Applications of Refractories: Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings, Volume 7, Issue 1/2

331 Pages·1986·23.61 MB·English

Application of Refractories
A Collection of Papers Presented at the
87th Annual Meeting
of the Refractories Division
Charles R. Beechan
Program Chairman
May 5-9, 1985 Cincinnati Convention Center
Cincinnati. OH
ISSN 0196-6219
Published by
The American Ceramic Society, Inc.
65 Ceramic Drive
Columbus, Ohio 43214
@The American Ceramic Society, Inc., 1986
Executive Director & Publisher Editor
W Paul Holbrook William J Smothers
Director of Publications Production Coordinator
Donald C. Snyder Carl Turner
Committee on Publications: Richard A. Eppler, chair; Victor A. Greenhut;
John F. MacDowell; Dale E. Niesz; Roy W. Rice; W. Paul Holbrook, ex officio;
Liselotte J. Schioler, ex officio; William J. Smothers, ex officio.
Editorial Advisory Board: Liselotte J. Schioler, chair: Cameron G. Harman,
Jr.; You Song Kim; Brian R. Lawn; Ronald H. Lester; Thomas F.
Root: Robert 0. Russell; David P. Stinton: Leslie J. Struble; James M. Stubbs.
Jr.: Minoru Tomozawa; Danh C. Tran.
Editorial and Subscription Offices: 65 Ceramic Drive, Columbus, Ohio,
43214. Subscription $60 a year; single copies $15 (postage outside U.S. $2
additional). Published bimonthly. Printed in the United States of America.
Allow four weeks for address changes. Missing copies will be replaced only if
valid claims are received within four months from date of mailing. Replacements
will not be allowed if the subscriber fails to notify the Society of a change of
address.
CESPDK Vol. 7, NO. 1-2, pp. 1-323, 1986
The American Ceramic Society assumes no responsibility for the state-
ments and opinions advanced by the contributors to its publications. or by the
speakers at its programs.
@Copyright, 1986, by the American Ceramic Society. Permission to photocopy
for personal or internal use beyond the limits of Sections 107 and 108 of the US.
Copyright Law is granted by the American Ceramic Society for libraries and other
users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center, provided that the fee of $2.00
per copy of each article is paid directly to CCC, 21 Congress Street, Salem, MA
01970. The fee for articles published before 1986 is also $2.00 per copy. This
consent does not extend to other kinds of copying, such as copying for general
distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, or for creating new collective
works. Requests for special permission and reprint requests should be addressed
to the Technical Editor, the American Ceramic Society (0916-6219/86 $2.00).
Preface
This issue of Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings features papers
from the Refractories Division 1985 technical programs. The 29 papers cover
the wide interests of our Division, including processing and properties of raw
materials and their effect on physical properties of refractories made from
them. Statistical process control is discussed in two papers. Recently developed
methods of using X-ray computed tomography are discussed. Design,
modeling, and application of refractories are covered in several papers. Use
of refractories in the steel industry, one of the largest applications, is the sub-
ject of 10 papers. Other uses in glass, petrochemical, and cement industries
are covered. Also, several of the papers are by authors from overseas. As
chairman of the Program Committee for the Refractories Division, I want
to thank the authors and session chairmen who contributed to the meetings
and in the preparation of this publication.
Charles R. Beechan
Program Chairman
Refractories Division
American Ceramic Society
iii
Table of Contents
The Deming System After One Year: One
Company’s Experience ...................................... 1
H. R. Crick, H. Golczynski, and G. G. Vining
Identifying and Controlling Sampling and Testing
............................................
Errorsin SPC 14
P. N. Sheldon and R. A. Landy
Effects of Oxidation-Reduction Reactions in
Magnesia-Graphite Composites .............................. 27
Yu-Lian Lin and Charles E. Semler
Selective Leaching of Extruded Cordierite Honeycomb
Structures ................................................ 40
Thomas H. Elmer
.........................................
