Question 1

Effect of MgO addition: in alumino-silicate (fireclay) refractories, how does the presence of MgO generally affect refractoriness (softening temperature under load)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Impurities and deliberate additives can alter the high-temperature behavior of alumino-silicate refractories. MgO is a basic oxide and can react with silica-rich matrices, influencing melting behavior and refractoriness under load (RUL). Given Data / Assumptions: Matrix: alumino-silicate system typical of fireclay refractories. MgO added in modest amounts (as impurity or minor additive). Assessment concerns general trend in refractoriness. Concept / Approach: Basic oxides like MgO can form low-melting silicates with SiO2-rich phases, reducing the softening temperature. Unless engineered as a distinct basic refractory (high MgO content), small MgO in alumino-silicates usually lowers refractoriness due to formation of eutectic compositions or glassy phases at grain boundaries. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify chemical interaction: MgO + SiO2 → magnesium silicates with lower melting points.Effect on RUL: presence of low-melting phases promotes earlier deformation.Thus, refractoriness generally decreases. Verification / Alternative check: Binary and ternary phase diagrams (MgO-Al2O3-SiO2) show eutectics at lower temperatures compared with pure high-alumina systems, explaining the trend. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Increase/no effect: contradict typical phase equilibria for alumino-silicate matrices with basic impurities. Conditional behavior: while level and distribution matter, the general rule for typical fireclay compositions is a reduction in refractoriness. Common Pitfalls: Assuming MgO always improves refractoriness because it is used in basic bricks; context (matrix chemistry) is critical. Final Answer: Lowers refractoriness

Question 2

Refractoriness Under Load (RUL): which factors significantly govern the RUL of a refractory?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: RUL measures the temperature at which a refractory deforms under a specified load. It is critical for hot-face linings exposed to stress, gravity, and thermal gradients, such as coke ovens and blast-furnace stoves. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard RUL test load and heating rate. Refractory bodies may contain multiple crystalline phases and glassy binder. Minor impurities can modify softening behavior. Concept / Approach: RUL depends on the onset of viscous flow or softening in the microstructure. Chemistry sets melting/eutectic points; physical structure distributes load and controls creep; impurities often form low-melting phases that accelerate deformation. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess chemistry: determines high-T phase stability and liquid formation.Assess structure: porosity and grain bonding influence load-bearing capability.Assess impurities: Fe2O3 and alkalis reduce softening temperature via glass formation.Together, these factors control RUL → select “All of the above”. Verification / Alternative check: RUL improvements correlate with higher alumina content, lower glassy phase, tighter bonding, and minimized fluxing impurities, confirming the multifactor dependence. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Single-factor answers (chemistry or structure or impurities alone) ignore the coupled nature of hot-strength performance. Only bulk density: density matters but is not the sole determinant. Common Pitfalls: Equating high refractoriness (pyrometric cone equivalent) with high RUL; a high-PCE brick can still show poor RUL if microstructure or impurities are unfavorable. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 3

Volume changes of silica polymorphs: which statement about transformations is correct?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Silica’s polymorphic transformations induce volume changes that can crack linings if not accommodated. Correctly quantifying these changes is important for choosing silica or alumino-silicate bricks in zones that cycle through transformation temperatures. Given Data / Assumptions: Common SiO2 polymorphs: quartz, tridymite, cristobalite. Transformations occur at high temperatures under equilibrium conditions. Approximate volume changes are adequate for engineering judgment. Concept / Approach: Quartz to tridymite transformation is associated with a significant specific-volume increase on heating (often cited around 12–16% depending on reference and form). Changes between tridymite and cristobalite are comparatively smaller and not described as “very large expansion.” Step-by-Step Solution: Evaluate statement (a): accepted as approximately a 16% volume increase → TRUE.Evaluate statement (b): tridymite ↔ cristobalite change is not “very large”; hence FALSE.Therefore, only (a) is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Thermal expansion data for silica bricks and phase-change tables corroborate a large volume jump when passing from quartz to higher-temperature forms, especially near transition ranges. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (b) exaggerates the tridymite→cristobalite expansion. (c) and (d) contradict the mixed truth of the two statements. (e) is opposite in direction; quartz→cristobalite results in higher specific volume, not a decrease. Common Pitfalls: Assuming all silica phase transitions have similar magnitude; the quartz transition effects are notably more problematic for lining design. Final Answer: Quartz → Tridymite conversion involves about a 16% volume increase

