METHOD FOR REMOVING PHOSPHORUS FROM PHOSPHORUS-CONTAINING SUBSTANCE, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING RAW MATERIAL FOR METAL SMELTING OR RAW MATERIAL FOR METAL REFINING, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING METAL

Abstract

A method removes phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance. In the method, the phosphorus-containing substance that is used as a raw material for metal smelting or refining is reacted with a nitrogen-containing gas so that phosphorus in the phosphorus-containing substance is removed through nitriding. Prior to a treatment of a nitriding removal of phosphorus from the phosphorus-containing substance, a treatment is performed in which the phosphorus-containing substance is heated to an unmolten state temperature range so as to react with a reducing agent, thereby reducing at least a part of metal oxide in the phosphorus-containing substance.

Claims

1. A method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance in which the phosphorus-containing substance that is used as a raw material for metal smelting or metal refining is reacted with a nitrogen-containing gas so that phosphorus in the phosphorus-containing substance is removed through nitriding, wherein prior to a nitriding removal of phosphorus from the phosphorus-containing substance, a reduction treatment is performed in which the phosphorus-containing substance is heated to an unmolten state temperature range so as to react with a reducing agent, thereby reducing at least a part of metal oxide in the phosphorus-containing substance.

2. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1, wherein the reducing agent has an equilibrium oxygen partial pressure of not more than 10.sup.−1 atm determined by the reducing agent and a product resulting from complete combustion of the reducing agent at a treatment temperature of the reduction treatment.

3. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1, wherein a treatment temperature Tr (° C.) of the reduction treatment satisfies a condition of Expression (1) below:
[Expression 1]
300≤T.sub.r≤0.95×T.sub.n (1) wherein T.sub.m denotes a melting point (° C.) of the phosphorus-containing substance.

4. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1, wherein a reduction ratio of iron oxide and manganese oxide in the phosphorus-containing substance at an end of the reduction treatment is set to not less than 11% and less than 33%, wherein the iron oxide represents any of or a mixture of FeO, Fe.sub.3O.sub.4, and Fe.sub.2O.sub.3, the manganese oxide represents any of or a mixture of MnO, Mn.sub.3O.sub.4, Mn.sub.2O.sub.3, and MnO.sub.2, and the reduction ratio refers to a ratio of an amount of oxygen removed by reduction to total oxygen in the iron oxide and the manganese oxide.

5. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1, wherein the reducing agent is a reducing gas or a solid reducing agent.

6. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 5, wherein the reduction treatment using the reducing gas is performed in a range of Expression (2) below:
[Expression 2]
1.5≤x×Q≤6.0 (2) wherein x denotes twice (−) a volume ratio of an oxygen gas in a standard state required for complete combustion of a unit volume of the reducing gas in the standard state, and Q denotes an amount of the reducing gas (Nm.sup.3/kg) used for the reduction treatment with respect to a total amount of the iron oxide and the manganese oxide in the phosphorus-containing substance.

7. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 5, wherein the reduction treatment using the solid reducing agent is performed by adjusting a mass W.sub.M (kg) of a solid reducing agent M so as to satisfy a condition of Expression (3) below: $[Expression 3]$ $\begin{matrix} \frac{1}{3 y} \leq \frac{W_{M}}{M_{M}} / (\frac{W_{F e_{2} O_{3}}}{M_{F e_{2} O_{3}}} + \frac{W_{M n_{2} O_{3}}}{M_{M n_{2} O_{3}}}) \leq \frac{1}{y} & (3) \end{matrix}$ wherein M.sub.M denotes a molar mass (kg/mol) of the solid reducing agent M, M.sub.Fe2O3 denotes a molar mass (kg/mol) of Fe.sub.2O.sub.3, M.sub.Mn2O3 denotes a molar mass (kg/mol) of Mn.sub.2O.sub.3, W.sub.M denotes the mass (kg) of the solid reducing agent M, W.sub.Fe2O3 denotes a mass (kg) of Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 in the phosphorus-containing substance, W.sub.Mn2O3 denotes a mass (kg) of Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 in the phosphorus-containing substance, and y denotes an amount of substance (mol) of an oxygen atom that reacts with 1 mol of the solid reducing agent M.

8. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1, wherein the nitriding removal from the phosphorus-containing substance is a treatment in which the phosphorus-containing substance is heated to an unmolten state temperature so as to react with a nitrogen-containing gas having a nitrogen partial pressure of more than 0.15 atm and less than 0.95 atm, thereby removing at least a part of phosphorus in the phosphorus-containing substance therefrom into a gas phase.

9. The method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 8, wherein the nitriding removal from the phosphorus-containing substance is a treatment in which the phosphorus-containing substance is heated to the unmolten state temperature so as to react with a nitrogen-containing gas having a nitrogen partial pressure of more than 0.15 atm and less than 0.95 atm, thereby removing at least a part of phosphorus in the phosphorus-containing substance therefrom as a PN gas.

10. A method for manufacturing a raw material for metal smelting or a raw material for metal refining, wherein the method comprises, in manufacturing the raw material for metal smelting or the raw material for metal refining, a step of decreasing a phosphorus content in a phosphorus-containing substance by use of the method for removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance according to claim 1.

11. A method for manufacturing metal, wherein in manufacturing the metal via at least one of a smelting step or a refining step, the raw material for metal smelting obtained by the method according to claim 10 is used to perform smelting in the smelting step or the raw material for metal refining obtained by the method according to claim 10 is used to perform refining in the refining step.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0034] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a relation between a treatment temperature T (° C.) and an oxygen partial pressure (log P.sub.O2) when equilibrium of each reaction is established for a reaction (a) for removing phosphorus as a gas of PN and an equilibrium reaction (d) between solid carbon and a carbon monoxide gas.

[0035] FIG. 2 is a diagram showing a relation between the treatment temperature T (° C.) and the oxygen partial pressure (log P.sub.O2) when equilibrium of each reaction is established for a reaction (e) in which Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 is reduced to Fe.sub.3O.sub.4 and an equilibrium reaction (g) between a hydrogen gas and a water vapor gas.

[0036] FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a relation between a phosphorus removal ratio (ΔP) in iron ore and a nitrogen partial pressure (P.sub.N2) at a treatment temperature T.sub.DP=1000° C.

[0037] FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a relation between the phosphorus removal ratio (ΔP) in iron ore and the treatment temperature T.sub.DP (° C.) at P.sub.co=0.1 atm and P.sub.N2=0.9 atm.

[0038] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a relation between a reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and a reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide.

[0039] FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide and the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP.

[0040] FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a relation between the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide.

[0041] FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a relation between the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide.

[0042] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a relation between the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide.

[0043] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing a relationship between a reduction treatment temperature Tr and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide.

[0044] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide and the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP.

[0045] FIG. 12 is a graph showing a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide in iron ore and a reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis, which is obtained from a result of an analysis before and after a treatment when a reducing agent ratio is changed at the reduction treatment temperature Tr=1000° C.

[0046] FIG. 13 is a graph showing a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide in iron ore and the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP in iron ore, which is obtained from a result of an analysis before and after a treatment when the reducing agent ratio is changed at the reduction treatment temperature Tr=1000° C.

DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENT

[0047] In developing the present invention, the inventors focused on inexpensive substances having a high phosphorus concentration as main raw material and auxiliary raw material for metal smelting or metal refining and pursued a study on a method for preliminarily removing phosphorus from such phosphorus-containing substances prior to the smelting or refining using the substances.

[0048] The phosphorus-containing substances that are used as raw material (main raw material and auxiliary raw material) for metal smelting or metal refining contain phosphorus mainly as an oxide such as P.sub.2O.sub.5 and usually contain, in addition thereto, metal oxides such as CaO, SiO.sub.2, MgO, Al.sub.2O.sub.3, MnO, Mn.sub.2O.sub.3, FeO, and Fe.sub.2O.sub.3. Examples of such raw material for metal smelting or metal refining, particularly raw material for ironmaking, include iron ore, manganese ore, or steelmaking slag. Table 1 shows typical compositions thereof.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 CaO SiO.sub.2 MgO Al.sub.2O.sub.3 T. Mn T. Fe P.sub.2O.sub.5 Iron ore — 3.5 — 1.4 — 63.0 0.2 Manganese ore 0.4 4.1 0.2 8.1 50.1 0.8 0.2 Steelmaking slag 41.0 13.8 6.1 5.6 1.6 18.7 1.6

[0049] As mentioned above, the main raw material and the auxiliary raw material for metal smelting and metal refining (hereinafter, an explanation will be made taking “a raw material for iron- and steel-making” as an example) comprises various metal oxides. Since phosphorus has a weak affinity with oxygen compared to calcium (Ca) and silicon (Si), it is known that P.sub.2O.sub.5 in the phosphorus-containing substance is easily reduced in a reduction of the phosphorus-containing substance by carbon, silicon, aluminum and so on. On the other hand, iron is included in various raw materials for iron- and steel-making as an oxide in the form of FeO or Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 (hereinafter, abbreviated as “FexO”). Since the affinity of these iron oxides with oxygen is comparable to that of phosphorus, FexO is reduced at the same time when the phosphorus-containing substance is reduced by carbon, silicon, aluminum and so on. In this regard, manganese is included as an oxide in the form of MnO, Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 or MnO.sub.2 (hereinafter, abbreviated as “MnxO”). Since the oxide of manganese is strong in affinity with oxygen compared to that with phosphorus but weak compared to that with carbon, silicon, aluminum and so on, MnxO is also reduced together with phosphorus when the phosphorus-containing substance is reduced by these substances.

