International Journal of Cast Metals Research

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ycmr20

Effect of microstructure on the hardness of ASTM

A48 class 20 flaked graphite cast iron

Manojkumar V. Sheladiya, Shailee G. Acharya & Ghanshyam D. Acharya

To cite this article: Manojkumar V. Sheladiya, Shailee G. Acharya & Ghanshyam D. Acharya
(2022) Effect of microstructure on the hardness of ASTM A48 class 20 flaked graphite cast iron,
International Journal of Cast Metals Research, 35:4, 73-83, DOI: 10.1080/13640461.2022.2093586

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13640461.2022.2093586

Published online: 05 Jul 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 32

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ycmr20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH
2022, VOL. 35, NO. 4, 73–83
https://doi.org/10.1080/13640461.2022.2093586

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effect of microstructure on the hardness of ASTM A48 class 20 flaked graphite

cast iron
a,b
Manojkumar V. Sheladiya , Shailee G. Acharyac and Ghanshyam D. Acharyad
a
Research Scholar, Gujarat Technological University (GTU), Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India; bFaculty of Engineering & Tech, Atmiya University,
Rajkot, Gujarat, India; cMechanical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Technology, Vasad, Gujarat, INDIA; dMechanical
Engineering, Atmiya University, Rajkot, Gujarat, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In foundries, it becomes necessary to minimise the machining allowance for economic reasons. Received 1 December 2020
It will save resources and costs by reducing the energy and expenses incurred on re-melting, Accepted 20 June 2022
machining and tooling. A deeper understanding of the complicated microstructures developed KEYWORDS
within about 3.5 mm of the mould-metal interface is necessary. The current research work uses Mould-metal interface; Sub-
a unique experimental design that involves performing surface and subsurface microscopy and surface; flake graphite size;
spectroscopy at 0.5 mm intervals from the as-cast surface to a depth of up to 3.5 mm for three hardness; machinability
samples. The objective is on evaluating microstructure for determining graphite flake size,
distribution, grouping, pearlite and ferrite percentage, and different elements. All three sam­
ples were subjected to a hardness test, which is a measure of machinability. The relationship
between hardness as a single response to percentage presence of elements, graphite distribu­
tion and pearlite has been established using statistical analysis.

Introduction To ensure the quality of a grey iron casting product,

Casting Technology is 6000 years young process, and
the contribution of the grey cast iron is 45% in major
cast metals [1]. No-bake sand binders system is swiftly
developing technology and is universally acceptable in
the current era considering the benefits of dimensional
stability, surface accuracy, low hardening time and
usage of reclaimed sand for economic justifica­
tion [2,3].
In the no-bake family, furan no-bake casting process
employs resins and acid catalyst to form a furan binder
system. However, this process configures castings with
augmented strength and quality surface finish. But it is
facing the limitation of cast skin thickness develop­
ment of a minimum of 3.5 mm and must be removed
by machining.
The casting process is called the process of uncer­
tainty. With the latest development in the field of
solidification simulation software, metallurgy, and
machining, the uncertainty reduced to a great extent.
Still, the field is open for research in casting metallurgy.
Grey Irons (G.I.) is characterised by the presence of
a large portion of its carbon in the form of graphite
flakes.
Figure 1 indicates the graph of annual casting pro­
duction from the 50th Census of the world casting
production and almost 45% contributor is of grey
cast iron alone. So, research on the grey cast iron is
impactful.
it is necessary to understand and correctly use the
methodologies of characterisation and evaluation of
mechanical properties that are used in the industry,
but also applying technical and scientific knowledge to
explain the results observed [4].
Most castings retain most of the as-cast surface. This
surface layer (the casting skin) includes both surface
and subsurface features. Because of the casting skin,
the mechanical properties of the part are typically
significantly lower than those found on standard
ASTM machined specimens [5].
Castings are produced by a manufacturing method
which gives the components properties that are depen­
dent on design, metallurgy, and casting method. The
wall thickness influences the resulting coarseness and
type of microstructure and the material will have prop­
erties dependent on local metallurgical and thermal
history. If the microstructure is determined or predicted
at a given point, it is possible to calculate the local
material properties and its deformation behaviour [6].
Most of the relationships between mechanical prop­
erties and experimental measurements are limited to
the small data set conducted by a single research
project. In the study made by the University of
Alabama at Birmingham, 2000 cast iron sample data
were collected from the literature. Statistical analysis
was done to compare predicted mechanical properties
and experimental measurements [7].

