Next Article in Journal
The Effects of Layer Thickness on the Mechanical Properties of Additive Friction Stir Deposition-Fabricated Aluminum Alloy 6061 Parts
Previous Article in Journal
A Link between Neutron and Ion Irradiation Hardening for Stainless Austenitic and Ferritic-Martensitic Steels
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Purification and Recovery of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Slag via Supergravity-Induced Cake-Mode Filtration

1
State Key Laboratory of Advanced Metallurgy, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
2
Energy and Environment Research Institute (R&D Center), Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., Shanghai 201900, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Metals 2024, 14(1), 100; https://doi.org/10.3390/met14010100
Submission received: 27 December 2023 / Revised: 9 January 2024 / Accepted: 11 January 2024 / Published: 14 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Extractive Metallurgy)

Abstract

:
The elimination and retrieval of slag produced during the hot-dip galvanizing process are crucial in reducing plating defects and enhancing economic efficiency. Hot-dip galvanizing slag can be separated and purified efficiently by using graphite carbon felt filtration in a supergravity field. The effects of the gravity coefficient (G), separation temperature (T), and separation time (t) on the separation efficiency were investigated. Under the optimal conditions as G = 300, T = 460 °C, and t = 120 s, these conditions yielded filtered zinc with 0.022 wt% Fe and 1.097 wt% Al. The separation efficiencies achieved were 87% for the acquisition ratio of filtered zinc (AZn), 93.67% for the recovery ratio of zinc (RZn), and 96.01% for the loss ratio of iron (LFe). Based on these laboratory findings, an amplified centrifugal separation apparatus was conceptually designed for future online separation and recycle of zinc slag on an engineering scale. The filtered zinc obtained from this apparatus contained 0.027 wt% Fe and 1.844 wt% Al, while the recovery ratio of zinc (RZn) and the loss ratio of iron (LFe) achieved 85.97% and 95.47%, respectively.

1. Introduction

Hot-dip galvanizing is a common corrosion-preventive treatment for metals [1,2,3]. It is widely used for its strong corrosion protection, low maintenance, high aesthetics, and malleability, and hot-dip galvanizing accounts for nearly half of all zinc used [4,5,6]. However, during continuous hot-dip galvanizing process, the zinc bath is often saturated with iron and hot-dip galvanizing slag inevitably precipitates. This slag is composed of Fe-Zn, Fe-Al, or Fe-Al-Zn intermetallic compounds formed at high temperatures between the dissolved Fe and molten Zn in the zinc bath or with the addition of Al to the zinc bath [7,8,9,10]. For the batch hot-dip galvanizing process, because its aluminum content is much lower, the Fe-Al phase slag will not be formed in the galvanizing bath, and only the hard zinc of Fe-Zn intermetallic compounds will be produced. Therefore, this study only focuses on the continuous hot-dip galvanizing process. In production, hot-dip galvanizing slag is generally removed by manual or mechanical methods since it harms the surface quality of the galvanizing layer [9,10,11,12]. Approximately 12% to 15% of metal zinc is inevitably carried in the process of fetching slag, resulting in a significant increase in galvanizing costs. Apparently, hot-dip galvanizing slag with a metal zinc content of more than 85% is a secondary resource with significant economic recovery value [13]. Recovery and utilization of zinc slag can extend the service life of zinc resources, reduce production energy consumption, reduce environmental pollution, and increase the economic benefits of plants.
Currently, there are several methods available for the recovery and treatment of galvanizing slag, such as electrolysis [14,15], vacuum distillation [16,17,18], chemical [19,20,21], and Welz methods [22,23]. Although these methods can recover hot-dip galvanizing slag, they still have several drawbacks that hinder their industrial application. For example, the electrolysis method requires frequent purification of the electrolyte due to the presence of iron impurities, which significantly increases costs. Vacuum distillation is a widely used method for separating zinc from zinc slag, but its production costs are high and productivity is low. The chemical and Welz methods involve a complex process of dissolving zinc slag in concentrated acid or ammonia, which is not suitable for mass production. Therefore, it is crucial to find a highly cost-effective and convenient way to recover zinc slag.
Supergravity is defined as significantly higher than the normal gravitational acceleration on the ground (9.81 m/s2). This technique utilizes a rotating centrifuge operating at high speed to generate supergravity, enhancing mass transfer and migration of non-homogeneous phases [24]. The relative velocity of the two phases is mainly determined by the buoyancy factor Δρg and the fluid viscosity, where Δρ represents the density difference and g denotes the gravitational acceleration. Supergravity can accelerate the separation between different phases by increasing, even if the density difference between the two phases is small. This technique has been successfully applied to remove impurities from alloys or metals. Under the supergravity field, by using graphite carbon felt (CFF) as the filtration medium, Sun Ningjie successfully recovered aluminum matrix alloys and SiC particles from scrap aluminum matrix composites (AMCs) [25], and Meng Long used supergravity to recover valuable metals (Pb, Sn, Zn, Cu) from granular computer printed circuit boards [26]. Meanwhile, by using Al2O3 Ceramic Filter Plate (Al2O3 CFP) as the filter medium, Sun Ningjie successfully removed the impurity particles from galvanizing zinc liquid [27] by super gravity-induced filtration. Sun Bolin used the supergravity induction technology to purify the scrap 1060 aluminum alloy containing iron and silicon through the Al2O3 CFp [28]. In summary, Supergravity can quickly and efficiently separate valuable components, and has the advantages of high efficiency, simple process, and low emission. Related studies have been performed in our laboratory [10], but no optimization of the parameters and no studies for industrial applications have been performed. Different galvanizing plants have different galvanizing slag, and the optimal conditions applicable to the production line are different.
This study aims to establish a method for the recovery and treatment of hot-dip galvanizing slag under the supergravity field. It is investigated through two dimensions: laboratory exploratory experiments and engineering experiments. The effects of process parameters on the laboratory separation effect were mainly investigated, and the purification mechanism was analyzed. Based on this, engineering-scale equipment for industrial applications was designed and developed, and validation tests were performed in the laboratory.