Zircon Processing 52
K. K. Cheang
Refractories for Torpedo Cars ................................ 58
Saburo Miyagawa, Makoto Yokoi, Akira Mastuo, Tadashi Morimoto,
and Tastuo Kawakami
Water Model Experiment of the Refractory-Lined Lance to
Inject Oxygen into a Molten Iron Bath ........................ 75
K. Kurata
Analysis of Silicon Carbide Refractories after Service
in Blast Furnaces ......................................... 79
Donald K. Henry and Roy W. Brown
Development and Properties of Silicon Carbide Refractories
...................................
for Blast Furnace Use.. 100
D. Campos-Loriz and Thomas R. Holmes
Progress on Carbon-Bearing Refractories for the BOF ........... 119
Yoichi Naruse, Keisuke Hiragushi, Sukekazu Kiwaki, and Ichiro Takita
Recent Technological Trends of Surface Coating Refractories
.....................................
for CC Tundish Liners 131
K. Watanabe, S. Fujisaki, and T. Takeshige
Nondestructive Testing of Refractories Using Industrial
X-ray Computed Tomography ............................... 145
Yoshiro Aiba, Kazuo Oki, Kazumi Arakawa, and Shigeo Matsuura
Observations on the Thermomechanical Behavior of Refractory
Linings of Cylindrical-Type Shells ............................ 167
Charles A. Schacht
V
High Strength Insulation for Steel Ladles .....................
185
Valeria E. McCallen
Measurement of Properties for Use with Finite Element
Analysis Modeling ........................................
196
M. A. Stett
Improved Analytical Procedures and Material Properties for
Predicting the Thermomechanical Behavior of Refractory
Linings of Teeming Ladles. .................................
209
Charles A. Schacht
Compressive Strength and Creep Behavior of a Magnesium
Chromite Refractory .......................................
220
Ralph F. Krause, Jr.
Optimizing Corrosion-Resistant Monolithic Performance
through the Use of Dual Lining Systems.. ....................
229
Curtis E. Zimmer
Application of Vibratory Castables in Petrochemical Industries. ...
236
Subrata Banerjee
Microstructural Aspects of Microsilica-Blended High
Alumina Castables .......................................
243
A. Seltveit, G. S. Dhupia, and W. Kronert
The Effects of Curing Temperature and Times on Low-Moisture
Trough Castables .........................................
261
Robert A. Howe and John A. Kaniuk
ANCHOREX Anchoring System. ............................
267
E. Olsen
New High Chrome Fused Cast Refractory for Use in
Contact with Highly Corrosive Glasses .......................
269
T. A. Myles and F. Knee
Influence of Cement Raw Meal Composition on Lining Life .......
277
T. K. Das, R. de la Garza, and J. C. Davila
Importance of the Modulus of Elasticity on Basic Refractory
Brick for Cement Rotary Kilns ..............................
284
R. de la Garza
Corrosion of Ceramic Refractories in Synthetic Coal
Slags
Determined by the Rotating-Cylinder Technique ................
292
Sherman Greenberg and Roger B. Poeppel
Monolithic Refractory Problems in Gasifier ..................
a 293
G. N. Zirczy
vi
Corrosion Resistance of Ceramic Materials To HCI,
HN03, and H,SO, ........................................ 301
James P. Bennett
Relationship of Creep Properties of Bauxite Refractories
.......................................
with Microstructure 314
Xiangchong Zhong, GengCheng Sun, and Rushan Yin
vii
Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings(cid:13)(cid:10)
Charles R. Beechan(cid:13)(cid:10)
© The American Ceramic Society, Inc., 1986(cid:13)(cid:10)
The Deming System After One Year: One
Company‘s Experience
H. R. CRICK, H. GOLCZYNSKaIn, d G. G. VINlNG
Faber-Castell Corp.
551 Spring Place Road, Lewisburg, TN 37091
Many companies have begun implementing the Deming system of statistical process
control. This paper presents the expetiences of one such company after mhg this system
for one y. It covers: (1) what exactly is the Deming system, (2) how it has helped,
and (3) what obstacles one can expect.
The Deming System
S
tatistical Process Control, Statistical Quality Assurance, Statistical Quality
Control, call it whatever you wish, is sweeping American industry. Unfor-
tunately, many people view these as purely statistical programs. Many look
at these programs as almost magical cures for their problems. These people
attend a SQA seminar. Upon their return they hire a statistician or an engineer
trained in statistics and then dump the entire mess into the new person’s lap.
Commonly the underlying attitude is, “Don’t bother me with the details; just
go out and make it work.”
