Question 1

Applications of tar-bonded dolomite bricks in steelmaking: these basic refractories are commonly selected for which of the following furnace types due to compatibility with basic slags and adequate hot strength?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Dolomite refractories (CaO·MgO), when tar-bonded and properly conditioned, are classic choices for lining steelmaking vessels that operate with lime-rich basic slags. Their chemistry and microstructure deliver corrosion resistance and hot strength in aggressive environments. Given Data / Assumptions: Operations use basic slags (high CaO, FeO). Tar bonding contributes carbon phases that aid hot strength and slag resistance. Correct storage and heat-up are assumed to prevent hydration before service. Concept / Approach: Because tar-bonded dolomite is a basic refractory, it is compatible with basic steelmaking practice across multiple furnaces: basic Bessemer (Thomas) converters, basic open-hearth furnaces, and electric furnaces operating with basic slags. Its wear properties are favorable in many zones after in-situ sintering of the lining surface. Step-by-Step Solution: Match refractory basicity to slag chemistry.List common basic steelmaking units: converters, open-hearth, basic EAFs.Select the inclusive option covering all valid applications. Verification / Alternative check: Historic plant practices and handbooks list tar-bonded dolomite as a standard choice in the above furnaces, especially in zones facing basic slags and high temperatures. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Picking only one unit omits other long-established uses.“None of these” contradicts common industry practice. Common Pitfalls: Neglecting strict moisture control; dolomite must be protected from hydration.Assuming suitability for acidic slag service; basic bricks are unsuitable there. Final Answer: All (a), (b) and (c)

Question 2

High-temperature transformation of silica: conversion of a silica mineral to cristobalite at elevated temperatures is accompanied by which change(s) in bulk properties?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silica-based refractories undergo polymorphic changes on heating. The formation of cristobalite at high temperature alters the crystal framework and therefore the bulk physical properties. Designers must anticipate these changes to manage dimensional stability and thermal-shock behavior. Given Data / Assumptions: Cristobalite is the high-temperature SiO2 polymorph stable above ~1470°C. We compare average room-temperature densities of the phases. Bulk volume is inversely related to density for a fixed mass. Concept / Approach: Among common SiO2 phases, quartz has higher density (~2.65) than cristobalite (~2.27–2.33). Thus, transformation to cristobalite is associated with a reduction in specific gravity (density). For a given mass, a lower density implies a larger volume, not a reduction in volume. Therefore, only the density decreases; the statement about volume reduction does not hold for the same mass of solid. Step-by-Step Solution: Recall densities: quartz > cristobalite.Infer property change: density decreases on forming cristobalite.Relate density and volume at fixed mass: lower density → larger volume.Hence, “reduction in specific gravity” alone is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Materials handbooks list cristobalite with lower density than quartz or tridymite. Dimensional change studies in silica bricks highlight the impact of phase composition on bulk volume and thermal cycling response. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Reduction in volume: opposite to the density trend at fixed mass.Both (a) & (b): contradicts the volume–density relationship.Neither / Increase in specific gravity: inconsistent with measured densities. Common Pitfalls: Confusing transient thermal expansion with permanent phase-related density changes.Ignoring kinetic barriers that control the extent of transformation in service. Final Answer: Reduction in specific gravity (density)

Question 3

Service limitation of chrome–magnesite bricks: identify the furnace where chrome–magnesite refractories are generally not preferred due to chemical incompatibility and attack by the molten charge or fluxes.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Chrome–magnesite refractories couple magnesia with chromite phases and perform well with basic steelmaking slags. However, lining selection must consider the specific molten metal environment; certain metals, notably aluminium, can reduce or wet oxide phases and cause rapid degradation. Given Data / Assumptions: Application choices include basic oxygen steelmaking, steel-melting wear zones, and aluminium melting. Molten aluminium exhibits strong reducing behavior and problematic wetting with many oxides. We prioritize chemical compatibility over mere hot strength. Concept / Approach: In steelmaking with basic slags, chrome–magnesite shows good corrosion resistance and structural performance. In contrast, molten aluminium and its fluxes can aggressively attack and penetrate chromite- or magnesia-containing oxides, making chrome–magnesite unsuitable for aluminium melting furnaces. As a result, aluminium practice relies more on alumina-graphite, silicon carbide, and other specially formulated low-wetting linings. Step-by-Step Solution: Match refractory chemistry to process chemistry.Recognize aluminium’s reducing/wetting tendencies toward many oxides.Conclude that aluminium melting furnaces are the exception. Verification / Alternative check: Industry references for non-ferrous metallurgy list chrome–magnesite as generally unsuitable for molten aluminium contact zones, confirming the choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: LD converter / steel-melting wear zones: common basic applications for chrome–magnesite.“All of them” cannot be true because it works well in (a) and (c).Tundish backup: distractor; practice varies but does not overturn the aluminium exception. Common Pitfalls: Assuming good steelmaking performance implies suitability for non-ferrous service.Ignoring metal wetting and reduction reactions in selection. Final Answer: Aluminium melting furnaces

