Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Pirometallurgy - 2018
Kuliah 8
Application of Pirometallurgy:
Ironmaking-Steelmaking
Hydrometallurgy vs. Pyrometallurgy
Hydrometalurgy Pyrometallurgy
Treat high grade Less economic More economic
ore?
Treat low grade ore? Possible with Unsuitable
selective leaching
Treat sulphide ore No SO2; otherwise SO2 generated (can
So or SO42- are be converted to
generated H2SO4)
Separate similar Possible with certain Not possible
metal, such as Ni method
and Co
Pollutant Waste water, Gases and dust
solid/slurry residues
Reaction rates Slower Rapid
Hydrometallurgy vs. Pyrometallurgy
Hydrometalurgy Pyrometallurgy
Scale of operation? Possibly economic to Unconomic at smale
be done at small scale operation
scale operation and
expansion is easier
Capital cost Generally lower than Higher
pyrometallurgy
Energy cost Lower Higher
Materials Handling Slurry Easy to be Handle Molten
Pumped and Metal, Slag,
Transported Matte
Residues Residues – Fine Slags – Coarse
and Less Stable and Stable
Indonesia mineral deposit
15
10
[5] International Energy Agency, 2008. Worldwide trends in energy use and efficiency; [2] The Japan Iron and Steel federation. ;
[6] http://www.syntropolis.net/knowledgehub/wiki/energy-efficiency-in-industry/
Ironmaking industry 14
Finishing process
Raw materials:
High grade coal = 690 kg/ton-pig iron Non-renewable resources
High rank iron ore = 1390 kg/ton-pig iron Limited amount
Limestone = 140 kg/ton-pig iron Expensive
BF gas
Solid
flowing Reactions:
Iron ore 200oC 3Fe2 O 3 CO 2Fe3O 4 CO2 ;
Fe3O 4 CO 3FeO CO2
Coke (C) 500oC 2CO C CO2
FeO CO Fe CO 2
900oC
FeO CO Fe CO2
1200oC FeO C Fe CO
C CO2 2CO
C CO2 2CO
1700oC
C O 2 CO2
Gas
flowing
29