I If D E X.
page.
Introduction
1.
MaterialA
1.
Ore
Flux
Character, Preparation,
Fuel
Sampling,
Analysis. 1 - 8.
Description
of Blast Furnace
9.
9.
Blower
Calculation of Charge
11.
Description
14.
of Run
-
Data Sheets -
- 20.
16
21.
Clean Up -
22.
Analysis of Products - --
-
Gas Analysis
Account of Stock
-
Theoretical Balance Sheet for materials
of one fyritic Charge
Calculation of Blast. -
23.
- 24 - 26 a.
- 2',30.
Thermal Balance
38.
Summary
43.
-
37.
1
INTRODUCTI~N.
The subject of this thesis ia pyritic smelting
tha Tnstitute b~~st furnace of a mixture af copper-nickel
and
the
cuprlferouB
Institute
pyr1 ta •
blast
furna.ce,
a reducing atmosphere.
conditions.
the sulphide of
matte
raduc lng emel ting
1n
18,%of coke _1s used which furnishes
In pyritic smelting, no coke or only a Bm~
amount 1s used, and this
oxidizing
With the ordinary
in
causes the smelting to taka place under
The oxidation of the iron and sulphnr of
iron and the formation of the slag, furnish the
whOle or the greater part of the heat necessary.
nf tha process, it is necessary
For the success
to have an abundant supply of
air at the right pressure and a sufficient
~uant1ty of silica
to slag off the iron which 13 not required for the desired grade
of matt9.
The matte concentration
ia affected by the amount of
alT' furnished, by the quantity of ailiciapresent
added.The
slag c~mpo81tion under given conditions
constant.
An increasa of silica
tion, but causes the formation
a. riss
and by the cOke
ia always
will not change this composiof a larger quantity of slag and
1n the grade nf the me.tte. \.
MATERIALS.
The or~ smelted consisted
nickel matte and aupriferous
of equal parts of coppsr-
pyrite.
Matte. The matte used was a mixture of four lots of coppsr matte
and one lot of nickel matte prOduced at the Institute
in labora-
x
tory :runs and in a thee is run of 1.908.
The fi va lots
'of matte
were
sap9.rately
brOken
by
s19ve to remove the finss"
han~
BS
to
only the oversize
This was sampled by fractional
weight of each lot
30 mm. B.nd screwed
S91sction,
on 8 mm.
was to be used.
one tenth part by
being reserved as sample.
The samples were
combined and reduced to 1/4 inch In the Sturtevant
rOll-jaw
.
cnlsher. Tha combined sample was then halved 1n the Jones samplar and the reserved portion put through the Hendrlck-Bolthoff
sample grinder .to pass's 30 mesh
sieve, then SPlit-shoveled
down
to 485 grams and this ground on the bucking plate to pass a
..
t,
100 mesh :screen. The matte was found to ba magnetic,
meta~11c iron particl~a from the machines
hence the
could not be r~moved
,wlth a magn.et.
The ma.tte
was analyzed
for
,C:U,N!,
Fe, Pb,
S,
CaO,
The sample for analysis was traat8d with a solution
of bromide in HN03 (Sp.Gr.l.42).
After action ceased, concen-
trated HO/was added, and the SOlution boiled until no more substance wa.s dissolved.
Na
2
The residue was then filtered, fused with
C0 8nd added to the main SOllltion.
3
evaporated
~
*
to dryness,
dehydrated,
The sOlution W~6 then
H~/and water ware added,
and the silica filtered off, washed, ignited, and weighed.
x Foot-note from 1st. p~e:-Bradford and C. A. Gibbons, Jr.
Thesis
No. 341 by A. H.
3
H2 S was passed 1ntc the slightly
a.cid fl1tre.t~,
of .copper and lead wars precipitated
sulphides
precipitate
was dissolved
in H N ~and
zed. The copper was weighed as
the
and filtered.
The
th?- SOlution electrolY-
Cu and the lead as PbO.2
The filtrate wasevaporatsd
nearly to dryness
with
H S 04,watsr was added, and the SOlution passed through a Jones
2
The iron was det.armined by ti trat1ng wi th K lJ[n04 '
solution was eV8,po:hat~d to about 250 q.;<;.,
rednctor.
AJ:tA!'.titra~ingnthe
g.od th'S nickel
weighed
precipi ta.ted by the dimsthy~gJ.YOi:ime.
i4N.404Nt ~.
as C8 H
A frash sample was taken forthedeterm1nat1on
CaO
method end
and Al 2 03. It was put into SOlution
Cn. and Pb were separated
of aluminum andiron
prsc1.pitatlt)n,
S.s shown,
thrown down
filtered,
ignited
of
as a~ove, 5102
and the combined hydroxides
by
means of a d~ubla ammonia
and weighed.
As soma nickel
carried down its amnunt has to be determined.
This was done
by fusine; the ignited precipitate
is
with ~HS04' taking up with
wat~r, precipitating with dimethylglyoxime,
ducting
,
the wsight of the previously
and weighing. De-
determined
oxides of iron
and nickel gave the A12 03 •
The ca.lcium wa.s preclp1 t:3.ted in the filtrate
cinm,b~late~he
precipitate
was di9801ved in H ~.S04 ~d
a.s cal-
titrat-
ed hot wi th:XMnO 4,-
Sulphur was determined in ~ne s~~ple by the Fresenius
method
of fusing with Na2 C03and K N 03 and in another by the
,
Gla.ser method of fusing
.
.with N8. 0
2
a,
4
The metta
of iron.
The analysis
9.54
ton,
Pb
Fe
2.35
55.32
..
Pyr!~~.
gav~ the fOllowing
:Ni
Cu
%
was found to contain some magnetic
S
25.94
.42
The pyrit~
used
CaO
SiO~. 0#
Al-O
G .tJ
~
.46
.45
came from the
pyrite
with
.63
Total
100
4.89
screening.
removad-:by
selection
on the flcor.
rOll-Jaw
crusher,
and ground
in the
the amalls
, finer
ore
in half
thrl)ugh
a lOO-mesh sieve.
sample
iron
was romoved with
by hand
by fractional
from it when
in the sturtevant
Jones
grinder.
to 210 grams and this
The metal2ic
copper-
than 8 mm. were
by means of the
HendrickTBclthoff
sp~1t-shove19d
C~Ple-
was broken
pieces
The sample was crushed
cut
mine at
was halved
sampled by taking
was-then
th9 machines
as gangue.It
The coarse
and one half
Eustis
The ora was a massive
some quartz
to pass ~ 30 rom. screen,
spread
results:
'
PTovince of Quebec, Canada.
b9~ring
oxide
sampler
The pUlp
amount bucked
from the wear of
a magnet.
The pyri ta was analyzed for S i02' F~," Al~ 03 . S, and
Cu. The SiO
,combined
oxides
of irl)n p..nd aluminum
a.nd S
2
were ds.termined in one sample, as fOllowd:
A samp~9 of about
1n 20 c.c.
of a frshly-m~da
5/10 gram. ef pyrite
mixture
of three
was dissolved
vO~lmas HN03
(Sp.gr.l.42) ..and ons volume of Hel (Sp. gr. 1.20). When dieIntegrat1.on was c('mplata 50. c. of sod.ium carbonate
wers added.
50.c.
The whole was evaporated
Hel and dehydrated.
The residue
sOlution
to dryness,treated
wae moistened
with
with
5
lo.c. HC1, _100 c.c. of hot water were ~ddad, the whole heated
to boiling and the silica fl1tsTad off, washed, and ignited
and weighed.
A teat with HF showed that the 1ne01uble residue
was silica..