[0050] Phosphorus, however, has a high solubility into iron or manganese, and especially, phosphorus formed by reduction is quickly dissolved into iron or manganese that are formed through reduction, thus forming a high phosphorus-containing iron or a high phosphorus-containing manganese.

[0051] Therefore; the method for removing phosphorus formed by reduction presents a problem that a phosphorus removal ratio is low because phosphorus is absorbed and dissolved into iron and manganese which are valuable components.

[0052] As a result of diligent research to solve the problem, the inventors have found out that it is possible to perform a treatment under a temperature and oxygen partial pressure at which a metal iron and a metal manganese are not formed by removing phosphorus as a gas of nitride, and whereby absorption of phosphorus into iron and manganese can be suppressed.

[0053] That is, the inventors have confirmed, by a thermodynamic consideration, that a reaction (a) represented by the following chemical equation 1 that removes phosphorus present as P.sub.2O.sub.5 in a phosphorus-containing substance is removed as a gas of nitride such as, for example, a gas of phosphorus mononitride (PN) is more stable than reactions (b) and (c) described in the following chemical equations 2 and 3, respectively, in which iron oxide or manganese oxide included in the phosphorus-containing substance are reduced to form a metal iron or a metal manganese, respectively.

[Chemical Formula 1]

2/5P.sub.2O.sub.5(I)+2/5N.sub.2(g)=4/5PN(g)+O.sub.2(g) (a)

[Chemical Formula 2]

2FeO(s)=2Fe(s)+O.sub.2(g) (b)

[Chemical Formula 3]

2 MnO(s)=2Mn(s)+O.sub.2(g) (c)

[0054] FIG. 1 shows a relation between a temperature and an oxygen partial pressure when equilibrium is established for the above-described reaction (a) expressed by Chemical Formula 1. FIG. 1 also shows, for a comparison purpose, a relation between a temperature and an oxygen partial pressure determined by equilibrium between solid carbon and a carbon monoxide gas (a reaction (d) expressed by Chemical Formula 4). Here, it is assumed that an activity of P.sub.2O.sub.5 is 0.001, an N.sub.2 partial pressure is 0.9 atm, a PN partial pressure is 0.001 atm, an activity of C is 1, and a CO partial pressure is 1 atm.

[Chemical Formula 4]

2CO(g)=2C(s)+O.sub.2(g) (d)

[0055] In FIG. 1, in a region where a temperature and an oxygen partial pressure are beneath respective lines of the reactions (a) and (d), the reaction progresses to the right side in (a) and (d). That is, in order to achieve a nitriding removal of phosphorus in the reaction (a), it is necessary to control the oxygen partial pressure to not more than 2.2×10.sup.−19 atm at 800° C., not more than 1.45×10.sup.−14 atm at 1000° C. and not more than 4.66×10.sup.−11 atm at 1200° C.

[0056] Here, in order to reduce the oxygen partial pressure, it is effective that an element such as a single element of Ca, Mg, Al, Ti, Si, C or the like, which is stable when formed into an oxide, is coexistent. The single metallic element, however, is expensive and requires an increased reaction time. Thus, in the present invention, from the viewpoint of decreasing treatment cost and treatment time, it is preferable to decrease the oxygen partial pressure by use of carbon (C). This can be understood also from the diagram of FIG. 1 in which the oxygen partial pressure achieved by solid carbon at a temperature of not lower than 724° C. has a value sufficient for the reaction (a) of nitriding removal of phosphorus to progress.

[0057] Furthermore, in reduction reactions of Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 in the phosphorus-containing substance, a partial pressure of oxygen resulting from reactions (e) and (f) below in which these metal oxides are reduced to form Fe.sub.3O.sub.4 and Mn.sub.3O.sub.4, is higher than that in the reaction (a). That is, under a condition that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 remain, the reaction (a) in which phosphorus is removed as phosphorus mononitride does not progress, and thus it is effective to preliminarily perform reduction treatments to reduce these oxides, whereby case the reaction (a) is expected to be further promoted. In order for reduction of Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 to progress, it is required that, by use of a reducing agent, the oxygen partial pressure in an atmosphere be made lower than an equilibrium oxygen partial pressure determined for the reaction (e) at a treatment temperature Tr. Accordingly, there is used, as the reducing agent, a gas having an equilibrium oxygen partial pressure lower than an equilibrium oxygen partial pressure determined for the reaction (e) at the treatment temperature Tr or a solid capable of reducing the equilibrium oxygen partial pressure, Here, the equilibrium oxygen partial pressure of the reducing agent is determined by the treatment temperature Tr, a partial pressure or an activity of the reducing agent and a partial pressure or an activity of a product, Here, from the viewpoint of decreasing treatment cost and treatment time, it is desirable and effective to use, as the reducing agent, a reducing gas or a solid reducing agent such as, for example, carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (C.sub.xH.sub.y), hydrogen (H.sub.2), or a carbonaceous material, though there is no limitation to these examples.

[0058] FIG. 2 shows a relation between a temperature and an oxygen partial pressure when equilibrium is established for a reaction (g) in which H.sub.2 is completely combusted into H.sub.2O, together with a reaction (e). Here, it is assumed that an H.sub.2 partial pressure is 0.9 and an H.sub.2O partial pressure is 0.001 atm. In FIG. 2, in a region defined by temperature and oxygen partial pressure values beneath a line of each of the reactions (e) and (g), the each of the reactions (e) and (g) progresses to the right side. That is, in order for Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 in the reaction (e) to be reduced to Fe.sub.3O.sub.4, it is required that the oxygen partial pressure be not more than 8.9×10.sup.−30 atm at 300° C. and not more than 1.0×10.sub.−1 atm at 1300° C., whereas the oxygen partial pressure determined for the reaction (g) is 6.3×10.sup.−46 atm at 1300° C. and 3.1×10.sup.−17 atm at 300° C., and thus Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 can be reduced to Fe.sub.3O.sub.4 at either of these temperature values.

[Chemical Formula 5]

6 Fe.sub.2O.sub.3(s)=4Fe.sub.3O.sub.4(s)+O.sub.2(g) (e)

[Chemical Formula 6]

6Mn.sub.2O.sub.3(s)=4Mn.sub.3O.sub.4(s)+O.sub.2(g) (f)

[Chemical Formula 7]

2H.sub.2O(g)=2H.sub.2(g)+O.sub.2(g) (g)

[0059] Thus, based on the above-described results of examination, the inventors performed an experiment to confirm whether or not phosphorus is removed through nitriding. In this experiment, 10 g of iron ore whose particle size was adjusted to 1 to 3 mm was used as a phosphorus-containing substance, and 5 g of reagent carbon (having a particle size of under 0.25 mm) was used as solid carbon. Then, they were put on different boats made of alumina and placed stably in a compact electric resistance furnace. The furnace was heated to a predetermined temperature (600 to 1400° C.) while an Ar gas was supplied thereinto at 1 liter/min, after which the supply of the Ar gas was stopped and followed by supply of a mixture gas of carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen (N.sub.2), instead of the Ar gas, at 3 liter/min; and the temperature was maintained constant for 60 minutes. In this case, a ratio of the mixture gas between carbon monoxide and nitrogen was made to vary so that a nitrogen partial pressure P.sub.N2 fell within a range of 0 to 1 atm. After a lapse of a predetermined time, the supply of the mixture gas of carbon monoxide and nitrogen was stopped and followed by supply of an Ar gas instead at 1 liter/min, and after a temperature decrease to room temperature, the iron ore was collected. In this experiment, the gases were supplied from an upstream side on which the reagent carbon was placed stably so that the carbon monoxide gas reacted with the reagent carbon first.