2. Experimental

2.1. Raw Material

The raw material investigated in this study is hot-dip galvanizing surface slag acquired from China Baowu Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. (Wuhan, China). To ensure uniform composition, the raw material is melted in a muffle furnace with proper stirring and then cooled in the furnace. For the subsequent supergravity separation test, the raw material was processed into 20 mm diameter samples using wire-electrode cutting, as depicted in Figure 1. Table 1 illustrates the chemical composition of the hot-dip galvanizing slag, where the oxygen content in the raw material is insignificant and therefore disregarded. The contents of the other three principal elements, namely Zn, Al, and Fe, are normalized. Zn is the primary component with a content of 91.84 wt%, followed by Al and Fe with a content of 7.68 wt% and 0.48 wt%, respectively.

2.2. Apparatus

Schematic and physical diagrams of the centrifugal apparatus are shown in Figure 2, with a resistance heating furnace and counterweights symmetrically fixed on the horizontal rotor. This apparatus has several advantages, such as small volume, wide applicability, convenient operation and maintenance, and low energy consumption. It has two centrifugal tanks, with one used to heat and centrifuge the sample (separation tank) and the other used to balance the equipment and maintain the centrifugal process’s stability (counterweight tank). The resistance furnace is composed of Cr27Al7Mo2 resistance wire for heating and alumina fiber used as the insulating layer. The counterweight tank must have the same weight and center of gravity as the separation tank. The temperature is controlled by a programmed controller with a B-type thermocouple, and the observation accuracy range is ±3 °C.
The gravity coefficient (G), which is defined as the ratio between centrifugal and normal gravity acceleration, was calculated using Equation (1).
G = g 2 + ( ω 2 r ) 2 g = g 2 + ( N 2 π 2 r 900 ) 2 g
where g is normal gravity acceleration equal to 9.8 m/s2; w is the angular velocity (in rad/s); r is the distance from the axis to the sample center (equal to 0.25 m in this work); and N is a rotating speed (in r/min).

2.3. Experimental Procedures

To conduct the supergravity separation experiment, approximately 35 g of the sample was placed in the bottom of the upper crucible with graphite carbon felt, as depicted in Figure 1. The graphite crucible was then heated to the target separation temperature (T) in the furnace and held for 30 min before the centrifuge was started and operated at the specified speed (N = 0–1892 r/min, G = 1–1000) for the corresponding separation time (T). Once the centrifuge was switched off, the graphite crucible was immediately removed and cooled in air. The filtered zinc and residue were then separated into the lower and upper crucibles, respectively, in preparation for further characterization.

2.4. Selection of Filter Medium

From the above introduction, it can be seen that in the super gravity field, different filtration medium are required for different samples to achieve efficient separation and purification. So the selection of filter medium plays a crucial role in thermal filtration. At present, there are two main filtration principles that are suitable for different impurity content: deep-bed filtration for low impurity content (<0.1%) and cake-mode filtration for high impurity content (>1%), as depicted in Figure 3. Al2O3 ceramic filter plates are often used as deep-bed filter media (Figure 3a), while carbon fiber felt (CFF) is commonly used as cake-mode filter media in the laboratory (Figure 3b). The principle of deep-bed filtration is that the impurities smaller than the media void can enter the media inside and be trapped by the long and tortuous pore channels and eventually adhere to the medium. Deep-bed filtration has no filter cake formation. Cake-mode filtration refers to the gradual deposition and bridging of impurity particles on the filter media, eventually forming a filter cake. What really plays the role of the filter medium is the filter cake itself, through which the subsequent molten metal is filtered, which also prevents a large number of impurity particles from blocking the pores of the filter medium.
Hot-dip galvanizing slag belongs to the latter raw material with high content of impurities. In order to avoid the problems of low separation efficiency caused by the blockage of pores of the ceramic filter plate, this study proposes to adopt cake-mode filtration in order to achieve better impurity removal, and CFF is selected as the filter medium to form the filter cake. In this experiment, a 5 mm thick layer of carbon fiber felt (CFF) was utilized as the filter medium. The CFF was procured from Jing Hang Te Tan Ltd. (Neimenggu) in China and possessed the following fundamental properties: bulk density of 0.171 g/cm3, real density of 1.82 g/cm3, and an average fiber diameter of 17 μm.

2.5. Characterization

The raw material, filtered zinc, and residue are each longitudinally divided into two parts along the central axis. To investigate the distribution, composition, and morphology of the impurity phase, one part is polished and subjected to analysis using scanning electron microscopy (SEM; MLA250, FEI Quanta, Hillsboro, OR, USA) and X-ray diffraction (XRD, Smartlab, Rigaku, Tokyo, Japan). The second part is subjected to analysis of element content using inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometry (ICP-OES, Optima 7000DV, Perkin Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA) for both the filtered zinc and residue. Image J software (1.53k version) is utilized for pore analysis of residue and statistical analysis of the average size of inclusions on obtained electron microscopy images. By comparing the results with those of the raw material, the effect of supergravity separation and purification can be elucidated.
To evaluate the recovery of filtered zinc and removal of iron from hot-dip galvanizing slag under different experiment conditions, the acquisition ratio of filtered zinc (AZn), the recovery ratio of zinc (RZn), and the loss ratio of iron (LFe) were defined, and calculated as shown in Equations (2), (3) and (4), respectively.
A Z n = m f m o × 100 %
R Z n = m f × ω f , Z n m o × ω o , Z n × 100 %
L F e = 1 m f × ω f , F e m o × ω o , F e × 100 %
where m f and m o are weights of the filtered zinc and raw material, respectively, ω f and ω o   are mass fractions of Zn or Fe in the filtered zinc and raw material, respectively.

