Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

IConAMMA_2017

Prediction of shrinkage allowance for tool design of aluminium

alloy (A356) investment casting
Ramesh Kumar Nayak a* and S. Venugopal b
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar-751024, India

b
Foundry and Forge Division, HAL Bangalore-560017, India

Abstract

Investment casting process has been adopted by the industries to produce castings having good surface finish, complex shape and
better dimensional accuracy. Gradually, dimensional tolerance is decreasing day by day to reduce the overall weight of the
casting. Manufacturing of dimensionally stringent investment casting products require number of shop floor trials and pattern
die/tool rework to produce castings with acceptable dimensional tolerance. This is because of uneven shrinkage of a casting
during the solidification process in complex shape castings. In this paper shrinkage allowances were determined for H-shape
investment casting made up A356 alloy. Experiments were conducted for three types of H-shape castings (small, medium and
big). There are two types of shrinkage (free and restricted) has been identified and determined for H-shape casting. The
dimensions of die tooling, wax pattern and casting were measured, in order to determine the actual shrinkage allowance for the
die. The results revealed that the shrinkage percentage of free and restricted solidification areas is different. However, both
shrinkage allowance factor is linear in nature. Further, the shrinkage pattern at free and restricted area has been correlated with
microstructure to support the new findings. This study has enlightened the importance of shrinkage allowances during tool
making of investment casting products to achieve the desire dimension of the casting. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the
free and restricted shrinkage area of a casting before we assign the shrinkage allowance to the die/tool for a particular investment
casting product. As a result, number of shop floor trials can be avoided, time required to develop of a casting may be reduced
resulting reduction of energy utilization and cost of production.
Keywords: Shrinkage allowance, Investment casting tool design, A356 Alloy;
*Corresponding Author E-mail address: rnayakfme@kiit.ac.in

2214-7853© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Advances in Materials and Manufacturing Applications
[IConAMMA 2017].
24998 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005

1. Introduction
Near net shape components are manufactured by die casting, investment casting and rapid prototyping
manufacturing process. During the manufacturing process shrinkage allowance is a critical factor to achieve the
desired dimension within the tolerance of the casting [1-4]. Aerospace investment casting product requires stringent
dimensional tolerance to reduce the overall weight of the aircraft leads to better fuel efficiency and cost. Wax
patterns are used for investment casting process. Different wax shrinks differently [5-6]. Therefore, manufacturing
of investment casting having stringent dimensional tolerance is a major challenge to most of the investment casting
foundries. Pattern die making is a crucial step in investment casting process which controls the deviation of casting
dimension from the original design. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the wax pattern-tooling dimensions more
accurately before shop floor trial. Pattern die manufacturers have not sufficient scientific knowledge to meet the
requirement as demanded by the aerospace customer to produce the casting acceptable dimensions. With the prior
experience of die designer, the pattern or die allowances were assumed to manufacture the pattern die. It is observed
that average shrinkage allowance works pretty well for a regular or simple shape aerospace casting components [7].
However, the shape of the investment casting components is very complex /unsymmetrical. During the solidification
process, some of the casting areas solidified freely and other places shrinks with some restrictions. However, the
die/pattern makers allotted the shrinkage allowance factor uniformly throughout the casting during tool design. As a
result, wax pattern die rework / reconditioning is required to meet the casting dimension within the tolerance.
Therefore, to carry out three to four times rework of the die is a time taking and expensive process, which lead to
delay in delivery schedule. A.S.Sabau and S.Viswanathan [8-9] have developed mathematical models to predict the
wax shrinkage. They had observed that shrinkage of wax varies with the rate of cooling.

Dimensional variability with different casting processes has been under investigation for the past decade in
different universities as well as in reputed foundries. Vaupel et al. [10] investigated the tolerance system
interpretation on dimensional variability. Backermann et al. [11] developed finite element models for prediction of
pattern allowance in green sand mould casting. They also studied both simple and complex shaped casting and
concluded that it is reasonable to predict the shrinkage allowance for simple casting compared to complex one. Deo
Mandar [12] developed an empirical model for the prediction of pattern allowance in steel casting. Based on above
study, it could be reasonably said that the actual linear shrinkage is not simply a function of the metal shrinkage rate
or coefficient of thermal expansion but is also influenced by the mould rigidity. In case of wax shrinkage, the die
cavity shape and cooling time in the cavity may also reduce the amount of shrinkage. In case of metal shrinkage, the
mould geometry and relative thicknesses of mould materials also contribute to reduce the amount of shrinkage. In
both the cases, the reduction in shrinkage rate may be localised, leading to distortion of the pattern/casting. Since the
cooling range from wax melting point to room temperature is less, the amount of linear contraction is very limited
(typically in the order of 1%). Clearly this is not the case for cast metals which cool through a much larger
temperature range whilst fully enclosed within the mould.