Question 4

Blast furnace lining selection: for the upper (top) section of a blast furnace where burden movement abrades the lining, which refractory property is most critical?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Different zones of a blast furnace impose different stresses on refractories. The upper stack region experiences intense mechanical wear from descending burden and gas flow, making abrasion resistance a prime selection criterion. Given Data / Assumptions: Location: top section (upper stack) of the blast furnace. Dominant stressor: rubbing/impact from coke, sinter, and pellets. Chemical slag attack is less severe here than at the bosh/tuyère level. Concept / Approach: Wear mechanisms vary with height. Upper zones require high abrasion/erosion resistance; lower zones (bosh, hearth) prioritize corrosion resistance and thermal stability against hot slag/iron. Property prioritization must match local duty. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify dominant mechanism: mechanical wear by burden.Map property to mechanism: high abrasion resistance minimizes lining loss.Select option: resistance to abrasion. Verification / Alternative check: Blast furnace lining schemes commonly grade materials from abrasion-resistant in upper stack to chemically resistant and high-temperature-stable in bosh/hearth. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Slag penetration/corrosion dominate in lower furnace zones. High-T volume stability is important but not the top priority in the upper stack compared with abrasion resistance. Pure insulation focus ignores mechanical wear realities. Common Pitfalls: Applying the same refractory criteria to all furnace zones; optimal design uses zoned properties. Final Answer: Resistance to abrasion

Question 5

Classifying refractories by basicity: which of the following is NOT a basic refractory material?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Refractories are often categorized as acidic, basic, or neutral depending on their behavior with slags. Correct classification avoids deleterious reactions in service and premature wear. Given Data / Assumptions: Basic refractories: MgO-rich systems such as magnesite, dolomite, chrome-magnesite. Neutral refractories: silicon carbide, carbon, alumina in certain contexts. Service with basic slags typically needs basic refractories. Concept / Approach: MgO and CaO bearing refractories are basic. Silicon carbide is generally classed as neutral (chemically stable to both acidic and basic slags to a degree) and not “basic.” Step-by-Step Solution: List basic candidates: magnesite, chrome-magnesite, dolomite (MgO/CaO systems) → basic.Evaluate SiC: considered neutral, not basic.Thus, “Silicon carbide” is the item that is not basic. Verification / Alternative check: Textbook tables place SiC among neutral refractories, known for high thermal conductivity and oxidation sensitivity at very high temperatures. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Chrome-magnesite, magnesite, dolomite, and magnesia-spinel are classic basic systems designed for basic slags. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “neutral” equals “acidic” or “basic”; neutral refractories have distinct behavior and compatibility ranges. Final Answer: Silicon carbide

Question 6

Resistance of refractories to slag attack: which statements about factors reducing slag-corrosion resistance are correct?

Accepted Answer

Introduction: Slag attack is a principal wear mechanism in metallurgical furnaces. Selecting and installing refractories to maximize corrosion resistance requires considering chemical compatibility, temperature, and construction quality. Given Data / Assumptions: Molten slags vary from acidic to basic; refractories can be acidic, basic, or neutral. High temperature accelerates reaction kinetics and diffusion. Cracks and poor joints increase penetration pathways. Concept / Approach: Chemical compatibility controls thermodynamic driving forces for dissolution. Higher temperatures increase reaction rates and lower viscosity, enhancing infiltration. Mechanical defects like cracks and gapped joints provide rapid channels for slag ingress, overwhelming bulk resistance. Step-by-Step Solution: Match slag and refractory basicity to minimize reaction.Recognize that increased temperature raises corrosion rate (Arrhenius behavior).Ensure tight, well-rammed joints; defects allow deeper penetration and wash-out.Thus, all listed factors reduce resistance if unfavorable. Verification / Alternative check: Field experience and lab corrosion tests consistently link higher temperatures and poor construction quality to faster refractory wear, modulated by chemical compatibility. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Single-factor explanations ignore the coupled chemical-thermal-mechanical nature of slag attack. Asserting that only slag basicity matters is incorrect; temperature and defects are critical. Common Pitfalls: Overlooking the impact of thermal cycling on joint integrity and assuming chemistry alone dictates life. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 7

Refractory materials — beryllia (BeO) vs. alumina (Al2O3): Beryllia is often chosen for crucibles used to melt uranium and thorium because, above 1900°C, it outperforms alumina in most high-temperature properties. In which single aspect is beryllia …

