Ferrous metal production and ferrous slags

Author(s):  
George C. Wang
1987 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 166-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.Gerard Adams ◽  
Bernard Duroc-Danner

RSC Advances ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (35) ◽  
pp. 21406-21411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurlan Dosmukhamedov ◽  
Valery Kaplan ◽  
Yerzhan Zholdasbay ◽  
Ellen Wachtel ◽  
Igor Lubomirsky

Sulfur emission in the form of SO2 in flue gases is the one of the most serious atmospheric pollutants associated with coal combustion and non-ferrous metal production.


Omega ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 98 ◽  
pp. 102136
Author(s):  
Michel Siemon ◽  
Maximilian Schiffer ◽  
Grit Walther

2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (22) ◽  
pp. 3685-3691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomichi Fukuda ◽  
Masaki Takaoka ◽  
Shingo Doumoto ◽  
Kazuyuki Oshita ◽  
Shinsuke Morisawa ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 269-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
J M Pacyna ◽  
E G Pacyna

An accurate and complete emission inventory for atmospheric trace metals on a global scale is needed for both modeler community and policy makers to assess the current level of environmental contamination by these pollutants, major emission sources and source regions, and the contribution of the atmospheric pathway to the contamination of terrestrial and aquatic environments. Major progress has been made in assessing emissions of trace metals in various countries and even regions, e.g., Europe, since the first global emission estimate for these pollutants was made by Nriagu and Pacyna (1988). These improved national and regional emission inventories have been used in this work to assess the global trace metal emissions from anthropogenic sources in the mid-1990s. The results of this work conclude that stationary fossil fuel combustion continues to be the major source of Cr, Hg, Mn, Sb, Se, Sn, and Tl with respect to the coal combustion and the major source of Ni and V with respect to oil combustion. Combustion of leaded, low-leaded, and unleaded gasoline continues to be the major source of atmospheric Pb emissions. The third major source of trace metals is non-ferrous metal production, which is the largest source of atmospheric As, Cd, Cu, In, and Zn. The largest anthropogenic emissions of atmospheric trace metals were estimated in Asia. This can be explained by growing demands for energy in the region and increasing industrial production. As a result, the Asian emissions are not only larger than the emissions on other continents, but also show an increasing trend. Another factor contributing to high emissions in Asia is the efficiency of emission control, which is lower than in Europe and North America. Concerning the two latter continents, emissions of trace metals show a decreasing tendency over the last two decades. Key words: anthropogenic sources, atmospheric emissions, trace metals, global emission inventory


2008 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Vromman ◽  
C. Saegerman ◽  
L. Pussemier ◽  
A. Huyghebaert ◽  
L. DE Temmerman ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
A.D. Degtyareva ◽  
N.B. Vinogradov ◽  
S.V. Kuzminykh ◽  
M.A. Rassomakhin