Question 4

Classification of sillimanite (Al2SiO5) refractories: based on chemical behavior with slags, sillimanite bricks are best categorized as which class of refractory?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sillimanite (Al2SiO5) and related minerals (kyanite, andalusite) are widely used raw materials in refractories. Upon firing, they convert principally to mullite (3Al2O3·2SiO2) plus silica, producing bodies with good refractoriness and corrosion resistance across a range of slags. Given Data / Assumptions: We classify refractories by their chemical behavior against acidic or basic slags. Sillimanite-based bricks form mullite as the main phase after firing. Service commonly includes variable slag chemistries. Concept / Approach: Neutral refractories resist both acidic and basic slags better than strongly acidic (silica) or strongly basic (magnesia, dolomite) materials. Sillimanite’s mullite-rich structure confers relatively broad chemical compatibility, categorizing it as a neutral refractory. This is distinct from “high alumina” as a composition label; while mullite is alumina-rich, the accepted chemical classification for sillimanite bricks remains neutral. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize sillimanite → mullite formation during firing.Relate mullite chemistry to slag interactions.Assign chemical class: neutral refractory. Verification / Alternative check: Handbooks list sillimanite/mullite products under neutral class due to their balanced corrosion resistance profile across slag chemistries compared with silica (acid) and magnesia/dolomite (basic). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Basic / Acidic: too one-sided for mullite-rich refractories.High alumina: describes composition, not chemical class.Insulating: refers to thermal property, not chemical classification. Common Pitfalls: Conflating compositional labels with chemical classification.Assuming all alumina-bearing bricks are “basic.” Final Answer: Neutral

Question 5

Raw materials for silicon carbide refractories: the principal raw material actually fed to make SiC shapes and bricks is which of the following?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silicon carbide (SiC) refractories are valued for high thermal conductivity, excellent thermal-shock resistance, and good corrosion resistance. In practice, most commercial SiC bricks and shapes are manufactured from pre-synthesized SiC grains commonly known by the trade name “carborundum.” Given Data / Assumptions: Modern production uses graded SiC aggregates plus binders. Reaction-bonded and nitride-bonded variants exist, but the feed still contains SiC grains. Al2O3 (corundum), bauxite, and MgO (periclase) are raw materials for other refractory classes. Concept / Approach: Although SiC can be synthesized from silica sand and coke in an Acheson furnace, the refractory plant typically purchases classified SiC grains as the starting aggregate for brickmaking. These are shaped with suitable bonds (e.g., clay, silicon nitride, or oxide binders) and fired or cured to form robust products. Hence, the correct “raw material for manufacture” in a refractory works context is carborundum itself. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the target material class: silicon carbide refractories.Note industrial practice: start from SiC grain feedstock.Select “carborundum (SiC grains)” as the principal raw material. Verification / Alternative check: Supplier catalogues and process descriptions list graded SiC as the primary aggregate for SiC bricks; silica and coke are feedstocks for the synthesis of SiC, not the typical brickmaking charge at the plant. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Corundum, bauxite, periclase: raw materials for alumina or magnesia bricks, not SiC.Silica flour only: incomplete and not representative of SiC refractory manufacture. Common Pitfalls: Confusing SiC synthesis feed (silica + coke) with refractory plant raw materials (SiC grains).Assuming all SiC bricks are identical; bonding systems vary. Final Answer: Carborundum (silicon carbide grains)