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Beryllia (BeO) and alumina (Al2O3) are advanced ceramic refractories used in extremely high-temperature environments, including crucibles for melting reactive metals like uranium and thorium. This question probes understanding of which performance attribute does not favor beryllia when compared directly with alumina, especially above 1900°C. Given Data / Assumptions: Service temperature exceeds 1900°C. Applications include crucibles for very reactive, high-melting metals. We compare intrinsic material properties relevant to refractory service. Concept / Approach: Beryllia exhibits exceptional thermal conductivity, high melting (fusion) point, and excellent thermal shock resistance, typically surpassing alumina in these regards. Its electrical behavior at high temperature remains that of a very good electrical insulator with favorable dielectric properties. The major downside of BeO is economics and handling: it is more expensive to produce and requires strict health safeguards due to beryllium toxicity during powder handling and machining. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify properties where BeO is superior: thermal conductivity (BeO >> Al2O3), refractoriness/fusion point, and high-temperature stability.Evaluate electrical properties: both are good insulators; BeO has excellent dielectric performance at high temperature.Compare cost and HSE requirements: BeO is significantly more expensive and demands stringent safety controls.Therefore, the single aspect where BeO is not superior is cost. Verification / Alternative check: Materials handbooks consistently list BeO's thermal conductivity and high-temperature performance above alumina, while highlighting its higher cost and processing hazards. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Electrical conductivity: both are insulating; BeO is not inferior here. Thermal conductivity: BeO markedly exceeds alumina. Fusion point: BeO has very high refractoriness, not inferior to Al2O3. Common Pitfalls: Confusing electrical conductivity with dielectric loss; BeO remains an insulator. Assuming “better property” always implies “better choice” without considering cost and safety. Final Answer: cost

Question 8

Fireclay bricks and thermal spalling behavior: As the open porosity of a fireclay refractory brick increases, how does its resistance to thermal spalling (cracking and flaking due to rapid temperature change) typically change?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Thermal spalling involves crack formation when a refractory is subjected to rapid or repeated temperature swings. Fireclay bricks are widely used liners. Understanding how porosity influences thermal shock resistance is fundamental for choosing the right brick in furnaces and kilns. Given Data / Assumptions: Material: fireclay brick (alumino-silicate composition). Property varied: open porosity (void fraction). Performance metric: resistance to thermal spalling. Concept / Approach: Higher porosity introduces compliant voids that can blunt crack tips and accommodate thermal strain mismatch between grains. This tends to improve thermal shock resistance (i.e., reduce spalling) at the expense of strength, density, and sometimes corrosion resistance. Thus, as porosity increases (within practical ranges), spalling resistance usually increases. Step-by-Step Solution: Relate porosity to thermal stress relief: more pores = more strain accommodation.Recognize trade-offs: improved spalling resistance but lower mechanical strength and possibly higher slag penetration.Conclude: resistance to thermal spalling increases with porosity (up to practical limits). Verification / Alternative check: Textbook guidance on refractory design notes that insulating, more porous bricks tolerate thermal shock better than dense, low-porosity bricks, which are stronger but more brittle under rapid temperature changes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Decreases/remains same: contrary to established behavior of porous ceramics under thermal shock. May increase or decrease: too vague; the dominant trend is an increase. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “stronger” (denser) always means “more durable” in every mode of failure. Ignoring service specifics (chemical attack may still favor denser bricks despite spalling trends). Final Answer: increases

Question 9

Selection of basic refractories for steelmaking: Magnesite (MgO) bricks are best suited for lining those furnace zones which primarily need which performance characteristic?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In steelmaking and non-ferrous metallurgy, slag chemistry dictates refractory choice. Basic refractories like magnesite (MgO) and dolomite are selected where basic oxide slags are present. Knowing the primary advantage of MgO bricks helps avoid premature lining failures. Given Data / Assumptions: Material: magnesite brick (basic refractory). Service environment: contact with basic slags rich in CaO and MgO. Goal: identify the chief benefit that motivates choosing MgO. Concept / Approach: Refractory “basicity” should match slag basicity to minimize chemical dissolution. Magnesite bricks have excellent resistance to attack by basic slags and are therefore preferred in basic oxygen furnaces, EAF slags, and cement kilns with basic conditions. While MgO bricks can handle high temperatures, their standout attribute is chemical compatibility with basic slags. Step-by-Step Solution: Match slag chemistry to refractory chemistry: basic with basic.Identify magnesite's forte: chemical resistance against basic slags.Select the option highlighting resistance to basic slag. Verification / Alternative check: Industry practice places MgO linings in converter slags; silica or high-alumina bricks would be rapidly corroded by CaO-rich slags. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Thermal cycling resistance: not the primary reason for MgO selection. High mechanical load: many refractories can handle load; chemistry is the key differentiator here. None of these: incorrect, as basic slag resistance is central. Common Pitfalls: Overvaluing generic “strength” over chemical compatibility with slag. Using acidic refractories in basic environments, leading to rapid wear. Final Answer: resistance to corrosive basic slag