CONTACT Manojkumar V. Sheladiya mvsheladiya@gmail.com Research Scholar, Gujarat Technological University (GTU), Gujarat, India Faculty of
Engg. & Tech., Atmiya University, Rajkot, Gujarat, India
© 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
74 M. V. SHELADIYA ET AL.
World's total casting production of different metals in Percentage
44.89%
24.56%
10.46%
0.85%
Gray Iron
Ductile
Malleable
Steel
Iron
iron
Figure 1. World annual casting production [1].
A review of the literature showed that there are
two principal regions in grey iron chemistries.
A region where Mn and S levels are below the
solubility limit of MnS at the solidification tempera­
ture, and a region above the solubility limit. Tensile
strength first increased with sulphur, reaching
a maximum strength level, and then decreased
with further increases in sulphur. Maximum strength
coincided with the solubility limit of MnS inclu­
sions [8].
One of the method to increase the strength of cast
iron is pearlite refining and it can be performed by
using different strategies including increasing the con­
tent of Cu, Mo and Cr contents; escalating the cooling
rate of the metallic mould; and cooling of the cast iron
with forced air [9].
The increase in the cooling rate promoted the refin­
ing of the eutectic cell size, primary dendrite modulus,
inter-dendritic hydraulic diameter and pearlite interla­
mellar spacing. The increase in the cooling rate also
refined their graphite flakes, changing the morphology
from B to E type [10].
Inoculation is a necessary part of governing
material properties in grey cast iron. Inoculation
practice is based on the addition to the melt of
small amounts of elements with a strong affinity
to O (and S) just before casting takes place. This is
the proven method to be effective in most cases.
But it has the limitation that the nucleation effect
fades away over time. Graphite flake formation and
matrix formation are influenced by the
Nitrogen [11].
It is seen that eutectic cell or nodule count is inher­
ently related to the chill tendency, pre-shrinkage
expansion, shrinkage porosity, shrinkage depression
and graphite type [12]. The mechanical properties of
casting will depend on the microstructure, which in
turn is ruled by the cooling rate at each point of the
component. As a matter of fact, for each cast iron
composition, the solidification time is the most power­
ful parameter influencing the microstructure at con­
stant chemical composition [13].
Percentage
15.42%
1.69% 0.19% 0.65% 1.30%
Copper
Aluminum
Manganese
Zinc
Other Non-
Base
ferrous
The development of shrinkage defects is related to
both the micro-segregation pattern and the solidifica­
tion macrostructure. The investigation of the macro­
structure demonstrates that large solidification grains,
composed by dendritic austenite and graphite, char­
acterising the solidification of carbon equivalent values
ranging from hypoeutectic to hypereutectic [14].
In the prior art survey, it is seen that the local fatigue
strength based approach leads to increase number of
cycles to failure as to an accurate prediction of the
location of crack initiation. Compared to the conven­
tional design of castings, a substantial qualitative and
quantitative improvement in assessing the real perfor­
mance of cast iron materials can be compre­
hended [15].
Fatigue cracks initiated from graphite flake tips in the
early stage of the total fatigue life but was not observed
when the applied stress was below the fatigue limit. The
fracture mechanics approach is an effective predicting
method for fatigue limits of flake graphite cast iron [16].
The study demonstrated that the casting skin consider­
ably decreases the tensile strength of cast iron. The
casting skin is expected to have a more pronounced
effect on fatigue properties [17,18].
In both grey and compacted graphite irons, fracto­
graphic examination showed that the crack starts at
graphite tips, grows through the graphite skeleton
inside a eutectic cell and progresses by the coales­
cence of multiple fatigue cracks from one eutectic
cell to another, fracturing the matrix at eutectic cell
boundaries [19].
Need for the research
The global electric motor sales market is expected to
grow from an estimated USD 94.23 Billion in 2016 to
USD 127.63 Billion by 2021. Electrical motors in indus­
trial applications consume between 30% and 40% of
the generated electrical energy worldwide [20].
So, the research in the field is always is being a need
of the day. The current research focused on the identi­
fication of the elements present up to depth of 3.5 mm

(at 0.5 mm interval) from the internal surface of the
motor-body and corresponding microstructural ana­
lysis for identification of pearlite and ferrite propor­
tion, graphite flake size and its distribution in
a quantified manner. For mechanical testing, the
Brinell hardness test is performed to reduce the
machining allowance. This research is useful to the
foundry industries to improve the productivity of
the organisation. Our well thought-out deliberations
in the subsequent write up entail the numerous
effects of alloying elements of melt on the surface
properties, i.e. at mould-metal interface of FNB
casting.
Chemistry of the binder
The resin and catalyst mixture will result in exothermic
poly-condensation leading to hardening action. The
one of the reason for the retardation of the curing
rate (dehydration) is the reaction produce water as
a byproduct. The further polymerisation, i.e. chain
forming cross-linking action is the result of the bond
producing reaction. With the well-controlled curing
time formulation, one can fix the quantity of acid as
a hardener in a two-part system. The high-temperature
Figure 2. Conceptual sketch of the sample preparation.
Pouring Basin
Runner
Figure 3. 3d drawing of the motor body.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH 75
liquid metal pouring will results into the decomposi­
tion of hardener, i.e. sulphonic acid with toluenesulfo­
nic acid [21].
Experimental procedure
In the current research work, the samples have been
collected from different three electrical motor bodies
of BL-200 with the interest of surface and subsurface
microstructure and spectroscopy. For that conceptual
sample prepared for experimental purpose as shown
in Figure 2. The purpose of the exercise is to determine
different elements level at 0.5 mm interval from the
casting skin for identification of the possible impact of
elements on the inner skin and hardness of the motor
body. The three samples have been taken from the
same location for nullification of the effect of the sec­
tion modulus. Figure 2 shows the Conceptual sketch of
the sample preparation. Figure 3 shows the sample
preparation stage by stage from three motor bodies.
Pouring Cup
Feeder
Ingates
Air-Vents
76 M. V. SHELADIYA ET AL.