Question 6

Meaning of “high refractoriness” in brick selection: when a refractory brick is described as having very high refractoriness, it primarily indicates which property?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Refractoriness” expresses a refractory’s ability to withstand high temperatures without softening or melting. It is fundamental to lining selection because it bounds the safe service temperature in a given environment. Given Data / Assumptions: Refractoriness is typically indexed by tests such as PCE (softening without load) and RUL (refractoriness under load). A “high” refractoriness rating implies resistance to deformation at elevated temperatures. Spalling resistance and porosity are different properties. Concept / Approach: High refractoriness means the material resists fusion and softening at high temperature. While microstructure affects spalling, and porosity influences thermal shock, those attributes are not what “refractoriness” specifically measures. Therefore, the correct interpretation focuses on resistance to softening/melting rather than shock behavior or density attributes. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the definition: refractoriness relates to softening/fusion temperature.Map to standardized indices: PCE and RUL.Select the option that states “high resistance to fusion.” Verification / Alternative check: Standards and handbooks categorize bricks by refractoriness ranges; higher PCE/RUL correlates with better high-temperature deformation resistance, confirming the chosen meaning. Why Other Options Are Wrong: High/low spalling resistance: thermal shock property, not refractoriness per se.Low porosity / high conductivity: unrelated to the definition of refractoriness. Common Pitfalls: Using “refractoriness” as a catch-all; it specifically concerns high-temperature softening.Confusing PCE (no load) with RUL (with load); both are useful but distinct. Final Answer: High resistance to fusion (softening at temperature)

Question 7

In an integrated steel plant, which furnace typically consumes the maximum tonnage of refractory annually due to severe cyclic service and frequent hot repairs?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractory consumption varies across units in an integrated steel plant. While large vessels like blast furnaces hold enormous linings, their campaigns are long. Other furnaces, subjected to rapid cycling and frequent door/roof operations, can consume more refractory per year due to ongoing hot repairs and replacements. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider typical historical integrated works with soaking pits for ingot re-heating. Consumption metric is annual tonnage of refractory used (repairs plus relines). Service involves severe thermal cycling and mechanical abuse. Concept / Approach: Soaking pits undergo repeated opening/closing, rapid heating of cool steel, and exposure to oxidizing flames and scale. Thermal gradients and abrasion lead to frequent patching and brick replacement. Therefore, despite the massive size of a blast furnace, the annual refractory consumption of soaking pits is typically higher because of the intense, repetitive service and short maintenance intervals. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare service conditions: cyclic shock and mechanical wear in soaking pits vs. long blast-furnace campaigns.Relate frequent maintenance cycles to cumulative annual consumption.Conclude that soaking pits consume the most refractory annually. Verification / Alternative check: Classical steel-plant statistics and training materials often cite soaking pits among the highest consumers of refractory tonnage due to their duty cycle and repair frequency. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Blast furnace: huge lining but long campaigns reduce annual turnover.LD converter / EAF: significant consumption but often below soaking pits historically.Coke ovens: large total lining, yet long rebuild intervals. Common Pitfalls: Focusing on vessel size instead of service cyclic severity.Ignoring repair frequency as a driver of annual consumption. Final Answer: Soaking pit

Question 8

Carbon (graphite) refractories: which property combination is characteristically very high, explaining their use in high-temperature, reducing atmospheres and in zones needing rapid heat flow?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Carbon refractories (graphite and carbon blocks) are widely used in ironmaking and steelmaking where reducing atmospheres and contact with slags or molten metal demand exceptional thermal and chemical performance. This question asks which property combination is characteristically very high and central to their industrial usefulness. Given Data / Assumptions: Service occurs at high temperature in largely reducing conditions (limited oxygen). Candidate properties include refractoriness (resistance to softening), thermal conductivity, wetting, and porosity. We focus on intrinsic material behavior of dense carbon/graphite bricks and blocks. Concept / Approach: Graphite has an exceptionally high sublimation temperature and maintains strength at elevated temperatures in low-oxygen environments, which translates to very high refractoriness in service. Simultaneously, carbon and graphite possess high thermal conductivity, enabling rapid heat flow and temperature equalization that can reduce local thermal gradients. These two properties—refractoriness and thermal conductivity—together explain why carbon linings are selected for hearths, tap holes, and other hot-face regions under reducing conditions. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the properties that control performance in reducing atmospheres.Recall that carbon/graphite resists softening up to extremely high temperatures → high refractoriness.Recall that graphite conducts heat very effectively → high thermal conductivity.Combine findings → the correct choice is both high refractoriness and high thermal conductivity. Verification / Alternative check: Industrial data sheets for carbon blocks show very high thermal conductivity (relative to oxide refractories) and excellent hot strength when oxygen is limited. Field applications (blast furnace hearths, ladle bottoms in specific designs) corroborate these traits. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Wetting characteristics: carbon is often selected because many slags and metals wet it poorly; “very high wetting” is not a desirable trait.Porosity: can be tailored, but “very high porosity” is not characteristic of dense carbon blocks. Common Pitfalls: Assuming carbon is suitable in oxidizing atmospheres; oxidation rapidly damages carbon.Confusing electrical conductivity (also high) with thermal conductivity; both are high for graphite, but the question emphasizes thermal performance. Final Answer: Both (b) and (c)

