chitradurga iron ore beneficiation studies

ore geology reviews | journal | sciencedirect.com by elsevier

ore geology reviews | journal | sciencedirect.com by elsevier

Ore Geology Reviews aims to familiarize all earth scientists with recent advances in a number of interconnected disciplines related to the study of, and search for, ore deposits. The reviews range from brief to longer contributions, but the journal preferentially publishes manuscripts that fill

characterisation and processing of some iron ores of india | springerlink

characterisation and processing of some iron ores of india | springerlink

Lack of process characterization data of the ores based on the granulometry, texture, mineralogy, physical, chemical, properties, merits and limitations of process, market and local conditions may mislead the mineral processing entrepreneur. The proper implementation of process characterization and geotechnical map data will result in optimized sustainable utilization of resource by processing. A few case studies of process characterization of some Indian iron ores are dealt with. The tentative ascending order of process refractoriness of iron ores is massive hematite/magnetite

The exponential demand, improved socio-economic conditions, stringent environmental regulations on mining industry and depletion of massive compact high grade anhydrous iron oxide ores necessitated the processing and utilization of sub and low grade iron ore lumps and fines and mine waste dumps. The previous works by IBM [1, 2], FIMI [3] and Sahoo et al. [4] on iron ore processing comprises of size reduction-sizing, washingclassification of fines, jigging of fine-chips, crushing-closed circuit grinding to liberate values followed by classification, gravity concentration, magnetic concentration, selective dispersion of gangueflocculation of iron ore slimes followed by desliming, inverse flotation of iron minerals, selective magnetic collector adsorption followed by magnetic separation, pyro-processing followed by desliming, gravity concentration, magnetic concentration and agglomeration of concentrates. The industrial trend is to reduce the cost, both capital and operative, by enhancing unit capacities, reducing energy consumption, giving flexible flow sheet for pre-concentration of values at coarse sizes at site, as indicated by some of previous reviews of IBM [1, 2] and FIMI [3]. Iron ores are categorized as anhydrous iron oxide ores, hydrated iron oxide ores, iron carbonate and iron silicate ores based on iron ore mineralogy. It is also categorized as massive hematite, banded anhydrous iron oxide quartz [BHQ/banded magnetite quartzite (BMQ)], friable hard/soft laminated ores, laterites, beach black iron ore sands, marine oolitic ores, massive magmatic Ti/V magnetite ores, manganese bearing iron ores and ferruginous cherty quartzite by IBM [1, 2] and FIMI [3].

The process characterization data of the ores based on granulometry, texture, mineralogy, physical, chemical properties, merits and limitation of process, costs, market and local conditions may aid the mineral processing entrepreneur. The proper implementation of process characterization and geo-technical map data will result in pragmatic sustainable utilization of resource by processing. The onus for solutions to the problems associated with the assemblage of minerals and processes lie with them only. Hence, the paper briefly enumerates the mineral-process characteristics of some iron ores mainly from India, based on ore characteristics, diagnostic amenability test (DAT) and generic process results.

Iron ore samples from Donimalai [1], Bellary [3], Chitradurga [4], Hospet [5], CN Halli [6], Sandur [6] from Karnataka, Gonda, Ratnagiri [2] from Maharashtra, Odisha and Goa [7] were collected for the above study. The samples were subjected to standard feed preparation and sampling methods. The DAT is as follows. The original sample was subjected to detailed mineralogical and chemical analysis. A representative portion of the sample as received was dry ground to 0.2 to 0.1mm based on degree of liberation, wet sieved over 500 mesh to reject slimes [500 mesh]. The sand fraction was subjected to heavy liquid separation at 2.96 specific gravity using TBE and also the sand fractions, sink and float products were subjected to hand magnet, Frantz Iso dynamic separator at various intensities. Mineral processing studies comprised of controlled crushing and grinding (if needed), wet screening for particle size refining to study the amenability of sample to washing and particle size refining for high grade massive ores and friable clayey iron ores and WLIMS for alluvial sands. The siliceous iron ores and BMQ were subjected to controlled closed circuit grinding with screens to liberation size followed by gravity and magnetic separation processes. The BHQ was subjected to fine grinding to unlock quartz followed by wet high intensity high gradient magnetic separations. The complicated ores like massive hydrated iron oxide ores, Mn bearing iron ores and Ti magnetite were subjected to chemical processing methods.