The ~11trata
we,a treat9d with bromine water to oxidize
oxides of iron and a.luminum ware precip-
the iron. The combined
itated
into an _8xces3
pouring the hot filtrate
by
filtering off the
hydroxides.
and re-prec1pitated
1'hey wers re-dissolvedin
with-ammonia.. This-second
filtrate
the washing ware added to the first filtrate.
was ignl tad anct weighed
determined
as
of ammoni~,
Fe2~3'
and
The precipitate
0t -Sulphur
9.nd A12
as Ba 504 by precipitating
Hel
was
in the hot
with Ba C12
filtrate.
Iron was determined from the second sample ofpyr1te
by
dissOlving
in the sa.me mixture
chloric acid as above,
ttm
carbonate,
of nitr1cac1d
and hydro-
filtering, fusing the residue with -aOdi-
adding water and suphurlc acid (cone.), evap-
orat~d until fumes are given off, passing through a.Jonas reductor and titrating with K~no4.
Copper was determined
third sample of pyrite. -It was dissolved
1zed with ammonia., ~ada slightlY
as above, no~tral-
a.cid with hydroch:toric acid,
.-hea.ted to b~11ing a.nd hydrogen sulphide
pa.ssed. in.
itated copper sulphide was filtered off, dissolved
acid and electrolyzed.
The following
S
eu
....•
~%
40.62
45.'11
81°2
,-
1.25
~"
,
10.12
Al20~
-
The precip-
1n nitric
are the results
analysis.
Fe
in the
. .. .........
'-
2.07
-
Total
to,'
.,...
99.17
~f the
6
The fluxes used were limestone and quartz.
L1mest~ne.The
was sampled,
limestone used was a very pure white marble.
It
crushed, and ground to about 30-meah 1n the sama
way as'the pyrite. ~he sample wag split-shoveled to 300 grams ,
and then bucked through
8
lOO-mesh screen. All metallic iron
present was ~emoved with a magnet.
The analysis was carried
out in about the same way as in the Spathic
ure, common in the InstItute
The analya1s
CaO
"
54.16
Iron Ore Proceed-
raboratories.
was as fOllOws:
MgO
FeO
8102
1.13
.35
.21 43.89
C(;)2
99.74
# Calculated.
Quartz ..The ~uartz was the same used 1n the thesis of Messrs.
Bradford and Gibbons, Jr., in 1908. The1t analysis gave:
%
~i02
FeO
A1203
Tota.l
96~'61
1.50
0.49
98.60
For use 1n the smelt the quartz was broken up by hand
.to pa.ss through
a. 30 mm. screen.
Fuel. The fuel used was Everett
bins. A sufficient
The fin(:)s ware not rt:3moved.
coke taken from the Instmtute
quantity was put aside for tha run and samp-
led by reservinga;p1ece
from every fourth shovelful.
le was broken by hand, then crushed
as thf; py!'lte. It wa.s split-shoveled
this
amnunt bucked. through
8.
The samp-
and ground in the same way
down to 100 grams and
100-mesh screen.
The fOllowing
7
is "approximate"
a~~1y;~1$ of the coke.
FixedcCarbon
Matter •••• ; •••••••.
6.76
Ash ••.••••••••••••••••••••••
16•22
%
%
(Undried Sample) •••00.92
%
Volatile
Moisture
I
The aBhg~ve,
A1203 MgO
r:f
Ie;
'6.39
%
••••••••••••••• 77.02
~2.~3
8i02
upon analYsis,
,
Al:?6~ .tBO~
Fe2<?3
35.10
32.10
In the subjoined
15. 75
Tota.l
. A1k s
4 .38
3. 75
Table I a.re assembled
100.00
the results
the'above analyses.
Si02. Fe
Maienals
Mot/e. oii3
of
-
hO h?zq C,O
MiO A~~
OH'"
55.32
(! ()z
o!Js
0
~g1
S
Cq Ni
Pb.
tJ':!2
25'.9'1 9. 5'~ 2,.3S'
.
.'i1J.lll
IO.lt
.
Pyritl!
,"
I
Lim~.ste
0.2/
«ifortz:. 96.61
ao/(@
A$h
32./0
2.07
"-
o.af)
.1/3.89
/.13
6Jf./b
'IS;1/ 1.2S
t
1.60
•
35'./0
For convenience
-
0._-
____
'.37
~-
, ,
.
h.
_.
0/19
__
$03
•
3.76< '1.38
2..53 /5".75"
in calculating
the slag the percentage
of magnesia and alumina' were changed ~nto equivalent
a~es of lime and added to tne
AIKs
percent-
CaO cOlumn. This was dona as
fOllOws.
Mol. Wt. of CaO,
. x ,'1 A1 0''= Equi valent
2 3 ..
MOl. Wt. OfA1 -.O
.....-2
3
%
of Ca.o
8
MO!.!_~
_?lt. of CaO x ,'t MgO
trOl. wt:"Ofggo
=
Equi valent
%
of CaO.
Table No. I .1a thus c.h:mged'a.s given below in Table
NO.
II •
S
au
Ni
0.71
25.94
9.54
2.35
52.22
1.13
45.11
1.~5
1.50
0.27
0.35
55.73
32.10 · 31.5~
18.53
Materials
81°2
FeO
Matte
0.63
71.12
Pyri te
10.12
Q,uartz
96.61
'CaO
.
,
Limestone
Coke Ash
0.21
1.50
)~)b
0.42
9
DESCRIPTION
The blaat
OF THE BLAST FURNACE.
furna.ce of the laboratory
is similar
to the
Arizona capper blast fu~nace. It cone1ats of a water-jacketad
bo11ar shell r&st1ng on four cast iron COlumns. The working
height 1s 46" and the distance from the bottom to the level
of the
tuyerss
is
14".
a ie-meter
The
at
the top
of the furna.ce
is 23-1/4" and at the bottom 17-1/2",
There are
seven
tuyeres -- four 1-3/8" and three
2" in diametar. The bustle pipe is 6" in dlamster. This ie
shown in the drawing.
The crucible was put in the furnace as f~llOws: the
bott~m
pl8,t'9 was placed
ture of
3
and clamped •. Then a mix-
parts coke, 1-1/2 part ashes and 1 part fire clay,
was introduced
into place.
tuyer'3S
in pos1 tion
through
cha.rgiI?g door
the
a.nd tamped firmly
The fu~naca was filled up to the leval of the
w1i:h thIs
ll19.terial
firmly
tamped down. Then
the plats
which closed the br~ast of the fl~nace was rem~ved and the
central p~rt of the compact brasque dug out leaving the cruai.ble. wi th the crose
eecti"n
THE
ahown in the
drawing.
BLOWER.
The blowar which supplied the air to the furnace is
a Root No. 1/2. It has a rated ca~ac1ty of 487 c\lbic fe~t of
•
1 .•
free air per minute. running at a rats of 325 R. P.M. The
bla.st
main is 6" in diameter.
lC
The vOlume of air furnished to the furnace was measured w1th a
Pitot
tub~ and two U-tube manometers , giving
respectivelY the static and velocity pressure heeds.
P
I TOT
TUBE. S
I,
I
22-
k
2.
!
Slots are in each
s,"de dlametrt"cally
"
K------- 2.1..
2.
Fit at A IN'dh standard
Sca.le -
rull
Size.
if" elhow.
opposite.
APPARATUS.
for
BLAST
Connected
to Static
MEASUREMENTS
Tube.
Conn~cted to Static
Cl
I)
9
Tube.
0
2.0
I.S
1.0
D.S"
Connected to
9
o
O.S
Velocity
StQtJc
Pressure.
Pressure.
e
Velocity
Tube.
CA!.,CULPTION
t~~ smelt
It wa.s decided
mntte
and pyri
O~P CHARGE.
a m1xtt1.re af equa.l pa.rts of
ta .9.nd to pruduc~
e. mette
wi th 30,:1 copper
e.nd
n1ckel •
.Starting
~ha mixture
contains 5.40 Kgs. Cu, 1.17 Kgs. N1 end .21 Kgs.