Question 9

Reason for using silicon carbide (SiC) refractories in zinc smelting furnaces, muffle furnaces, and tunnel kiln supports: their refractoriness is approximately of the order of which temperature (°C)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silicon carbide (SiC) refractories are chosen for applications requiring high strength at temperature, excellent thermal-shock resistance, and rapid heat transfer. Typical installations include zinc smelting furnaces, muffle furnaces, and kiln furniture in tunnel kilns. The question seeks the approximate order of their refractoriness as commonly stated in refractory engineering practice. Given Data / Assumptions: “Refractoriness” refers to resistance to softening or deformation at high temperature. We refer to the order-of-magnitude value cited in engineering selections rather than absolute melting points. Service environments are oxidizing to neutral at high temperature, with thermal cycling. Concept / Approach: SiC exhibits very high hot strength and resists creep up to elevated temperatures. In design tables and selection guides, SiC refractoriness is often cited around the order of 2200°C. While SiC’s sublimation occurs at even higher temperatures under inert conditions, the practical engineering description associates SiC with refractoriness on the order of ~2200°C, supporting its use in the listed furnaces and kiln fittings. Step-by-Step Solution: Recall practical refractoriness indices for SiC products used industrially.Match with standard tabulated “order of” values.Select 2200°C as the representative order for SiC refractoriness. Verification / Alternative check: Product datasheets and refractory handbooks list SiC with very high softening temperatures and service limits consistent with an order-of-2200°C refractoriness figure for selection purposes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1800°C / 2000°C: too low to represent the conventional “very high” refractoriness attributed to SiC.2400°C / 2700°C: these values approach sublimation or idealized limits; engineering tables typically quote ~2200°C as the order figure. Common Pitfalls: Confusing practical refractoriness (RUL/PCE context) with thermodynamic sublimation points.Ignoring oxidation or binder effects that limit service temperature below theoretical maxima. Final Answer: 2200

Question 10

Chrome–magnesite bricks: which statement is reliably true for this class compared with silica bricks when considering performance at high temperature under load?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Chrome–magnesite (magnesia–chrome family) refractories are widely used in steelmaking and other basic environments. Two key selection metrics are refractoriness under load (RUL) and softening behavior at temperature. The question asks for a correct general statement compared with silica bricks. Given Data / Assumptions: Silica bricks show excellent PCE but comparatively lower RUL because of viscous deformation near service temperatures. Magnesia-containing bricks generally demonstrate superior RUL at high temperature under load. Nomenclature distinctions (chrome–magnesite vs. magnesite–chrome) depend on relative chromite/magnesia percentages and vary by source. Concept / Approach: RUL gauges the ability to bear load at elevated temperature without excessive deformation. Magnesia–chrome compositions typically exhibit higher RUL than silica bricks because periclase-containing matrices retain rigidity and creep resistance at high temperatures. Therefore, the most reliable comparison among the choices is that chrome–magnesite bricks have higher RUL than silica bricks. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare high-temperature load-bearing behavior of silica vs. magnesia–chrome.Note silica’s good PCE but relatively poorer RUL.Conclude that chrome–magnesite → higher RUL than silica. Verification / Alternative check: Textbook tables of RUL values place magnesia–chrome and high-alumina bricks above silica bricks for load-bearing at high temperature. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Acidic in nature: chrome–magnesite is commonly classed as basic or near-neutral, not acidic.Neutral in nature: classification varies with composition; “always neutral” is too absolute.Made by 30% chromite and 70% periclase: a specific mix describes a magnesite–chrome variant; not a universal definition for “chrome–magnesite.”Lower softening point than fireclay bricks: generally incorrect; magnesia–chrome withstands higher temperatures. Common Pitfalls: Confusing PCE (no load) with RUL (with load).Overgeneralizing chemical classification without considering composition window. Final Answer: Having higher RUL than silica bricks