The massive hard lumpy/laminated high grade iron ore with ~30% fines assaying 64.90% Fe, 2.06% SiO2, 0.60% FeO, 2.13% Al2O3, 0.05% P, 0.03% S, 1.72% LOI and containing hematite [94%], quartz [2%], clay [4%] goethite and martite[Tr] was the easiest ore that needs little beneficiation. The DAT produced a >67% Fe concentrate with ~90% Fe recovery at 86% yield. The results are given in Table1. The process consists of primary, secondary, tertiary crushing in closed circuit with 100, 30 and 10mm screens, classification of 10mm fines produced a lumpy and sinter grade concentrate assaying >65% Fe with 90% Fe distribution similar to the results enumerated by IBM [1].

The black marine sands from Ratnagiri, Maharashtra assaying 10% Fe containing mainly quartz with minor to sub ordinate amounts of free magnetite was the easiest to upgrade. The DAT produced a >62% Fe concentrate with ~90% Fe recovery at 8.6% yield. The process comprised of particle size refining by wet screening over 1 and 0.05mm and WLIMS of 1+0.05 sand fraction yielded a sinter/pellet grade magnetic concentrate assaying >67% Fe with 75% Fe recovery at 6wt% yield. Mandre et al. [5] incidentally obtained similar results by WLIMS of black sands from Ratnagiri. The results are given in Table2.

The grayish coloured hard and compact BMQ sample from Bellary, Karnataka assayed 58.25% Fe, 13.52% SiO2, 6.75% FeO, 1.82% Al2O3, 0.20% P, 0.10% S, 0.40% LOI and contained hematite [20%], quartz [5%], chlorite [15%], martite [20%], magnetite [40%], apatite, clay, goethite, pyrite[Tr]. The DAT produced >64% Fe, 6.52% SiO2, 16.75% FeO, 0.82% Al2O3, 0.50% P, 0.10% S, 0.20% LOI concentrate with 87% Fe recovery at 75wt% yield from the phosphorus and sulfur bearing high grade BMQ. The DAT indicated that the sample is amenable to gravity and magnetic concentration and flotation may be required to remove P, S and remnant SiO2. The gravity and magnetic separation (WLIMS) test varying MOG yielded optimum results at 0.6mm followed by cleaner gravity and WLIMS after regrinding to 0.1mm yielded a concentrate assaying 65.65% Fe, 4.02% SiO2, 0.10% Al2O3, 0.75% FeO, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 0.42% LOI with 75.7% meeting the pellet grade. The results are given in Table3. The grade was low at MOG coarser than 0.2mm due to interlocking and Fe recovery was low at size finer than 0.074mm due to slime constraints on gravity and WLIMS, leading to pre-concentration at coarse size followed by cleaner step after regrinding to 0.1mm. The flotation of gangue minerals using xanthate, oleate and amine sequentially from concentrate reduced the impurity level in non float significantly. The ganuge content and fine interlocking nature complicates the process though the processing of BMQ appears simple. Haran et al. [6] produced similar and better results employing dry cobbing at coarse sizes of 6mm, gravity and concentration at 0.1mm and inverse flotation to remove S and P after grinding the concentrate to 0.075mm.

The soft friable siliceous blackish gray coloured iron ore fines from Chitradurga, Karnataka assayed 59.60% Fe, 9.06% SiO2, 1.06% FeO, 1.09% Al2O3, 0.05% P, 0.03% S, 4.02% LOI and contained hematite [50%], quartz [8%], clay [2%], goethite [35%], martite [5%], magnetite, apatite, chlorite, pyrite[Tr]. The DAT produced a concentrate assaying >62% Fe, 6.02% SiO2, 0.85% FeO, 0.82% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 2.20% LOI with 85% Fe recovery at 80wt% yield indicating the easy amenability of sample to gravity/WHIMS. The process comprised of stage grinding to 0.1mm, desliming to remove 10m slims, gravityWHIMS of gravity tails which yielded a concentrate assaying >64% Fe, 3.92% SiO2, 0.52% Al2O3, 1.05% FeO, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 2.42% LOI with 83% Fe recovery at 78wt% yield meeting the pellet grade. The results are given in Table4. The grade was low at MOG coarser than 0.2mm due to interlocking and Fe recovery was low for size finer than 0.074mm due to slime constraints on gravity and WLIMS process. Incidentally similar results were obtained by IBM while treating ores from the same belt.