[0060] FIG. 3 shows a relation between a phosphorus removal ratio (ΔP={(P concentration before experiment)−(P concentration after experiment)}/(P concentration before experiment)) (%) and a nitrogen partial pressure (P.sub.N2) (atm), which is obtained from a result of a composition analysis of iron ore before and after the above-described treatment was carried out at 1000° C. As can be seen from FIG. 2, phosphorus is removed from the phosphorus-containing substance except when the nitrogen partial pressure (P.sub.N2) is 0 atm and 1 atm, and particularly in a range of more than 0.15 atm and less than 0.95 atm, a phosphorus removal ratio as high as not less than 60% is obtained. Preferably, the nitrogen partial pressure (P.sub.N2) is in a range of 0.2 to 0.9 atm. Conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio is low when the nitrogen partial pressure is not more than 0.15 atm is that the nitrogen partial pressure was too low, so that, phosphorus removal by the reaction (a) did not, progress sufficiently within a predetermined treatment time. Furthermore, conceivably, when the nitrogen partial pressure was not less than 0.95 atm, an amount of a CO gas supplied was small, so that the oxygen partial pressure was increased due to oxygen resulting from thermal decomposition of iron oxide in the iron ore, suppressing the reaction (a) of nitriding removal of phosphorus. This can be understood also from the fact that phosphorus cannot be removed by supplying a 100% nitrogen gas (P.sub.N2=1 atm).

[0061] FIG. 4 shows a relation between the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP (%) and a treatment temperature T.sub.DP, (° C.), which is obtained from a result of a composition analysis of iron ore before and after the experiment in which the treatment was carried out using a mixture gas of CO=vol % (P.sub.co 0.1 atm) and N.sub.2=90 vol % (P.sub.N2=0.9 atm). As can be seen from FIG. 4, a high phosphorus removal ratio is obtained at 750 to 1300° C., and thus it can be understood that this temperature range is preferable for nitriding removal of phosphorus. The reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low at a temperature of lower than 750° C. is considered partly because, as shown in FIG. 1, at a temperature of not higher than 724° C., an oxygen partial pressure required for nitriding removing of phosphorus could not be achieved using solid carbon. Furthermore, conceivably, the reason why it is low at 1350° C. and 1400° C. is that the iron ore was in a state ranging from a semi-molten state to a molten state, and a recovered sample was aggregated, so that gaps and pores between iron ore particles disappeared to significantly reduce an interfacial area for contacting gas. In this regard, a melting point (T.sub.m) of iron ore measured by the differential thermal analysis method is 1370° C., and a high phosphorus removal ratio was obtained at a temperature of 1300° C., which is 0.95 times the melting point. Thus, it is considered preferable to set the treatment temperature to not higher than “0.95×T.sub.m(° C.)” in order to maintain a reaction interfacial area for removing phosphorus.

[0062] Next, a small-scale experiment was performed to confirm whether or not phosphorus is removed through nitriding when the nitriding dephosphorization treatment is carried out after a reduction treatment using the reducing gas. In this experiment, 20 g or 40 g of iron ore was put on a boat made of alumina and subjected first to the reduction treatment and then to the nitriding dephosphorization treatment. In the reduction treatment, a flow rate of a carbon monoxide (CO) gas and a treatment time were adjusted so that a reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was 0.3 to 9.0 in the iron ore, and the temperature was set to 1000° C. Here, x denotes twice (−) a volume ratio of an oxygen gas in a standard state required for complete combustion of a unit volume of reducing gas in the standard state, and when CO is used as the reducing gas, since CO reacts with ½O.sub.2 to form CO.sub.2, x ½×2=1 is established. Furthermore, Q denotes an amount of the reducing gas (Nm.sup.3/kg) used for the reduction treatment with respect to a total amount of Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 in a phosphorus-containing substance. After that, the nitriding dephosphorization treatment was carried out at a temperature of 1000° C. under an atmosphere in which a ratio of a CO gas flow rate to a CO.sub.2 gas flow rate was 2 and N.sub.2=80 vol % (nitrogen partial pressure=0.8 atm).

[0063] FIGS. 5 and 6 show a relation between a reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide and the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and a relationship between the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP (%) and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide, respectively, which are obtained from a result of an analysis before and after a nitriding dephosphorization treatment when 20 g of iron ore is subjected to a reduction treatment for a treatment time of 30 minutes or 10 minutes. Here, the reduction ratio of iron oxide refers to a ratio of an amount of reduced oxygen to total oxygen in the iron oxide. Furthermore, the phosphorus removal ratio refers to a ratio of an amount of phosphorus removed after the reduction treatment to a total amount of phosphorus in the iron ore. Further, FIGS. 5 and 6 also show results in a case where the reduction treatment s not performed (the reduction ratio of iron oxide is 0%).

[0064] As a result, as is clear from FIG. 5, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide increases with increasing reducing gas unit consumption x×Q. Furthermore, as is clear from FIG. 6, it can be seen that in a case where the reduction treatment is performed, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is increased as compared with the case where the reduction treatment is not performed. Particularly in a case where the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33%, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is high. At this time, the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is 1.5 to 6.0. Conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is less than 11% is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment, and thus the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) progressed. Furthermore, conceivably, when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide was larger than 33%, a part of the iron oxide was reduced to metallic iron, which then absorbed vaporized phosphorus, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio.

[0065] Furthermore, after 40 g of iron ore was subjected to a reduction treatment at a temperature of 1000° C. for a treatment time of 30 minutes or 10 minutes, a nitriding dephosphorization treatment was performed as in the above-described case where 20 g of iron ore was subjected to the reduction treatment for a treatment time of 30 minutes or 10 minutes. FIG. 7 shows a relation between the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide. FIG. 7 also shows a result in a case where the reduction treatment is not performed (the reduction ratio of iron oxide is 0%). Also in this case, as in the above-described case where 20 g of iron ore was subjected to the reduction treatment for a treatment time of 30 minutes or 10 minutes, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33% when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is 1.5 to 6.0. Furthermore, in a case where a nitriding dephosphorization treatment as in the above-described case is performed after the reduction treatment, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is high when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33%.

[0066] FIG. 8 shows a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide and the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q in a case where 20 g of iron ore is subjected to a reduction treatment at a temperature of 1000° C., in which a reducing gas flow rate is set to 0.5 L/min or 2.0 L/min, and FIG. 9 shows the same relationship in a case where 40 g of iron ore is subjected to a reduction treatment at a temperature of 1000° C., in which the reducing gas flow rate is set to 0.5 L/min or 2.0 L/min. FIGS. 8 and 9 also show results in a case where the reduction treatment is not performed (the reduction ratio of iron oxide is 0%). Also in these cases, as in the above-described case where the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was made to vary with the treatment time set to be constant, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33% when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is 1.5 to 6.0. Furthermore, in a case where a nitriding dephosphorization treatment as in the above-described case is performed after the reduction treatment, a high phosphorus removal ratio is obtained when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33%.

[0067] Next, to verify the method of the present invention, the reduction treatment was first carried out by holding a carbon monoxide (CO) gas whose flow rate was adjusted in iron ore at various temperatures (200 to 1400° C.) for 30 minutes so that the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was 5, and then a treatment for nitriding dephosphorization was carried out at a temperature of 1000° C. under an atmosphere in which a ratio of the CO gas flow rate to a CO.sub.2 gas flow rate was 2 and N.sub.2 80 vol % (nitrogen partial pressure 0.8 atm).

[0068] FIGS. 10 and 11 show a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe, Of iron oxide and the reduction treatment temperature Tr and a relation between the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide, respectively, which are obtained from a result of an analysis before and after a nitriding dephosphorization treatment. FIG. 10 also shows a result in a case where the reduction treatment is not performed (the reduction ratio of iron oxide is 0%). As is clear from FIG. 10, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is high when the reduction treatment temperature Tr is not lower than 300° C. Furthermore, as is clear from FIG. 11, except when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is about 26% and the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low, when the reduction treatment is performed, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is increased as compared with the case where the reduction treatment is not performed. The phosphorus removal ratio is high particularly when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 10 to 26%. Conceivably, the reason why the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is low when the reduction treatment temperature Tr is lower than 300° C. is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 was stable at lower than 300° C., and thus a reduction using carbon monoxide did not progress. Conceivably, as a result thereof, Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment at lower than 300° C., and thus the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) progressed, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio. Furthermore, there may be a case where the phosphorus removal ratio is low when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is about 26%. Since this corresponds to a case where the reduction treatment temperature Tr is 1350° C. or 1400° C., conceivably, the reason for the low phosphorus removal ratio is that iron ore was in a semi-molten or molten state, and as a result of aggregation of a sample, gaps and pores between iron ore particles disappeared to significantly reduce an interfacial area for contacting gas.