Tctal = 6.78 Kgs.
Pb.
Kgs. matte and 50 Kgs. pyr1 t~.
wi th 50
Cu, Ni, Pb.
These
6.78 Kg~. =
Hance
~(?'8.__ x 100 ;:: 22.8
3~~ of Wt. nf m~tte,
Kgs. 1s the
~.rt.
~f
matte
t.o
be
prcduced par 100 Kga. ore.
New 'S.40 KgB. copper
1.17
0.21
=
6.76 KgB.
CU2S
2.13
"
Ni3S2
"
"
Pb S
"
N1
-
"
Pb
- 0.24
- 9.13
Tota.l
Matte.
Th~ FeS in tho mette will be
22.60 - 9.13 = 13.47 Kgs.
'ro snPPly
th~ FeO nacessa:ry
£'r 1"
12 Kgs. coke per 100 kge.
me tte
A ft)rm~r
one showed th~t
run,
l
this
13.4'7 x
simila.r
in cl1.e,rf:l,cter to th{-) prf.lsent
an addition
of 12 Kgs. coks to 100 Kgs.
~f ore would supplement the heat generated
ien of iroD and sulphur
thitJ
FeO ~ ll.03
-peS-"
.
end pyr1 tEt werf; us ad.
-- hc?nce the
same
by
Xgs.
the c~mbuat-
&.mcunt of fuel
time.
The slag chosen had the f~llowing
S1 02' 36.8
1;
FaO, 51.2
%;
CaO,12.o1.
compos1t1cn:
It 11es within the
range ~f pyritic slag.
The tabla N~. III
ShOW8
that the proposed charge
12
contains 62.29 Kgs. FeO.
Frcm this
totBl "ri11 have to be deducted
FeO gC'ing
1.ntc\ the matte.
82.29
- 11.03 = 51.26 . Kgs. FeD to be fluxed.
equals 36.~ x
51.2
The Silica necessary fer this FeO
=
the number of Kgs.
36.84
Kgs.
Tabla Ne. III shows t~t
Rance,
51.26
to be Bupp:..ied
Si O
2
The quartz
thera is 6.00 Kgs. s11ic~ prAsent.
used conte.lna
ThaI"ef:'('~re quartz
the.t
equals 36.84
95.531
has
- 6.00
30.84
30.84 x 100
= 313• {ggs,
95.53
T~ find the CaO n~c8s8ary the silica w~a used as
thl9 basis
c-f calcnlation.
As sh~.~.n byta,ble
Ne. IT] there
a~e now present 37.20 Kgs. of 8100.
CaO necessary for this 1s
OJ
x 37 .20~ 12.14
_1~_
36.8
Kgs.
Ther8 ~r~ already prosent 1.37 Kgs. CaD.
rence the CaO to be supplied 1a
12.14
- 1.37
= 10.77
Kp-"s.
Th9 11mAstcn~ contains .3~1FeO. Ae this 1s equ1v~1~nt
to---x
12
51.2
5.5.73 -
d
.35 /-,-:FeO
=
4 CaO, there.
• 08
/.1
V
.08.=.55.65)1. CaO available
in
1s
the
lim€;ston€l.
R9nce, the 11m~stcn9 necessary to furnish the CaD is
10. 77
5:cr.es-
x 100== 19.36
Kga.
Kgs.
8102 t
ava11ab16
to bo o...dded
==
13
TAB LF
0,:,'
~
~
~
~
;
,
N
~.
~
,
~l l''i~
"~
~t::)
K O.
::
~
~
.......
~ ...
~
~
~
'"
~
~
~
~
~
..........
~
w
"-
~
~
6'-.
~
~
~
~
lo..:)
~
C\
N
~t
~
"N
......
~
~
......
~
'()
~
:....
~
~
~
~
~
~
......
\:}
....,:
'-)
.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
"~
..
S\
~
~
~
~
~
CJ
;-..
~
c.....
~
N
~
':'
N
~
c:::i
t::)
~c:s
.ry.
N
.....
......
".~
>-
~
~
~
~
I::::.
~
~
~
~
N
tIJ
N
G'-
......
e'i
~
~
~
.~
~
~
~
N
......
b.
~
II..:l
~
~
N
c....
-Q...
~
~C)
~
<.r{
~
N
~
'.a
~
~
<%}'
~
.~
~~
*
!'i-
~
~
*
~
*
~
~
~
~
.......
~
~
~
"N
~
~
~
~
~
~
.~
"
<
l\J
~
~
~
~
"
~
~
~
~,
v,
"1
~
<
' ..
."i-
~
......
~
N
V;
~
~
a....
~
~~
~
~tJ..
......
......
~
~
--.0
~
C;'-
CS".
~
~
~
<:.tJ
~~
"~
"\
.....
j
N
~
~
I
''.~"
~
~
~
~
~
~
0)
~
~
~
~
,".
~
N
~
......
l- ~
~
~
:0...
~
N
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~~
~
~
~
~
~
T 1J •
I
"
~
~
~
~
N
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~,...
()
~
~
14
DESCRIPTION
rrhf:' fn:rne.ca
OF RUN AND DATA SHERTS.
bIO?'!"
was
in che.rg9 consisted
idual
and
ch€t,rge8
the
ing in charges
were the same
blest
tng fUAj~n.
The furnace,
was lighted,
later,
and. a gentle
ble ..st turned
the charccal
~nd coke
1-3/A"
tuyares
Charges
The indiv-
weI'EJ fad are
date sheets.
those
used
furna.ce
a tuyere
for
in
The blowthA
was inserted
'lre.rtf'
burming
freelY.
the
reducin charge,
in the t~p-hcle
'Then
furna.ce
E',.rd the
labora-
a normel
en. This was kept 'going
Ws!,'e ins art6d
until
the
run
four
a while
pyri t1c cl1a.rg-e. tJow the
~ere pu t. In ~n d t-Jhe
ttlteI"oS
~
matte.
filled with ,the blowing
l1nti 1 it got hot ene-ugh fer
th-,'.~,
~ng ~ 2 'f
9,5
charccal,
1Ai(.ct
in ~thlch t.hey
and feeder's
p
d,
kindling
(n~d51
fr:r blct1, 1ng in the
AM • The blowing
fine coppar
scm$
weigher
shown in th~
tory'
lnd
n e..t 8.45
pp...per,
~f
c~ke, coppaT slag
j
regu 1aT pyr it.10
cf 100 Kgs. cf ore and flux with 8 Kgs. of coke
fed.
DUl':fng the ~tln the f~1lcw1ng
eratn:re
of Je.ckat
water
at
r~e.ds wa~e taken:
1n:..,(:t C'.:.nd outlet,
and vel~ci~y
.h~eds cf th~ b~ast,
cubic font)
in the air, barometric
Ie temp~re.tura,
at
th~:. tempera.ture
and
,.na.tar 'Nas mea.81Jrt~d at
flew
during
tC"inE'4d frt:m
e. ha.lf
evary
8.1~r: m~'de during
m~i6tDr&
intervals
minute.
51ag
th~
part.
run.
Chilled
ot~_tic
(Gra1nG rer
prEssure,
0':'
the
temp-
etmospher-
e2,ag. The Jp-.ck-
by weighing
t.he CVf;r-
alE4..g semplE'S were
1'wo flt".e gfia ana.lyses
Gb-
were
15
'Phe fUrni\Ce
fluidi
worked vary well,
ty and th0 sam!
n. vs'!':y 18.re~~ amcpnt
formed
"1'8.S
1n the furnace
we:r(i black
mf.'lst 'cf
W8,S
the
the
the
case
produced.
sla.g shewed grea.t
wi th the
mp..tte of '"hlcll
An artificial
bosh
e,s shown by the. dral},71ng, the
time"
but
th~
blast
WEtS
tuyaree
penetrated
th~
walJ. accretion without difficulty.