The brownish dark grey coloured Soft friable clayey iron ore fines from Hospet, Karnataka assayed 55.24% Fe, 5.61% SiO2, 0.70% FeO, 8.81% Al2O3, 0.05% P, 0.03% S, 5.60% LOI and contained hematite [60%], quartz[Tr], gibbsite [5%], ferruginous clay [15%], goethite [20%], martite, magnetite, apatite, chlorite, pyrite[Tr]. The DAT yielded a concentrate assaying ~60% Fe concentrate with 40% Fe recovery at 37wt% yield. The results are given in Table5. Figure1 shows the intimate association of clay with iron minerals. The sample is amenable to simple attrition and washing yielding only sinter grade concentrates. The process comprises of a stage crush to 1mm, attrition scrubbing, desliming yielding a concentrate assaying ~62% Fe, 2.92% SiO2, 0.75% FeO, 4.52% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S and 2.42% LOI with 56% Fe recovery at 50wt% yield. Incidentally IBM [2] evolved a process comprising of stage crushing to 1mm, attrition scrubbing, desliming, gravity concentration and WHIMS of gravity tailsslimes yielded a sinter grade concentrate assaying >63.5% Fe with Fe distribution of 50% and wt% yield of 35 from highly clayey and slimy low grade ores from Hospet.

Clayey iron ore hematite (He) inclusions within the ferruginous clay/limonite (Fe Cl/Li). Free ferruginous clay/limonite (Fe Cl/Li) and hematite (He) grains are seen in <400m size sample. (Reflected light, 20, air)

Brownish yellow coloured lateritic lumpy hydrated iron oxide lumpy ore from CN halli, Karnataka assayed 57.65% Fe, 2.69% SiO2, 0.19% FeO, 4.40% Al2O3, 0.08% P, 0.03% S and 10.80% LOI and contained goethite [90%], hematite [4%], quartz [1%], clay [5%], gibbsite, martite, magnetite, apatite, chlorite, pyrite[Tr]. The DAT yielded a concentrate assaying ~61.7% Fe concentrate with 23% Fe recovery indicating that the sample could not yield stipulated grade concentrates by simple physical separations thereby indicating the necessity of chemical processing. The results are given in Table6. Hence calcinations studies were conducted varying temperature, size and time. The calcinations followed by wet particle size refining under optimum conditions of 10mm size Calcine for 30min at 450C, water quench, screen over 0.2mm, gravityWHIMS of 0.2mm fraction yielded a concentrate assaying 63.48% Fe, 3.30% SiO2, 0.15% FeO, 3.00% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 2.06% LOI concentrate with 93% Fe recovery at 84wt% yield meeting the industrial specifications.

Grayish black coloured manganiferrous clayey iron ore fines from Goa assayed 45.24% Fe, 9.89% Mn, 5.61% SiO2, 0.70% FeO, 8.81% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S and 5.60% LOI and contained hematite [50%], FeMn clay [25%], goethite [10%], psilomelane [15%], magnetite, quartz, apatite and pyrite[Tr]. The DAT yielded a concentrate assaying ~56% Fe, 7.2% Mn concentrate with 40% Fe recovery indicating the necessity of separation of Mn by chemical methods like magnetizing roast followed by LIMS to concentrate Fe values or leaching of Mn values by reducing acid leaching. The results are given in Tables6 and 7. Figure2 shows the mineralogy of the sample. Conventional process of gravity and WHIMS at 0.5mm yielded a concentrate followed by sulphurous acid leaching of concentrate yielded a concentrate assaying 62 with 46% Fe recovery. IBM [2] and FIMI [3] reported similar results employing magnetizing roast followed by magnetic separation for Mn bearing ores of India.