[0069] A small-scale experiment was performed to confirm whether or not phosphorus is removed through nitriding when the nitriding dephosphorization treatment is carried out after a reduction treatment using the solid reducing agent. In this experiment, reagent carbon was also mixed into iron ore, and the iron ore mixed with the reagent carbon was subjected to a reduction treatment in which heating to a predetermined temperature (Tr=200 to 1400° C.) was performed and then to a nitriding dephosphorization treatment as in the case of using a reducing gas.

[0070] This reduction treatment was carried out in the following manner. That is, the reagent carbon was mixed into the iron ore so that a reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis was 0.11 to 1.34, and the iron ore mixed with the reagent carbon was kept at Tr=1000° C. for 30 minutes. Herein, where W.sub.m, W.sub.Fe2O3, and W.sub.Mn2O3 denote masses (kg) of a solid reducing agent M and Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 in a phosphorus-containing substance, respectively, and M.sub.M, M.sub.FeO.sub.3, and M.sub.Mn2O3 denote molar masses (kg/mol) of the solid reducing agent M and Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 in the phosphorus-containing substance, respectively, the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is expressed as (W.sub.M/M.sub.M)/{(W.sub.Fe2O3.sup./M.sub.Fe2O3)÷(W.sub.Mn2O3/M.sub.Mn2O3)}. After that, the nitriding dephosphorization treatment was carried out at the treatment temperature T.sub.DP=1000° C. under an atmosphere in which a ratio of a CO gas flow rate to a CO.sub.2 gas flow rate was about 2.0 and N.sub.2=80 vol % (nitrogen partial pressure P.sub.N2 0.80 atm). FIGS. 12 and 13 show a relation between the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide and the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis and a relation between the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP (%) and the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide, respectively, which are obtained from a result of an analysis before and after the treatment. Here, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe (%) of iron oxide refers to a ratio of an amount of reduced oxygen to total oxygen in iron oxide. FIG. 13 also shows a result in a case where the reagent carbon is not used (the reduction ratio of iron oxide is 0%). As is clear from FIG. 12, the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide increases with increasing reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis. Meanwhile, as is clear from FIG. 13, when the reduction treatment is performed, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is increased as compared with the case where the reduction treatment is not performed. Particularly when the reduction ratio R.sub.Fe of iron oxide is 11 to 33%, a high phosphorus removal ratio is obtained. Conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio is low when the reduction ratio of iron oxide is lower than 11% is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment, and thus the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) finished progressing. Conceivably, when the reduction ratio of iron oxide was larger than 33%, a part of the iron oxide was reduced to metallic iron, which then absorbed vaporized phosphorus, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP.

[0071] Further experiments were carried out for different particle sizes by applying the above-described nitriding dephosphorization treatment to manganese ore and steelmaking slag. It was then confirmed that a high phosphorus removal ratio can be obtained in a nitrogen partial pressure range of “more than 0.15 atm and less than 0.95 atm” and a temperature range of “not lower than 750° C. and not higher than a melting point (° C.)×0.95” under all conditions. It was confirmed that a high phosphorus removal ratio can be obtained particularly in a case where manganese ore or steelmaking slag is subjected to the reduction treatment with the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q of “1.5 to 6.0” or the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis of “0.33 to 1.0” and in a temperature range of “not lower than 300° C. and not higher than a melting point (° C.)×0.95.”

[0072] As described above, as a treatment of removing phosphorus in a phosphorus-containing substance through nitriding, it is required that nitrogen be suppled at a high temperature and a low oxygen partial pressure as preset conditions. As equipment used for the treatment, any type of equipment capable of heating-up and atmosphere adjustment, such as an electric furnace, a rotary hearth furnace, a kiln furnace, a fluidized bed heating furnace, and a sintering machine, can be used with no problem. Also, as a method for decreasing an oxygen partial pressure, any of the following methods may be used as long as a predetermined oxygen partial pressure can be obtained:

(a) Bringing a solid reducing agent into contact with a nitrogen gas at a high temperature,
(b) Mixing a reducing gas such as any of carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and hydrocarbon into a nitrogen gas,
(c) Introducing a nitrogen gas into a solid electrolyte to a voltage has been applied so as to remove oxygen.

[0073] In a case where a reduction treatment is performed before a nitriding dephosphorization treatment, however, it is required that the treatment be performed at a high temperature. Further, equipment used for the treatment may include any type of equipment capable of heating-up, such as a high-frequency heating furnace, an electric furnace, a rotary hearth furnace, a kiln furnace, a fluidized bed heating furnace, and a sintering machine. As a reducing gas, for example, types of gas such as carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (C.sub.mH.sub.n), and hydrogen (H.sub.2) are desirable and effective from the viewpoint of decreasing treatment cost, but any type of gas may be used. A value of x noted above varies depending on a type of the reducing gas. When CO is used as the reducing gas, x=1 as described above, and also when H.sub.2 is used as the reducing gas, the number of oxygen atoms required for H.sub.2 to form H.sub.2O is one. Furthermore, when C.sub.mH.sub.n is used as the reducing gas, x denotes the number of oxygen atoms required for a C atom to form CO.sub.2 or for an H atom to form H.sub.2O, and x=2 m+0.5 n is established. It is also effective that the reducing gas is used by being circulated during the reduction treatment so as to increase reaction efficiency. A solid reducing agent may be any substance containing an element stable as an oxide, such as a single element of Ca, Mg, Al, Ti, Si, or C. Furthermore, the solid reducing agent may be used in a granulated state of being mixed with a phosphorus-containing substance.

[0074] According to the method of the present invention, iron ore that has been subjected to a reduction treatment and then to a nitriding dephosphorization treatment can be used as powder ore to obtain a low phosphorus-containing sintered ore by use of a downward suction type Dwight-Lloyd sintering machine. By blending this sintered ore in a blast furnace, low-phosphorus molten pig iron can be manufactured. This makes it possible to reduce an amount of a refining agent used for a molten pig iron pretreatment and to achieve a reduction in treatment time to maintain a high molten pig iron temperature, thus contributing to large-volume use of a cold iron source, and is, therefore, effective in terms of energy saving and a reduction in environmental load. Furthermore, according to the method of the present invention, manganese ore that had been subjected to a reduction treatment and then to a nitriding dephosphorization treatment was charged as a manganese source during converter refining to manufacture low-phosphorus and high-manganese steel. In this method, low-phosphorus and high-manganese steel could be economically manufactured without the need to use an expensive manganese alloy or to perform a dephosphorization treatment in a subsequent treatment. Without being limited the above-described example, the method of the present invention is applicable to a preliminary dephosphorization treatment of iron and steel slag to be recycled, an auxiliary raw material to be charged in a preliminary treatment, or the like.

EXAMPLES

Example 1

[0075] Into a rotary hearth furnace having a scale of 5 ton/hr, 2 t or 4 t of iron ore was charged, and a reduction treatment thereof was performed for one or two hours by adjusting respective amounts of fuel and oxygen to be supplied to a heating burner and supplying a carbon monoxide gas into the furnace. Then, a nitriding dephosphorization treatment was carried out for 30 minutes, in which the respective amounts of fuel and oxygen and an amount of a nitrogen gas were adjusted to perform adjustment so that a treatment temperature was 1000° C., a CO/CO.sub.2 ratio was 2.02 to 2.05, and a nitrogen partial pressure was 0.8 atm. A temperature measurement and a gas composition analysis were performed at a location of the charged sample after a lapse of 15 minutes. Respective concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2) in the gas were measured using an infrared gas analyzer, and a residual component of the gas was treated as the nitrogen gas. Further, an oxygen partial pressure was calculated from the CO/CO.sub.2 ratio determined from the respective concentrations of CO and CO.sub.2 based on reactions (h) to (j) expressed by formulae below. Furthermore, respective compositions of iron ore and manganese ore used are as shown in Table 1 above.