The run le.stad
materials
till
2.15
p. M.
fed was 230 Kgs.,elag;
Kge., pyrite;
139.9 Kgs., quartz;
~nd 84.1 Kge. , coke.
The total
e.mc.unt
236.8 Kgs., matte;
72.1 Kgs.,
of
216.9
11meBt~n6;
16
WEIGHER.
Titne.
w.
Chqr~e
Ore.
Slag.
Mettte. Pyrite.
No.
Flu x.
Quartz
3b
SO
..J
If
9. If)
J.f
If'.
1,20
S-
I~.
'1,tfJ
/:;
~.:.
33, 33,
21.3 I ~. 8
JO,on
1
~
33. 33.0
2-\.3 J?,f6
. lo~) 7 g'
/,b 4:7
20
d
~o
(J
(j
I//?r~
CI"
It
(
,
t,
:}'}cO
JJeO
')...1 t.J , l ~f
1. r
:3(0
33:0
::2/0
("2 ~g
:2.[ ~3
/~Jb
\
~1..3 I~'~.r
(,
0
.33,() 33cO
~',
:3~to. 3JO
I /,45"
} ~ . If-
1:<'Ll-3
/3 fl.
~
/00
~
tI ~(55 1°
J 1.15 I,
-
t ure.
J
2-
,
Signa
Limest!
J
)
8.11- ~~
r
Coke.
/2 c; '1 J~/
.
6 J ~_,~ 1~,<1
J~.J
].3
_;f'
!D
v
eo
\of
\.
~eI
PI
/>~
r;..,~c:..r
r~~
,
¥ .-S?
c.t!,~]Rii-
r
1C,f1
J'
~'''.I~
wr
17
:FEED£R
I
1.
t/
/'
~
- 0.31
~/O. J
S- 3
6 !l,'b(If
7 I,
~ I~~C/
ff 1/
v{~S5
9
/1,3
10
9.~S-
l~
:./
/'2.0
If.
"
/z,. Z3
/1-
12,'1-3
/.3
/"Z15
/e
Cot¥
fA/:
G
1
t ,
,"
I.
Cot
I,
,r
/
,,
t.
,.
'
I'
I
,/
,3
2~o
1/
II
I,
w~
r
I' C ~ 7411]
Z"Z
0
cU-
2J '",
4-
..
,
/,{/
11.;:/(
y-
."
'-
(f:~
~
I"Z.°f
Wr
, £., .I1!;)'
,?~~
,
(}wo~~
t'WtA:.4 J
~
II.sS-
18
TAPPER.
ASS/~TANT
Time
~
S'totj
o/:~~
J"; S
' 3~
fO,'OS
{;,t(r
,st
/O.(CJ
, . If
.j ,
It) J '"
'If
I
'11
it)
/~,''i'l
I~:J{?
-
1~:.J.r
1/; /
II;
f-
~fL
II,' 3/
1/'. j t
,
..
0
/J. 1/6
J.'!~
,.rr;
,.elf
CJ 7r
· 6 tJ
{,7tJ
...
/..2 .' .z 21~,'.J2
lll,'tf If
/:;:JJ"
/:
-
f~j
. CtJ
/ p
/ /.;{
7
_/:J
(rx.. j,\rs
~
) ~. a r
0
J,.Jr
.(fer
12..~/
tt.()
/J~ I
bJ:
..
f
~:;.
~I
t.~
ff!.'()
I(
qJ:'r
7.(/ 1(.
/).rJ
1;"/
1
,r;~
9) C{ 0
/2.'0
I!)..
,tf:J/.()
f/. j.'
$f.tJ°
,
t.rl(
II
I
2. j
/2,,1/
I
"
r'
~r,()
'I
"
'1. (/
61-d
'1
6{.(
/1
'f
6%,1
fIe ~2/(. / t I
/.2. /
~f. dO
6(.0
6f.(J
1
P 3. J"
1tJ 1(;
7~.;
1/
0
6r:7
1()./cl~
t rC.29
(
• IP 7...
I'vl(
'/
67'7
/2,)
,
II
(tJj]
?,2.~d
..&
If
()
It/
o.
II
IJ.~/ 6/.j
).(, / ct,tJ
6 $0)-
.(,1
'I
tI
/,j..(
. ~ 2-
'I
()
'/). t! d
7;,'dJ-
70S7. err
U/fo
6'Jj.
rer , 6 i
,vi
'J~
7-1' r .• (p I
. (''210/1
-.,/
/.2./
,(,2,
If
6f~
12,/
()
'1J~ TJ
7.
"76""
c3.7
()
,S1
" 'J/~
()
[)
1)q,
fj~P
11,'1/7
t 'f
/.2; 0-0 '.7/
/2./
rf lt~o
' ;-1
l(J"
(l
--0
,3Z
I
If'/"
6J. ~
5.~
~~.r
,/;, 10
( 'jJ II; 0 3
•
(if
C.J.f
)p.'1(1J
d
'.
I ()::L?
~f
71~
1"b:t
"
71.
:L
':17
6, P;-
jo ~'Ib
l~. S()
5/°
(PI
(,'/0 {/
•~6~ ~:l. (P~'6
0
r.I((
/1../
1).6
1.7-~1
I 'l-. 0
?'f IJ~ ~
7().I
/ ;2. (
/p. C/
/:2.(
b!,f)
1)./
&6'7
I,
'/
'I
r/
f'
"
r
19
TAPPER.
Time.
TQP' Plug.
~/QPsed
of Tuye,. es. Slag Note~.
Appea.ra.nc~
Time.
2. d.
I.
4.
s.
6.
Si9nature.
Remarks.
7.
r~~
'<:$ • J-f a
,ne
ir/14-l
~.c.:.
ft. ,4. /If.
~
,-
~~J~
/ I- .:z
9,$0
9.S-~
I().
0 1-
/(). 04
9',16-
Hlh,~,
1'1..
r~~
r
/0.7>3
J 0. J
IIJ.'f.}-
lo.f''?
1~
~~~
>T
/1).
/1 tJ:!:.
1/. /L(
/ I. 2lf'
tJ;;;Z;
lo.s7
I ~
dt di
11,°'1
/
/1.
I
I J-
It
,r
'r
I
,, ,.
ILJt) ... If - 31:-
2
hit. M ~
II 3'
I
II. If 6
/2.cI"])
j:J.""
/1. ~ 2
.12.32It.
c./\{
./'l.S';
1./0
/1.2'
II. /19
"
' l/7
/2.dl
I
I
..,, .,,
..
',
,
.
/2.17
/
'
/2.2-3
(
M
/~.
13
I
t(
11..,0I 2. S"/.-
/
f.lf
,
')./;
I
,
1.1~
1/31
/
((
,'
/. tS'
2-
II
II
r
I
,
I'
..
.
0 •
In
f'
I'
,t
"
dJl,
dA 4
,,
,.
•
Ir
,-
,.
-
"
.,
I,
f-
'
.
..
,~
,,
..
.,
.'
"
.,
\0 •
,,
"
"
.
~
,,
II
t
.
(
~
..
.. .. ., ..
I •
h
..
.
~~.
~~
,.
..
"
41
I
.
..
\
7
" ~~
,
',
. "
I I
.
'
~
. . ..
"
..
..
If
...
"
~
h
..
tJ3 w , 'L.A
r1l
Il. u
"
~
.
Ii,
h
M M-
..
,(
,.
J,
~
,
I'
"
I.
1.2S
- I.
"
..
~r
,,
.,
",. ,,
,' ,,
/
JJ. di
~
•
',
'4 •
..
I I
.
,
,,
• I
.-r/
20
SLAGMAN.
Tilne .