Statistically based pattern allowance also adopted for tooling design [13].Interface gap is formed between
casting and mold during solidification process due shrinkage of casting has also been studied and it may contribute
the shrinkage pattern allowances [14-15]. Therefore, so many number of experiments need to be conducted to
determine the shrinkage allowance of wax and casting for different alloys. In this paper, we have studied the
shrinkage pattern of wax and casting for an H-shape casting made of A356 alloy. Extensive dimensional
measurement during wax pattern and casting stage has been carried out. We have studied the shrinkage behaviour at
different locations of H-shape casting. It is observed that the wax and casting shrink linearly with different slopes
for different locations/lengths. Further, the shrinkage pattern has also been correlated with microstructure.

2. Experimental
There are three types of H-shape castings have been designed and the dies were made up aluminium. During the
3D modelling stage, shrinkage allowance factor has not provided to the die. We referred H-model 1, 2 and 3 as
HM1, HM2, and HM3 respectively. HM1, HM2 and HM3 refer to large, medium and small castings respectively.
All the casting dimensions are in mm and have reported in Table 1. Each H shape casing has three different
 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005 24999

dimensions i.e. A, B and C. Figure 1 shows the H shape castings having different length (A&B) and thickness(C).
The length A=A1=A2=A3=A4, B=B1=B2=B3=B4 and C=C1=C2=C3=C4. In this study it is assumed that the
length A and C are free shrinkage and length B is restricted shrinkage with respect to its solidification behaviour.
There were four wax patterns of each H-shape casting have been injected using wax injection machine. The average
dimension of A, B and C has been measured and taken into account to determine the wax pattern shrinkage. Wax
patterns have been coated with fused silica refractory of 6-7 mm thickness by providing 6-7 ceramic slurry coatings.
The ceramic shells were de-waxed at 200 0C and sintered at 1100 0C for 12 Hrs to achieve the desire strength of the
shells. The sintered refractory shell moulds were heated to 400 oC for 4 hrs before the liquid metal was poured. The
pouring temperature of A356 alloy for all the three castings was 7100C. After the solidification and cooled to room
temperature of the shell, castings were knocked out and fettled. Sand blasting was done to clean the surfaces of the
casing before the dimension measurement.

The dimensions of the die, wax patterns, and castings were measured at the locations as shown in the Figure 1 using
a digital vernier calliper. The least count of the calliper is 0.001mm. Die, wax pattern and casting dimensions were
measured and reported in Table1, 2, and 3 respectively. Figure 2 and 3 show the wax pattern and cast parts for HM1,
HM2 and HM3 respectively. The wax and casting shrinkages were determined for all three types of H-shape castings.

Fig. 1- Schematic diagram of H-shape casting

Fig. 2 H shape wax patterns of different dimensions Fig.3 Three H- shape A356 alloy investment casting
25000 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005

3. Results and Discussions

3.1. Shrinkage Pattern Allowance
The wax pattern and casting shrinkage of the H-shape castings have been calculated using the following
relationships:
1. Wax shrinkage( WS) = Die dimensions - Wax Pattern dimensions
2. Cast shrinkage(CS) = Wax pattern dimensions- Casting dimensions
3. Total shrinkage(TS) = (WS) + (CS) = Die dimensions- Casting dimensions

The average length A, B and C were calculated for all castings and their means have been tabulated in Table 1, 2
and 3 respectively. In our study, the dimension of 'B' is referred as restricted shrinkage and dimension 'A' and 'C'
were referred as free shrinkage.
Table.1- Dimensions and shrinkage for H-Model 1 (HM-1)
Wax Cast Wax Cast Total
Die dimensions
dimensions dimensions shrinkage shrinkage Shrinkage
(mm)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
A 104.35 102.6005 101.4453 1.7495 1.1152 2.8647

B 59.7875 59.01876 58.4173 .76874 .60146 1.3702

C 21.29 21.094375 20.9173 .195625 .177078 .372703

Table.2- Dimensions and shrinkage for H-Model 2 (HM-2)

Wax Cast Wax Cast Total
Die dimensions
dimensions dimensions shrinkage shrinkage Shrinkage
(mm)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
A 78.85 77.75 76.7588 1.1 .7932 2.0912