3. Results

3.1. Characterization of the Raw Material

Figure 4 presents the XRD image of the hot-dip galvanized slag, and Figure 5 illustrates the SEM images and EDS point analysis results of the characteristic positions in the hot-dip galvanizing slag. Based on Figure 4 and Figure 5, it can be concluded that the main components inside the raw material are metallic zinc and Fe2Al5ZnX inclusions. The low content of ZnO cannot be analyzed by XRD and can be observed in electron microscopy images. The dark contrasting Fe-Al-Zn particles are polygonal and uniformly distributed on the light contrasting metallic Zn substrate, and the ZnO inclusions are very small and serpentine on the substrate. Therefore, hot-dip galvanizing slag is a valuable secondary resource with a large amount of metallic zinc within it and has great potential for recovery.
Based on the SEM images shown in Figure 6, significant differences were observed among the three different positions (top, middle, and bottom) of the raw hot-dip galvanizing slag. The Fe-Al-Zn particles were mainly present in the top and middle positions and were observed to be large in size, while the particles in the bottom position were few and small in size. This phenomenon can be attributed to the fact that the density of Fe-Al-Zn particles (4.2 g/m3) [29] is lower than that of molten zinc (6.5 g/m3) [30], resulting in the particles moving towards the surface of the molten zinc and aggregating to form surface slag. The average diameter of Fe-Al-Zn particles at different positions was calculated using ImageJ software, and the results are presented in Table 2. It was found that the average diameter of the top particles was slightly larger than that of the middle particles (46.83 μm and 42.26 μm, respectively), while the bottom particles were significantly smaller in size, with an average diameter of only 14.67 μm.

3.2. Efficiency of Centrifugal Separation

In this study, the separation and purification of hot-dip galvanizing slag were carried out under a super-gravity field with varying conditions, and the impact of the gravity coefficient (G), separation temperature (T), and separation time (t) on the elimination of Fe-Al-Zn particles from hot-dip galvanizing slag was investigated.

3.2.1. Effect of the Gravity Coefficient

Figure 7 illustrates the impact of G on the macroscopic separation at T = 460 °C and t = 180 s. As depicted in Figure 7a,b, the hot-dip galvanizing slag sample could not be filtered into the lower crucible at G = 1 or G = 30, as the centrifugal force was not strong enough to overcome the resistance of the CFF, impeding separation and purification. As the gravity coefficient increases to 80, molten zinc begins to flow through the CFF into the lower crucible, while some of the unfiltered residue is trapped in the upper crucible. When G exceeds 300, the volume of filtered zinc in the lower crucible no longer significantly increases, as indicated in Figure 7c–e.
Table 3 and Figure 8 illustrate the influence of the gravity coefficient on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency (AZn, RZn and LFe) at T = 460 °C and t = 180 s. It can be observed that the gravity coefficient has a negligible impact on the chemical composition and LFe of the filtered zinc. The chemical composition of the filtered zinc remains highly consistent throughout the range of gravity coefficients (G = 80–1000), with average contents of Zn, Al, and Fe of approximately 98.725 wt%, 1.252 wt%, and 0.023 wt%, respectively. The variation in LFe is minor and consistently fluctuates between 96.29 wt% and 95.61 wt%. In contrast, AZn and RZn are significantly influenced by the gravity coefficient. It is evident that when G is only 80, AZn and RZn are 77.41% and 82.86%, respectively. As the gravity coefficient increases, AZn and RZn also increase markedly with a similar trend. At a gravity coefficient of 300, AZn and RZn reach 87.77 wt% and 94.31 wt%, respectively. Beyond a gravity coefficient of 300, there is no significant change in AZn and RZn, which stabilize at approximately 97% and 94%, respectively. Hence, the gravity coefficient of 300 is a more appropriate working parameter.
Figure 9 presents the electron micrographs of filtered zinc obtained at G = 300. The micrographs reveal that, in comparison to the raw material (Figure 6), most of the Fe-Al-Zn particles were entirely eliminated through supergravity separation (Figure 9a) and are not easily discernible under low magnification electron microscopy. The number and size of inclusion particles were considerably reduced, leading to a significant enhancement in the purity of the filtered zinc. At high magnification, only a small quantity of fine Fe-Al-Zn particles, which are usually less than 5 μm in size, were found in the filtered zinc. The morphology of these particles is similar to that in the original sample, with a polygonal shape (Figure 9b).
The SEM images displayed in Figure 10 reveal that the residue obtained under different gravity coefficients contains a significant number of Fe-Al-Zn particles along with numerous pores resulting from the separation of molten zinc into the lower crucible. The porosity of the residue samples was determined by analyzing the volume fraction of pores in the SEM images using the ImageJ software, and the results are presented in Table 4. The data show that the residue porosity is 27.28% at G = 80 and gradually increases to 37.79% and 42.84% as the gravity coefficient increases to 300 and 1000, respectively. Thus, it can be observed that an increase in the gravity coefficient leads to a corresponding increase in the residual porosity, which can be attributed to the separation of more molten zinc into the lower crucible at higher gravity coefficients, resulting in the formation of more pores in the residue.
In order to further investigate the phase composition and distribution in the residue, scanning electron microscopy and porosity calculation are performed on the position (A–C) of the residue shown in Figure 7, and the results are presented in Figure 11 and Table 5. It is evident that the top position of the residue contains minimal remaining metal Zn, and the escape of molten Zn leads to the formation of numerous pores between Fe-Al-Zn particles, as depicted in Figure 11a. The porosity at this position is measured to be 53.86% using the ImageJ software. Conversely, the porosity is reduced to 36.31% and the metal matrix is increased, filled with Fe-Al-Zn particles and meandering ZnO, as shown in Figure 11b. The bottom position of the residue (depicted in Figure 11c) contains the highest metal zinc matrix, with the fewest Fe-Al-Zn particles and the lowest porosity at 22.68%.
In summary, it can be seen that the porosity of the residue gradually increases from the lower to the upper, which is attributed to the fact that the metal zinc in the top position of the sample is first separated into the lower crucible during supergravity separation. As the separation proceeds, a large number of Fe-Al-Zn particles accumulate on the carbon felt, resulting in an increase in filtration resistance, and eventually causing the sample to collapse on the carbon felt. Hence, the highest porosity is found in the top position of the residue, while the lowest porosity is found in the bottom position of the residue near the CFF.