J
3/0,9 HY9rom.
No.
9.50
/
O.C2
2
8qro/n.
Read/119. Pressure.
~ q .«)'~'.
71,ick - Qu-.te.. \Nqrrn
R. L. 73EA /£8
3 q. SO
29.~<&
H 6t - 7J1()r~ f/~
R. L, _ 73t~A If S
10.13
+-
10.20
cF
"
10.210
7
''1S
9
"
I D .4--tJ
'0
"
If] 6T
Ii
/1.1Jl)
/2
If. 2. 'I
.Ll.'!: (,
12.
t1)J
. /2(1;
~fO
~
..
~
t
,-:3
41(
/.1{
If'
/"'1
-l~
#J
"
"
r,
.
.,
-
t
I J..t/y
2.3
2'1
I'
I.)D
..2 ~--
"
J. :1,.)-
2~
I"
7
.,
t
7710. ff-c.
,,
0
.,
.,
..
..
"
"
If
.
~HY /'r;d-
,
.,
..
"
, «
~(
rlJW~
re. ' ~
t13W~
~"
f
M-
1'~
, ..
~
/t.b7n:/' C
Z;r/:J.;/~
''
7~
"
('
,,
.
'f
,
\
"
f
f •
I '
,,
• I
II!Lo°e.
I(!J
D
1/ lfD
"
'
'r
«
I'
"
'-
~
.f
I'
flu,oJ
frs
..
,-
...
,
.f
"
tfJrr
g." ~
id-
I •
f f
_ 212.
2i
"
It'
.L2..3 l
,.S" 3
,-
, f
/1
2
,.
.,
f
9.1
7
.,
I~
12.,1
13
'.
66i
'k
~ 12.Ft'
.
,
, I
:ll(, If
W-=-.J_?"'- _/-6 .....
II. '3 ~
S-O
,.
11J.!J3
/ '.D 3
:~/-'-::IH
St"9nQ t vre.
4/.3
'-J tJ.
Ill. , () 3
. Rema.rks.
f
I'
II 'fo
/4,30
t'
-t!:.f O'c./~c f rowe ri...,!!n
I'
,
....!......
h.3~
fOP"CIE
r
cJ
tf.
f,
"
die"
,
~
~
f
.
21
CJ~AN
UP.
The products of the smelt were divided into pyritic
slag,
matte,
pyritic
matte,
preliminary
final slag and oddA and ends. Towards
And
prelimine,ry
the end of the pra-
I1mlnary run~ the pots were kept in the order in which
they' were filled,
slag
so a.s te keep separa.te
a.nd matt frc,m the
pyritic
when COld by the difference
The preliminary
end
the pT€tlimine.ry
to distinguish
and
in appearance
them
of the slag.
also the final slag were black in
cOlor, vitreous in lustre while the pyritic slag wes black
but was dull
and non-vi treC'u5.
Al~. the roatte
produced
after that which had been fed ~1th the blowing
in charges
",'
~.'e..s cons idered
be pyri tic
t(l
me.tte.
The odds e.nd ends
included the crnst forming the. bOsh or wall accretion,
the matte-soaked
portion of the crucible, and the mat~r-
1al drawn from the furnace
the unburned
It
ina~y
WJlS
decided
last
tap
not to se.mple and e.na.lyze
matte,aE,be1ng
sqnalin
1t probablY
excepting
...
excepting
took up frt"m the
the
pra:!.im-
to the matte
the
was assumed tc
amount
blowing
added
in
of cnpper
Rlag.
ware broken by hand t" abc:ut egg-size
products
th~n sampled.
weight
run, 1ts compos1 tion
h9:ve :remained nncha.nged.
other
the
coke ~lh1ch 'lITae picked out by hand.
dU.r1ng the prelimin.ary
.that
aftt~r
by
fract1?nal
All
and
selection. A hod of each was
preserved as a sample, and a hodful crushed, ground, and
bucked to pa.ss a lOO-mesh screen 1n the same way as was
done w 1th th~ samples
of
,or6
fOl'
the smelt.
Analys.!~_E!
PrcduE.!:!.
of the
The prOducts
22
:run were ena.l-
yzed :for their copper, nickel, and sulphur contents.
'In additiC'n,
the
there
W!/re
detE-trmined,
iran .. in the chilled
in the pyritic
sample of the pyrlti'c
me.tte,
slag:
the
I
FeO,.Si0
CaO, MgO, and A1 0 ' The methods of analysis
2 3
2
were similar to thode used with the raw materi~le of the
smelt. Some difficulty was experienced
ccpper
electrolytica.lly
in determining
in the pyritic
the
slag and. in the
cdds and ends. Tha ~esult6 ware checked by the method of
ttration with potassium
iodat~ (KI03)dev1aed by G. S.
Jamieson, L. H. tevy, and H. I. Welle a.~d published in
the
jC'ul'na.l of .the American Chemical
Society,
1908, Vol.
T, Page 760.
PRODUCTS.
Materials
Matte
Slag
Odds & Ends
Materials
TAB!,E
S
Fe
8.73
1.95
26.25
0.76
O.~96
2.75
0.28
0.00 . 1.48
1.59
0.29
S
FeO
~..
NO. IV.
58.65
2.51
8102
CaO
~
,
Pyritic Slag
Chilled Sample
--
MgO
A1203_
\
2.57
28.80
37.35
18.34
0.86
4.61
-
23
GAS
C02&~S02
ANALYSIS.
N
CO
0
I
19.6%
0.6%
1.a%'
78.0%
II
20.6~(fIf
0.4%
3.4%
75.6%
No. I'
802
0.35%
No.
II
0.15,%
24
ACCOUNT OF STOCK,
Th~ blcwlng in charges contained 20 Kgs. of matte,
th~ ana-lye is ()f ~h~ch was n~t known. For this
reason,
e..
complete acc~unt of the copper is nnt possible •
. The first
m9.tte mixture
w~.s assumed.
20 KgB.
and foul
to conte-.in
~ther products.
of me,t ta' produced
slag
used
E:2~11copper
resulted.
from the
in the blowing in and
not ecc~unted
for.
in
The balance sheet was made, using this
~ assnmpt1r.n.
The balance sheet of sulphur wes calculated onlY
forthe pyritic nln.
25
BALANCE SHEET OF MATERIALS.
-
NO VI.
rrA'RT.R
Materials
Wt.1n
Fed
Kgs.
Matte
Fyri te
Matte
Copper
%
216.8
216.8
.
lO V.L--
:tl1ckcl
..A
legs
Total
9.54
1.25-
20.68
2.70
CSU.7":J
0.67
2.22
.
wt. kg.
ci
I'"
o~rTotal
c
/0
~oo
--Z. Dff -. b. O~
10.54
20~(
Mix
330.0
Foul SlRg
8.6a
I
I
Quartz
139.9
Lime!1tone
:
84.1'
160.6
Coke
.
I
Total
1168.2
25.60
#
i
as it was decided
This analy~is unknown
5.09
. i
just before
the
run to add the matte mixture.
!,ABLE NO. VII.
Wt. in
Materials
Produced
Copper
%:'
Kgs.
Kgs
.
20.0
Prelim.Matte
18.89
1.90#
"
.
73~'80
0.76
1.95
7.62
255.6
0.28
0.72
2.81
134.4.
1~59
2.14
8.36
-Odds
.....,
~,
,
--" .....
#
Si~ce
the
a complete
eu
%
10 of
KgA
'ota]
88.65
1.95
4.22
0.06
0.15
3.15
0.29
0.39
8.20
.-':.'.
88.24
Total
Nickel
7.41
~Yr1t1c' Slag 256.0
Prelim &: Fin •
Slag
& Ends
I
'--:.
21.6.,.,4 "a~ 73
Matte
.
% cC"f
'Tota:!:
-
.
.
