Notice: fwrite(): send of 231 bytes failed with errno=10054 Se ha forzado la interrupci�n de una conexi�n existente por el host remoto. in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\anfre.com\httpdocs\wp-includes\Requests\Transport\fsockopen.php on line 212
Asociación Nacional de Fabricantes e Instaladores de Productos Refractarios, Materiales y Servicios Afines - Página 86 de 93 - Asociación Nacional de Fabricantes e Instaladores de Productos Refractarios, Materiales y Servicios Afines

Jun 16

CURSO MATERIALES REFRACTARIOS JUNIO 2016

Este mes de junio ha tenido lugar en Llanera, Oviedo, el Curso de Materiales Refractarios ofrecido por ANFRE e impartido por el ITMA. Este curso ha sido íntegramente para personal de las empresas asociadas de ANFRE.

foto-arciresaSe ha tratado de un curso en el que se ha combinado a la perfección las clases teóricas con el laboratorio y las visitas a empresas relacionadas con el sector.

Se ha hablado en profundidad de los materias primas refractarias, su clasificación, aplicaciones industriales, procesos de fabricación y hemos tenido tiempo incluso de de contar con la colaboración de Roberto Inoriza de Dominion Global que nos da dado una charla sobre la Ingeniería de detalle y el montaje de refractarios.

Se han realizado dos visitas, una a la Acería de Veriña  y otra a Arciresa, empresa asociada de ANFRE que se dedica a las Materias Primas.  En estas visitas los alumnos han podido vivir un poco más de cerca la realidad del sector y hacerse una idea de cómo se trabaja en dichas empresas.

Queríamos aprovechar la ocasión para dar las gracias a los las empresas y los alumnos que han participado en dicho curso, esperando que les sirve para su, esperamos, próspera carrera profesional. Igualmente queremos agradecer al Itma la oportunidad que nos ha brindado de realizar el curso con ellos, a la Acería de Veriña y Arciresa por permitirnos ver sus instalaciones y a Roberto Inoriza por asistir como invitado y excelente ponente.

Esperamos veros a todos en el siguiente curso.

Jun 14

Coal Tar Pitch, high temperature (CTPht) in the Refractory industry – Intermediate under REACH Art. 3 (15)

Intermediate means a substance that is manufactured for and consumed in or used for chemical processing in order to be transformed into another substance […].

Intermediates are exempted from authorisation under REACH Art. 2(1c) and Art. 2(8b)

1 Background

During the manufacture of slide gate assemblies, PRE member companies use “Coal Tar Pitch high temperature” (CTPht) (CAS 65996-93-2) to produce “Coke (coal tar) high-temperature pitch” (CAS 140203-12-9), in the following named “Pitch coke”. A slide gate system is one of the flow control components in the steel casting process. The basic function of the slide gate system is to control the flow of the liquid steel from the ladle to the tundish and from the tundish to the mould (it can also be used for furnace gates). The basic principle of a slide gate system is shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2. For successful operation, a slide gate system requires different refractory components (assemblies). The slide gate plate for example is one of the most critical refractory components in a slide gate system for liquid steel casting and metering.

Figure 1: Figures showing construction of a slide gate system (top left) position of slide gate plates in the system (right) and a slide gate system in operation (bottom left).

Figure 1: Figures showing construction of a slide gate system (top left) position of slide gate plates in the system (right) and a slide gate system in operation (bottom left).

2: Principle of a slide gate system – left side open position and right side closed position

2: Principle of a slide gate system – left side open position and right side closed position

The material properties of the slide gate assemblies achieved by use of CTPht in the manufacturing process, guarantee the observance of the required safety standards in dealing with liquid steel. This is because the service life of slide gate plates is a limiting factor for performance of the slide gate system. The lifetime of slide gate systems depends on factors such as refractory material, plant operating conditions and steel grades. Therefore, the chemical composition (refractory material) of slide gate components is a key to ensure process and workers safety and consequently extended service life of the slide gate systems and thus higher productivity and improved economical operation.

2 Manufacture of slide gate assemblies

Figure 3 provides an overview on the production of slide gate assemblies the different intermediate products and the use of CTPht:

Figure 3: Production of slide gate assemblies

Figure 3: Production of slide gate assemblies

2.1  Step 1: Mixing and forming of raw materials

In the first production step, a primary product – the so called “raw body” – is produced by mixing, forming and firing of different raw materials (e.g. Magnesia, Aluminium oxide, Graphite, Resin and Pitch). At this stage, no CTPht is used. The resulting “raw body” has a porous structure and provides the cavities/pores, which are then filled with CTPht in the following step.