B 55.4725 54.680628 54.10724 .6028 .573388 1.36526

C 11.62 11.2694 11.1815 .1506 .11464 .25624

Table.3- Dimensions and shrinkage for H-Model 3 (HM-3)
Wax Cast Wax Cast Total
Die dimensions
dimensions dimensions shrinkage shrinkage Shrinkage
(mm)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
A 52.5698 52.001125 51.5059 .55855 .50535 1.0639

B 39.94025 39.9256 39.5791 .11465 .3465 .46115

C 6.176 6.15 6.1159 .0026 .0341 .0601

 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005 25001

Fig. 4 WD vs. die dimensions (DD) for length 'A' and 'C' Fig. 5 WD vs. die dimensions (DD) for length 'B'

Figure 4 shows the wax pattern shrinkage for HM1, HM2 and HM3 of free shrinkage A &C. It is observed that
the shrinkage trend for the dimension “A and C “is linear, having slope of 0.985. Figure 5 shows the wax pattern
shrinkage for HM1, HM2 and HM3 at restricted location i.e. B. It is observed that the shrinkage trend for the length
'B' is also linear. However, the slope is 0.988, which is different from free shrinkage of A &C.The results revealed
that although the shrinkage allowance is linear in nature, but the magnitude is different.

Fig.6 Casting Vs die dimension at A&C Fig.7 Casting Vs die dimension at B

Figure 6 shows how the casting dimension (CD) versus die dimensions (DD) of HM1, HM2 and HM3 at
location A &C. It is observed that the shrinkage pattern is linear having slope of 0.973. Figure 7 shows how the
casting dimension (CD) changes for different die dimensions at location B with respect to the die dimension (DD). It
is observed that the shrinkage pattern for the length B is also linear. However the slope is 0.983, which is different
from free shrinkage of A &C.

Figure 8 shows the comparison between the free and restricted shrinkage allowance versus die dimension for
HM1, HM2 and HM3 castings. It is observed that there is a significant difference in shrinkage allowance between
free and restricted shrinkage locations. Therefore, instead of providing average shrinkage allowance to the die, it is
25002 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005

necessary to provide different shrinkage allowance factor for different dimensions to avoid number of rework of the
pattern die resulting less no of shop floor trial.

Fig.8 Comparison of shrinkage allowance between free and restricted casting dimension

3.2 Microstructure Analysis

The shrinkage allowances have been correlated with the microstructure. The cast parts were cut along the
thickness cross-sections and the cut samples were polished and etched by conventional metallographic techniques
for microscopic examination. Figure 9 shows the location where the casting has been cut for microstructure analysis.
The cut samples were polished and etched by conventional metallographic techniques. A cut piece of approximate
dimensions of 10x20x20mm3 was polished on a belt grinder to ensure flatness and the edges bevelled. Specimen
were polished using a series of emery papers ranging from 80, 180 and 400 grit sizes. Ethyl alcohol etchant was
used as enchant. T The secondary dendrite arm spacing (SDAS) was measured using image analyzer software. The
etched samples were examined under Nikon optical microscope for microstructure and secondary dendrite arm
spacing at a magnification of 50 X. The micrographs of each sample were recorded in the form of photographs and
computer images. The dendrite arm spacing was measured using the image analyzer software. The SDAS was
calculated using the equation below:
SDAS=Length of the dendrite/ (no. of secondary dendrite arms)
The secondary silicon particle spacing was measured by measuring the distance between parallel silicon
rods/particles by grain intercept method using Image analyzer software. The average silicon rod spacing was
determined for samples which were cut from different H-models of different dimensions. The calculated data has
been reported in Table 4.
 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005 25003

Fig. 9 Section of the casting for microstructure observation

Table. 4- SDAS and average silicon rod spacing for different thickness of location C
Average Silicon
Cast thickness Cast shrinkage of
SDAS(µm) rod spacing
(mm) thickness C(mm)
(µm)
H-model 1 20.9173 98.756 14.088 .177078

H-model 2 11.1815 82.783 8.7561 .11464

H-model 3 6.1159 72.75 7.5181 .0341

Figure 10 shows the variation of secondary dendrite arm spacing vs. thickness of the casting of thickness 'C'. It is
observed that with increase in thickness of ‘C’ SDAS increases. This is because local solidification time increases
with increase in thickness. Figure 11 shows the variation of average Si particle spacing vs. thickness of the casting at
location 'C'. It is observed that with increase in thickness of the casting, increases Si particle spacing.This concludes,
shrinkage is less for closer spaced Silicon particles which is found in the thinner section castings and vice versa.