1---
in the matte
account
\
4.?6
25.60
.
used when blowing.
of the eu is not po~sible.
in is
notknown
*", ..-, •.
26.
:RALA1~CE SHEET OF SULPHUR.
TABLE NO. VIII.
I
"
twlaterials
Charged.
Weig;ht
%
Su1'Phur.
wt.Kgs.
25.94
56.24
Kga.
~atte
216.8
..
Pyrite
216.8
45.11
J
Goke
52.6
7" of total.
~
---.-..
36.50
.,~,---"._-------._
--,
0.14
•
63.46
97.80
~.+ ...............
-
d
0.04
0.07
-rotal
486.2
---
TABLE NO.
rMaterials' .
~roduced •
~att'e
154.11
100.00
---
,.
IX.
Sulphur.
Weight
. Kga.
216.4
%
wt.
Kgs. ,
%
of total
-.......... -
26.25
56.'SO
84.49
-..
Pyri tic
Odds
Total
Slag
& linda
256.0
2.75
7.04
10.50
134 •.
4
2.51
3.37
5.01
67.21
100.00
606.8
27
CALCULATION
OF THEORETICAL
FORO~~
BALANCE SHEET OF MATERIALS
PYRITIC CHARGE.
There are three methods of calculating
a Theor8tical
Balance Sheet of Mat~r1al. They are baaed on, (1) total
materials;
'~matsI'1ale
(2) definite weight 'cf me.tte produced;
of
9.
(3)
single cha.rge.
The irregularities
in ths running of the furnace dur-
ing blowing in and blowing out make it difficult to oht~in reliable data fo~ these two periods and also to de.fine the limits ~fthe
fOT m~{1ng a definite
(tf calculation.
The same hOlds good
run proper.
of matte produced, the basis
am~unt
In the third method, these errors are
avoided, as the calculation3
are based upon data taken
while the furnace 1s running normelly.
chosen fer making a theoretical
It was the~fore
balence sheet of material.
_Since the hea.t requirE.\d to smelt
the charge
depends
largely upon the form in the elements ara chemically
com-
b1n~d, it is necessary to calculate a rational analYsis
Of the materials, cha~ged.
Matte.
.
iron
Frc:m the analysis
This- is done
as
fOllOWS
=
o:r the ma:tl:1eit is known that
the
is pre8e~t as FeS, FeD, Fe304aDd the remainder is
assumed to exist as metallic iron. The amount of oxygen
present is assumed to be the per cent not avountad
1n the chemical analysis. With these assumpt1ens,
amounts cf FeS, FeO, Fs 04and Fe
3
fCl1cws=
for
the
were calculated as
28
Iron present is FeS.
This 1s feund by ca.lculating the sulphur necessary
un1 te with
Ct2
s,
N~
the
Cu,' r-r1,
andPb
present
to
to form
r
s~
and 'P~S I~d
assuming
the rema.i ning
S to
exist as FaS.
, Total sulphur present = 25.94,1
,S as CU2S
N13Saand
=
Pbs
3.34%
S to form FeS 1s 25.94 - 3.34 ::;22.601
F~ &quival~nt to this Sulphur as FeS
~}'
x 22.60 == 39.46.%
FeS present equals 62.08%
The amount ofFaO
,1s
present 1s determined
in the:'~.rat10 40 to the
..
30
silica.
by
present,
assuming it
that
i8,
tha.t
it ia 1n the f~orm of slag pelJ.ets.
Silica present equals
.6~~
FeG present equals 40
30
,x. v=.8
4~
p
to .65% iren and .19t Oxygen.
This 1s equivalent
The remainder
6~
of the iron
exists
as 'Fe304and metallic
Fe.
The amonnt of "oxygen in t.he Fe304 is obta.ined by subtracting from lO~~ the total percentage
a.na.lys 1s (95
.1~7 )
This
:.,.70,1: a.s the
leaves
and the percent
amount
as found by
oxygen in the FeO( .19%> •
of oxygen
combined
with
iron in the form of Fe 0 •
3 4
Fe 'in Fe304 that
,1s equivalent
to
4.70,'1 0 = 12.34%
•
This gives 17.041 of Fe 04 •
3
,The remaining iron is the ,metallic iron and its
c~nt is found
by
subtracting
from the tot~l Fe, the
amount present as FeS, FeO, and Fe 0
3 4
•
per
29
Total Fe equals
55.32%
Metallic Fe equals 55.32 - (39.46
The Ala Oa,Ca
0
12 .34 )
.65
and S1 02 a.re assumed
=:
to exist
2 .87%
in
that form.
Elri.!~.The pyrite contains 1.251
exist as CU2S'
the
eu
which is assumed to
~he ram~1n1ng S is conBider~d to be in
form of FeS a.nd FeSc:)
, the a.mount of each qei ng ca,lcuIJ
lat~d as fOllows:
S as FeSand
Fe S~:::
.,., tota.l
S - S
,
CU2S•
8.S
Total S equals 4;5.11%•.,
S as C'l2 S equa.ls.
32%.
S as FeS and FeS2
=
Fe as Fee and FeSa
Now
1.at X :::
;t
= 44.79%
45.11 - .32
= total
Fes,
•
Fe :;::40.62%.
then ~
X=-% S a.s FeS.
88
= ,"/Fe~,-G
" Y
Also
the
.~ FeS
-t-
"
64
12v
-,,-'
.1 FeS 2
= %
Y -=
%
Fe ..,...
S as Fe S 2
%
S a.s
•
FeS
and FeSa.
(1)
=
S as FeS and FeS 2
(2) X -r
r ::::40.62
From equations
.:!,FaS
,e:!.
=-
FeS2=
=
+
44.79
64
120
y
= 85.41
(1) and (2)
:::.. 4.51%
X
Y
=
80.90%
assumed to
.83;~ unaccounted
for
ed to be water of crystallIzation
cate.
32 X
88
The A1203' a.nd Sf 02a~9
The remaining
44.79
exIst
in
that
by a.nalysis
form.
is
assum-
in the aluminum sili-
30
Qua?tzt'he
form.
Si~
, FeO and AJe
ca
a.re assumed
to exist
in that
The rem~ining 1.40% unaccounted for by the analysis
1s designated
in the table
~ro. XII as X.
1s assumed tc
It
be slag-forming material.
!'imesto~.
The CaO, MgOt FeO,
a.nd Si02
are
as obtained by analysis. The 44,15% unaccounted
re corded
for is
assumed to be CO •
. 2
The proximate analysis
Coke.
77 .02% fixed
ba.sed on dry coke gave
ca.rbon and 16.22,% ash.
The sulphur
in the
latter probably exists as 503 (.6~~).,The S03 is VOlatile
at the furnace temperature leaving 15.61% of Blag-forming.
The 6.7~~ unaccounted for is the VOlatile mat-
mat8Tiel.
ter in the coke.
of coke,as
The moisture accompanying
obtained
Calculation
by
analysis,
is
the 7.91 KgB.
.73 KgB •.
of Blast.
There are two methods of c8.1cule.tion of the blast,
using the
flue gas analysis
end
one
the am~unt of carbon per
...
charge, the other
by
means of Pitot tube measurements
velocity hea.o.and
static pressure head.
of
Method Ueing Gas An~lYsiB.
I
The VOlume of flue gas is first calculated
ing the total weight of carbon in ons charge
'of c'a.rbon
Average
CO2,
( as
CO and C02
3
) in I-m-=- of
by
by divid-
the ~e1ght
ga.s.
Gas Analysis.
19.85;1;
CO, 2.60,4;
8°2,.2.5,1;
0,.50%;
N,76.80;(.
31.