Question 10

Quality evaluation of refractories by spray testing: In refractory testing, the “spray test” is primarily used to determine which performance characteristic of a lining material?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractory linings in steel and non-ferrous metallurgy face aggressive slags that can penetrate and erode the brick microstructure. Laboratory tests simulate such conditions. The “spray test” (or slagging test variants) assesses how easily liquid slag infiltrates a refractory surface. Given Data / Assumptions: Test type: spray test simulating slag contact in service. Materials: common metallurgical refractories (e.g., alumina, basic bricks). Outcome: qualitative/quantitative measure of slag penetration depth/extent. Concept / Approach: Under high temperatures, slag can wet pore walls and advance into the lining, weakening it. Tests that expose a hot refractory face to a slag spray evaluate its resistance to this ingress. Lower penetration depth implies better performance against slag attack and improved service life in slag-wetted zones. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify what the test emulates: hot, flowing slag contacting refractory surfaces.Recognize measured outcome: depth or severity of slag infiltration.Conclude: spray test is for resistance to slag penetration. Verification / Alternative check: Standards and plant test protocols distinguish between CO-attack tests (reducing atmospheres), RUL tests (creep under load), and re-firing dimensional stability tests, none of which match “spray” conditions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Resistance to CO attack: different test environment (reducing gas), not slag spray. RUL: measures softening/creep under load, unrelated to penetration. Permanent linear change: dimensional stability test after heat treatment, not slag ingress. Common Pitfalls: Confusing general “slag attack” with creep or thermal shock tests. Assuming one test covers all failure modes; each property requires a dedicated test. Final Answer: resistance to slag penetration

Question 11

Silicon carbide (SiC) refractories: which property is “very low” for SiC bricks among the listed choices?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silicon carbide refractories are widely used in high-temperature applications such as kiln furniture, heat-treatment furnaces, and waste-to-energy units. Their industrial popularity stems from a bundle of excellent properties: very high refractoriness, high thermal conductivity, impressive resistance to thermal shock, good abrasion resistance, and acceptable oxidation resistance depending on grade and binder system. This question checks whether learners can correctly reject incorrect negative statements about SiC performance. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider typical high-quality SiC refractory bricks or shapes. Operating temperatures often exceed 1700°C for service limits. Thermal shock resistance is benchmark-high compared with many alumino-silicates. Concept / Approach: Evaluate each property qualitatively. SiC has high refractoriness (not “very low”); high thermal conductivity (not “very low”); and very good thermal shock resistance (again, not “very low”). The “trap” in the stem is the phrase “have very low,” which is untrue for these key performance attributes. Therefore, none of the given negatives applies—“None of these” is the correct selection. Step-by-Step Solution: Check refractoriness: SiC service limits are well above 1700°C → not low.Check conductivity: SiC is a highly conductive ceramic → not low.Check thermal shock: SiC resists spalling/cracking from temperature swings → not low.Conclusion: all given “very low” claims are incorrect; choose “None of these.” Verification / Alternative check: Materials handbooks consistently list thermal conductivity of SiC far above that of fireclay and many high-alumina bricks, and thermal-shock indexes confirm superior behavior under rapid heating/cooling cycles. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Low refractoriness”: contradicts SiC's high-temperature capability.“Low thermal conductivity”: false; SiC is used precisely for good heat transfer.“Low thermal-shock resistance”: opposite of observed performance.“Low oxidation resistance”: modern SiC grades form protective SiO2 scales; not “very low.” Common Pitfalls: Assuming all ceramics are insulating; SiC is an exception with high conductivity.Equating “high hardness” with “brittle under shock”; SiC still outperforms many bricks in thermal shock tests. Final Answer: None of these