3.2.2. Effect of Separation Temperature

Table 6 and Figure 12 demonstrated the effect of separation temperature on the separation efficiency and chemical composition in the hot-dip galvanizing slag under G = 300 and t = 180 s. Overall, AZn and RZn varied in a similar trend with increasing temperature, with values increasing from 83.22%, 89.49% at 430 °C to 87.77% and 94.31% at 460 °C, respectively. After reaching 460 °C, the values of AZn and RZn tend to stable and no longer vary with the increase of temperature. Conversely, ηiron exhibits an opposite trend. As the temperature increases from 430 °C to 600 °C, LFe gradually declined from 96.53% to 93.92% and the Fe content in filtered zinc increased from 0.020 wt% to 0.033 wt%, which is mainly attributed to the fact that more Fe is centrifuged to the lower crucible as the solubility of Fe in the molten zinc elevated with the rise in temperature. Considering the temperature of the zinc bath and the online slag removal technology, 460 °C is regarded as the optimal separation temperature for the online treatment of hot-dip galvanizing slag by supergravity.
Figure 13 shows the SEM images of different positions in the filtered zinc at different separation temperatures. It can be observed that the number of Fe-Al-Zn particles tends to decrease from the top to bottom region of samples, and the amount and average diameter of Fe-Al-Zn particles in each position decreases with reducing temperature. More Fe-Al-Zn particles are present in the top position of filtered zinc compared to the other position, which is owing to the fact that the density of Fe-Al-Zn particles is smaller than the density of molten zinc and hence migrates towards the top of the filtered zinc.
Table 7 and Figure 14 show the average diameter of the inclusions at different positions of the filtered zinc under different temperatures. Compared to the raw material, a significant reduction in the inclusions size was observed in all three positions after super gravity. At the same temperature, the number and size of inclusions in each sample presents a gradient decreasing distribution from top to bottom. The size of the inclusions at the same position diminishes with decreasing temperature, which also coincides with the trend of LFE in Figure 12. When the separation temperature was 550 °C and 600 °C, the inclusions in the upper and middle part decreased from 45 μm to approximately 15 μm. the inclusions in the top and middle position were only approximately 3 μm. Therefore, 460 °C is a more desirable separation temperature.

3.2.3. Effect of Separation Time

At G = 300 and T = 460 °C, the effect of the separation time on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency was studied, and the results are shown in Table 8 and Figure 15. It can be observed that the separation time has a slight effect on the chemical composition of filtered zinc and separation efficiency. The elemental content of Zn, Fe and Al in filtered zinc fluctuated in the interval 98.475%~98.881%, 0.019 wt%~0.024 wt% and 1.097 wt%~1.506 wt%, respectively, with small variations as the time increases.
For the separation efficiency, AZn and RZn increased slowly from 85.12% and 91.27% to 88.00% and 94.47%, respectively, as the separation time increased from 10 s to 300 s, while there was a slight decrease in LFe, from 96.63% to 95.60%. In summary, it can be concluded that efficient acquisition ratio of filtered zinc can be achieved in the supergravity field with only 10 s, which proves the efficiency of super gravity technology is efficient in enhancing multiphase separation.
As time increases, AZn and RZn have similar trends and slowly increase from 85.12% and 91.27% to 88.00% and 94.47%, respectively, while LFe has a slight decrease from 96.63% to 95.60%. when t = 10 s, AZn and RZn are 85.12% and 96.63%, respectively. As the time continues to increase, AZn, RZn and LFe tend to level off. The experimental results show that the separation of metallic zinc in hot-dip galvanizing slag can be completed in 10 s time by using the supergravity technique, which demonstrates the high efficiency of the supergravity technique in enhancing multiphase separation.

3.3. Centrifugal Separation on an Engineering Scale

To realize the practical application of separation and purification of hot-dip galvanizing slag under supergravity, engineering-scale equipment was designed and developed to verify the practical application of supergravity separation, as shown in Figure 16. The engineering supergravity separation of hot-dip galvanizing slag is mainly divided into four procedures: (a) dipping into the zinc bath, (b) absorbing slag online, (c) lifting out of zinc bath, and (d) discharging slag, as illustrated in Figure 17. Engineering separation experiments of hot-galvanizing zinc dross was proceeded at G = 50 with the T = 460 °C and t = 120 s, after which the filtered zinc and residue were identified. The filtered zinc contained 0.027 wt% Fe and 1.844 wt% Al while the value of RZn and LFe, respectively, achieved 85.97% and 95.47%. There is a deviation existing between engineering separation experiments and laboratory exploratory experiments. Compared to the raw material (Figure 6), the amount of inclusions in the filtered zinc is drastically reduced and the size is small. The filtered zinc is relatively pure (Figure 18a), containing only 0.027% iron, which can be returned directly to the galvanizing bath for processing. The loose and porous residue is filled with a significant number of Al-Fe-Zn particles and a little metal zinc (Figure 18b), which can be applied as a composite Aluminum-zinc-iron (PAZF) coagulant for the purification of wastewater. Such coagulants are very effective in removing turbidity and organic matter [31]. Filtered zinc and residue from hot-dip galvanizing slag after ultra-gravity separation can all be utilized in a highly efficient manner.

