MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091453486 · doi:10.1179/cmq.2008.47.2.149

EVALUATION OF OPTIONS FOR METALS RECOVERY FROM ALTASTEEL EAF DUST

2008· article· en· W2091453486 on OpenAlexfundno aff
P. C. Holloway, Thomas H. Etsell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCalcinationRoastingOxidizing agentChemistryLeaching (pedology)KilnElectric arc furnaceMetallurgyZincRotary kilnReagentWaste managementMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several process options for the treatment of Altasteel electric arc furnace dust (9.4% Zn, 31.9% Fe) are discussed including hot acid leaching, Na2CO3 roasting, Waelz kiln processing and a modified Waelz kiln process using more oxidizing roasting conditions and acid leaching to recover zinc from the residue. Elemental deportments and their implications on possible process flowsheets are discussed and flowsheets are developed to allow comparisons among the various processes based on metal recoveries, residue stability, reagent consumption, operating temperatures and potential removal of deleterious minor elements.Of the processes discussed, the modified Waelz kiln process appears to be the best option in terms of process simplicity and the volume and stability of the residue produced. The trade-offs for this increase in residue stability are higher acid consumptions during leaching and possibly higher coal costs during roasting compared with the more traditional Waelz kiln processing.On discute de plusieurs options de procédé pour le traitement de la poussière du four électrique à arc d’Altasteel (9.4% Zn, 31.9% Fe), incluant la lixiviation à l’acide chaud, la calcination au Na2CO3, le traitement au séchoir de Waelz et un procédé au séchoir de Waelz modifié utilisant des conditions de calcination plus oxydantes ainsi que la lixiviation à l’acide, pour récupérer le zinc du résidu. On discute des points élémentaires et de leurs implications sur les schémas de procédés potentiels et l’on développe ces schémas afin de comparer les divers procédés en se basant sur la récupération de métal, sur la stabilité du résidu, sur la consommation de réactif, sur les températures de service et sur l’enlèvement potentiel des éléments mineurs nuisibles.Parmi les procédés discutés, le procédé du séchoir deWaelz modifié semble la meilleure option en ce qui a trait à la simplicité du procédé et au volume et à la stabilité du résidu produit. Les compromis de cette augmentation de la stabilité du résidu sont une consommation plus élevée d’acide lors de la lixiviation et possiblement des coûts plus élevés de charbon lors de la calcination par rapport au traitement plus traditionnel au séchoir de Waelz.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207