Question 12

Fireclay brick strength at high temperature: an ordinary fireclay brick has a cold crushing strength of about 950 kg/cm^2. After exposure to around 1500°C, the crushing strength may fall to approximately how low (kg/cm^2)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractory selection and lining design require realistic expectations of strength retention at temperature. Cold crushing strength (CCS) is measured at room temperature, but service at elevated temperatures can drastically reduce brick strength due to microstructural changes, glassy phase development, and thermal damage. This item tests recognition of the order-of-magnitude reduction for ordinary fireclay bricks after severe thermal exposure near 1500°C. Given Data / Assumptions: Cold CCS ≈ 950 kg/cm^2 for an ordinary fireclay brick. Exposure temperature ≈ 1500°C (very high for fireclay class). Question asks for “as low as” value—worst-case indicative figure. Concept / Approach: At very high temperatures, fireclay bricks may experience softening of the glassy matrix, grain-boundary weakening, and increased porosity from thermal cycling. Consequently, hot strength (or residual room-temperature strength after exposure) can drop dramatically to a small fraction of the original CCS. Among the options, 150 kg/cm^2 reflects a severe yet plausible lower bound in line with typical data charts for ordinary (not super-duty) fireclays subjected to extreme temperatures near 1500°C. Step-by-Step Solution: Baseline: CCS_cold ≈ 950 kg/cm^2.Thermal exposure: approach 1500°C → matrix softening, microcracking.Result: strength may fall to a small fraction (on the order of 10–20%).Pick closest “as-low-as” figure: 150 kg/cm^2. Verification / Alternative check: Refractory property tables often show large drops in compressive strength for clay-bonded bricks above their safe working range, reinforcing that a reduction to ≤ 200 kg/cm^2 is reasonable as a lower-bound benchmark after such exposure. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 450 or 250: could occur at lower temperatures; do not represent the “as-low-as” extreme queried.65: excessively pessimistic for ordinary fireclay in many datasets.900: essentially unchanged—unrealistic after 1500°C exposure. Common Pitfalls: Confusing hot modulus of rupture with cold crushing strength trends.Assuming linear decline with temperature; degradation can accelerate near softening ranges. Final Answer: 150

Question 13

Refractory classification check: which of the following is not a neutral refractory material?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractories are commonly grouped as acidic, basic, and neutral based on their chemical behavior with slags and atmospheres. Correct classification is essential for selecting lining materials in steelmaking, non-ferrous metallurgy, and high-temperature process equipment. This question asks you to identify the item that does not belong to the neutral class. Given Data / Assumptions: Neutral refractories are broadly compatible with both acidic and basic slags. Basic refractories react favorably with basic slags but are attacked by acidic slags. We consider typical industrial compositions and usage. Concept / Approach: Typical neutral refractories include chromite, alumina, graphite, and silicon carbide—materials that exhibit relative chemical inertness to both acidic and basic environments (within limits). Magnesite (magnesia, MgO), however, is a classic basic refractory extensively used in basic oxygen furnaces, electric arc furnaces, and ladle linings where basic slag chemistry prevails. Therefore, magnesite is not neutral; it is basic. Step-by-Step Solution: List neutral candidates: chromite, graphite, alumina, silicon carbide.Identify basic material: magnesite (MgO).Select the non-neutral: magnesite (MgO). Verification / Alternative check: Materials handbooks and steelmaking references classify MgO, doloma, and spinel systems as basic refractories, contrasting with neutral materials like chromite and alumina that tolerate a wider slag chemistry range. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Silicon carbide: generally treated as neutral/inert to many slags.Chromite: considered neutral for many service conditions.Graphite: chemically inert carbon; grouped as neutral in refractory practice.SiC-bonded alumina: engineered neutral behavior in many applications. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “carbon” implies reducing behavior only and not classifying it as neutral.Confusing spinel or doloma with chromite when memorizing families. Final Answer: Magnesite (MgO)