Figure 12 shows the interdendritic network of eutectic Al- Si alloy at 50X and 200X magnification for HM1,
HM2 and HM3 cast sample. In thicker sections the silicon particles were found to be coarser compare to thinner
sections. Silicon particles are more uniform and ordered for the thinner sections compare to thicker. This increases
the strength of the material and hence there is more hindrance to shrinkage. Therefore from microscopic
examination, it can be concluded that thicker sections shrink more compare to thinner sections. Furthermore, the
degree of strengthening resulting from second-phase particles depends on the distribution of the particles in the
ductile matrix. It is observed that the average silicon rod/particle spacing (λ) is more for the thicker sections as
compared to the thinner sections.
25004 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005

Fig. 10 SDAS vs. casting thickness 'C' Fig. 11 Avg. Si particle spacing vs. casting thickness 'C'

Fig. 12 The interdendritic microstructure of eutectic Al- Si alloy at 50X and 200X magnification for HM1, HM2
and HM3 cast sample.
 Ramesh Kumar Nayak and S.Venugopal / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24997–25005 25005

4. Conclusions

The price of investment casting product can be reduced be by reducing excess mass and manufacturing cost.
This leads to less energy consumption and helps to create better environment. Currently, the casting design engineer
prefers less dimensional tolerance to reduce the weight and cost of the casting. Production of stringent dimensional
tolerance is a challenge to most of the investment casting foundries. This paper investigated the free and restricted
shrinkage allowances of Aluminium alloy casting. It is observed that wax pattern shrinks linearly for both free and
restricted location. Moreover, the linearity behaviour is different for free and restricted location of the casting.
However, the shrinkage depends on the rate of cooling and the shape of the castings. Therefore, the shrinkage
allowance factor need be provided to the tool as per the size and shape of the casting rather same linear shrinkage
allowance to all the location. Furthermore, it is observed that SDAS increases with increase in thickness and silicon
particle distribution is coarser for thicker sections as compared to the thinner section of the casting.

References

1. Mondal, B., et al. "Net-shape manufacturing of intricate components of A356/SiC p composite through rapid-
prototyping-integrated investment casting." Materials Science and Engineering: A 498.1 (2008): 37-41.
2. Fuh, J. Y. H., S. H. Wu, and K. S. Lee. "Development of a semi-automated die casting die design
system." Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture 216.12 (2002): 1575-1588.
3. Mavromihales, Mike, J. Mason, and W. Weston. "A case of reverse engineering for the manufacture of wide
chord fan blades (WCFB) used in Rolls Royce aero engines." Journal of materials processing technology 134.3
(2003): 279-286.
4. Liou, S. Y., and R. A. Miller. "Design for die casting." International Journal of Computer Integrated
Manufacturing 4.2 (1991): 83-96.
5. Bemblage, Omkar, and D. Benny Karunakar. "A study on the blended wax patterns in investment casting
process." Proceedings of the world Congress on Engineering. Vol. 1. 2011.
6. Bonilla, W., S. H. Masood, and P. Iovenitti. "An investigation of wax patterns for accuracy improvement in
investment cast parts." The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 18.5 (2001): 348-356.
7. Nayak, Ramesh K., et al. "Experimental Study on Pattern Allowance in Investment Casting." Indian Foundry
Journal 59.12 (2013).
8. Sabau, Adrian S., and Srinath Viswanathan. "Material properties for predicting wax pattern dimensions in
investment casting." Materials Science and Engineering: A 362.1 (2003): 125-134.
9. Sabau, Adrian S. "Alloy shrinkage factors for the investment casting process." Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions B 37.1 (2006): 131-140.
10. Vaupel, Wayne G., et al. The implications of tolerance system interpretation on past and present dimensional
variability studies. No. INEL--95/00017; CONF-9411272--1. Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA
(United States), 1994.
11.Ou, S., and Christoph Beckermann. "Simulation of dimensional changes in steel casting." SFSA T&O
Conference. 2003.
12. Deo Mandar., A Pattern Allowance Advisor Tool for Steel Casting, Ph.D. Dissertation, The Pennsylvania State
University, 2005
13. Potter, L. A., et al. "Statistically Based Pattern Approval Process." Transactions of the American Foundrymen's
Society, 104 (1996): 307-316.
14. Nayak, Ramesh K., and Suresh Sundarraj. "Selection of Initial Mold–Metal Interface Heat Transfer Coefficient
Values in Casting Simulations—a Sensitivity Analysis." Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B 41.1 (2010):
151-160.
15. Nayak, R. K., and S. Sundarraj. "Sensitivity study of IHTC on solidification simulation for automotive
casting." International Journal of Cast Metals Research 22.1-4 (2009): 294-297.