4.7 Article

A new iron recovery and dephosphorization approach from high-phosphorus oolitic iron ore via oxidation roasting-gas-based reduction and magnetic separation process

期刊

POWDER TECHNOLOGY
卷 413, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2022.118043

关键词

High-phosphorus oolitic iron ore; Oxidation roasting; Gas-based reduction; Na2CO3

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new approach for simultaneous iron recovery and dephosphorization from high-phosphorus oolitic iron ore using oxidation roasting-gas-based reduction (ORGR) and magnetic separation process was developed. The mechanism was investigated using thermodynamic calculations, X-ray diffraction (XRD), and scanning electron microscopy combined with energy dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-EDS). The results showed high iron recovery rate and low phosphorus content in the reduced iron, making it ideal for steelmaking.
Deep dephosphorization of high-phosphorus oolitic iron ore (HPOIO) is extremely difficult because of its re-fractory characteristics. A new approach for simultaneous iron recovery and dephosphorization from HPOIO by oxidation roasting-gas-based reduction (ORGR) and magnetic separation process was developed. The underlying mechanism was investigated using thermodynamic calculations, X-ray diffraction (XRD), and scanning electron microscopy combined with energy dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-EDS). The results showed that the powdery reduced iron produced contained 91.37% iron and 0.14% phosphorus, and the iron recovery was 92.81%, which is an ideal for steelmaking. The addition of Na2CO3 formed nepheline, which promoted the formation and coarsening of hematite during oxidation. Concurrently, Na2CO3 reacted with the phosphorus in the iron minerals and fluorapatite to form sodium calcium phosphate, which was embedded in hematite with a simple relationship. Hematite was subsequently converted into metallic iron, sodium calcium phosphate was not reduced, and metallic iron and phosphorus were separated efficiently.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据