3
C in
1 m
In flue
of flue
=
gas
(;I
of C02 In flue
% eo
gas
x (Wt. of C in 1 mS of CO or C02
gas)
under
ste~n-
ds.rd conci t~ons) •
Wt.
of C in
C
1 m 3 of CO or
"""""
CO2 under
(.1985
gas::::;
fl'l't9
Carbon ant~rl ng gas frcm coke
..
"
"
"
Total carbon In gas
..
"
"
..
C
=
6.09
__ -= 63.58 m3
.026)
=
12
44
introduced
ondi t1
.54
x
one:=. 54Kg.
=
.12 Kg.
(See TabIe XI I • )
6.09 Kgs.
T
1.54
x 5.64
:=
1.54Kgs.
at
I
7.,63 Kgs.
::::;
oOC
mm.
and 760
•
.12
It was e,ssumad that all the ni trogen
was that
C
from coke -r- C from limestone.
=:
Volume of flue gas per charge
= ~~
=
limestone
,
standard
in the flue gases
by the blast.
VOlunle cf N' ::::
.~N in flue gas x volume of flue gas.
=
VOlume of N
.768
x
63.58
3
m •
:: 48.83
VOlume of air _ VOlume of N
N in air x 100.
- ~
of N 1n air _
Vt;')lumeof a.ir to
t!!
79.2.~ by vOlume.
3
furnish
48.83 m
N equals
3
~~~_x
(9.2
100 :::61.65
3
'Nt. of 1 m
"61.t3S""
..
dry
..
m
air at
"
"
0
dry air a.t 0 and 760 mm.
0° a.nd 780 nun.
"If
"
"
"
=:
1.293 Kgs.
,:::::
79.71
"
Condl t1 ons at
time of run.
Atmospheric temp. -
'e90
F
.=
20~5
C
Barometric pressure = 29.90
approx. standard.
3
0
61.65
m dry air at 0 and 760 nun.::: 293.5
tt
= 66.28 m 3 dry air at 20~5 C and 760 273
mm.
x 61.65 '
The moisture acccmpanying
this air is calculated as
. fOllows:
Hygrometer
readings
gp..ve
;3.6 grains
wa.ter to cubic
foot air •
.. 3
3.6 grains par cubic foot equals 8.27 grams per m
VOl. of blaat x Kgs. H20 per m
in bIe.at per charge
"
"
"
"
•
86 •2~ x 8.27
1000
_
=.55
Kge.
3
H20.
Method using Pitot Tube measurements.
The vOlume of the .blast.was calcule.ted from the Pitot
tube measurements
as fOllows:
Vol. of air
croas
section
furnace
=
pe+harge
of pipe
) i.X)
(Vel. per Sec.)
of one charge
(
x
(A.of
in passing
through
in seconds).
The veloci ty 1s calculated
where h 1a the velocity
VaJ..Oc i ty
head
==.61"
Water is 772 x
by the
formula. V =
V2
gh
head in terms of air.
.:wa.ter.
as heavy as air at 0° and 780 mm.
Therafc-re velocity
=
head
.61 x 772 = 470.9" a.ir
39.24' air.
==
"(
,
I
Substituting
in the formula
~--
V::
-
V 54 xl~.2 .~~~; = 52.08'
per sec.
Area af cross section of blast main
=
.195 sq. ft.
Rate of charging equals one charge in 21 minutes or 1,260 sec.
Static
pressnre
head == 8 .97" w~ter ~ 1/4 lb.
Therefore Vol. of a.ir .par charge
=
per sq.
inch.
:::: 52.08 x .196 x 1260
12A65 en .ft. a.lr at 26'.5 and 1/4 lb.
33
o
cu. ft. air at 20.5
12865
364
m3
"
..
..
..
"
II
3
and 1/4 lb. -
0
364 m at 20.5 ~1/4#
0
ai r at 0
344"
a.nd 760 mm.
NOTE.There
is a gre~t difference
the vOllmes of air
between
'obta~ned by the two methods. This is due either to
of the Pitot tubas
gas samples or to the lack of calibration
or to both.
The vOlume calculated
was used 1n the calculations
Pitot tube measurements,
faulty
from the gas analysis
, and not that obtained
as the gas analysis
from the
had to enter
the "calculation of the heat balance.
The materials
are distributed
under the heads of Matte,
Sla.g and Gas. The copper,
nickel,
a.ndlead
as entering the matte,the
small amounts
matte
figured
in t~e slag are
\
a.SSUIntllO.
ar~. all
to exist there as matte -particles'.
of
The weight
produced from one charge was calculated
from the
weight of copper in the charge and the per cent of copper
in the'matte produced.
The.weights
of iron and sulphur
entoring the matte were calculated
frcm the analysis
m~.tte fo~ed.
notentsrlng
All
solid
substances
were assumed to form slag and the remaining
of the
the matte
vOlatile
and
combustible matter to enter the gas.
Wt. matte
produced per charge - wt. eu ner charge x 100
- nu1iil:matte-'-•
Wt. Cu per charge
=
3.55 Kgs.
1Cu in me.ttet=8.73%.
34
Matte produced, per charge;
The sulphur is
x 100 == 40.67 KgB.
~..!~~_
8.-(3
assigned as follows:
The Cu
S ,Ni. S
, Pbs, and FaS (amounting to
2
:5 2
27.82 Kgs) ~ were assigned to the matte. Thess conta1nad
9.20 Kgs. sulphur. The sulphur in the matte produc~d is
25~25% (by analysis). Therefore, the 40.67 Kgs. of m~tte
contain
10.88 Kgs. sulphur.
furnished
==
10.68 - 9.20
This 1s equ1va1e~t
The amount of S still to be
::= 1.48 Kgs.
to 3.87 Kgs. FeS which must be fur-
n1~hed -by the FeS2 ."
The remaining sulphur is 3.asign~d to the
gas.
The iron 1a assigned as fo~lows:
The total.iron
entering the mate as indicated above
equals 16.30 Kgs.
The matte prOduced
magnetic
dete:rm1nad
Total
both metallic
iron and
oxide of iron. The am~unt of the latter was not
but is
to correspond
estimated
wt. of sulphides
The weight
contains
=
31.29 Kgs.
Fe and Fea 04= 40.87-
Wt. 0 in ma.tte
_
This. is equivalent
Wt. metallic Fe
to 3,~ of oxygen.
.03 x 40.87
31.29
=
= 9.38 Kgs.
1.22 Kgs.
to 4.42 Kgs. Fe3 O~ •
= 9.38
- 4.42 == 4.96 Kgs.
The Fe3 04 ia assumed to be supplied
matte cha.rged. The remainder
by
the
of the la.tter
F9304
in the
Fe 3°4 1s assumed
to be reduced to FeO and 0 and to enter the slag ~nd gas
35
respectively. The metallic iron (4.96Kgs.) is assumed to c
come from the FeS2• Of the FeS2J 8.63 Kge •. (4.96 Kgs~
aR Fe and 3.Q7 Kgs. asFeS ) enter the matte,.
The Fe
(5.30 Kgs) is assigned to the slag and remaining S (I~.74
Kgg.)
to the gas.
The assignment of the remaining materials requires
no'comment
~xcept that of the 1.76 Kge. of 0 from the
blast which is assigned to the slag. It~is the 0 required
to oxidize the metallic
iron from the matte charged and
the iron which enters theslag from the FeS2.
38
THEBMAL BALANCE.
The figures used for heats ofiformation,
specific heats,
etc. are~tho5e ~iven by J.W.Richards in his ~Metallurgical
Calculations".
Those marked "approx~. do not apply directly
to the materials
in this case. Eut since determinations
specific heats, heats of fusion, etc. on thedifferent
erials were not. practicable,
of
mat-
figures were selected which
seemed to apply most nearly to each case.
Heat Generated.
(I)
Oxidation
C .to CO2
e burned to CO2
=
(8100 Cal. per Kgs. of C)
(Vol. of gasX~
CO2 X Wt. C in
m3 CO2) ~ ( Wt.
