Discussions - Extractive Metallurgy Division

T.B.King (Depaytment of Metallurgy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)— A valuable contribution of the authors is in the factual information which they have been able to gather; this type of information is quite difficult to obtain. In many respects, however, it would have been better if they had not subsequently embarked on a discussion of the chemistry of the converter process. It seems inconceivable that the authors do not refer to the papers of Schuhmann and his associates14 which have set the thermodynamic foundation for the whole copper smelting operation. In addition, a very useful review on the physical chemistry of copper smelting by Ruddle 5 appeared as long ago as 1953. An examination of this literature would have convinced the authors that there is no cause to be surprised at a correlation between the magnetic content and the silica content of converter slags, though they rightly point out that one should distinguish between the total magnetite content of the slag and the amount of magnetite which may be considered to be in solution. It is not true that the lowest melting converter slag is that corresponding to the eutectic between ferrous oxide and silica. The simplest slag system which can be considered is a three-component system, since both ferric and ferrous iron are present. As Schuhmann, Powell, and Michal have shown, there are lower melting compositions than this eutectic in the ternary system. The most unfortunate impression given by this paper is that the driving force for chemical reaction is determined by the heat of reaction: of course the entropy change must be taken into account. It would have been more correct to list, in Table VI, values for free energies of formation. Nor can it be said that the data in Table VI represent the "best available data." They do not corregtond with any of the recent, acknowledged sources. F. E. Lathe and L. Hodnett(author's reply)— We are pleased that Dr. King finds the factual information in our uawer of some interest. Dr. King suggests that it would have been better if our analysis and discussion of the data had been omitted, largely because our list of references is so. incomplete. If he will carefully read our introduction, he will see that the questionnaire was sent out in the hope of obtaining data which would throw light on certain questions relating to the use of converter refractories. We did not attempt (nor would the AIME have published!) a complete review of the literature on copper converting, as Dr. King has apparently assumed, nor indeed a complete analysis of the data submitted, but tried only to find a sound basis for the choice of refractories, taking into consideration common variations in converter practice. We hope our paper indicates that, by raising the silica content of the converter slag and operating at a higher temperature, the normal circulating load of magnetite can be greatly reduced, and the whole reverberatory-converter operation improved to a major degree, with resultant important savings. Under such operating conditions, chrome-magnesite brick may be expected to stand up better than those of straight magnesite. Regardless of the choice as between these brick types, however, we find the cost of converter refractories to be so low in comparison with other converter costs as to justify operation under the more severe conditions suggested. Valuable as are the papers by Schuhmann and associates and the book by Ruddle, we make no apology for omitting reference to them, nor for using heats of reaction without mention of entropy changes or free energies of formation. Our primary object was to interest the practicing copper metallurgist, with whose language we may claim to be fairly familiar; we think it would have been unwise to include the highly theoretical phases of the subject which Dr. King suggests. The interest shown in our preliminary paper presented at the New York meeting in 1956, and the trends in practice whtat we have observed since that time, suggest that we did not wholly miss the target. In conclusion, we sincerely hope that Professors King and Schuhmann will independently review the data obtained in our questionnaire and submit a paper giving their own recommendations as to the choice of refractories and the particular converter operating conditions which will result in the lowest overall cost of copper smelting and converting.