[00002] $[Chemical Formula 8]$ $\begin{matrix} 2 {CO}_{2} (g) = 2 C O (g) + O_{2} (g) & (h) \end{matrix}$ $\begin{matrix} Δ G^{\circ} = 13 4,3 0 0-4 0.74 ⨯ T (cal / mol) & (i) \end{matrix}$ $\begin{matrix} K = \exp (- \frac{Δ G^{\circ}}{RT}) = {(\frac{P_{CO}}{P_{{CO}_{2}}})}^{2} .Math. P_{O_{2}} & (j) \end{matrix}$

[0076] Regarding an operation in which the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was made to vary, Tables 2 to 3 show treatment conditions and results thereof where the reduction treatment temperature Tr 1000° C., an amount of iron ore was 2 t, and a reduction treatment time was one or two hours, and Tables 4 to 5 show treatment conditions and results thereof where an amount of iron ore was 4 t and a reduction treatment time was one or two hours.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Flow Reducing Reduction Phos- Iron rate of gas ratio Gas composition Oxygen partial phorus Outer ore reducing unit of iron CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 pressure removal appearance amount Temp. gas consumption oxide Temp. vol vol vol CO/ P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 rate after t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. % % % CO.sub.2 atm atm % treatment Inventive 2.0 1000 50 1.50 13.0 1000 13.38 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.76 70 Granular Example 1 Inventive 2.0 1000 75 2.25 13.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 2 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 3.00 17.6 1000 13.43 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 3 Inventive 2.0 1000 150 4.50 24.9 1000 13.43 6.57 80 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Example 4 Inventive 2.0 1000 200 6.00 32.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 5 Comparative 2.0 1000 10 0.30 2.4 1000 13.45 6.55 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 45 Granular Example 1 Comparative 2.0 1000 25 0.75 6.1 1000 13.38 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 2 Comparative 2.0 1000 250 7.50 38.3 1000 13.38 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Example 3 Comparative 2.0 1000 300 9.00 46.3 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 50 Granular Example 4

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Flow Reducing Reduction Phos- Iron rate of gas ratio Gas composition Oxygen partial phorus Outer ore reducing unit of iron CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 pressure removal appearance amount Temp. gas consumption oxide Temp. vol vol vol CO/ P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 rate after t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. % % % CO.sub.2 atm atm % treatment Inventive 2.0 1000 25 1.50 11.5 1000 13.41 6.59 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 6 Inventive 2.0 1000 38 2.25 13.9 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Example 7 Inventive 2.0 1000 50 3.00 18.1 1000 13.39 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 8 Inventive 2.0 1000 75 4.50 24 9 1000 13.43 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 9 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 6.00 33.0 1000 13.41 6.59 80 2.04 1.70E−15 −14.77 79 Granular Example 10 Comparative 2.0 1000 — — — 1000 12.73 6.27 81 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 45 Granular Example 5 Comparative 2.0 1000 5 0.30 2.0 1000 13.39 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 6 Comparative 2.0 1000 13 0.75 4.9 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 49 Granular Example 7 Comparative 2.0 1000 125 7.50 39.3 1000 13.41 6.59 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Example 8 Comparative 2.0 1000 150 9.00 45.1 1000 13.42 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Example 9

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Flow Reducing Reduction Phos- Iron rate of gas ratio Gas composition Oxygen partial phorus Outer ore reducing unit of iron CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 pressure removal appearance amount Temp. gas consumption oxide Temp. vol vol vol CO/ P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 rate after t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. % % % CO.sub.2 atm atm % treatment Inventive 4.0 1000 100 1.50 13.0 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Example 11 Inventive 4.0 1000 150 2.25 12.9 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Example 12 Inventive 4.0 1000 200 3.00 18.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 69 Granular Example 13 Inventive 4.0 1000 300 4.50 23.5 1000 13.41 6.59 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 14 Inventive 4.0 1000 400 6.00 32.7 1000 13.44 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Example 15 Comparative 4.0 1000 20 0.30 2.5 1000 13.42 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 47 Granular Example 10 Comparative 4.0 1000 50 0.75 4.3 1000 13.40 6.60 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 11 Comparative 4.0 1000 500 7.50 39.6 1000 13.43 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Example 12 Comparative 4.0 1000 600 9.00 45,6 1000 13.43 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Example 13

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 4.0 1000 50 1.50 10.6 1000 13.44 Example 16 Inventive 4.0 1000 75 2.25 13.0 1000 12.76 Example 17 inventive 4.0 1000 100 3.00 18.7 1000 12.78 Example 18 Inventive 4.0 1000 150 4.50 26.3 1000 13.43 Example 19 Inventive 4.0 1000 200 6.00 32.0 1000 13.43 Example 20 Comparative 4.0 1000 10 0.30 1.7 1000 13.42 Example 14 Comparative 4.0 1000 25 0.75 4.9 1000 13.42 Example 15 Comparative 4.0 1000 250 7.50 38.6 1000 13.44 Example 16 Comparative 4.0 1000 300 9.00 45.0 1000 13.39 Example 17 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Example 16 Inventive 6.24 81 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Example 17 inventive 6.22 81 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Example 18 Inventive 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 19 Inventive 6.57 80 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Example 20 Comparative 6.58 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 47 Granular Example 14 Comparative 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 15 Comparative 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 49 Granular Example 16 Comparative 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −44.77 48 Granular Example 17

[0077] In inventive Examples 1 to 20 of the present invention shown in Tables 2 to 5 in which the reduction treatment was performed first, a phosphorus removal ratio is improved by performing the reduction treatment as compared with Comparative Example 1 of the present invention in which the reduction treatment was not performed, with any value of the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q, Furthermore, in Inventive Examples 1 to 20 of the present invention in which the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is 1.5 to 6.0, as compared with Comparative Examples 2 to 17, the phosphorus removal ratio is as high as about 70%. Conceivably, the reason why an increase in phosphorus removal ratio is small when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is less than 1.5 is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 still remained after the reduction treatment, and thus the above-described reaction (a) was suppressed until the above-described reaction (e) progressed. Conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio is low when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is larger than 6.0 is that a metallic iron resulting from progress of the above-described reaction (b) absorbed vaporized phosphorus, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio.

[0078] Furthermore, regarding an operation in which the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was made to vary, Tables 6 to 7 show, along with results thereof, treatment conditions that the reduction treatment temperature Tr=1000° C., an amount of iron ore was 2 t, and a flow rate of a reducing gas was 25 L/min or 100 L/min., and Tables 8 to 9 show, along with results thereof, treatment conditions that an amount of iron ore was 4 t and a flow rate of the reducing gas was 25 L/min or 100 L/min. In inventive Examples 21 to 40 of the present invention shown in Tables 6 to 9, for any value of the reduction treatment temperature Tr, as compared with Comparative Example 1 in which the reduction treatment was not performed, a phosphorus removal ratio is improved by performing the reduction treatment. Furthermore, in Inventive Examples 21 to 40 of the present invention in which the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is 1.5 to 6.0, as compared with Comparative Examples 18 to 33, the phosphorus removal ratio is as high as about 70%. Conceivably, the reason why an increase in phosphorus removal ratio is small when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is less than 1.5 is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 still remained after the reduction treatment, and thus the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) progressed. Further, conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio is low when the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q is larger than 6.0 is that a metallic iron resulting from progress of the reaction (b) absorbed vaporized phosphorus, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Temper- Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount ature reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm’/min Nm/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 2.0 1000 25 1.50 11.7 1000 13.41 Example 21 Inventive 2.0 1000 25 2.25 13.8 1000 12.72 Example 22 Inventive 2.0 1000 25 3.00 18.5 1000 12.72 Example 23 Inventive 2.0 1000 25 4.50 26.4 1000 13.38 Example 24 Inventive 2.0 1000 25 6.00 32.9 1000 13.42 Example 25 Comparative 2.0 1000 25 0.30 2.2 1000 13.40 Example 18 Comparative 2.0 1000 25 0.75 5.2 1000 13.44 Example 19 Comparative 2.0 1000 25 7.50 39.5 1000 13.44 Example 20 Comparative 2.0 1000 25 9.00 45.0 1000 13.43 Example 21 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Phosphorus Gas composition pressure removal Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.59 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 21 Inventive 6.28 81 2.02 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 22 Inventive 6.28 81 2.02 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 23 Inventive 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 24 Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 25 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 45 Granular Example 18 Comparative 6.56 80 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 48 Granular Example 19 Comparative 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 49 Granular Example 20 Comparative 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 51 Granular Example 21

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 2.0 1000 100 1.50 11.5 1000 13.42 Example 26 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 2.25 13.9 1000 1.3.40 Example 27 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 3.00 18.9 1000 13.42 Example 28 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 4.50 26.1 1000 13,44 Example 29 Inventive 2.0 1000 100 6.00 33.2 1000 13.45 Example 30 Comparative 2.0 1000 100 0.30 1.5 1000 13.41 Example 22 Comparative 2.0 1000 100 0.75 4.8 1000 13.45 Example 23 Comparative 2.0 1000 100 7.50 39.2 1000 13.39 Example 24 Comparative 2.0 1000 100 9.00 44.8 1000 13.43 Example 25 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 69 Granular Example 26 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 27 Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 28 Inventive 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Example 29 Inventive 6.55 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Example 30 Comparative 6.59 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 45 Granular Example 22 Comparative 6.55 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 48 Granular Example 23 Comparative 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Example 24 Comparative 6.57 80 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 51 Granular Example 25