Question 11

RUL versus PCE proximity: for which brick type are the values of refractoriness under load (RUL) and pyrometric cone equivalent (PCE) typically the closest in magnitude?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Two standard high-temperature indices used for refractory selection are pyrometric cone equivalent (PCE), indicating softening without load, and refractoriness under load (RUL), indicating deformation under specified load. The closeness of these two metrics helps assess how much load degrades the effective working temperature. Given Data / Assumptions: Silica bricks: high PCE but RUL notably lower due to viscous flow on load. Fireclay bricks: moderate PCE and often a pronounced gap to RUL. High alumina bricks: stronger load-bearing at temperature; RUL approaches PCE more closely. Concept / Approach: High alumina bricks contain phases (e.g., mullite, corundum) that sustain rigidity and resist creep at temperature. As a result, their RUL is typically nearer to their PCE than for silica or general fireclay refractories. This reduces the “penalty” when load is applied, allowing higher safe service temperatures under stress. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare microstructures and high-temperature creep resistance across brick classes.Identify the class with minimal RUL–PCE gap → high alumina.Select “High alumina bricks.” Verification / Alternative check: Material datasheets often show high alumina products with RUL values close to PCE, while silica shows larger divergence due to load sensitivity. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Silica / Fireclay: larger RUL reduction relative to PCE.Tar dolomite: performance depends on bonding and sintering; not generally closest.Carbon bricks: different test context; PCE terminology is for oxide refractories. Common Pitfalls: Assuming highest PCE implies closest RUL; the relationship depends on creep resistance. Final Answer: High alumina bricks

Question 12

Reason for poor thermal-shock resistance of silica bricks below about 600°C: which property dominates their tendency to spall in this lower-temperature range?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silica bricks are staple refractories for coke ovens, glass tank crowns, and hot-blast stove checkers. However, they are notorious for poor thermal-shock resistance at lower temperatures. Understanding the governing property helps operators avoid damaging heat-up or cooldown profiles. Given Data / Assumptions: Temperature range of interest: ambient to roughly 600°C. Silica undergoes polymorphic transitions with significant volume/expansion changes, especially near 573°C (alpha–beta quartz transition). Thermal shock relates to rapid temperature changes coupled with material expansion behavior. Concept / Approach: Below ~600°C, silica’s effective thermal expansion is high due to phase transitions and structural changes. This high coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) causes large strain for a given temperature change, generating tensile stresses that lead to cracking and spalling. Thus, in this temperature band, the CTE dominates the thermal-shock response, more than conductivity or nominal refractoriness. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify key transition: alpha–beta quartz near 573°C.Relate high CTE to stress under rapid thermal cycling.Conclude that elevated CTE up to ~600°C drives poor shock resistance. Verification / Alternative check: Heat-up schedules for silica refractories specifically slow the ramp through ~573°C to limit damage, confirming the central role of high expansion. Why Other Options Are Wrong: High thermal conductivity / diffusivity: these can reduce gradients; not the main cause of spalling.Low refractoriness: silica actually has very high refractoriness; not the issue here.Low density: not the principal driver of shock failure. Common Pitfalls: Ramping too fast through the 500–600°C range.Confusing high-temperature creep with low-temperature shock sensitivity. Final Answer: High coefficient of thermal expansion up to this temperature

Question 13

Identify the incorrect statement regarding raw materials and classifications: choose the option that is factually wrong for standard refractory knowledge.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractory selection relies on accurate knowledge of raw materials, phase transformations, and service compatibility. This question asks you to spot the statement that conflicts with standard refractory practice and materials science. Given Data / Assumptions: Silicon carbide can be synthesized in an Acheson furnace from silica sand and coke. Carbon refractories are stable in reducing atmospheres but oxidize in oxygen-rich environments. Mullite forms from alumino-silicate minerals (andalusite, kyanite, sillimanite) upon heating. Silica exists in amorphous (opal, fused silica) and crystalline (quartz, tridymite, cristobalite) forms. Concept / Approach: The clearly incorrect statement is that carbon refractories cannot be used in reducing furnaces. In fact, reducing atmospheres are precisely where carbon refractories excel; they avoid oxidation and display high refractoriness and thermal conductivity. The other statements align with accepted knowledge: SiC synthesis uses sand and coke; mullite derives from alumino-silicate minerals; and silica occurs in both amorphous and crystalline forms. Step-by-Step Solution: Evaluate each option against standard references.Identify the contradiction: carbon is suitable for reducing, not oxidizing, atmospheres.Mark option (b) as the incorrect statement. Verification / Alternative check: Industry practice employs carbon/graphite bricks in blast furnace hearths, cupolas, and other reducing environments, confirming that their proper domain is not oxidizing service. Why Other Options Are Wrong (as choices for “incorrect”): (a): Correct—SiC is made from sand and coke.(c): Correct—mullite forms from andalusite/kyanite/sillimanite on firing.(d): Correct—silica occurs in amorphous and crystalline forms.(e): Correct in general—many carbides show low wettability by certain slags. Common Pitfalls: Assuming carbon works universally; it rapidly oxidizes in air at high temperature.Equating raw-material synthesis routes with refractory plant feed choices. Final Answer: Carbon refractories cannot be used in furnaces operating under reducing conditions.