The grayish coloured hard and compact BHQ/BHJcherty quartz [6065%] and ferruginous chert sample from Odisha, assayed 26.50% Fe, 61.19% SiO2, 0.21% Al2O3, and 0.30% LOI and contained hematite [3540%]. The DAT at very fine size yielded a concentrate assaying 60% Fe, 12.02% SiO2, 0.85% FeO, 0.38% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 0.62% LOI concentrate with 60% Fe recovery at 56wt% yield. The results are given in Table8 and very fine mineralogical assemblage is given in Fig.3. Requisite grade concentrates could not be produced due to very fine mutual interlocking and inclusions of chert with hematite. The process comprising of WHIMS with cleaning stage and inverse cationic flotation of iron values at 0.07mm yielded a concentrate assaying 60% Fe, 13.92% SiO2 concentrate with 32.8% Fe recovery at 14.5wt% yield. Similar grade concentrates were reported by IBM [2] and FIMI [3]. The ferruginous cherty BHQ/BHJ sample seems to be highly refractory from processing point of view.

The grayish coloured Ti/V bearing magnetite ores from Gonda, Maharashtra assaying 51.30% Fe, 6.10% SiO2, 8.64% FeO, 14.62% TiO2, 5.74% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, and 0.59% V2O5 and contained hematite [20%], quartz [2%], clay [1%], goethite [3%] ilmenite [20%], magnetite [40%], chamosite [15%], pyrite and apatite[Tr]. The DAT yielded a concentrate assaying 56% Fe, 13.28% TiO2 concentrate with 84% Fe recovery indicating highest refractory nature of the sample. Figure4 shows the mineralogical assemblage of the sample. Table9 gives the DAT and OD test data. Conventional rougher WLIMS at 0.5mm followed by two stages of cleaner WLIMS of rougher concentrate reground to 0.05mm could yield a concentrate assaying 55.96% Fe, 13.86% TiO2, 1.08% SiO2, 9.04% FeO, 3.05% Al2O3, 0.03% P, 0.03% S, 1.52% V2O5, 0.15% LOI concentrate with 85% Fe recovery at 79wt% yield. Only special plasma metallurgical processes may use this pelletized concentrates.

Based on the above chemical, mineralogical characterization and DAT the ores were categorized. The mineral processing test was done based on generic process developed at liberation size by previous works on similar ore types [47]. The ores from Donimalai, Bellary Hospet, Chitradurga and CN Halli from Karnataka, Gonda and Ratnagiri from Maharashtra, Odisha, Goa of India respectively are characterized as massive high grade hard anhydrous iron oxide, BMQ, soft friable clayey iron ore fines, soft friable siliceous iron ore fines, lateritic hydrated iron hydroxide ore, massive titanivanadi ferrous magnetite, alluvial black iron oxide sands and manganiferrous clayey iron ore fines. It can be noticed all the ores except titanivanadi ferrous magnetite, manganiferrous clayey ores and ferruginous cherty quartzite, yielded marketable concentrates assaying >62% Fe by both physical and/or chemical processing studies similar to the finding of previous works of Sahoo et al. [4], Haran et al. [6], Mandre et al. [5] and Banerjee et al. [7]. The refractoriness is attributed to chemically bound deleterious values within the lattice of iron minerals besides ultra fine dissemination of gangue at micronsub micron levels with iron minerals.

The process characterization studies indicated that the tentative ascending process refractoriness of iron ores are massive hematite/magnetite

R.K. Sahoo, B.C. Acharya, B.C. Naik, S.K. Misra, Mineralogical characteristics of some off-grade iron ores of Orissa, India, in IIM proceedings of International Symposium on beneficiation and agglomeration, RRL Bhubaneshwar, 1980

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Krishna, S.J.G., Patil, M.R., Rudrappa, C. et al. Characterisation and Processing of Some Iron Ores of India. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. D 94, 113120 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40033-013-0030-4

chemical, physical, thermal, textural and mineralogical studies of natural iron ores from odisha and chhattisgarh regions, india | springerlink

chemical, physical, thermal, textural and mineralogical studies of natural iron ores from odisha and chhattisgarh regions, india | springerlink