Question 14

Silica refractories: which of the following statements about silica bricks is correct?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silica bricks are widely used where high refractoriness and load-bearing at elevated temperatures are required, such as in coke ovens and hot-blast stoves. However, they have well-known limitations, particularly poor thermal-shock resistance. Selecting the correct statement requires recalling both their strengths and weaknesses. Given Data / Assumptions: Silica bricks are rich in SiO2 (often > 93%). Service areas include coke oven walls, regenerators, and hot-blast stove crowns. Thermal conductivity relative to fireclay depends on temperature but is typically not lower at high temperatures. Concept / Approach: Silica bricks possess high refractoriness and good creep resistance at high temperatures, yet they are susceptible to spalling under rapid heating or cooling, i.e., poor thermal-shock resistance. Contrary to option (b), they are indeed used in hot-blast stove domes. Regarding (c), silica's thermal conductivity is not generally lower than that of fireclay bricks at service temperatures; in many data sets, it is higher. Hence only statement (a) is the accurate characterization among the options provided. Step-by-Step Solution: Review applications: silica is used in stoves and coke ovens → (b) is incorrect.Compare thermal-shock behavior: silica spalls easily → (a) is correct.Compare conductivity: silica is not lower than fireclay at high T → (c) is incorrect.Therefore, only (a) stands as correct. Verification / Alternative check: Property tables list low thermal-shock indices for silica and extensive use in stove crowns, confirming (a) and refuting (b) and (c) for typical service conditions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (b) Misstates a common application; silica bricks are suitable for stove crowns.(c) Misrepresents relative conductivity; silica is not characteristically lower than fireclay at high temperatures.(d) Cannot be true because (b) and (c) are false.(e) Opposite of reality; thermal-shock resistance is a weakness. Common Pitfalls: Assuming high refractoriness implies good thermal-shock resistance—properties are independent.Overgeneralizing conductivity at room temperature to high-temperature service. Final Answer: They crack when subjected to a sudden change of temperature (poor thermal-shock resistance).

Question 15

Effect of alumina content: as Al2O3 content increases in firebricks, how does the fusion point (refractoriness) change?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In refractory technology, compositional tuning directly impacts softening temperature, load-bearing capacity, slag resistance, and thermal behavior. Alumina (Al2O3) content is a key handle in alumino-silicate systems: higher alumina generally raises refractoriness and improves hot properties up to the high-alumina and mullite ranges. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider conventional firebricks progressing from fireclay to high-alumina grades. Mineralogy shifts from glassy/cordierite phases toward mullite and corundum with increasing alumina. Other variables (impurities, porosity, bonding) are held conceptually constant. Concept / Approach: Increasing Al2O3 content generally elevates softening temperature under load and the fusion point because high-alumina phases like mullite and corundum possess higher melting or transformation temperatures than silica-rich phases. This trend underpins the specification of 50–90% alumina bricks for hotter furnace zones compared with standard fireclay bricks (~30–45% Al2O3). Step-by-Step Solution: Relate composition to phase assemblage (more mullite/corundum at higher Al2O3).Recognize these phases have higher melting/softening temperatures.Infer global property: fusion point increases with alumina content.Select option reflecting this trend: “Increases as alumina content increases.” Verification / Alternative check: Property charts in refractory manuals consistently show a monotonic rise in refractoriness from fireclay to high-alumina bricks, validating the answer choice. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Linear decrease or general decrease: contradict established materials data.Unchanged: ignores strong compositional effects on softening behavior.Sharp drop above 50%: opposite of observed improvement toward mullite/corundum. Common Pitfalls: Assuming silica alone governs refractoriness in all alumino-silicate bricks.Ignoring impurity effects (alkalis, iron) that can depress softening—trend still upward with higher Al2O3 when impurities are controlled. Final Answer: Increases as alumina content increases

Question 16

Which of the following is not an alumino-silicate refractory material?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Refractory linings are selected by matching slag chemistry and thermal service with suitable brick chemistries. Alumino-silicate refractories comprise silica and alumina phases (e.g., fireclay, mullite, sillimanite). Basic refractories include magnesia and doloma systems, which are chemically incompatible with acidic slags but excel in basic environments. This question asks you to identify the non-alumino-silicate among common brick types. Given Data / Assumptions: Alumino-silicates include fireclay, high-alumina, mullite, and sillimanite families. Tar-bonded dolomite bricks belong to the basic refractory class (MgO·CaO with tar pitch binder). We focus on the primary refractory system, not minor additives. Concept / Approach: Because tar dolomite bricks are magnesia-lime based (after calcination), they do not contain the alumina-silicate backbone that defines the alumino-silicate family. In contrast, fireclay (Al2O3-SiO2), mullite (3Al2O3·2SiO2), high-alumina bricks, and sillimanite (Al2SiO5) are classic alumino-silicates used across furnaces, kilns, and regenerators where slag chemistry permits. Step-by-Step Solution: List alumino-silicates: fireclay, high-alumina, mullite, sillimanite.Identify basic system: tar dolomite (doloma + tar pitch).Select the outlier (non-alumino-silicate): tar dolomite bricks. Verification / Alternative check: Materials catalogues and steelmaking texts place tar dolomite within basic refractories, often used in converters and ladles exposed to basic slags rich in CaO and MgO, underscoring that it is not an alumino-silicate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Fireclay, mullite, high-alumina, sillimanite: all are alumino-silicate systems. Common Pitfalls: Confusing “mullite” with “magnesite” due to similar sounds.Assuming tar bonding changes the basic chemical classification; the matrix remains doloma-based. Final Answer: Tar dolomite bricks