Question 14

Where are carbon bricks NOT used? Select the lining application in which carbon bricks are generally unsuitable due to oxidizing conditions.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Carbon and graphite bricks provide high thermal conductivity and refractoriness in reducing atmospheres, but they are vulnerable to oxidation. Correct placement therefore hinges on the local gas chemistry of the furnace zone. Given Data / Assumptions: Reducing (low-oxygen) conditions protect carbon; oxidizing flames destroy it. Blast furnace stoves have combustion chambers with strongly oxidizing conditions during firing. Blast furnace hearths and certain electric furnace zones may be neutral or reducing. Concept / Approach: Carbon bricks should be avoided where free oxygen and high temperatures coincide, such as combustion chambers. In contrast, they are widely used in the hearth of a blast furnace and in other zones engineered to limit oxygen potential. For chemical equipment handling certain non-oxidizing environments, carbon’s corrosion resistance can also be advantageous. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the options with oxidizing vs. reducing environments.Recognize the combustion chamber as strongly oxidizing.Conclude that carbon bricks are not used there. Verification / Alternative check: Plant lining practices avoid carbon in direct-flame zones; specifications often call for high-alumina, silica, or other oxide refractories in combustion chambers. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Electric furnaces: may include carbon components depending on zone and practice.Chemical-resistant equipment: carbon can be suitable if the chemistry is non-oxidizing.Blast furnace hearth: a classic application for carbon blocks.Torpedo ladle working lining: depends on design, but carbon-containing linings are used in some configurations. Common Pitfalls: Assuming carbon can tolerate any hot zone regardless of atmosphere.Ignoring local gas chemistry variations within a single furnace. Final Answer: Combustion chamber of blast furnace stoves

Question 15

Applications check: in which of the following listed installations are silica refractories generally NOT used as the standard lining material?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silica bricks exhibit excellent refractoriness and creep resistance at high temperature and have traditionally been used where structural rigidity and load-bearing at elevated temperature are required. However, lining selection also depends on thermal cycling, slag chemistry, and the evolution of furnace designs. Given Data / Assumptions: Coke oven walls and beehive coke ovens historically employ silica bricks for dimensional stability at high temperature. Hot-blast stove domes and upper checkers commonly use silica due to high-temperature strength. Open-hearth technology has seen diverse roof linings over time; modern practice and alternatives complicate the historical picture. Concept / Approach: Although classic literature lists silica for some open-hearth roofs, many designs moved toward basic or high-alumina roofs to accommodate different thermal and chemical demands, especially where thermal cycling and slag/atmosphere interactions favor alternatives. In contrast, the other listed installations are canonical, textbook applications for silica refractories. Therefore, within the scope of the options, “open-hearth furnace roof” is presented as the exception. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify canonical silica applications: coke ovens and hot-blast stove domes.Evaluate open-hearth roof practice: varied and often non-silica in later practice.Select the exception among the list provided. Verification / Alternative check: Historical and regional practices differ; many plants adopted high-alumina or basic roofs for open-hearths, whereas silica remained entrenched in coke oven batteries and stove crowns. The question expects the exception relative to the other, strongly silica-associated installations. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Coke oven walls / beehive ovens: classic silica applications.Hot-blast stove domes: silica is widely employed for high-temperature strength.Glass tank crown (added distractor): also a typical silica use. Common Pitfalls: Assuming open-hearth practice is uniform across eras and regions.Overlooking the strong, near-universal association of silica with coke ovens and stove domes. Final Answer: Open-hearth furnace roof