4. Discussion

To ensure that the surface slag can complete the separation process in the supergravity field, the relationship between the filtration resistance (Pr), centrifugal pressure (Pc) and the gravity coefficient G also needs to be analyzed. the centrifugal pressure generated by the supergravity field is proportional to the mass of the hot-dip galvanizing slag on the surface of the graphite carbon felt [10,32]. In order to obtain clean filtered zinc, the filtration resistance generated on the surface of the graphite carbon felt should be lower than Pc, which is calculated as follows:
P c = F c s i = m × g × G s
where Fc denotes the centrifugal force, m denotes the weight of hot-dip galvanizing slag in the crucible and si denotes the internal surface area of graphite crucible. Pr can be defined by on the capillary law:
P r = 4 σ cos θ d
where σ denotes the surface tension of molten zinc (0.753 N/m at 460 °C [33]); θ is the wetting angle of zinc liquid on graphite carbon felt (137° at 460 °C [34]); and d is the average pore size of the filter medium, 17 μm. Based on the capillary law, the equation for calculating the Pr of permeation of liquids zinc through graphite carbon felt was introduced [35]:
P r = 4 σ cos θ V f ( 1 V f ) D
where D denotes the average fiber diameter (17 μm [30]); Vf is the fiber volume fraction of graphite carbon felt (0.094 [10]).
In order to complete the solid–liquid separation of the impurities from the hot-dip galvanizing slag, the centrifugal pressure Pc on the zinc liquid needs to be higher than Pr of 13.443 kPa (calculated by the Formula (7)). As the separation proceeds, the amount of hot-dip galvanizing slag above the CFF decreases, lowering the Pc. The variation in the residue in the upper part of the crucible in relation to the Pc at different gravity coefficients is illustrated in Figure 19. When the gravity coefficient is greater than 80, the zinc liquid can flow through the graphite carbon felt. As the separation proceeds, the remaining amount of zinc liquid in the upper part of the graphite carbon felt also decreases. When the centrifugal pressure on the residue is less than 13.443 kPa, the zinc liquid cannot pass through the graphite carbon felt. The theoretical percentages of the residue and filtered zinc at different gravity coefficients are listed in Table 9. The proportion of residue becomes smaller as the gravity coefficient increases, while the percentage of filtered zinc becomes larger. With the increase of the gravity coefficient from 50 to 300, the amount of residue drops steeply from 100% to 17% while the percentage of filtered zinc increased sharply from 0 to 83%. With increasing gravity factor to 800, the amount of residue in the upper part of the carbon felt continues to decrease slowly to 6%, while the percentage of filtered zinc gradually increases to 94%. It is apparent that the larger the gravity coefficient, the better the supergravity separation of hot-dip galvanizing slag, which echoes the previous conclusion.
In the current factory, hot-dip galvanizing slag is mainly fished out manually or by robots, and there is still a large amount of metallic zinc in the slag they fished out, which will cause a serious waste of zinc resources, and will also increase the operating costs of the factory. At the same time, this method also requires labor cost and the purchase and maintenance cost of the robot, which is also very expensive. In this study, an industrialized design has been carried out based on laboratory work and scaled-up experiments have been performed for engineering. There are expectations to address the problem of wasted zinc resources and high costs in galvanizing plants. The cost of this experimental equipment is low, and does not require manual maintenance, and the zinc slag fished out contains only a small amount of metallic zinc, which can greatly reduce the loss of metallic zinc, saving the cost of the entire production line. Therefore, from the perspective of the whole galvanizing market, this experimental study is still very meaningful and economical.

5. Conclusions

In this study, the hot-dip galvanizing slag was subjected to a detailed characterization. Supergravity was applied to separate and reduce the impurity content of the hot-dip galvanizing slag to improve the metal zinc purity so that it can be returned online directly to the zinc bath for galvanizing. The effects of separation temperature, separation time, and the gravity coefficient were systematically investigated. The formation process of filter cake and the relationship between the gravity coefficient and filtration resistance were analyzed and clarified. The main findings are as follows.
(1)
Supergravity has been verified as a very efficient and economical means of separating and recovering hot-dip galvanizing slag. The optimal conditions for laboratory conditions are G = 300, T = 460 °C and t = 120 s, under yielded the filtered zinc containing 0.022 wt% Fe and 1.097 wt% Al and separation efficiencies reached 87% for AZn, 93.67% for RZn and 96.01% for LFe.
(2)
With the increase in the gravity coefficient and separation temperature, the acquisition ratio AZn and RZn increased. LFe is minimally affected by the gravity coefficient, but decreases significantly as the separation temperature increases. The separation time has little effect on both the filter zinc yield, and the iron removal rate.
(3)
Cake-mode filtration is the most suitable filtration mechanism for hot-dip galvanizing slag with high impurity content. The filtration parameters and the relationship between filtration resistance and centrifugal pressure were analyzed.
(4)
Based on the separation conditions obtained from exploratory laboratory experiments, the industrial scale-up equipment was designed and fabricated, and industrial scale-up experiments were performed. It was concluded that the filtered zinc contained 0.027 wt% Fe and 1.844 wt% Al, while the values of RZn and LFe reached 85.97% and 95.47%, respectively. A fully utilized process route was also designed to maximize the benefits of the hot-dip galvanizing slag.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.G. and Z.W.; methodology, Z.G. and L.S.; validation, Z.G., Z.W., X.L. and L.S.; formal analysis, S.Z.; investigation, S.Z. and Z.W.; resources, L.S.; data curation, S.Z. and Z.G.; writing—original draft preparation, S.Z.; writing—review and editing, S.Z. and X.L.; visualization, Z.W. and X.L.; supervision, Z.G. and L.S.; project administration, Z.G.; funding acquisition, Z.W. and X.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 52374409) and the Youth Science and Technology Innovation Fund by Jianlong Group and University of Science and Technology Beijing (2023-1241).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in article.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Lei Shi was employed by the company Energy and Environment Research Institute (R&D Center), Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare that this study received funding from the Youth Science and Technology Innovation Fund by Jianlong Group. The sponsors had no role in the design, execution, interpretation, or writing of the study.