The article describes morphological and typological characteristics of non-ferrous metal, determines the for-mulae of alloys, as well as identifies techniques used for the production of tools by the Alekseyevka-Sargary cul-ture from the South Trans-Urals (15th/14th and 12th/11th BC). We carried out the morphological and typological study of the non-ferrous metal along with the X-ray fluorescence (Institute of Archaeology RAS, Institute of Mine-ralogy UB RAS; X-MET3000TX analysers from Oxford Instruments Analytical, M1 Mistral from Bruker Nano GmbH) and metallographic (Tyumen Scientific Centre SB RAS; Zeiss Axio Observer D1m microscope) analyses. A total of 19 tools exhibiting morphology inherent to the tool collections of the Alekseyevka-Sargary culture were selected for the study. These tools comprised random finds and items from the settlements of the Chelyabinsk and Kurgan regions of Russia, as well as from the Kostanay Region of Kazakhstan: daggers, а spearhead, sick-les, socketed chisels, a spear end cap and single-blade knives. A group of tools and weapons characteristic of all Eurasian cordoned-ware cultures was distinguished — daggers with handguards and socketed grooved chisels. In addition, weapons characteristic of the sites attributed to the Alekseyevka-Sargary culture (Saryarka, Altai, and Semirechye) were identified within the weapon complex of the South Trans-Urals. These weapons included bush hooks of the Sosnovaya Maza type, knives having marked handles, spearheads with holes and socketed straight-blade chisels. The metal of the South Trans-Urals is distinguished by the marked heterogeneity of its chemical composition with the predominance of low-alloyed bronzes Cu–Sn, Cu–Sn–As and Cu–As (66.7 %). There are 4 pure copper items, as well as products from the complex alloy Cu–Sn–As–Ni–Co and products with elevated iron concentrations (up to 2.68 %). These data indicate that the population experimented in the course of metal-lurgical processing of raw materials; they transitioned to smelting metal from sulphide ores or to the smelting of copper with sulphide or silicate nickel ores of the Ufaley Massif (deposits in the Chelyabinsk Region). South Ural craftsmen produced bronze and copper primarily using technologies for casting tools in one-sided (with flat cov-ers) and two-sided moulds. The casting was followed by refining operations using the cold forming technology with the intervals of low-temperature forging modes. This choice of temperature is justified in the procession of low-alloyed bronze. Clearly, the centre for metal production of the Alekseyevka-Sargary culture in the South Trans-Urals was a metallurgical one, with the development of both oxidised and sulphide deposits in the South Urals. Innovative technologies of smelting copper with chalcopyrite, arsenopyrite, and nickel-containing ores were introduced. The complex of tools attributed to the Alekseyevka-Sargary tribes from the Tobol area is generally identical to the bronze inventory from Saryarka, Altai and Kyrgyzstan. Local craftsmen employed the traditional technologies of processing copper and bronze commonly used in the centres for metal production throughout the area of the Alekseyevka-Sargary culture, working primarily with bronzes low-alloyed by tin. As in previous eras, tin ingots and products were delivered from Central Kazakhstan and Ore Altai, but in much smaller quantities. The small number of products and the data of an analytical study indicate the relocation of the main centres for metal production of the Alekseyevka-Sargary culture from the Urals region (as compared to the big centres of Petrovka and Alakul cultures) to Central and Eastern Kazakhstan, up to Xinjiang in China.


Author(s):  
А.Д. Дегтярева ◽  
Н.В. Рындина

Обобщены данные аналитического изучения цветного металла ямной культурно исторической области двух ареалов западного (Северное Причерноморье) и восточного (Южный Урал и Среднее Притоболье) методами спектрального, атомно эмиссионного, микрорентгеноспектрального, металлографического анализов. Приведенные материалы показали существование двух различных моделей металлопроизводства ямных племен, объясняющихся направленностью векторов историко металлургических контактов, наличием доступной рудной базы, сохранением традиционных технологий или же выработкой инновационных методов обработки мышьяковой бронзы. Черты определенного технологического сходства между уральской и причерноморской металлообработкой прослежены лишь на ранней стадии развития северопричерноморского центра металлопроизводства. Металлопроизводство ямных племен Северного Причерноморья в последующем демонстрирует иные технологические традиции получения орудий и украшений из низколегированной мышьяковой бронзы, поступающей из западных сырьевых источников. Уральские мастера использовали приемы литья крупных орудий из местной каргалинской окисленной меди в открытые и составные закрытые формы с высокотемпературными режимами термообработки. The paper summarizes data from the analytical studies of non ferrous metal in two areas of the Yamnaya (Pitgrave) culture, i. e. the western area (the North Pontic region) and the eastern area (the Southern Urals and the Middle Tobol basin). Methods of spectral, atomic emission, electron microprobe and metallographic analyses were employed. The materials described demonstrate existence of two different metal production models used by the Yamnaya population. The difference in the models is stipulated by different directions of historical and metallurgical contacts, availability of accessible ore deposits, maintenance of traditional technologies or development of innovation methods of arsenical bronze production. Certain technological similarities between the Urals and the North Pontic metalworking were identified only for the early development stage of the North Pontic center of metal production. In the subsequent period metal production of the Yamnaya population groups which lived in the North Pontic region demonstrates other technological traditions of producing tools and jewelry from low alloyed arsenical bronze that came from western raw material sources. The Urals craftsmen employed techniques of casting heavy tools from local Kargaly oxidized copper in open and composite closed moulds with high temperature modes of heat treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document