Question 17

Design goal for insulating refractories: which combination of properties is required for good thermal insulation performance in furnace linings?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Insulating refractories are engineered primarily to reduce heat loss and keep the steel shell or outer casing of furnaces at safe temperatures. Unlike dense, load-bearing refractories, their central design objective is low thermal conductivity, which is typically achieved through high, fine-pore porosity and suitable microstructures. This item checks whether learners can distinguish the properties that enhance insulation from those that reduce it. Given Data / Assumptions: We consider insulating firebricks and castables used as backup linings. Thermal insulation improves as thermal conductivity decreases. Porosity (closed and open) strongly affects conductivity via gas-filled pores. Concept / Approach: Thermal conductivity k decreases when solid conduction paths are interrupted by pores and when radiation/convection through the structure is minimized. Therefore, insulating refractories are intentionally made with high porosity and low bulk density. Option (a) “High thermal conductivity” would increase heat flow, which is undesirable. Option (b) “Low porosity” likewise increases solid conduction pathways and raises k. Hence, neither (a) nor (b) is required for good insulation. A more accurate description would be “low thermal conductivity with high, controlled porosity,” which is included as a teaching distractor here but not among the A–D choices requested by the stem. Step-by-Step Solution: Define insulation goal: minimize heat flow q.Relate q to k: lower k → lower heat loss.Microstructure lever: increase controlled porosity to disrupt solid conduction.Therefore, avoid high k and low porosity; select “Neither (a) nor (b).” Verification / Alternative check: Manufacturers’ datasheets show insulating firebricks with bulk densities ~0.5–1.0 g/cm^3 and very low k compared with dense bricks (~2.0–3.0 g/cm^3), confirming the reliance on porosity for insulation performance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: High k: defeats the purpose of insulation.Low porosity: increases heat conduction through the solid phase.Both (a) and (b): doubly adverse to insulation.Option (e): conceptually correct guidance, but not among the A–D answers requested. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “stronger” (denser) bricks are always better; insulation demands the opposite.Overlooking the role of pore size distribution in balancing insulation with mechanical integrity. Final Answer: Neither (a) nor (b)

Question 18

In steelmaking metallurgy, which refractory nozzle material is most commonly used for continuous casting of steel (tundish/nozzle applications), owing to its excellent erosion and thermal shock resistance?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Continuous casting of steel places extreme demands on nozzle refractories. The material must withstand high temperatures, steep thermal gradients during start–stop cycles, erosive/chemical attack by molten steel and slag, and mechanical wear. This question checks practical metallurgy knowledge of which refractory composition is typically preferred for casting nozzles in tundish and ladle systems. Given Data / Assumptions: Operating temperatures are above 1500 °C with cyclic thermal loads. Molten steel and slag are chemically aggressive and can erode/penetrate porous refractories. Nozzle materials should resist erosion, chemical attack, and thermal spalling while maintaining dimensional stability. Concept / Approach: Zirconia (often stabilized) and zircon (ZrSiO4) based refractories exhibit high refractoriness, excellent corrosion resistance to basic/acidic slags, low wettability by molten steel, and good thermal shock resistance when engineered with suitable microstructures. These properties make zircon/zirconia the benchmark choice for continuous-casting nozzles. Alternative materials like silicon carbide offer good thermal shock but may oxidize/transform, and thoria/beryllia are expensive, scarce, or present radiological/toxicity concerns, limiting common steel plant use. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify key service requirements: thermal shock resistance, corrosion/erosion resistance, non-wettability.Match material properties: zircon/zirconia meet these needs better than common alternatives.Assess practicality and safety: thoria/beryllia limited by hazards and cost; SiC oxidizes and can degrade.Conclude zircon/zirconia is the standard nozzle material for continuous casting. Verification / Alternative check: Industry practice and vendor datasheets for tundish/slide-gate nozzles frequently specify zirconia/zircon compositions or alumina–zirconia–graphite blends, confirming the dominance of zirconia-rich materials in this application. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Thoria: excellent high-T properties but radiological concerns and cost restrict routine steel plant use.Carborundum (SiC): good thermal shock yet susceptible to oxidation and chemical interaction under service.Beryllia: outstanding thermal conductivity but toxic and costly; rarely used in steel nozzles.Magnesia–chrome: good basic slag resistance but not the standard for precision casting nozzles. Common Pitfalls: Assuming highest refractoriness alone decides selection; nozzle materials must also resist wetting/erosion and survive thermal cycling. Health, safety, and cost factors also matter. Final Answer: Zircon (zirconia-based) nozzles