The chemical, physical, thermal and texture properties of iron ores from different regions of Odisha and Chhattisgarh regions, India, have been investigated to understand the compositional variations of Fe, Al2O3, SiO2, S and P. They were analyzed for its susceptibility to meet the industrial requirements, for various iron manufacture techniques. Chemical analysis indicated that the majority of the iron ores is rich in hematite (> 90 wt%), poor in gangue (<4.09 wt% SiO2 and <3.8 wt% Al2O3) and deleterious elements (P<0.065 wt% and S<0.016 wt%) in all these iron ores found to be low. XRD peaks reviled that the gangue is in the form of kaolinite and quartz, and same was observed in Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy in the range of 914 to 1034 cm1. The iron ores were found to have excellent physical properties exemplify with tumbler index (82 wt%91 wt%), abrasion index (1.27wt%4.87 wt%) and shatter index (0.87wt%1.64 wt%). FTIR and thermal analysis were performed to assimilate the analysis interpolations. It was found that these iron ores exhibit three endothermic reactions, which are dehydration below 447 K with mass loss of 0.13 wt% to 1.7 wt%, dehydroxylation at 525609 K with mass loss of 1.09 wt%4.49 wt% and decomposition of aluminosilicates at 597850 K with mass loss of 0.13 wt%1.15 wt%. From this study, we can conclude that due to its excellent physico-chemical characteristics, these iron ores are suitable for BF and DRI operations.

, FeAl2O3SiO2S P ,, ,(> 90 wt%),(<4.09 wt% SiO2,<3.8 wt% Al2O3),(P<0.065 wt%,S<0.016 wt%)XRD ,(FTIR)914~1034 cm1 ,(82 wt%~91 wt%)(1.27 wt%~4.87 wt%)(0.87 wt%~1.64 wt%), ,447 K ,0.13 wt%~1.7 wt%, 525~609 K , 1.09 wt%~4.49 wt%,597~850 K ,0.13 wt%~1.15 wt% ,DRI

UPADHYAY R K, VENKATESH A S, ROY S. Mineralogical characteristics of iron ores in Joda and Khondbond areas in Eastern India with implications on beneficiation [J]. Resource Geology, 2010, 60(2): 203211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-3928.2010.00126.x.

UPADHYAY R K, VENKATESH A S. Current strategies and future challenges on exploration, beneficiation and value addition of iron ore resources with special emphasis on iron ores from eastern India [J]. Applied Earth Science, 2006, 115(4): 18795. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/174327506X13 8922.

SINHA M, NISTALA S H, CHANDRA S, MANKHAND T R. Mineralogy of iron ores of different alumina levels from Singhbhum belt and their implication on sintering process [J]. Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering, 2015, 3: 180193. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmmce.2015.33021.

MUWANGUZI A J, KARASEV A V, BYARUHANGA J K, JNSSON P G. Characterization of chemical composition and microstructure of natural iron ore from Muko deposits [J]. ISRN Materials Science, 2012, 3: 19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/147420.

KUMAR M, JENA S, PATEL S K. Characterization of properties and reduction behavior of iron ores for application in sponge ironmaking [J]. Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review, 2007, 29(2): 11829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08827500701421896.

CHOKSHI Y, LIMAYE M A, DUTTA S K, LODHARI D R. Mineralogical studies of low-grade iron ore from jharkhandorissa region, india [J]. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 2016, 69(1): 151155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12666-015-0740-4.

RAO D S, KUMAR T V, RAO S S, PRABHAKAR S, RAJU G B. Mineralogy and geochemistry of a low grade iron ore sample from Bellary-hospet sector, India and their implications on beneficiation [J]. Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering, 2009, 8(2): 115131. DOI: 10.4236/jmmce.2009.82011.

MAHIUDDIN S, BONDYOPADHWAY S, BARUAH J N. A study on the beneficiation of Indian iron-ore fines and slime using chemical additives [J]. International Journal of Mineral Processing, 1989, 26(3, 4): 285296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-7516(89)90034-3.

CLOUT J M, MANUEL J R. Fundamental investigations of differences in bonding mechanisms in iron ore sinter formed from magnetite concentrates and hematite ores [J]. Powder Technology, 2003, 130(1): 393399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00241-3.

MAO Hong, ZHANG Ren, LV Xue, BAI Cheng, HUANG Xiao. Effect of surface properties of iron ores on their granulation behavior [J]. ISIJ International, 2013, 53(9): 14911496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational. 53.1491.

