, Volume 45, Issue 11, pp 39–42 | Cite as

Recent trends in binder pitches for reduction anodes

  • Nigel R. Turner
Aluminum Production Overview


The properties of coal tar pitches have changed more in the last eight years than in the previous 40. Over the same period of time, the understanding of the influence of these properties on anodes has increased greatly. The definition of a good-quality pitch for the manufacture of anodes for the primary aluminum industry has changed radically. Pitches that would have been rejected 15 years ago are now preferred and are in high demand. Changes have been led in equal proportion by the pitch producers and by the primary aluminum industry. The increased pace of change will continue as the quest for higher performance is unending. Further advances will be achieved through closer cooperation between producer and user to define and redefine pitch quality in terms of what is the best compromise between what the customer wants and what the producer can practicably manufacture.


Softening Point Coke Oven Coke Plant Binder Content Primary Aluminum 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J.A. Griffiths and H. Marsh, “Surface Structures in Carbons from Petroleum and Botanical Sources Caused by Gasification,” Carbo’80 (Köln, West Germany: Deutsche Keramische Gesellschaft, 1980), pp. (17–20).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Bradley, “Tar Distillation Today,” The Coke Oven Managers Yearbook 1986 (Mexborough, England: COMA Year Book, 1986), pp. (99–114).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W.D. Betts, International Tar Association, England, private communication with author (April 1993).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C.L. Irwin et al. “Sources and Industrial Uses of Coal Tar Products,” Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Pittsburgh International Coal Conference (1991), pp. (809–812).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.H. Jukes, “Blast Furnace Granular Coal Injection,” Metallurgical Plant and Technology International, 2(April 1993), pp. (56–60).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Bureau of Metal Statistics (Ware, U.K.: 1993).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Augie et al., “Formation of Thin Mesophase Layers at the Interface between Filler and Binder in Prebaked Anodes,” Carbon, 19(4) (1981), pp. (277–283).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Couderc, P. Hyvernat, and J.L. Lemarchand, “Correlations Between Ability of Pitch to Penetrate Coke and the Physical Characteristics of Prebaked Anodes,” Fuel, 65 (February 1986), pp. (281–287).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J-L. Saint-Romain, D. Cottinet, and P. Couderc, “Capillary Flow of Coal Tar Pitch into a Porous Bed,” Light Metals 1987 (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1987), pp. (603–611).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    O. Bowitz and O. Sandberg, “Söderberg Anode Carbon in Cells for Electrolytic Production of Aluminum,” Trans. Met. Soc. AIME (1962), p. 53.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P.J. Rhedey, “Laboratory Evaluation of a Low QI Coal Tar Pitch as Anode Binder,” Light Metals 1990 (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1990), pp. (605–608).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J-L. Saint-Romain and P. Lagassie, “QI in Coal Tar Pitches—Part 2,” Light Metals 1990 (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1990), pp. (597–603).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    N.R. Turner, “The Volatiles Emitted from Bench-Scale Anodes during Bake,” Light Metals 1992 (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1992), pp. (571–580).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W.K. Fischer et al., “Baking Parameters and the Resulting Anode Quality,” Light Metals 1993 (Warrendale, PA: TMS, 1993), pp. (683–689).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© TMS 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nigel R. Turner
    • 1
  1. 1.Bitmac Ltd.Malta

Personalised recommendations