References

  1. Peng, S.; Xie, S.-K.; Yang, Y.-M.; Xiao, G.-Y.; Lu, J.-T.; Zhang, L.-C. Aluminum and Antimony Segregation on a Batch Hot-Dip Galvanized Zn-0.05Al-0.2Sb Coating. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 694, 1004–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chakraborty, A.; Ghosh, R.; Sudan, M.; Mondal, A. Improvement in Hot Dip Galvanized Coating Microstructure and Properties by Pre-Metallic Deposition on Steel Surface: A Comprehensive Review. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2022, 449, 128972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sinha, S.; Choudhari, R.; Shekhar, S.; Mishra, D.; Sahu, K.K. Recovery of Zinc as Zinc Phosphate and By-Products from Hydrometallurgical Treatment of Hot-Dip Galvanizing (Zn-Al) Dross. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 46, 1532–1536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Vinter, S.; Montanes, M.T.; Bednarik, V.; Hrivnova, P. Stabilization/Solidification of Hot Dip Galvanizing Ash Using Different Binders. J. Hazard. Mater. 2016, 320, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kania, H.; Mendala, J.; Kozuba, J.; Saternus, M. Development of Bath Chemical Composition for Batch Hot-Dip Galvanizing—A Review. Materials 2020, 13, 4168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sinha, S.; Choudhari, R.; Mishra, D.; Shekhar, S.; Agrawal, A.; Sahu, K.K. Valorisation of Waste Galvanizing Dross: Emphasis on Recovery of Zinc with Zero Effluent Strategy. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 256, 109985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ding, X.; Feng, H.; Zhao, C. Study on Zinc Slag Defects on Surface of Pure Hot Dip Galvanized Steel Sheet. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2022, 2390, 012022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gang, C.; Binbin, D.; Ling, X.; Xiaoyan, C. Research on Recognition Method of Zinc Dross in Hot Dip Galvanizing Pot Based on Image Feature. In Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems (ICoIAS), Wuhan, China, 14–16 May 2021; pp. 134–138. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, Z.; He, Y.; Zheng, W.; Wang, H.; Zhang, Y.; Li, L. Effect of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Process on Selective Oxidation and Galvanizability of Medium Manganese Steel for Automotive Application. Coatings 2020, 10, 1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, Z.; Gao, J.; Shi, A.; Meng, L.; Guo, Z. Recovery of Zinc from Galvanizing Dross by a Method of Super-Gravity Separation. J. Alloys Compd. 2018, 735, 1997–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lobato, N.C.C.; Villegas, E.A.; Mansur, M.B. Management of Solid Wastes from Steelmaking and Galvanizing Processes: A Brief Review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 102, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bai, L.; Yue, C.F.; Li, D.J. Application Research of Slag-Removing Robot for Zinc Pot on Hot-Dip Galvanizing Line. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1314, 012114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kaya, M.; Hussaini, S.; Kursunoglu, S. Critical Review on Secondary Zinc Resources and Their Recycling Technologies. Hydrometallurgy 2020, 195, 105362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Owais, A.; Gepreel, M.A.H.; Ahmed, E. Production of Electrolytic Zinc Powder from Zinc Anode Casing of Spent Dry Cell Batteries. Hydrometallurgy 2015, 157, 60–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ren, X.; Wei, Q.; Hu, S.; Wei, S. The Recovery of Zinc from Hot Galvanizing Slag in an Anion-Exchange Membrane Electrolysis Reactor. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 181, 908–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ali, S.T.; Srinivas Rao, K.; Laxman, C.; Munirathnam, N.R.; Prakash, T.L. Preparation of High Pure Zinc for Electronic Applications Using Selective Evaporation under Vacuum. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2012, 85, 178–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gopala, A.; Kipphardt, H.; Matschat, R.; Panne, U. Process Methodology for the Small Scale Production of m6N5 Purity Zinc Using a Resistance Heated Vacuum Distillation System. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2010, 122, 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kamimura, G.; Matsuura, H. Separation of ZnCl2 from Less-Volatile Chlorides by Vacuum Distillation. Metall. Mater. Trans. B 2020, 51, 1395–1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ma, A.; Zheng, X.; Li, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, S. Zinc Recovery from Metallurgical Slag and Dust by Coordination Leaching in NH3–CH3COONH4–H2O System. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2018, 5, 180660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vida, S.; Gilnaz, A.; Fereshteh, R.; Navid, M. A Shrinking Particle—Shrinking Core Model for Leaching of a Zinc Ore Containing Silica. Int. J. Miner. Process. 2009, 93, 79–83. [Google Scholar]
  21. Rudnik, E. Hydrometallurgical Recovery of Zinc from By-Products and Waste Materials of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Process. In Recycling Technologies for Secondary Zn-Pb Resources; Kaya, M., Ed.; The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 205–234. ISBN 978-3-031-14685-5. [Google Scholar]
  22. Mager, K.; Meurer, U.; Garcia-Egocheaga, B.; Goicoechea, N.; Rutten, J.; Saage, W.; Simonetti, F. Recovery of Zinc Oxide from Secondary Raw Materials: New Developments of the Waelz Process. In Recycling of Metals and Engineercd Materials; Stewart, D.L., Daley, J.C., Stephens, R.L., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; pp. 329–344. ISBN 978-1-118-78807-3. [Google Scholar]