It is important to mention that the shape and surface of the “raw body” differs significantly from the shape/surface/design of the final slide gate assemblies. The forming performed at this stage does not provide the required final shape, surface and design of produced slide gate assemblies. The final shape, surface and design is obtained by machining in the final production step (see Section 2.3). For the overall manufacturing process, the machining step is mandatory since slide gate assemblies with a shape/surface/design similar to the “raw bodies” in practice are useless for the final application. The chemical composition of the “raw body” however is a prerequisite for the subsequent production steps and the performance of the final slide gate assembly. In other words, the chemical composition of the “raw body” is important for the next production step (and the final product) in contrast its shape/surface/design.

Consequently, the resulting so called “raw body” does not fulfil the article definition under REACH[1](according to Article 3(2) of REACH an article is defined as an ”object which during production is given a special shape, surface or design which determines its function to a greater degree than does its chemical composition”). The product resulting from step 1 consequently is a substance (reaction mass) under REACH.

2.2 Step 2: Impregnating and firing

In the second production step, impregnation of the “raw body” with CTPht – filling of the pores/cavities of the “raw body” with CTPht – is performed. During the subsequent firing process, CTPht is completely transformed into “Pitch Coke”. The substance CTPht serves as the meltable (requirement for impregnation) parent substance (precursor) for the transformation product of the chemical reaction –“Pitch Coke”. The new substance “Pitch Coke” is formed via the chemical reactions of poly-condensation and polymerization during the firing step (high temperature). “Pitch Coke” (CAS 140203-12-9) is exempt from registration and authorisation under REACH, Annex V[2]

During step 2 only the chemical composition of the “raw body” is changed, but not the surface, shape and design. Similar to step 1, the shape, surface and design of the resulting object is secondary, as the “fired raw body” does not fulfil any other function besides use for further processing (shaping). Of crucial importance is the chemical composition (complete transformation of CTPht) of the object that allows the subsequent production of the final products by shaping.

“Pitch coke” leads to a high mechanical strength and a high slag resistance of the final slide gate assemblies. The slide gate system is crucial to process safety and safety at work in the casting of liquid steel in the steel making process. A failure of a slide gate will cause an uncontrolled release of hot liquid steel with dangerous consequences for workers and the environment. There are no other means for getting this required high mechanical strength, and slag resistance by applying other substances (e.g. bitumen, resin). The chemical composition, especially the content of “Pitch coke” in slide gate assemblies, is crucial for the functioning of the final products and an important safety element in the steel making process.

2.3 Step 3: Machining

After the transformation from CTPht to “Pitch coke”, the object undergoes different machining steps (e.g. grinding, cutting etc.) to achieve the final shape, surface and will finally be fitted with a metal band, metal can/cassette or metal sheet to achieve the final design.

3 Evaluation of legal situation

According to REACH, an intermediate is defined as “a substance that is manufactured for and consumed in or used for chemical processing in order to be transformed into another substance”. In the guidance document on intermediates – Appendix 4: Definition of intermediates as agreed by Commission, Member States and ECHA on 4 May 2010 – it is pointed out: “The status of a substance as an intermediate is in fact not specific to its chemical nature but to how it is used following manufacturing”.

 

It is clear that during the manufacture of slide gate assemblies, CTPht is converted into “Pitch coke” at industrial sites. Consequently, there are two main points to consider when evaluating whether the use of CTPht in the refractory industry is an intermediate use:

 

  1. Substances used for the production of articles cannot be regarded as intermediates as according to Article 3(15), a substance is only considered as intermediate if it functions as a starting material for the manufacture of another substance.

 

  1. As soon as the main aim of the chemical process is not to transform a substance into another substance, or when a substance is not used for this main aim but to achieve another function, the substance used for this activity should not be regarded as an intermediate under REACH. An example is the use of acrylamide in acrylamide-based grouting agents. Here, acrylamide is used in the manufacture of another substance during which it is itself transformed into that other substance, namely a polymer. However, the acrylamide is not used for the purposes of undergoing synthesis, as defined in Article 3(15) of Regulation No 1907/2006. It is not used with the aim of manufacturing that other substance, the main purpose of the chemical process being to obtain a sealing function that occurs when the acrylamide grouting agent polymerises. The use of acrylamide as a grouting agent is therefore not considered to be an intermediate use, but rather an end use of the substance.