The program just outlined misses the whole point of SQA. A well founded
SQA program involves a total philosophy of management, whose goal is to
help people work smarter, not harder. To this end, statistics happens to be
an important tool for making fundamental management decisions. Remember,
statistics is a tool for achieving a goal and not a goal in itself. Like all other
tools, statistics only has value to the extent we know how to use it. A welding
torch in my hands is not the same thing as a welding torch in the hands of
a master welder. Unless we learn to incorporate statistics into a total manage-
ment system, then any SQA program, no matter how well developed, is doomed
to failure. Any initial gains such a program wrought will show themselves
illusory, soon to disappear.
Many fine programs for incorporating SQA into a total management
system have been developed. Actually, most of these programs simply express
the same thing in different ways. For just over a year now, we have been
implementing the program outlined by Deming. Please keep in mind that we
are still just implementing the program. We do not expect to have the total
program in place for many more months. Why are we taking so long? A well
developed SQA program represents such a radical departure from normal
management techniques that one must implement it gradually in order for
management fully to understand and to accept it. Deming comments that a
well managed company should expect to take five yr before seeing the fruits
of this approach. Many companies will require ten, while others never will.]
The heart of the Deming approach is the fourteen points. We have sum-
marized these points by grouping them into four categories:
1
(1) Management Principles,
(2) Training,
(3) Implementation Concepts, and
Outside Suppliers.
(4)
The numbers to the left refer to Deming’s numbering system. Appendix A
offers a more detailed presentation of these fourteen points.
To understand the fourteen points, first we must understand that all proc-
esses, particularly manufacturing, are subject to various causes of variation.
In order to make products better and cheaper, we must isolate, attack, and
control these causes. We must help our people understand that their jobs
depend upon us eliminating as much variation as possible. We must train
ourselves in techniques that will help us achieve this goal. To do less is to place
the future of the company in jeopardy. The fourteen points simply represent
a systematic approach for management to attack its greatest enemy, process
variability. Those of you who remain skeptical should ask the American
automobile industry, who now realize that their survival depends upon the
constant attempt to eliminate process variation.
Traditionally, control charts have formed the foundation for SPC. How
do they function in this system? Initially, they serve as the basis for establishing
control over the process. The charts act like the lines on a highway, indicating
where we should go. If we go too far in either direction, we are sure to run
into trouble sooner or later. A person skilled in reading the chart can tell two
things from it: (1) what constitutes a problem (ie., an out of control situation),
and (2) approximately when the problem occurred. With this information, one
can more readily ascertain the cause of the problem, correct it, and take
measures to prevent its reoccurrence. As we said, one keeps the process on
the road. Eventually, one establishes a state of statistical control over the
process.
Once the process is in such a state, the chart then indicates how much
variation is inherent to the process as it now exists. At this point one can begin
to make significant comparisons of the process’s performance relative to its
specifications. In some cases we discover that we have a well-controlled process
that consistently violates its specifications. Immediately, we realize that we
must either change the process or the specifications.
This situation points out a common problem, specifications that are
arbitrary and really without meaning. In some cases, people would reject
material that actually was fit for use. In other cases, people would grant waivers
for this material. If we commonly waiver such material, then we must ask
why the specification is set where it is? Particularly in such situations, the con-
trol charts offer us the opportunity to establish meaningful specifications and
to get our process to meet them.
Once we have verified the process specifications, we must attempt to
reduce the process variation to the point where the probability of violating
the specification is zero. In order to achieve this goal, we must understand
what composes the process. Figure 1 defines process in terms of five major
factors:
(1) Materials,
(2) Machines,
(3) Methods,
(4) People, and
(5) Measurement.
2
This diagram helps us to focus on the potential causes of the inherent process
variability. Only management can make the necessary changes in these areas
to improve performance, and it is only by making changes that we can reduce
the chances of making defective product. Once we understand what composes
our process, we can make required improvements with minimal capital expen-
ditures. Not every process requires expensive new machinery. Yet, even in these
cases, the charts give us a solid basis for selling such a need to upper
management.
The Deming philosophy basically requires: (1) to get the process stable,
(2) to get the process comfortably within valid specifications, and (3) to make
the probability of producing defectives approach zero while spending the least
amount of money necessary.
How We Have Implemented the Program
Our initial exposure to the Deming approach occurred in November 1983
when our vice-president of manufacturing attended a five-d seminar which
outlined what upper management must do to implement a Deming program.