C
in
CO2
1
from lmste)
~3. 58 x .1985 x •.54 = 6.83 Kgs.
6.83 - 1.54 =5.29 Egs.
5.29 x 8100 = 44,'93 Cal.
(2) Oxidation
C to CO. (2430 Cal. per Kg. C.)
C burned to CO
=
Total C in. coke - C burned to C02.
6.09 -5.29 = .80 Kg.
~80 x 2430
(3) Oxidation
% S02
in
=
1944 Cal.
S to 802 (2164 Oal. per Kg. S )
3
gas x m3 of gas =.m of 802 • (Gas analysis)
Wt. of 1 m
:3
H x Density of 502 x
.a...
:3
= Wt. S in 1 m
802"
of ~2.
3
.0025 x 63.58 =.159 mof
50
2
.159 (.0896 x 32 x 32 ) = .22? Egs. S burned.
This does not agree
the theoretical
wyt~ theo!
S assigned to gas in
balance sheet. The difference
is .assumed
39
to have been distilled
off as free
sulphur •
•227'x .2164 = 491 Calf
(4) Oxidation
of Fe to FeO. (1173 Cal. per Kg. Fe.)
5.30 = 6:25 KgB. (See
wt. Fe oxidized = .95
Table No. XII)
6.25 x 1173
=
7331 Cal.
(5) Heat ot Formation
of Matte.
All copper and iron ex1stas
sulphides
The:.heat of union of FeS andCu2S
=
43.59 x 150
i8 unknown.
of Slag. (150 Cal. per Kg. approx.)
(6) Heat of Formation
Wt. slag made
in the ore.
45.59 Kge.
=
$53~ Cal.
o
(7) Sensible Heat in Blast at roam temp. (20.5) (Sp.
Heat .25 approx.
)
Vol. x Spa Ht., x Temp. = 66,.28 x .3036 x 20.5. =
413 Calf
(8)
Sens1bleHeat
in Charge at
room
o
temp. (20.5)
(sp. Heat = .25 approx.)
Wt. xSp. Ht. x Temp.
=
107.91 x .25 x 20.5
=
553 Cal.
HEAT ABSORBED.
(a) Reduction
of Fe304 to FeO. (1023 Calf per Kg. FeO. )
Wt. FeO from
Fe 304") = 1.llKgs.
1.11 x1023 =ll35'Cal.
(b) Reduction
FeS2 to Fe (428 Cal. p~r Kg. Fe Approx.
)
....
The heat of reduction
Since it probably
of FeSs! to
Fe is not kn.own.,.
is not much larger than FeS to
Fe,
49
the latter figure is used.
wt.
Fe from FeS2 =
constituents.
10.26 Kgs. (See distribution-of
matte
page 34.)
10.26 x 428 = 4391 Ca1.
(c) Decomposition
#
(1026 Cal. per Kg. C02)
of Limestone.
.R Figure for CaC63 to CO2 used since the amount of
MgC03 is small.
Wt. CO2 from
=
CaC03
5.64 Kgs.
5.64 x 1026 = 5787 Cal.
_
(d) Heat
in Slag
0
( Temp.• = 1130
C. )
o
Hea t in melted
a t l~OO =: 300 ..,Ca1. per Kg. (approx.)
slag
43 .59 x 300 = 130'(.'"
Cal.
o
TQ
heat .from 1100
0
to. 1130 C. (Sp. Ht.
= .27 approx.)
43~59 x .27 x 30 = 355 Cal.
=
Total Reat = i3cf'1' + S53)
(el Heat in Matte.
U4.3Q CaJl..
o
(Temp. = 1130 C )
0'
Heat in melted matte at 1000
=
,
200Cal.(approx.)
40.67 x '200 = 8134 Ca1.
o
To heat
from 1000
0
to 1130
40.67 x .285 x 130
Total Heat
=
=
(Sp. Ht .. = .285 approx.)
1507 Ca1.
8134 +,1507 = 9641 Ca1.
0
I
(f) Heat in Gasei.
( 212 ~ = 100
0
C.l
(1) CO + N + 0 = 79.90% •
( These gases have same specific heat.)
.7990 x 63.58 = 50.80 m3
3
Sp.Ht.
per m = (. 303 + .00002 7t )
Heat = 50.80 x 100 (.~03 + .000027 x 100 ) =
1553 CAL.
41
=
(2) Vol. of C02 = .1985 x 63.58
l2.62m3•
:3
Sp. lit. per m = (.37 + .00022t).
=
Heat
12.62 x 100 ( .37 + .00022
x 100 ) _..
495 Cal.
of 002 = .0025
:3
(3) .Vol.
Sp. Ht. per m
Heat
=
:3
.16 m.
x 63.58;:::
.
=(.36 + .0003t.>.
.16 x 100 ( .36 + .0003 x 100 ) = 6 Cal.
(4) Wt. evaporated
= .73 +.2'7 + .55 = 1. 55 Kgs~
o
Heat of Vaporization
1;55 x 606.5
=
=
at 0
606.5 Cal. per Kg.
940 Cal.
Sp. Ht. of Gas per Kg.
=
(.42 + .000188t ).
Heat = 1.55 x ,100 (.•42 + .000188 x 100) =
68 Cal.
= 1553
Total Heat in gases
+ 68 =.3162 cal.
(g) Heat in cooling wat~~.
Temp~ of Feed Water
=
o
12.1 C.
'0.
Temp. of Overflow = 92.1
c.
Rate of Flow = 14 Kgs. per minute~ .
"
"
"=147
Kgs. per charge.
147 x( 92.1 - 12.1 ) = 11,613 Cal.
+ 495 + .6 + 940
42
XIII.
THERM~AL BALANCE
FOR ONE CHARGE.
~-Credit, Kg. Calories.
Debit, Kg. Calories.
~urn1ng
C to CO2
_ 44,793
Burning C to CO'- -
~urning S to
802
1,944
~91
-
Reduction Fe304 to FeO - 1,135
Reduction
FeS2 to Fe - -.4,391
Decomposition
of CaCo3 - 5,.787
Burning Fe to FeO -
7,331
Heat
Formation
6,538
Heat in Matte
- - - - - 9,641
Sensible Heat in Blast 413
Heat in Gases
3,l6~
Sensible Heat .in c~a~
Heqt in.Cooling Water
..
Formation
of Slag -
of Matte(?)
62,063
in Slag - - - ... - .~13,430
11,613
49,159
Radiation{by Difference)12.90~
62,063
43
SUM1~ARY•
The sulphur a~1mlnat1on obtained in this run was
par cant of the sulphur present,
ed. If the analys1sof"
instead of 79.64% as expect-
the flue gas 1s ,correct about 9.8%
of the sulphur eliminated
sulphur'vapor
56.38
was driven off in the ~orm of
and not as sulphur dioxide. The sample of gas
must have been faulty,
as the conce,ntrat1on
1.6 into 1 -- gives a greater
falls belOw the calculated
The thermal balance
pyritic effect although it
concentration
shOWS
thatthe
heat. in the furnace was furnished
the oxidation'of
obta.ined,
by
of 4.4 into 1.
larger
part of the
the coke and not
by
the iron and sulphur as should have been
the case.
The Slag formed contained
32.37
% FeO
instead of the
.calculated 51.~~, the s1l1ca contents was 41.98% instead
of the calculated
36,08%. The percentage
of lime ran much
higher "than was intended. These facts show that sufficient
silica was present but thatthe
therefore
Assuming
iron was not oxidized
and
coUld not ent'3r the slag but went into the matte.
the air supply to be sufficient,
"prevente~ the desired pytl~1c
, A decrEtase
the coke must have
effect.
in the ampl.mt of coke
..
fore correct the smaltingconditions.
used WOUld thare-