 

 

Regarding point a), as explained above, the “raw body” and the “fired raw body” cannot be regarded as articles under REACH as due to the shape (surface and design) of these preliminary products no other use than further processing is possible (end use in the steel industry is impossible). The next processing step 3 does not require any specific shape (surface and design) of the intermediate products from the previous steps. The product achieved after step 2, namely the “fired raw body” is a mixture consisting of the reaction mass achieved in step 1 and “Pitch coke” synthesized from CTPht in step 2. It is irrelevant that the “fired raw body” has a specific form, as at this stage only the composition of the “fired raw body” is of interest. This mixture (“fired raw body”) is subsequently used in step 3 to produce an article, namely the slide gate assembly. At this stage, CTPht is not present anymore and therefore CTPht as such is not used in the manufacture of the article itself (as for example curing agents in case of articles made from polymers or substances used for surface treatment of articles). The “fired raw body” undergoes different machining steps like grinding and cutting to achieve the final shape, surface and is finally fitted with a metal band, metal can/cassette or metal sheet to achieve the final design. After this step, one may conclude that the design of the object is of similar importance as the composition, as this final step results in the properties (shape and surface) required for proper and safe functioning of the slide gate assembly. The precise shape and the defined surface property besides the chemical composition guarantee process safety and safety at work in the casting of liquid steel in the steel making process.

 

When looking at point b) it is obvious that a use of a substance is not regarded as an intermediate use in case the main purpose of the chemical process is not the manufacture of a new substance but another effect like sealing function resulting from polymerization reactions or change of surface properties of articles. In general, the properties of every article are a result of the chemical composition and the “Pitch coke” being part of the composition of the slide gate assemblies in combination with the other components gives the article specific properties like high mechanical strength and a high slag resistance.

 

However, in the slide gate assemblies manufacturing process CTPht has no other function than being transferred to “Pitch coke”. CTPht is neither used with the intention to close/seal the pores of the “raw body” (like in the case of acrylamide mentioned above) nor is the product of the chemical reaction transferring CTPht into “Pitch coke” (the “fired raw body”) an article as such and the chemical reaction does also not aim at changing the surface properties of the “raw body” (or an article).

 

Against this background, it is clear that the main aim of the chemical process (step 2) is to produce a mixture consisting of the reaction mass produced in step 1 and “Pitch coke” which is subsequently used in step 3 to manufacture articles. There is no other function and the chemical reaction is not an integrated part of producing articles.

 

There is a clear difference between the manufacturing process of slide gate assemblies and CTPht impregnated refractory bricks. In contrast to the manufacture of slide gate assemblies, there is no machining step (step 3) after the chemical transformation of CTPht to “Pitch coke” during manufacture of refractory bricks. Already before impregnation with CTPht and firing, the shape, surface and design of the refractory brick is developed. The “raw body” in this case consequently already constitutes an article and the use of CTPht aims at changing the (surface) properties of this article (increase resistance). In this case, the use of CTPht is an integrated part of the production of an article (impregnated refractory brick) as the chemical transformation of CTPht is the last manufacturing step of the article comparable to surface treatment and therefore part of the manufacture of the article and not the production of a substance subsequently used to manufacture an article.

 

In other words, in contrast to the manufacture of impregnated refractory bricks, in the present case the aim of the chemical transformation of CTPht is the manufacture the new substance “Pitch coke”. This new substance “Pitch coke” (in a mixture with other substances gained from step 1) is subsequently used to manufacture articles (slide gate assemblies) by machining in production step 3.

 

According to the relevant sections of the REACH regulation[3], Art. 3(15), Art. 2(1c), Art. 2(8b) and the applicable ECHA guidance documents[4] [5], the substance CTPht when used in the manufacture of slide gate assemblies is an intermediate under REACH and therefore exempted from authorisation.

[1] According to Article 3(15), a substance is only considered as an intermediate if it functions as a starting material for the manufacture of another substance – substances used for the production of articles can therefore not be regarded as intermediates.