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 4.0 1000 25 1.50 10.5 1000 13.42 Example 31 Inventive 4.0 1000 25 2.25 13.9 1000 13.45 Example 32 Inventive 4.0 1000 25 3.00 18.6 1000 13.43 Example 33 Inventive 4.0 1000 25 4.50 25.7 1000 13.40 Example 34 Inventive 4.0 1000 25 6.00 31.7 1000 13.40 Example 35 Comparative 4.0 1000 25 0.30 1.9 1000 13.45 Example 26 Comparative 4.0 1000 25 0.75 4.4 1000 13.41 Example 27 Comparative 4.0 1000 25 7.50 38.1 1000 13.40 Example 28 Comparative 4.0 1000 25 9.00 44.4 1000 13.41 Example 29 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 69 Granular Example 31 Inventive 6.55 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Example 32 Inventive 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 33 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 34 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 35 Comparative 6.55 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 47 Granular Example 26 Comparative 6.59 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 27 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.7 IE−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 28 Comparative 6.59 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 29

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 4.0 1000 100 1.50 11.4 1000 13.38 Example 36 Inventive 4.0 1000 100 2.25 13.2 1000 12.75 Example 37 Inventive 4.0 1000 100 3.00 17.4 1000 12.75 Example 38 Inventive 4.0 1000 100 4.50 26.3 1000 13.43 Example 39 Inventive 4.0 1000 100 6.00 33.0 1000 13.40 Example 40 Comparative 4.0 1000 100 0.30 1.9 1000 13.43 Example 30 Comparative 4.0 1000 100 0.75 4.6 1000 13.40 Example 31 Comparative 4.0 1000 100 7.50 37.5 1000 13.39 Example 32 Comparative 4.0 1000 100 9.00 44.9 1000 13.38 Example 33 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 69 Granular Example 36 Inventive 6.25 81 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 37 Inventive 6.25 81 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 38 Inventive 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 39 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 40 Comparative 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 47 Granular Example 30 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 31 Comparative 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Example 32 Comparative 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.76 48 Granular Example 33

[0079] Regarding an operation in which the reduction treatment temperature Tr was made to vary, Tables 10 to 11 show treatment conditions and results thereof where the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q was 3.0 or 5.0, an amount of iron ore was 2 t and a reduction treatment time was one hour. In Inventive Examples 41 to 52 of the present invention shown in Tables 10 to 11, for any value of the reducing gas unit consumption x×Q, as compared with Comparative Example 1 shown in Table 2, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is improved by the reduction treatment under a condition that the reduction treatment temperature Tr is not higher than 1300° C. The phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is high particularly in Inventive Examples 41 to 52 of the present invention in which the reduction treatment was performed at 300 to 1300° C. Furthermore, conceivably, the reason why an increase in the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is small in Comparative Examples 34 to 35 and Comparative Examples 38 to 39 in which the reduction treatment was performed at a temperature lower than 300° C. is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 was stable at lower than 300° C., and thus a reduction using carbon monoxide did not progress. As a result, Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment at lower than 300° C., and thus the above-described reaction (a) was suppressed until the above-described reaction (e) progressed, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio. Conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio is low in Comparative Examples 36 to 37 and Comparative Examples 40 to 41 in which the reduction treatment was performed at a temperature higher than 1300° C. is that a melting point of iron ore used this time was 1370° C., so that the iron ore was in a semi-molten or molten state at the reduction treatment temperature Tr of 1350 or 1400° C. and as a result of aggregation of a sample, gaps and pores between iron ore particles disappeared to significantly reduce an interfacial area for contacting gas. A melting point T.sub.m used in this example was measured based on the first method described above in paragraph.

TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 2.0 300 50 3.00 22.0 1000 13.40 Example 41 Inventive 2.0 500 50 3.00 23.6 1000 13.38 Example 42 Inventive 2.0 700 50 3.00 24.2 1000 13.38 Example 43 Inventive 2.0 900 50 3.00 25.2 1000 13.42 Example 44 Inventive 2.0 1100 50 3.00 25.5 1000 13.40 Example 45 Inventive 2.0 1300 50 3.00 25.6 1000 13.42 Example 46 Comparative 2.0 200 50 3.00 2.1 1000 13.40 Example 34 Comparative 2.0 250 50 3.00 3.0 1000 13.40 Example 35 Comparative 2.0 1350 50 3.00 25.8 1000 13.44 Example 36 Comparative 2.0 1400 50 3.00 26.1 1000 12.77 Example 37 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 41 Inventive 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.76 70 Granular Example 42 Inventive 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 43 Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 44 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 45 Inventive 6.58 80 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 46 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Example 34 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.70E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Example 35 Comparative 6.56 80 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 25 Molten state Example 36 Comparative 6.23 81 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 20 Molten state Example 37

TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Reduction treatment Nitriding treatment Reducing Reduction Gas Iron ore Flow rate of gas unit ratio of composition amount Temp. reducing gas consumption iron oxide Temp. CO t ° C. Nm.sup.3/min Nm.sup.3/kg % ° C. vol % Inventive 2.0 300 83 5.00 23.0 1000 13.39 Example 47 Inventive 2.0 500 83 5.00 24.0 1000 13.43 Example 48 Inventive 2.0 700 83 5.00 24.6 1000 13.40 Example 49 Inventive 2.0 900 83 5.00 25.2 1000 13.39 Example 50 Inventive 2.0 1100 83 5.00 26.2 1000 13.39 Example 51 Inventive 2.0 1300 83 5.00 26.6 1000 13.39 Example 52 Comparative 2.0 200 83 5.00 2.3 1000 13.40 Example 38 Comparative 2.0 250 83 5.00 3.3 1000 13.38 Example 39 Comparative 2.0 1350 83 5.00 26.5 1000 13.43 Example 40 Comparative 2.0 1400 83 5.00 26.6 1000 13.44 Example 41 Nitriding treatment Oxygen partial Gas composition pressure Phosphorus Outer CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 removal rate appearance vol % vol % CO/CO.sub.2 atm atm % after treatment Inventive 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Example 47 Inventive 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 48 Inventive 6.60 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 49 Inventive 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Example 50 Inventive 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 51 Inventive 6.61 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Example 52 Comparative 6.60 80 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Example 38 Comparative 6.62 80 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Example 39 Comparative 6.57 80 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 24 Molten state Example 40 Comparative 6.56 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 21 Molten state Example 41

Example 2

[0080] Into a rotary hearth furnace having a scale of 5 ton/hr, 4 t of iron ore or 4 t of manganese ore were charged together with a carbonaceous material, and a reduction treatment thereof was performed for two hours by adjusting respective amounts of fuel and oxygen to be supplied to a heating burner. Then, a nitriding dephosphorization treatment was carried out for 30 minutes by adjusting the respective amounts of fuel and oxygen to be supplied to the heating burner, a ratio therebetween, and an amount of a nitrogen gas to be supplied to perform adjustment so that the treatment temperature T.sub.DP=1000° C., a CO/CO.sub.D ratio: a range of 2.02 to 2.05, and a nitrogen partial pressure P.sub.N2=0.80 atm. A temperature measurement and a gas composition analysis were performed at a location of the charged sample after a lapse of 15 minutes in the nitriding dephosphorization treatment.

[0081] Tables 12-1 to 12-7 show treatment conditions and results in a case of treating iron ore. Treatment No. 1 is a comparative example in which a reduction treatment was not performed. Treatments Nos. 2 to 49 show results of operations in which the reduction treatment temperature Tr was set to 300, 800, 1000, and 1300° C. and the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis to iron ore was made to vary. In Treatments Nos. 2 to 49, under any of reduction treatment conditions, as compared with Treatment No. 1 as the comparative example, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP by a nitriding dephosphorization treatment is improved. The phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is as high as about 70% particularly under a condition that the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is ⅓ to 1.0, Conceivably, the reason why an increase in phosphorus removal ratio is small when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is less than ⅓ is as follows. That is, under the conditions of this example, a carbonaceous material is used as a solid reducing agent, and thus an amount of substance y of an oxygen atom that reacts with 1 mol of the solid reducing agent is 1 mol. The reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis required for the above-described reaction (e) to completely progress rightward (a reduction reaction) is expressed as ⅓y ⅓. That is, conceivably, when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis was less than ⅓, Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment, and thus in a subsequent nitriding dephosphorization treatment, a dephosphorization reaction of the above-described reaction (a) was suppressed until the above-described reaction (e) was completed. On the other hand, conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is larger than 1.0 is as follows. That is, the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis required for a reaction (k) expressed by Chemical Formula 12 below to completely progress rightward (a reduction reaction) is expressed as 1/y=1. That is, when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is more than 1.0, the above-described reaction (b) progresses rightward (a reduction reaction) to cause metallic iron to be formed, Therefore, it was considered that phosphorus was absorbed by the metallic iron, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP.

[Chemical Formula 12]

2Fe.sub.2O.sub.3(s)=4FeO(s)+O.sub.2(g) (k)

TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12-1 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 1 — — — 1000 13.38 6.62 80 2 300 0.11 3.2 1000 13.42 6.58 80 3 300 0.23 6.3 1000 13.45 6.55 80 4 300 0.33 9.9 1000 13.38 6.62 80 5 300 0.45 12.6 1000 13.42 6.58 80 6 300 0.56 15.8 1000 13.38 6.62 80 7 300 0.67 18.9 1000 13.40 6.60 80 8 300 0.78 22.0 1000 13.42 6.58 80 9 300 0.89 25.2 1000 13.45 6.55 80 10 300 1.00 28.2 1000 13.44 6.56 80 11 300 1.12 33.0 1000 13.44 6.56 80 12 300 1.22 36.3 1000 13.38 6.62 80 13 300 1.34 39.6 1000 13.39 6.61 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 1 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 45 Granular Comparative Example 2 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Inventive Example 3 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 53 Granular Inventive Example 4 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 65 Granular Inventive Example 5 2.04 1.68E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 6 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 7 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 8 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 9 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Inventive Example 10 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Inventive Example 11 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 60 Granular Inventive Example 12 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 54 Granular Inventive Example 13 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Inventive Example

TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 12-2 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 14 800 0.11 3.5 1000 13.43 6.57 80 15 800 0.23 7.0 1000 13.38 6.62 80 16 800 0.33 10.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 17 800 0.45 14.1 1000 13.40 6.60 80 18 800 0.56 17.8 1000 13.39 6.61 80 19 800 0.67 21.1 1000 13.42 6.58 80 20 800 0.78 24.2 1000 13.45 6.55 80 21 800 0.89 28.1 1000 13.44 6.56 80 22 800 1.00 31.4 1000 13.40 6.60 80 23 800 1.12 35.1 1000 13.39 6.61 80 24 800 1.22 38.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 25 800 1.34 42.1 1000 13.42 6.58 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 14 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 50 Granular Inventive Example 15 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 53 Granular Inventive Example 16 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 17 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 18 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 19 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 20 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 21 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 22 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Inventive Example 23 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 55 Granular Inventive Example 24 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 51 Granular Inventive Example 25 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Inventive Example

TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 12-3 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 26 1000 0.11 3.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 27 1000 0.23 7.2 1000 13.39 6.61 80 28 1000 0.33 11.0 1000 13.40 6.60 80 29 1000 0.45 13.8 1000 13.41 6.59 80 30 1000 0.56 17.4 1000 13.40 6.60 80 31 1000 0.67 21.1 1000 13.43 6.57 80 32 1000 0.78 25.2 1000 13.39 6.61 80 33 1000 0.89 28.3 1000 13.42 6.58 80 34 1000 1.00 31.9 1000 13.39 6.61 80 35 1000 1.12 35.6 1000 13.43 6.57 80 36 1000 1.22 37.3 1000 13.41 6.59 80 37 1000 1.34 38.0 1000 13.43 6.57 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 26 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 50 Granular Inventive Example 27 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 53 Granular Inventive Example 28 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Inventive Example 29 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 30 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 31 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 32 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 33 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 73 Granular Inventive Example 34 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 35 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 57 Granular Inventive Example 36 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 52 Granular Inventive Example 37 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 50 Granular inventive Example

TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 12-4 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 38 1300 0.11 3.7 1000 13.43 6.57 80 39 1300 0.23 7.4 1000 13.45 6.55 80 40 1300 0.33 11.2 1000 13.44 6.56 80 41 1300 0.45 14.6 1000 13.42 6.58 80 42 1300 0.56 18.3 1000 13.42 6.58 80 43 1300 0.67 21.9 1000 13.40 6.60 80 44 1300 0.78 25.6 1000 13.39 6.61 80 45 1300 0.89 29.2 1000 13.42 6.58 80 46 1300 1.00 32.9 1000 13.43 6.57 80 47 1300 1.12 35.8 1000 13.39 6.61 80 48 1300 1.22 38.6 1000 13.44 6.56 80 49 1300 1.34 41.8 1000 13.44 6.56 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 38 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 50 Granular Inventive Example 39 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 54 Granular Inventive Example 40 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Inventive Example 41 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 42 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 43 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 73 Granular Inventive Example 44 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 73 Granular Inventive Example 45 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 73 Granular Inventive Example 46 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 68 Granular Inventive Example 47 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 54 Granular Inventive Example 48 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 50 Granular Inventive Example 49 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 47 Granular Inventive Example

TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 12-5 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 50 200 0.33 1.9 1000 13.38 6.62 80 51 250 0.33 2.7 1000 13,38 6.62 80 52 300 0.33 9.9 1000 13,40 6,60 80 53 330 0.33 10.0 1000 13.43 6.57 80 54 350 0.33 10.2 1000 13.38 6.62 80 55 400 0.33 10.3 1000 13.43 6.57 80 56 600 0.33 10.4 1000 13.44 6.56 80 57 800 0.33 10.6 1000 13.39 6.61 80 58 1000 0.33 11.0 1000 13.38 6.62 80 59 1200 0.33 11.2 1000 13.41 6.59 80 60 1300 0.33 11.2 1000 13.43 6,57 80 61 1350 0.33 11.2 1000 13,41 6,59 80 62 1400 0.33 11.2 1000 13.44 6.56 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 50 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 47 Granular Inventive Example 51 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Inventive Example 52 2.03 1.70E−4 5 −14.77 65 Granular Inventive Example 53 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Inventive Example 54 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 69 Granular Inventive Example 55 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Inventive Example 56 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Inventive Example 57 2.03 1.7 IE−15 −14.77 71 Granular Inventive Example 58 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Inventive Example 59 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Inventive Example 60 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Inventive Example 61 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 23 Molten state Comparative Example 62 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 21 Molten state Comparative Example

TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 12-6 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 63 200 0.78 2.1 1000 13.42 6.58 80 64 250 0.78 3.0 1000 13.41 6.59 80 65 .300 0.78 22.0 1000 13.41 6.59 80 66 330 0.78 22.3 1000 13.41 6.59 80 67 350 0.78 22.6 1000 13.43 6.57 80 68 400 0.78 23.0 1000 13.45 6.55 80 69 600 0.78 23.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 70 800 0.78 24.2 1000 13.38 6.62 80 71 1000 0.78 25.2 1000 13.43 6.57 80 72 1200 0.78 25.3 1000 13.44 6.56 80 73 1300 0.78 25.6 1000 13.40 6.60 80 74 1350 0.78 25.8 1000 13.41 6.59 80 75 1400 0.78 26.1 1000 13.39 6.61 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 63 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Inventive Example 64 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 49 Granular Inventive Example 65 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 66 2.04 1.70E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 67 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 68 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 69 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 70 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inv eative Example 71 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 72 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 73 Granular Inventive Example 73 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 73 Granular Inventive Example 74 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 25 Molten state Comparative Example 75 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 20 Molten state Comparative Example

TABLE-US-00018 TABLE 12-7 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 76 200 1.00 9 2 1000 13.40 6.60 80 77 250 1.00 3.1 1000 13.43 6.57 80 78 300 1.00 28.2 1000 13.44 6.56 80 79 330 1.00 28.8 1000 13.44 6.56 80 80 350 1.00 29.0 1000 13.45 6.55 80 81 400 1.00 29.1 1000 13.39 6.61 80 82 600 1.00 30.5 1000 13.44 6.56 80 83 800 1.00 31.4 1000 13.43 6.57 80 84 1000 1.00 31.9 1000 13.44 6.56 80 85 1200 1.00 32.3 1000 13.40 6.60 80 86 1300 1.00 32.9 1000 13.44 6.56 80 87 1350 1.00 33.1 1000 13.40 6.60 80 88 1400 1.00 33.5 1000 13.41 6.59 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 76 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 48 Granular Inventive Example 77 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 49 Granular Inventive Example 78 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Inventive Example 79 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Inventive Example 80 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 69 Granular Inventive Example 81 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 70 Granular Inventive Example 82 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 71 Granular Inventive Example 83 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 70 Granular Inventive Example 84 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 72 Granular Inventive Example 85 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 72 Granular Inventive Example 86 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 68 Granular Inventive Example 87 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 90 Molten state Comparative Example 88 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 19 Molten state Comparative Example

[0082] Treatment Conditions Nos. 50 to 88 in Tables 12-5 to 12-7 show results of operations in which the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis was set to 0.33, 0.78, and 1.0 and the reduction treatment temperature Tr was made to vary. Under a reduction treatment condition that the treatment temperature is not higher than Tr=1300° C., as compared with the result of Treatment No. 1 as the comparative example, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP based on a nitriding dephosphorization treatment is improved. The phosphorus removal ratio ΔP based on the nitriding dephosphorization treatment is high particularly when the reduction treatment temperature Tr is 300 to 1300° C. Conceivably, the reason why an increase in the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is small when a reduction treatment is performed at lower than Tr=300° C. is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 was stable at lower than 300° C., and thus a reduction using carbon did not progress, as a result of which Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment at lower than 300° C., so that in a subsequent nitriding dephosphorization treatment, a dephosphorization reaction of the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) was completed. On the other hand, conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low when the reduction treatment is performed at a temperature higher than Tr 1300° C. is that the melting point T.sub.m of iron ore used this time was 1370° C., so that the iron ore was in a semi-molten or molten state at the reduction treatment temperature Tr of 1350 or 1400° C., which is higher than 0.95×T.sub.m, and as a result of aggregation of a sample, gaps and pores between iron ore particles disappeared to significantly reduce an interfacial area for contacting a nitrogen gas.