Question 16

Electrical resistivity comparison of refractory materials: which listed material exhibits the lowest electrical resistivity (i.e., highest electrical conductivity) at elevated temperature?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Electrical resistivity is important when refractories interface with induction fields or electrical heating. Most oxide refractories are electrical insulators at room temperature, with resistivity decreasing as temperature rises. Carbon/graphite, however, behaves as a good electrical conductor across a wide temperature range. Given Data / Assumptions: We compare typical engineering-grade materials: graphite versus common oxides (fireclay, alumina, zircon, silica). Temperature is elevated but below material degradation limits. We consider bulk behavior assuming dense shapes without unusual dopants. Concept / Approach: Graphite’s layered structure with delocalized electrons leads to high electrical conductivity (low resistivity). In contrast, silicate and oxide refractories have ionic/covalent bonding with large band gaps, making them electrical insulators at ambient temperatures; their resistivity drops with heat but remains far above that of graphite within normal service ranges. Therefore, among the listed options, graphite has the lowest resistivity. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize graphite’s conductive nature.Recognize oxides as insulators with temperature-dependent conductivity.Select graphite as the lowest-resistivity material. Verification / Alternative check: Material property tables consistently report graphite resistivity orders of magnitude lower than alumina, silica, zircon, or fireclay compositions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Fireclay / Alumina / Zircon / Silica: all are oxide-based and much more resistive than graphite, even at elevated temperatures. Common Pitfalls: Confusing thermal conductivity with electrical conductivity; graphite is high in both, but many oxides have low electrical conductivity despite variable thermal conductivity. Final Answer: Graphite

Question 17

Purpose of Seger (Segar) cones in refractory testing: these cones are primarily used to determine which property of refractory materials?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Seger cones (also spelled Segar) are standardized pyrometric devices that bend at calibrated temperatures during kiln firing. They offer a simple, practical way to judge the heatwork a refractory body has experienced and to estimate softening behavior without complex instrumentation. Given Data / Assumptions: Cones are formulated to deform predictably at specific temperature–time exposures. They are used alongside bricks or test bars during firing/heat treatment. We are concerned with the property indicated by their bending. Concept / Approach: When a Seger cone reaches its rated heatwork, it bends or “matures,” signaling that the specimen has attained a softening stage corresponding to the cone number. In refractory practice, this is linked to softening temperature or PCE (pyrometric cone equivalent). While many modern labs use RUL and other tests, cones remain a quick, visual indicator for softening ranges and kiln control, especially in ceramics and traditional refractory shops. Step-by-Step Solution: Place cones near the specimen during firing.Observe the cone’s bending at the designated heatwork.Translate the cone number to an equivalent softening temperature range. Verification / Alternative check: Standards map cone numbers to equivalent temperatures; comparing cone deformation with thermocouple readings confirms the correlation to softening behavior. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Spalling resistance: requires thermal-shock cycling tests, not cones.Electrical conductivity: measured with electrical methods, not heatwork cones.Resistance to slag attack: assessed via corrosion/immersion or cup tests.Apparent porosity: measured by boiling water vacuum or similar methods. Common Pitfalls: Treating cone temperature as an exact fixed point; cones indicate heatwork (temperature plus time).Using cones as a substitute for RUL/PCE standards in specification-critical testing. Final Answer: Softening temperature

Question 18

In ironmaking practice, the lower (hearth/bottom) portion of a hot metal mixer is lined with which class of refractory bricks to withstand metal washing and slag attack?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Hot metal mixers receive molten iron from the blast furnace and hold it for homogenisation before further processing. The lining must survive continuous contact with liquid metal, fluctuating temperatures, and chemical attack by slags. This question focuses on which refractory class is typically selected for the lower (hearth/bottom) region of a mixer where the most severe washing and corrosion occur. Given Data / Assumptions: Zone: lower portion (hearth/bottom) of a hot metal mixer. Exposure: intense washing/erosion by molten iron and contact with basic slags. Objective: choose a brick class having high hot strength, corrosion resistance, and adequate thermal shock tolerance. Concept / Approach: For mixer bottoms, refractories must combine good structural integrity with chemical compatibility. High alumina bricks, with elevated Al2O3 content, offer high refractoriness under load, respectable resistance to slag corrosion in this service, and better mechanical strength than standard fireclay. Silica, while excellent at very high crown temperatures, is unsuited to basic slag contact and thermal cycling in the hearth. Silicon carbide (carborundum) bricks have excellent abrasion resistance but are typically used selectively (e.g., wear-prone areas) and require atmosphere considerations; they are not the default full-bottom lining choice. Superduty fireclay is widely used in less severe areas, flues, or intermittent furnaces, but not preferred where the worst washing occurs. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify service conditions: washing + basic slag contact + high temperature.Match to materials: high alumina provides hot strength and better chemical durability than fireclay.Exclude silica (acidic) and general-use fireclay for the most severe hearth duty.Select high alumina as the standard lining for lower mixer regions. Verification / Alternative check: Industry lining schedules commonly specify high alumina compositions in hearth/bottom zones, with mullite or alumina-silicate products higher up where splash and slag corrosion are less intense. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Superduty fireclay: adequate in many services but inferior hot properties versus high alumina for the hearth.Silica: poor choice against basic slags and cycling in lower zones.Carborundum: excellent abrasion resistance yet not the default full hearth lining in mixers. Common Pitfalls: Assuming a single brick type suits all mixer zones; in practice, zones are graded to service conditions. Final Answer: High alumina