  23. Ruetten, D.; Frias, C.; Diaz, G.; Martin, D.; Sanchez, F. Processing EAF Dust through Waelz Kiln and ZINCEXTM Solvent Extraction: The Optimum Solution. In Proceedings of the European Metallurgical Conference, EMC 2011, Barcelona, Spain, 9–12 October 2011; Volume 5, pp. 1673–1688. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ramshaw, C. The Opportunities for Exploiting Centrifugal Fields. Heat Recovery Syst. CHP 1993, 13, 493–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Sun, N.; Wang, Z.; Guo, L.; Wang, L.; Guo, Z. Efficient Separation of Reinforcements and Matrix Alloy from Aluminum Matrix Composites by Supergravity Technology. J. Alloys Compd. 2020, 843, 155814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Meng, L.; Wang, Z.; Zhong, Y.; Guo, L.; Gao, J.; Chen, K.; Cheng, H.; Guo, Z. Supergravity Separation for Recovering Metals from Waste Printed Circuit Boards. Chem. Eng. J. 2017, 326, 540–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sun, N.; Wang, Z.; Li, Y.; Sun, B.; Guo, Z. A New Technology on Continuous Purification of Galvanized Zinc Liquid through Supergravity-Induced Filtration. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023, 171, 1009–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sun, B.; Sun, N.; Wang, L.; Li, Y.; Guo, Z. Efficient Purification of Scrap 1060 Aluminum Alloys Contaminated with Fe and Si by Super-Gravity Separation. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023, 177, 486–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dybkov, V.I.; Ebrary, I. Growth Kinetics of Chemical Compound Layers; Cambridge International Science Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hogness, T.R. The Surface Tensions and Densities of Liquid Mercury, Cadmium, Zinc, Lead, Tin and Bismuth. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 1621–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fu, Y.; Zhang, J.C.; Wang, Y.Z.; Yu, Y.Z. Resource Preparation of Poly-Al–Zn–Fe (PAZF) Coagulant from Galvanized Aluminum Slag: Characteristics, Simultaneous Removal Efficiency and Mechanism of Nitrogen and Organic Matters. Chem. Eng. J. 2012, 203, 301–308. [Google Scholar]
  32. Marder, A.R. The Metallurgy of Zinc-Coated Steel. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2000, 45, 191–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Falke, W.L.; Schwaneke, A.E.; Nash, R.W. Surface Tension of Zinc: The Positive Temperature Coefficient. Met. Trans. B 1977, 8, 301–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Etris, S.; Fiorini, Y.; Lieb, K.; Moore, I.; Batik, A.; Kelley, J.; Harris, H. Contact Angle of Zinc on Some Ceramic Materials and Metals. J. Test. Eval. 1974, 2, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mortensen, A.; Cornie, J.A. On the Infiltration of Metal Matrix Composites. Met. Trans. A 1987, 18, 1160–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of raw material processing.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of raw material processing.
Metals 14 00100 g001
Figure 2. Schematic and physical diagrams of centrifugal separation apparatus (1. counterweight; 2. base; 3. centrifugal axis; 4. heating furnace; 5. resistance coil; 6. residue; 7. filter medium; 8. the filter zinc; 9. Graphite crucible; 10. thermocouple; 11. temperature controller; 12. conductive slipping).
Figure 2. Schematic and physical diagrams of centrifugal separation apparatus (1. counterweight; 2. base; 3. centrifugal axis; 4. heating furnace; 5. resistance coil; 6. residue; 7. filter medium; 8. the filter zinc; 9. Graphite crucible; 10. thermocouple; 11. temperature controller; 12. conductive slipping).
Metals 14 00100 g002
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of filtration principle: (a) deep-bed filtration; (b) cake-mode filtration.
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of filtration principle: (a) deep-bed filtration; (b) cake-mode filtration.
Metals 14 00100 g003
Figure 4. XRD patterns of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag.
Figure 4. XRD patterns of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag.
Metals 14 00100 g004
Figure 5. SEM mapping of feature positions and EDS analysis in raw hot-dip galvanizing slag.
Figure 5. SEM mapping of feature positions and EDS analysis in raw hot-dip galvanizing slag.
Metals 14 00100 g005
Figure 6. SEM images of different positions in raw hot-dip galvanizing slag. (a) top; (b) middle; (c) bottom.
Figure 6. SEM images of different positions in raw hot-dip galvanizing slag. (a) top; (b) middle; (c) bottom.
Metals 14 00100 g006
Figure 7. Macro-sections of hot-dip galvanizing slag under different gravity coefficients. (a) G = 1; (b) G = 30; (c) G = 80; (d) G = 300; (e) G = 1000. The letters A, B, and C indicate the top, middle, and bottom positions of the sample.
Figure 7. Macro-sections of hot-dip galvanizing slag under different gravity coefficients. (a) G = 1; (b) G = 30; (c) G = 80; (d) G = 300; (e) G = 1000. The letters A, B, and C indicate the top, middle, and bottom positions of the sample.
Metals 14 00100 g007
Figure 8. Effect of the gravity coefficient on separation efficiency.
Figure 8. Effect of the gravity coefficient on separation efficiency.
Metals 14 00100 g008
Figure 9. SEM micrographs of the Fe-Al-Zn particles in the filtered zinc under the condition of G = 300; (a) SEM image of the filtered zinc; (b) the enlarged area.
Figure 9. SEM micrographs of the Fe-Al-Zn particles in the filtered zinc under the condition of G = 300; (a) SEM image of the filtered zinc; (b) the enlarged area.
Metals 14 00100 g009
Figure 10. SEM images of the residue obtained at different gravity coefficients. (a) G = 80; (b) G = 300; (c) G = 1000.
Figure 10. SEM images of the residue obtained at different gravity coefficients. (a) G = 80; (b) G = 300; (c) G = 1000.
Metals 14 00100 g010
Figure 11. SEM images of different positions in the residue at G = 300. (a) top; (b) middle; (c) bottom.
Figure 11. SEM images of different positions in the residue at G = 300. (a) top; (b) middle; (c) bottom.
Metals 14 00100 g011
Figure 12. Effect of separation temperature on separation efficiency.
Figure 12. Effect of separation temperature on separation efficiency.
Metals 14 00100 g012
Figure 13. SEM images of different positions in filtered zinc at different separation temperatures. (ac) top position, at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively; (df) middle position, at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively; (gi) bottom position at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively.