 

[2] ECHA guidance for Annex V: https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/annex_v_en.pdf

[3] REACH regulation: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02006R1907-20140822

 

[4] ECHA – Guidance on intermediates: https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/intermediates_en.pdf

 

[5] ECHA – Guidance on articles: http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/articles_en.pdf

 

Jun 08

Ceramic minerals – Taking the floor – Industrial Minerals 03 2016

 

 

Ceramic minerals – Taking the floorceramic-minerals-taking-the-floor-industrial-minerals-03-2016-1ceramic-minerals-taking-the-floor-industrial-minerals-03-2016-2

May 30

The 54% Rally in Steel Prices That Points to China’s Rapid Shift

Steel reinforcement bars are about as unglamorous an industrial product as one can get. Their rally in China this week is anything but, with a surge to the highest since 2014 that’s helping to boost iron ore.
Rebar futures jumped for the fourth straight day on the Shanghai Futures Exchange, advancing 6.1 percent to 2,750 yuan ($424) a metric ton. The product that’s used to strengthen concrete is 20 percent higher this week, and up 54 percent in 2016. Iron ore futures in Dalian rose to the highest in more than a year as benchmark Metal Bulletin Ltd. prices powered above $70 for the first time since January 2015.
“You’ve got a tight market, you’ve got momentum, and you’ve got this fundamental driver for steel in the government boosting the infrastructure and housing side of things,” said Chris Weston, chief market strategist at IG Ltd. in Melbourne. “The rebar price is really leading the iron ore price at the moment.”
The rallies in steel and iron ore in 2016 are in contrast to last year, when slowing economic growth in China hammered prices and too much supply chased too little demand. This year, policy makers in China have talked up growth and added stimulus, presiding over a revival in the property market. Steel demand in China may increase as much as 10 percent in 2016, according to Credit Suisse Group AG.
‘Getting Better’
“Firstly and perhaps of no surprise intuitively (but often overlooked in the market) rising steel and iron ore prices suggest demand is getting better,” Credit Suisse said in a report on global steel markets dated April 20. “The magnitude of the iron ore and steel price hikes suggest that not only is demand improving but expectations should have moved very much into the inflationary camp for steel and iron ore.”
Ore with 62 percent content delivered to Qingdao climbed 8.8 percent to $70.46 a dry ton on Thursday, according to Metal Bulletin. The price, which is set daily, has rebounded 84 percent since bottoming in December, surprising many banks that had forecast further losses in 2016.
Mills in China, which make about half the world’s supply, have boosted output to an all-time high as property prices in bigger cities jumped and higher steel prices improved margins, reversing a squeeze from last year. Crude-steel production soared to 70.65 million tons in March, according to data last week.

rally-in-steel-prices-that-points
The record output by mills has so far failed to replenish inventories as the government cranks up stimulus. Stockpiles of rebar contracted for a sixth week, declining 6.8 percent in the period to April 15, for the biggest drop since October 2014, according to Shanghai Steelhome Information Technology Co.
China’s economy gathered pace in March as a surge in new credit helped the property sector to rebound, with housing values in first-tier cities soaring. The trend has drawn concern from investors including billionaire George Soros, who said on Wednesday the credit-growth figures should be viewed as a warning.
“Why steel production jumped so rapidly was because the profitability of the steelmakers have improved dramatically,” Georgi Slavov, head of basic resources research at Marex Spectron, said in an interview in Singapore. The price gains “will not be valid for too long because supply of iron ore will improve, production of steel will gradually weaken, therefore demand for iron ore will weaken.”

May 26

NO to tiering of the EU ETS Carbon Leakage List

cerame-unieThe tiered approach to free allowance allocation for the EU ETS carbon leakage list is a concept which undermines the aim of the EU ETS and contradicts the October 2014 European Council Conclusions. It would not ensure the delivery of cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions, but on the contrary would have a deleterious impact on the wider European economy and would result in an increase in global emissions. A tiered approach would result in an inadequate level of carbon leakage protection for all ceramic sectors. Among others, we urge that the following key points are taken into account:
1) Carbon leakage risk – difficult to quantify accurately
2) Un-level playing field on EU internal and global markets
3) Evolution of trade and emission intensity
4) Unfair treatment for those sectors who have invested in carbon-efficiency
5) Increased compliance costs