Question 19

Electrical behavior of refractories for electric furnaces: identify the statement that is incorrect for materials used in such electrically heated equipment.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Electric furnaces rely on controlled current paths and precise thermal input. The electrical properties of refractories matter because unintended conduction can cause hot spots, short circuits, or energy losses. This item asks you to find the wrong statement regarding electrical behavior of refractory linings in electric furnaces. Given Data / Assumptions: Electric furnaces require linings that minimise parasitic current flow. Many oxide refractories are effective electrical insulators at moderate temperatures. Graphite and metallic refractories are conductive. Concept / Approach: When a refractory lines an electric furnace, its bulk resistivity influences safety and efficiency. In most cases, low electrical conductivity (high resistivity) is desirable to confine current to the designed elements/electrodes. Porosity further interrupts conduction paths, generally lowering effective conductivity. Statements that downplay the importance of conductivity in electric furnaces are therefore incorrect. Step-by-Step Solution: Check each choice against practical requirements for electric furnaces.(a) claims conductivity is unimportant; this contradicts design practice.(b) is broadly correct: graphite/metals are conductive; most oxide bricks are insulating.(c) is correct: low-conductivity linings are ordinarily preferred.(d) is correct: porosity tends to lower conductivity. Verification / Alternative check: Electrical resistivity data for fireclay, alumina, magnesia, and silica show high resistivity compared with graphite. Electric-arc and resistance furnace linings are chosen accordingly. Why Other Options Are Wrong/Right: (a) Wrong — conductivity matters greatly for electric furnaces.(b), (c), (d) — in line with standard refractory selection guidelines. Common Pitfalls: Overlooking temperature dependence of resistivity; some oxides become more conductive at very high temperatures and must be evaluated in their service window. Final Answer: Electrical conductivity of refractory is not important, when these are to be used in electrical furnaces.

Question 20

Clay and vitrification: pick the incorrect statement about fluxing, composition, sand addition, and why fireclay is vitrified during manufacture.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Vitrification is the process of forming a glassy phase during firing that bonds grains, reduces open porosity, and improves strength and impermeability. Understanding how fluxes and fillers modify firing behaviour is central to ceramic engineering and refractory design. Given Data / Assumptions: Lime and other fluxes lower the softening/vitrification temperature of clays. Clay is primarily an alumino-silicate material. Sand (silica) addition reduces plasticity and can raise fusion temperature while limiting shrinkage. Concept / Approach: The goal of controlled vitrification in fireclay refractories is to decrease open porosity and develop strong ceramic bonding between grains at service temperatures. Statements that claim vitrification increases porosity are therefore incorrect, because the opposite occurs when a glassy phase infills pores and necks particles together. Step-by-Step Solution: Evaluate (a): True — fluxes lower vitrification temperature.Evaluate (b): True — alumina and silica dominate clay chemistry.Evaluate (c): True — sand lowers plasticity, raises fusion point, reduces shrinkage.Evaluate (d): False — vitrification reduces open porosity and improves strength. Verification / Alternative check: Processing texts show porosity decreasing with well-controlled vitrification, improving modulus of rupture and permeability resistance. Why Other Options Are Wrong/Right: Only (d) contradicts fundamental ceramic processing principles. Common Pitfalls: Overfiring can cause bloating or excessive glass which may trap pores; however, the intent of vitrification is to reduce porosity, not increase it. Final Answer: Vitrification of fireclay material is done to increase its porosity.

Refractory Technology Questions