Question 19

Electrical conduction of refractories: except for which material listed below, most refractories are poor conductors of electricity (i.e., have low electrical conductivity)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In furnace design and linings, electrical properties of refractories influence heating methods, arc stability, and safety. Most oxide refractories are insulators, but a few materials conduct electricity well. Recognizing the standout conductor helps avoid misapplication in electrically heated systems or when stray currents are possible. Given Data / Assumptions: “Bad conductors” refers to low electrical conductivity typical of oxide refractories. We are comparing common refractory classes used industrially. We need the notable exception that conducts readily. Concept / Approach: Graphite, a crystalline form of carbon, has delocalized electrons moving in basal planes, giving it high electrical and thermal conductivity. By contrast, fireclay, chromite, and silica are largely ionic/covalent oxides with minimal free carriers at moderate temperatures. Silicon carbide is semiconducting and its conductivity rises with temperature, but graphite remains the classic good conductor among refractories, widely used as electrodes and susceptors. Step-by-Step Solution: List candidates: oxide refractories vs carbonaceous/semiconducting.Recall graphite’s electron mobility → high conductivity.Compare with SiC (semiconductor) and oxides (insulators).Select graphite as the clear exception. Verification / Alternative check: Industrial practice uses graphite electrodes in electric arc furnaces, directly evidencing its strong electrical conduction compared with insulating oxide bricks surrounding the vessel. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Fireclay/Chromite/Silica: typical low-conductivity oxides.Carborundum (SiC): semiconducting, but not as conductive as graphite at comparable conditions and not the standard “exception” cited in GK. Common Pitfalls: Equating rising SiC conductivity at high T with metallic-like conduction; graphite remains the definitive conductor in refractory lists. Final Answer: Graphite (carbon)

Question 20

Silica polymorphs: which crystalline form of silica is the most stable at room temperature under ambient pressure conditions?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Silica (SiO2) exists in several polymorphs—each with its own stability range and thermal expansion behavior. Refractory engineers and ceramic technologists must know which phase is stable at use temperatures because phase changes can cause volume shifts and spalling. Given Data / Assumptions: Ambient pressure, room temperature reference state. Common crystalline forms: quartz, tridymite, cristobalite. Amorphous varieties (e.g., opal) are not stable crystalline forms. Concept / Approach: Alpha-quartz is the thermodynamically stable crystalline form of silica at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. Tridymite and cristobalite are high-temperature polymorphs that can persist metastably on cooling but are not the equilibrium phase at room temperature. Their transformations involve significant expansion changes that must be managed in refractory formulations. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify equilibrium phase at 25 °C, 1 atm → alpha-quartz.Recognize tridymite/cristobalite are high-T forms with distinct expansion behaviors.Exclude noncrystalline opal as it is not a crystalline polymorph.Choose quartz as the correct stable form. Verification / Alternative check: Phase diagrams of SiO2 confirm quartz stability at low temperatures and transformations to tridymite/cristobalite at elevated temperatures, supporting the selection. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Cristobalite/Tridymite: high-temperature phases; metastable at room conditions.None of these: incorrect because alpha-quartz fits the criterion.Opal: amorphous, not a crystalline polymorph. Common Pitfalls: Confusing which phase is stable vs which has desirable thermal expansion for specific applications; stability and design choice are separate questions. Final Answer: Quartz (alpha-quartz)

Refractory Technology Questions