 

1) Carbon leakage risk – difficult to quantify accurately
Carbon leakage (i.e. the loss of production, jobs and investment to third countries with no or less stringent carbon constraints) occurs if companies are not able to pass-through the carbon costs onto consumers without losing market share. It is extremely difficult to quantify such risks at sectoral or sub-sectoral levels, since it is affected by the strategies adopted by individual businesses and across a long- term business cycle. Due to the specific cost structure (where energy and climate costs account for a large share of total production costs) coupled with the wider impacts on industrial value chains across the European economy, all energy-intensive industries must receive full protection to guard against leakage risks.
2) Un-level playing field on EU internal and global markets
The introduction of a tiered list would lead to inadequate carbon leakage protection for most industrial sectors and a further major distortion of the playing field both globally (against non-EU ceramic producers) and in the internal EU market. The reduced mitigation and increased carbon costs associated with tiering will increase the competiveness of non-EU producers (at the expense of EU producers) allowing non-EU products to penetrate the EU market to a greater degree than at present. Potential competitive market distortions would occur between industrial sectors producing substitutable products, for example: clay vs. cement-based concrete, steel and glass construction products and ceramic wall/floor tiles vs. carpet, vinyl, laminate etc). Moreover, given the durability of ceramics, such a shift would neither facilitate carbon emission reductions, nor improve the ecological footprint of the materials used, nor have any environmental justification or benefit.

 

Furthermore, there are substantial differences in carbon leakage exposure between different Member States, as the trade intensity of sectors and sub-sectors varies markedly with geographic location. Naturally, trade intensity tends to be higher for countries located at EU borders and subject to significantly higher import pressures from adjacent, non-EU countries. It should also be noted that producers of clay construction products tend to fulfil significant economic and employment roles in these regions (often being the main local employer). Furthermore, costal countries show increased vulnerability to sea transportation of non-EU imports.
3) Evolution of trade and emission intensity
In addition to geographic location, both trade and emission intensity indicators will evolve over time (in response to changing market characteristics) and will be impacted by other policy instruments (such as trade or industrial policy), meaning it is extremely difficult to reach a fair tiering conclusion. The carbon leakage list, which is to be drawn for a 10-year period (2021-30), needs to retain the flexibility to accommodate such changes and developments.
In particular, the Gross Value Added (GVA) element of the emission intensity indicator is not appropriate to reflect the impact of carbon costs on the competitiveness of a sector. It is reported at company level (which may cover a diverse range of ETS and non ETS activities), whilst carbon emissions are declared at installation level. There is often a significant mismatch between the two data sets, such that inappropriate GVA figures would skew any tiering assessment. In addition, the use of GVA underestimates and penalises the impact of carbon costs on sectors which are labour intensive, such as ceramics (since GVA = Gross Operating Surplus + labour costs). In this context, to enable a correct and comprehensive assessment, we also stress the need for qualitative carbon leakage risk assessments to be available to all sectors (without application of the 0.18 threshold).
4) Unfair treatment for those sectors who have invested in carbon-efficiency
Sectors which have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions in the recent years and hence have decreased their emissions intensity, would be penalised for their early action by being classified into a lower risk category. In other words, tiering would create a disincentive and discourage sectors from reducing their carbon emissions.
5) Increased compliance costs
Increasing the complexity of the scheme will increase administrative costs and burdens for public authorities as well as the scheme participants. Increased compliance costs will disproportionately hit SME-led sectors, such as ceramics, the hardest.

 

It is essential that before any tiering proposal is further considered, it is properly assessed under a full impact assessment to ascertain the effects on EU jobs and sectors’ competitiveness, both against non-EU competitors and between competing sectors in the internal EU market. It must also be recognised that tiering is not a guarantee to prevent triggering of the Cross Sectoral Correction Factor (CSCF). The only justifiable approach to target free allocation could be to develop a more dynamic allocation system that better reflects recent production levels. In addition, the number of free allowances available to industry must be increased (within the confines of the overall scheme cap) to maintain the competitiveness of all energy-intensive industries.
We urge EU Member States, Members of the European Parliament, the European Commission as well as other interested stakeholders not to support any tiered approach to free allocation for the afore-mentioned reasons.

 

Descargar en .PDF

Entradas más antiguas «

» Entradas más recientes

Translate »