LADAVOS A K, KATSOULIDIS A P, IOSIFIDIS A, TRIANTAFYLLIDIS K S, PINNAVAIA T J, POMONIS P J. The BET equation, the inflection points of N2 adsorption isotherms and the estimation of specific surface area of porous solids [J]. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 2012, 151: 126133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2011.11.005.

DWECK J. Qualitative and quantitative characterization of Brazilian natural and organophilic clays by thermal analysis [J]. Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 2008, 92(1): 129135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-007-8751-y.

BOUCHARD M, MILLIARD A, RIVARD S, NESS S. ISO 95161 simplified borate fusion/WDXRF analytical method for iron ore including total iron analysis: Part 2. [J]. Powder Diffraction, 2014, 29(2): 170175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S08857 .

Indian Standard IS: 9963. Method of determination of shatter index of iron ore lumps, sinter and Pellets [S]. Bureau of Indian Standards, 1981: 16. DOI: https://archive.org/details/gov.in.is.9963.1981.

MCCANN G, STREZOV V, LUCAS J A, EVANS T, STREZOV L. Iron ore characterisation during high temperature thermal processing [J]. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2004, 12(3, 4): 369382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/apj.5500120412.

FORMOSO A, MORO A, FERNNDEZ P G, MENNDEZ J L, MUNIZ M, CORES A. Influence of nature and particle size distribution on granulation of iron ore mixtures used in a sinter strand [J]. Ironmaking & Steelmaking. 2003, 30(6): 44760. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/030 4187.

TSUKADA T, SEGAWA H, YASUMORI A, OKADA K. Crystallinity of boehmite and its effect on the phase transition temperature of alumina [J]. Journal of Materials Chemistry, 1999, 9(2): 54953. DOI: 10.1039/A806728G.

BELLOTTO M, REBOURS B, EUZEN P. Mechanism of pseudo-boehmite dehydration: Influence of reagent structure and reaction kinetics on the transformation sequence [J]. Materials Science Forum, 1998, 278: 572577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.278-281.572.

CORES A, BABICH A, MUIZ M, ISIDRO A, FERREIRA S, MARTN R. Iron ores, fluxes and tuyere injected coals used in the blast furnace [J]. Ironmaking & Steelmaking, 2007, 34(3): 23140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/1743 28107X168066.

ULLAH R, DEB B K, MOLLAH M Y. Synthesis and characterization of silica coated iron-oxide composites of different ratios [J]. International Journal of Composite Materials, 2014, 4(2): 13545. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5923/j.cmaterials.20140402.13.

SALAMA W, AREF M E L, GAUPP R. Spectroscopic characterization of iron ores formed in different geological environments using FTIR, XPS, Mssbauer spectroscopy and thermoanalyses [J]. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 2015, 136: 18161826. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2014.10.090.

WEISSENBORN P K, DUNN J G, WARREN L J. Quantitative thermogravimetric analysis of haematite, goethite and kaolinite in Western Australian iron ores [J]. Thermochimica Acta, 1994, 239: 147156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-6031(94)87063-2.

STREZOV V, ZIOLKOWSKI A, EVANS T J, NELSON P F. Assessment of evolution of loss on ignition matter during heating of iron ores [J]. Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 2010, 100(3): 901907. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-009-0398-4.

ZERVAS T, MCMULLAN J T, WILLIAMS B C. Developments in iron and steel making [J]. International journal of energy research, 1996, 20(1): 6991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-114X(199601)20:1<69::AIDER241> 3.0.CO;2-3.

DE LIMA L C, DUARTE J B, VEZIROGLU T N. A proposal of an alternative route for the reduction of iron ore in the eastern Amazonia [J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2004, 29(6): 659661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3199(03)00053-3.

BEDARKAR S S, SINGH R. Removal of phosphorous from steel produced by melting sponge iron in induction furnace [J]. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 2013, 66(3): 207211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12666-013-0244-z.

Kotta, A.B., Karak, S.K. & Kumar, M. Chemical, physical, thermal, textural and mineralogical studies of natural iron ores from Odisha and Chhattisgarh regions, India. J. Cent. South Univ. 25, 28572870 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-018-3958-6

Related Equipments