In February 1984, the quality control manager, the manufacturing engineer,
and a process engineer were sent to another five-d seminar on SQA within
a Deming approach. Primarily, we were to learn the Deming system while
refreshing our SQA skills. Essentially, we were being trained on how to push
the program to the test of the company.
In May 1984, we officially kicked off the program. Upper management
informed the entire management team of the new philosophy, its importance,
and how everyone would fit into the new program. A preliminary outline of
the required training was presented. The first seminar was to be conducted
by an outside consulting firm while all others would be led by our own per-
sonnel. Also at the kick-off, management announced the formation of four
levels of committees, ranging from upper management to floor operators.
Figures 2-5 summarize the structures of these committees. Basically, these com-
mittees form Quality Circles where the problems of quality and productivity
are addressed in detail and where strategies for improvement are developed.
Upon each committee sits at least one person well trained in statistics who
serves as an advisor.
Upper management plus the heads of each corporate staff department
form the first level or steering committee which establishes overall policy and
oversees its implementation. Naturally, it was the first to meet and continues
to meet on an approximately monthly schedule.
The second level consists of upper plant management plus all manufactur-
ing department heads. This committee develops, on a plant level, policies and
programs for achieving the objectives established by the steering committee.
In theory, this committee should meet at least quarterly; however, it meets
less often.
All manufacturing supervision, divided by product area, forms the third
level committees. This level actually puts into practice the bulk of the pro-
gram. These committees discuss the particular problems within each depart-
ment, how these problems affect other departments, and how we can best
attack and solve them. Generally, these committees meet every two to three
weeks.
The final level consists of the entire individual department, including the
supervisors, all assistants, and all operators. Although this level has not started
3
to meet, these committees will function much like the more common Quality
Circles. Here, each department will discuss its particular quality and productiv-
ity problems as well as possible solutions. The supervisor, assisted by a statisti-
cian and engineers, evaluates and implements these suggestions in a systematic
manner.
The committee structure provides a formal and systematic basis for com-
municating quality problems to and within management. In different ways,
each committee seeks: (1) to identify our major problem areas, (2) to isolate
the causes of these problems, and (3) to correct these causes in the most cost
efficient way. The supervisors use control charts as tools to identify what the
major problems are and when they occurred. The committee structure pro-
vides a basis for communicating these problems to the level of management
required to correct the situation.
Naturally, a committee structure by itself does not correct problems. We
have expended a great deal of effort to train our people in both the philosophy
and the techniques of this program. To date, a consulting firm has conducted
one seminar on our plant site for all departmental supervisors. An in-house
team has conducted three other seminars for groups ranging from upper
management to assistant supervisors. Before we are finished, all employees
will receive some form of training in this program. Seminars, however, only
plant the seed. Three of us have had to nurture the further growth by one-on-
one follow-up instruction, particularly on how to sample, how large a sample
to take, how often to sample, how to chart, how to read the charts, and how
to use the charts as management tools.
Presently, all departments have ongoing SQA projects. Generally, we have
the management team establish in the third level committees what problem
area to attack. First, the supervisor in that departmetn works with an operator
to collect the samples, which the supervisor grades or measures and then charts.
Later, the operator will begin to grade the sample. Ultimately, the operator,
once he or she is familiar with the routine, charts the information as well.
In many departments, we have achieved this final step with some operators.
Yet, in all cases, we are using the charts to make fundamental decisions.
Areas Of Progress
We have seen significant improvements in many areas of our operation;
however, two require special mention. In our ceramic pencil lead process, we
have reduced our reject rate from over 10% in 1984 to less than 3% for 1985
to date. In essence, we have increased by more than 7% the productivity of
this department without spending any extra money. Consequently, an area
where we could not produce enough, now produces to excess.
Principally, we have achieved this improvement by working closely with
our suppliers. By monitoring when we begin to use new shipments of raw
materials, the important characteristics of these materials, and the process
variability that results in the important lead characteristics, we have been able
to establish meaningful raw material specifications. Certainly, raw materials
are not our only problem. Yet, with our SQA program in place, we have
operated this department at reject rates of less than 1'70 for significant periods
of time. We hope to beat this rate consistently by the end of the year.
Our injection molding department had been the worst area in our opera-
tion in terms of both quality and productivity for years. Performance was never
4