Figure 13. SEM images of different positions in filtered zinc at different separation temperatures. (ac) top position, at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively; (df) middle position, at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively; (gi) bottom position at 600 °C, 550 °C, and 460 °C, respectively.
Metals 14 00100 g013
Figure 14. Average diameter of inclusions at different positions and temperatures.
Figure 14. Average diameter of inclusions at different positions and temperatures.
Metals 14 00100 g014
Figure 15. Effect of separation time on separation efficiency.
Figure 15. Effect of separation time on separation efficiency.
Metals 14 00100 g015
Figure 16. Drawing of online separation of hot-dip galvanizing slag equipment by supergravity; 1. foundation, 2. rotating base, 3. connecting support arm, 4. rotating motor, 5. centrifugal separator, 6. rotating rod, 7. zinc liquid, and 8. galvanizing bath.
Figure 16. Drawing of online separation of hot-dip galvanizing slag equipment by supergravity; 1. foundation, 2. rotating base, 3. connecting support arm, 4. rotating motor, 5. centrifugal separator, 6. rotating rod, 7. zinc liquid, and 8. galvanizing bath.
Metals 14 00100 g016
Figure 17. The four procedures of the scale-up supergravity separation; (a) dipping into the zinc bath, (b) absorbing slag, (c) lifting out of the zinc bath, and (d) discharging slag.
Figure 17. The four procedures of the scale-up supergravity separation; (a) dipping into the zinc bath, (b) absorbing slag, (c) lifting out of the zinc bath, and (d) discharging slag.
Metals 14 00100 g017
Figure 18. SEM micrographs of filtered samples obtained by scale-up supergravity separation at T 460 °C, t = 120 s and G = 50: (a) the filtered zinc and (b) residue. Al-Fe-Zn particles are highlighted with dotted boxes.
Figure 18. SEM micrographs of filtered samples obtained by scale-up supergravity separation at T 460 °C, t = 120 s and G = 50: (a) the filtered zinc and (b) residue. Al-Fe-Zn particles are highlighted with dotted boxes.
Metals 14 00100 g018
Figure 19. The variation in the residue in the upper part of the crucible in relation to the Pc at different gravity coefficients.
Figure 19. The variation in the residue in the upper part of the crucible in relation to the Pc at different gravity coefficients.
Metals 14 00100 g019
Table 1. Chemical composition of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag (wt%).
Table 1. Chemical composition of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag (wt%).
ZnAlFe
91.847.680.48
Table 2. Average inclusion diameter in different positions of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag (μm).
Table 2. Average inclusion diameter in different positions of raw hot-dip galvanizing slag (μm).
TopMiddleBottom
46.8342.2614.67
Table 3. Effect of the gravity coefficient on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Table 3. Effect of the gravity coefficient on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Gravity CoefficientAZnRZnLFeChemical Composition of the Filtered Zinc (wt%)
ZnFeAl
8077.4182.9696.2998.4260.0231.551
10083.1989.3696.1998.6550.0221.323
20086.5293.0196.2198.7230.0211.254
30087.7794.3195.7998.6860.0231.291
40087.7094.2295.9898.6620.0221.314
50087.6494.4095.6298.9280.0241.048
80087.6894.4295.8098.9000.0231.077
100087.7894.4595.6198.8190.0241.157
Table 4. Porosity at different gravity coefficients (%).
Table 4. Porosity at different gravity coefficients (%).
G = 80G = 300G = 1000
27.2837.7942.84
Table 5. Porosity in different positions of the residue at G = 300 (%).
Table 5. Porosity in different positions of the residue at G = 300 (%).
TopMiddleBottom
53.8636.3122.68
Table 6. Effect of separation temperature on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Table 6. Effect of separation temperature on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Separation Temperature (°C)AZnRZnLFeChemical Composition of the Filtered Zinc (wt%)
ZnFeAl
43083.2289.4996.5398.7550.0201.225
44086.4292.9096.2298.7230.0211.256
46087.7794.3195.7998.6860.0231.291
48088.0894.5695.6098.6020.0241.374
50088.1594.7995.2398.7630.0261.211
55088.4495.0694.2998.7180.0311.251
60088.4995.0993.9298.6900.0331.277
Table 7. Average inclusion diameter in different positions of filtered zinc at different separation temperatures (μm).
Table 7. Average inclusion diameter in different positions of filtered zinc at different separation temperatures (μm).
PositionRaw Material600 °C550 °C460 °C
Top46.8319.8411.303.5
Middle42.2614.169.193.3
Bottom14.6713.917.103.0
Table 8. Effect of separation time on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Table 8. Effect of separation time on the chemical composition of the filtered zinc and separation efficiency.
Separation Time (s)AZnRZnLFeChemical Composition of the Filtered Zinc (wt%)
ZnFeAl
1085.1291.2796.6398.4750.0191.506
6086.0092.3996.2498.6640.0211.315
12087.0093.6796.0198.8810.0221.097
18087.7794.3195.7998.6860.0231.291
30088.0094.4795.6098.5920.0241.384
Table 9. The theoretical percentages of the residue and filtered zinc at different gravity coefficients.
Table 9. The theoretical percentages of the residue and filtered zinc at different gravity coefficients.
Gravity Coefficients30802003005008001000
The theoretical percentages of the residue (%)100391610643
The theoretical percentages of the filtered zinc (%)0618490949697
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, S.; Wang, Z.; Lan, X.; Shi, L.; Guo, Z. Purification and Recovery of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Slag via Supergravity-Induced Cake-Mode Filtration. Metals 2024, 14, 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/met14010100

AMA Style

Zhang S, Wang Z, Lan X, Shi L, Guo Z. Purification and Recovery of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Slag via Supergravity-Induced Cake-Mode Filtration. Metals. 2024; 14(1):100. https://doi.org/10.3390/met14010100

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Shuai, Zhe Wang, Xi Lan, Lei Shi, and Zhancheng Guo. 2024. "Purification and Recovery of Hot-Dip Galvanizing Slag via Supergravity-Induced Cake-Mode Filtration" Metals 14, no. 1: 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/met14010100

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop