T. Usui, ISIJ Int. 43, 1691–1697 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.43.1691CrossRef

16.

H. Ono-Nakazato, K. Taguchi, T. Usui, ISIJ Int. 43, 1105–1107 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.43.1105CrossRef

17.

K. Yamaguchi, Y. Takeda, Mater. Trans. 44, 2452–2455 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.44.2452CrossRef

18.

A.I. Zaitsev, N.E. Zaitseva, E.Kh. Shakhpazov, B.M. Mogutnov, ISIJ Int. 44, 639–646 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.44.639

19.

J. Wang, S. Guo, L. Zhou, Q. Li, J. Iron. Steel Res. Int. 16, 17–21 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1006-706X(09)60021-2CrossRef

20.

J. Łabaj, J. Lipart, Arch. Mater. Sci. Eng. 52, 13–17 (2011)

21.

K. Yamaguchi, H. Ono, ISIJ Int. 52, 8 (2012)CrossRef

22.

J. Łabaj, Arch. Metall. Mater. 57 (2012). https://doi.org/10.2478/v10172-012-0005-8

23.

£ABAJ J., O. B., S. G., METALURGIJA. 54, 265–268 (2011)

24.

X. Hu, Z. Yan, P. Jiang, L. Zhu, K. Chou, H. Matsuura, F. Tsukihashi, ISIJ Int. 53, 920–922 (2013). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.53.920CrossRef

25.

Y. Uchida, A. Matsui, Y. Kishimoto, Y. Miki, ISIJ Int. 55, 1549–1557 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.ISIJINT-2014-776CrossRef

26.

A.G. Wieliczko, J.N. Griszczenko, M. Krucinski, Hut. Wiadomosci Hut. 65, 256–259 (1998). ((In Polish))

27.

Li. Li, C. Xiang, P. Zhao, C. Wang, H. Tian, S. Li, J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 10, 5–7 (1998) (In Chinese)

28.

Y.G. Kim, I.J. Kim, J.S. Kim, Y.I. Chung, D.Y. Choi, Mater. Trans. 55, 171–175 (2014). https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.M2013244CrossRef

29.

J. Hait, R.K. Jana, S.K. Sanyal, Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. 118, 240–252 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1179/174328509X431463

30.

Y. Kilic, G. Kartal, S. Timur, Int. J. Miner. Process. 124, 75–82 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.minpro.2013.04.006CrossRef

31.

C. Wang, J. South. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 116, 593–600 (2016). https://doi.org/10.17159/2411-9717/2016/v116n6a16

32.

M. Jenko, J. Fine, D. Mandrino, Surf. Interface Anal. 30, 350–353 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-9918(200008)30CrossRef

33.

T. Shyrokykh, X. Wei, S. Seetharaman, O. Volkova, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 52, 1472–1483 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-021-02114-9CrossRef

34.

X. Wei, S. Dudczig, D. Chebykin, C.G. Aneziris, O. Volkova, Metals. 11, 2030 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/met11122030CrossRef

35.

O. Kovtun, M. Karbayev, I. Korobeinikov, C. Srishilan, A.K. Shukla, O. Volkova, Steel Res. Int. 20, 2000607 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.202000607CrossRef

36.

T. Matsuo, K.Maya, T. Nishi, K. Shinme, A. Ueno, S. Anezaki, ISIJ. Int. 36, S62–S65(1996)

37.

K. Morohoshi, M. Uchikoshi, M. Isshiki, H. Fukuyama, ISIJ Int. 51, 1580–1586 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.51.1580CrossRef

38.

T. Yoshida, T. Nagasaka, M. Hino, ISIJ Int. 41, 706–715 (2001). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.41.706CrossRef

39.

J. Lee, K. Morita, ISIJ Int. 42, 588–594 (2002)CrossRef

40.

J. Tanabe, Steel Res. Int. 77, 21–24 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.200606125CrossRef

41.

X. Wei, O. Kovtun, A. Yehorov, C.G. Aneziris, O. Volkova, Mater. Lett. 323, 132543 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2022.132543CrossRef

Titel: Decopperization by Utilization of the Filter
verfasst von: Xingwen Wei
Olena Volkova
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Multifunctional Ceramic Filter Systems for Metal Melt Filtration
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40929-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-40930-1

Copyright-Jahr: 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40930-1_20

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht