, Volume 54, Issue 4, pp 17–18 | Cite as

Tools for optimizing Cu electrodeposition: Modeling and reagent addition monitoring

  • Norbert L. Piret
Commentary Copper Electrodeposition


Copper Foil Copper Production Electrolytic Copper Copper Electrodeposition Cuivre 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    NI. Piret, “Perspectives of Hydrometallurgical Processing of CopperConcentrates: State of the Artand Future”Proc. of EMC 2001, Vol. 1 (Clausthal-Zellerfeld: GDMB, 2001), pp. 89–113.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F.van Raevels et al, U.S. patent 3,807,020 (1974).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.S. Gendron, R.R. Matthews, and W.C. Wilson, “Production of High Quality Electro-Refined and Electrowon Copper at Inco’s Copper Cliff Copper Refinery,”CIM Bulletin, 70 (484) (1977), pp. 166–172.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D.W. Hoey et al., “Modern Tankhouse Design and Practices at Copper Refineries PTY Ltd.,”The Electrorefining and Winning of Copper, ed. J. Hoffmann et al.(Warrendale, PA:TMS, 1987), pp. 271–293.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anon., “Isa Process Refining,”Copper Studies, (April 1994), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    W.G. Davenport et al., “Electrolytic Copper Refining—1999 World Tankhouse Operating Data,”Proc. of Copper 99—Cobre 99, Vol. III, ed. J. E. Dutrizac et al. (Warrendale, PA:TMS, 1999), pp. 3–76.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Jenkins et al., “Electrolytic Copper-Leach, Solvent Extraction and Electrowinning World Operating Data,”Proc. of Copper 99—Cobre 99, Vol. IV, ed. R.R Hackl et al. (Warrendale, PA:TMS, 1999), pp. 493–506.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Landau and H. Traulsen, “Die neue Kupferelek-trolyse der Norddeutschen Affinerie”Erzmetall, 43 (1990), pp. 357–361.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Winand et al., “Industrial Electrodeposition of Copper, Problems Connected to the Behaviour of Organic Additions,”Application of Polarization Measurements in the Control of Metal Deposition, ed. I.H. Warren (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1984), pp. 133–145.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Sun and T.J. O’Keefe, “The Effect of Additives in the Nucleation and Growth of Copper onto Stainless Steel Cathodes,”Metall. Trans. B, 23B (October 1992), pp. 591–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R Stantke, “Utilization of CollaMat for Measuring Glue in the Copper Electrolyte,” in this issue.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    I.H. Warren, N. Tarn, and F. Nok, “Application of Polarization Measurements in the Electrowinning of Zinc and Copper,” R.Schumann Int. Symp.on Innovative Technology and Reactor Design in Extraction Metallurgy (Warrendale, PA:TMS, 1986), pp. 741–751.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Winand, M. Degrez, and V Bastin, “Copper Electrocrystallization and the Continuous Monitoring of Electrorefining Additives,”Proc. of Copper ’91, Vol. Ill, (Montreal: CIM, 1991), pp. 341–354.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B.E. Langner and R Stantke, “The Use of the CollaMat-System for Measuring Glue Activity in Copper Electrolyte in the Laboratory and in the Production Plant,”EPD Congress 1995, ed. G.W. Warren (Warrendale, PA:TMS, 1995), pp. 559–569.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J.E. Hoffmann, “Application of the Haring Cell for Glue Addition Monitoring,” in this issue.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Goffman and T.L. Jordan, U.S. patent 4,511,443 (1985).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    V. Ramachandran and V.L. Wildman, “Current Operations at the Amarillo Copper Refinery,”The Electrorefining and Winning of Copper, ed. J.E. Hoffmann et al. (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1987), pp. 387–396.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    W. Wöbking and A. Anzinger, “Process Control Criteria and Methods in Electrolytic Copper Refining,”Proc. of EMC 2001,Vol. 1 (Clausthal-Zellerfeld: GDMB, 2001), pp. 79–88.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    H. Wöbking and J. Wallner, “Neue Erkenntnisse über die (mögliche) Wirkungsweise von Thioharnstoff in der Kupferraffinationselektrolyse” (Preprint of a paper presented at the 6th Non-ferrous Metallurgical Symposium, OMBKE, Balatonaliga, Hungary, 11–13 October 1989).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. Feneau and R. Breckpot, “Problèmes Relatifs à l’Electrocristallisation du Cuivre” (Brussels, Belgium: Comm. Congrès Intern. Chim. Industr., 1966), pp. 241–249.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Breckpot, “La Précipitation électrochimique du Cuivre—Electroraffinage et Electroobtention,”ATB Metallurgie, XI (1) (1971), pp. 35–44.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Filzwieser, K. Hein, and G. Mori, “Limiting Current Density and Diffusion Boundary Layer Calculations Using the CFD Method,” in this issue.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Stelter, H. Bombach, and N. Nesterov, “Investigations into the Use of Polyethylene Glycols as Alternative Inhibitors in Copper Electrorefining,” in this issue.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Y. K. Lee and T.J. O’Keefe, “Evaluation and Monitoring of the Nucleation and Growth of Copper Foil,” in this issue.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norbert L. Piret
    • 1
  1. 1.Copper, Nickel, Cobalt Committee of the TMS Extraction and Processing DivisionJOMUSA

Personalised recommendations