[0083] Table 13 collectively shows treatment conditions and operation results in a case of treating manganese ore. Here, a reduction ratio of iron oxide and manganese oxide refers to a ratio of an amount of reduced oxygen to total oxygen in the iron oxide and manganese oxide. In Treatments Nos. 90 to 109 in which the reduction treatment temperature Tr is in a range of 200 to 1350° C., as compared with Treatment No. 89 as a comparative example in which a reduction treatment is not performed, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is improved. Particularly under treatment conditions (Nos. 96 to 98, 101 to 103, and 106 to 108) that the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is in a range of ⅓ to 1.0 among conditions that the reduction treatment temperature Tr is in a range of 300 to 1350° C., as compared with treatment conditions (Nos. 95, 99, 100, 104, 105, and 109) that the reduction treatment temperature Tr is in the same range and the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is 0.22 or 1.11, the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is high. Conceivably, the reason why an increase in the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is small when the reducing agent ratio on an amount-of-substance basis is less than ⅓ is as follows. That is, under the conditions of this example, a carbonaceous material is used as a solid reducing agent, and thus the amount of substance y of an oxygen atom that reacts with 1 mol of the solid reducing agent M is 1 mol. Accordingly, the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis required for the above-described reaction (e) and reaction (f) to completely progress rightward (a reduction reaction) is expressed as ⅓y=⅓. That is, conceivably, when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis was less than ⅓, Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment, and thus in a subsequent nitriding dephosphorization treatment, a dephosphorization reaction of the above-described reaction (a) was suppressed until the above-described reaction (e) and reaction (f) were completed. On the other hand, conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis is more than 1.0 is as follows. That is, the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis required for the above-described reaction (k) and a reaction (l) expressed by Chemical Formula 13 below to completely progress rightward (a reduction reaction) is expressed as 1/y=1 when considered similarly to the above, That is, conceivably, when the reducing agent ratio M/O on an amount-of-substance basis was more than 1.0, the above-described reaction (b) and reaction (c) progressed rightward (a reduction reaction) to cause metallic iron and metallic manganese to be formed, so that phosphorus was absorbed by the metallic iron or metallic manganese, resulting in lowering the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP.

[Chemical Formula 13]

2Mn.sub.2O.sub.3(s)=4MnO(s)+O.sub.2(g) (1)

TABLE-US-00019 TABLE 13 Partial reduction treatment Reducing agent Nitriding dephosphorization Temp. ratio M/O Reduction Temp. Tr (amount-of- ratio T.sub.DP Gas composition [vol %] No. [° C.] substance ratio) R.sub.Fe [%] [° C.] CO CO.sub.2 N.sub.2 89 — — — 1000 13.42 6.58 80 90 200 0.22 1.8 1000 13.42 6.58 80 91 200 0.33 1.9 1000 13.42 6.58 80 92 200 0.78 2.1 1000 13.45 6.55 80 93 200 0.99 2.2 1000 13.40 6.60 80 94 200 111 2.3 1000 13.38 6.62 80 95 300 0.22 6.8 1000 13.41 6.59 80 96 300 0.33 10.0 1000 13.40 6.60 80 97 300 0.78 22.1 1000 13.39 6.61 80 98 300 0.99 27.9 1000 13.39 6.61 80 99 300 1.11 33.5 1000 13.43 6.57 80 100 800 0.22 7.2 1000 13.42 6.58 80 101 800 0.33 10.5 1000 13.45 6.55 80 102 800 0.78 24.0 1000 13.39 6.61 80 103 800 0.99 31.0 1000 13.38 6.62 80 104 800 1.11 34.3 1000 13.43 6.57 80 105 1350 0.22 7.4 1000 13.45 6.55 80 106 1350 0.33 10.9 1000 13.42 6.58 80 107 1350 0.78 25.6 1000 13.39 6.61 80 108 1350 0.99 29.3 1000 13.40 6.60 80 109 1350 1.11 35.0 1000 13.45 6.55 80 110 1450 0.22 7.5 1000 13.38 6.62 80 111 1450 0.33 11.1 1000 13.40 6.60 80 112 1450 0.78 25.8 1000 13.42 6.58 80 113 1450 0.99 29.9 1000 13.42 6.58 80 114 1450 1.11 35.4 1000 13.42 6.58 80 Nitriding dephosphorization Oxygen partial Phosphorus Outer pressure [atm] removal rate appearance No. CO/CO.sub.2 P.sub.O2 logP.sub.O2 ΔP [%] after treatment Remarks 89 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 38 Granular Comparative Example 90 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 40 Granular Inventive Example 91 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 40 Granular Inventive Example 92 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 41 Granular Inventive Example 93 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 41 Granular Inventive Example 94 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 41 Granular Inventive Example 95 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 44 Granular Inventive Example 96 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 56 Granular Inventive Example 97 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 58 Granular Inventive Example 98 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 58 Granular Inventive Example 99 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 51 Granular Inventive Example 100 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 45 Granular Inventive Example 101 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 58 Granular Inventive Example 102 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 59 Granular Inventive Example 103 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 61 Granular Inventive Example 104 2.05 1.68E−15 −14.78 46 Granular Inventive Example 105 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 46 Granular Inventive Example 106 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 60 Granular Inventive Example 107 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 60 Granular Inventive Example 108 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 61 Granular Inventive Example 109 2.05 1.67E−15 −14.78 41 Granular Inventive Example 110 2.02 1.72E−15 −14.77 17 Molten state Comparative Example 111 2.03 1.71E−15 −14.77 18 Molten state Comparative Example 112 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 19 Molten state Comparative Example 113 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 19 Molten state Comparative Example 114 2.04 1.69E−15 −14.77 18 Molten state Comparative Example

[0084] Furthermore, conceivably, the reason why an increase in the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is small when a reduction treatment is performed at lower than the reduction treatment temperature Tr=300° C. is that Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 and Mn.sub.2O.sub.3 were stable at lower than 300° C., and thus a reduction using carbon did not progress, as a result of which Fe.sub.2O.sub.3 remained after the reduction treatment at lower than 300° C., so that in a subsequent nitriding dephosphorization treatment, a dephosphorization reaction of the reaction (a) was suppressed until the reaction (e) and the reaction (f) were completed. On the other hand, conceivably, the reason why the phosphorus removal ratio ΔP is low when the reduction treatment is performed at a temperature higher than Tr=1350° C. is that the melting point T.sub.m of manganese ore used this time was 1425° C. so that the manganese ore was in a molten state at the reduction treatment temperature Tr of 1450° C., which is more than 0.95×T.sub.m, and as a result of aggregation of a sample, gaps and pores between manganese ore particles disappeared to significantly reduce an interfacial area for contacting a nitrogen gas.

Industrial Applicability

[0085] The dephosphorization method according to the present invention is not only a method for preferentially removing phosphorus from a phosphorus-containing substance but also a technique for preferentially reducing oxide, and this idea is applicable not only to the field of smelting and refining described merely as an example but also to other technical fields.

METHOD FOR REMOVING PHOSPHORUS FROM PHOSPHORUS-CONTAINING SUBSTANCE, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING RAW MATERIAL FOR METAL SMELTING OR RAW MATERIAL FOR METAL REFINING, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING METAL

Assignee

Inventors

Cpc classification

Classification Explorer

C01B21/097

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Classification Explorer

C21C7/0645

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Classification Explorer

C21C7/10

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Classification Explorer

C21C7/072

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Classification Explorer

C22B1/11

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Classification Explorer

C22B1/02

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

International classification

Classification Explorer

C22B1/11

CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY

Abstract

Claims

Description