Page images


The following recommendations emerged from a more general discussion at the end of the workshop:

o Groups should be set up which are multidisciplinary and focussed on a defined task, e.g., a team of sensor, refractory and control specialists should be given the task of developing a continuous carbon sensor which would be fully operational within 2 years.

o A team approach to "intelligent processing" should be initiated early in the project and knowledge integration should be emphasized.

o Research teams should be encouraged, where feasible, to develop generalized approaches and solutions, including computer software, to enhance applicability in the broad area of metal smelting and refining.

o All potential spin-offs should be well publicized and aggressively pursued.

In addition, a participant from a copper company (J. Fay) closed the session by stating that many of the sensors highlighted during this meeting would also be of use to the copper industry3 and that although the sessions had focused on in-bath smelting the outcome could have more widespread applicability.

3 See table 3.

Prepared by: Alan W. Cramb

Jan Kor

Table 1. Necessary Chemical Sensors

Carbon Content of Liquid Metal

Oxygen Activity of Liquid Metal

Sulfur Content of Liquid Metal

Carbon Monoxide Content of Gas

Carbon Dioxide Content of Gas

Water Content of Gas

Hydrogen Content of Gas

Nitrogen Content of Gas

Slag FeO Content

Fe3+\Fe2+ ratio of slag

Table 2. Potential Physical Sensor Techniques



Static Pressure


Refractory Life

Table 3. Sensor Needs for Copper Industry

Bath Level Measurement

Continuous Temperature Measurement*

Continuous Chemical Analysis of Matte and Slag*

Flame Length Measurement

Refractory Life*

Matte-Slag Interface

Off-Gas Composition*

Solid Feed Rate Measurement

Vessel Content (weight, etc.)

denotes sensor need area to be similar to in-bath smelting needs.


Session Co-Chairmen

W. Eugene Eckhart, Jr., U. S. Department of Energy
Richard Sussman, ARMCO, Inc.


M. R. Moore, USS Division of USX

R. A. Gleixner, Battelle Memorial Laboratories

L. T. Shiang, Inland Steel Company

Y. Sahai, Ohio State University

H. N. G. Wadley, University of Virginia
J. A. Walton, ARMCO, Inc.


The Near-Net Shape Casting session was organized with the realization that several research efforts are underway within North America, indeed worldwide, investigating different casting concepts. No single method has emerged as significantly more advantageous than the others. Accordingly, the principal objective of this session was to determine whether there are common needs that could lead to research projects that would serve a broad constituency in this subject area. The areas of opportunity could include sensors, controls, mathematical and physical modeling, and issues relating to final product properties.

This session was conducted in two parts, according to the agenda shown in the Appendix of this report. The first day was characterized by astute presentations made by experts in their respective fields. Each presentation generated a modest number of questions within the subject area. It is noteworthy that no process-specific problems were detailed during the first-day presentations, to the disappointment of some of the participants. It was emphasized that the intent of the first-day session was to present a broad overview of the subject area, with concentrations on specific problems slated for discussion the following day.

The second day of this session was started by brief presentations made by individuals having hands-on experience with near-net shape casting of metal. Despite the obvious differences between the various casting methods, needs were categorized into three distinct areas: liquid metal handling, casting, and strip collection. With these categories, numerous needs were cited for each of the different processes, many of which were similar from one process to another.

« PreviousContinue »