Charge calculation Table 1. Input sand and mould data for the samples.
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
The industry is importing the raw material for char­ First-Hour Compressive Strength 29.55 29.25 30.48
ging the furnace from trusted suppliers with almost (kg/cm2)
Sand Temperature 33°C 41°C 36°C
fixed types of scrap. For maintaining the composi­ Resin (BoS) 0.95% 0.95% 0.95%
tion of the elements in the casting, the industry is Catalyst (BoR) 45% 45% 45%
Grain Fineness Number (GFN) 49.76 51.48 49.55
taking chill samples of the molten metal in the
metal mould and perform optical emission spectro­
scopy. The charge calculation is performed as per
the available spectroscopy data. A sample calcula­ Spectroscopy (optical emission spectroscopy)
tion is as follows:
Spectroscopy of the first standard specimen is per­
If the desired carbon content is 3.65, obtained
formed for the calibration purpose and later on, all
carbon content = 3.2, purity of carbon = 98%, i.e.
samples’ spectrometry is performed and individual ele­
recovery of carbon in carbon metal), the total
ments’ average value is considered. The instrument
weight of the charge = 550 kg, then additional used for the purpose is calibrated Oxford made foun­
required carbon can be calculated as follows: dry master – XLINE as shown in Figure 5.

ð3:65 3:2Þ � 550

Additional amount of Carbon ¼
98
¼ 2:525 kg
3d drawing of the component representing
casting with feeder and gating system
Figure 3 represents a 3d drawing of the motor-body
with a pouring cup, pouring basin, runner, ingates,
feeders and air-vents.
Actual sample preparation for identification of
different elements and microstructure
As shown in Figure 4, samples have been collected
from motor bodies of different lots by breaking the
motor body and collecting samples at a fixed
location.
The input data for the samples including first-hour
compressive strength, sand temperature, resin percen­
tage based on sand weight, catalyst percentage based
on resin weight, and grain fineness number have been
given in Table 1.
Microscopy
Microscopy of the polished samples has been per­
formed on a microscope with a digital image analyser
for graphite distribution and pearlite and ferrite value
investigation. The instrument used for the purpose is
calibrated Metalsoft MV 12.5 D made inverted metal­
lurgical microscope.
Results and discussion
Spectrometer results
Spectroscopy of the samples has been performed
of first standard specimen for the calibration pur­
pose and later on, all samples’ spectrometry is
performed and individual elements average value
is considered. The corresponding graphs of the
individual important elements have been plotted
as shown in figure 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. The thick
horizontal line in the graphs lower and higher
limits in the case of two lines are present and
indicate a higher limit in the case of only a single
line as per ASTM A48/ A48M −03(2016) Standard
Specification of Gray Cast Iron. As per Figure 6, the

a. Sample c. Marking for e. Internal

b. Motor body d. Sawing Machine
Collection Sawing Machine Facing on the
Samples Cutting
Location Cutting lathe

Figure 4. Samples preparation from the motor body. (a) Sample Collection Location, (b) Motor body Samples, (c) Marking for
Sawing Machine Cutting, (d) Sawing Machine Cutting, and (e) Internal Facing on the Lathe.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH 77

Figure 5. Machined samples for spectroscopy.

Percentage of Carbon Percentage of Carbon Percentage of Carbon

4.7 4.7 3.9
4.5 4.5
4.3 4.3
4.1 4.1 3.7
3.9 3.9
3.7 3.7
3.5 3.5 3.5
0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm
1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm
K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 6. Percentage of carbon vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Percentage of Silicon Percentage of Silicon Percentage of Silicon

2.5 2.5 2.5
2.3 2.3 2.3
2.1 2.1 2.1
1.9 1.9 1.9
1.7 1.7 1.7
1.5 1.5 1.5
0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm

0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm

0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm
K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

Sample 1 Sample 2 K7186 BL200F

Sample 3

Figure 7. Percentage of silicon vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Percentage of Mn Percentage of Mn Percentage of Mn

0.65 1 0.61
0.9 0.59
0.6 0.8 0.57
0.55
0.55 0.7 0.53
0.6 0.51
0.5 0.5 0.49
0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm
1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm
K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 8. Percentage of manganese vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

observed carbon percentage is almost higher than
the prescribed value in sample 1, reaching in the
range after 2.5 mm depth in sample 2 and almost
within range in sample 3. As per Figure 7, the
silicon value is almost lower than the prescribed
in all samples. The positive fluctuation of
manganese from the higher value is observed in
samples 1 and 2 and found within range for sam­
ple 3 as shown in Figure 8.
The phosphorus value is found within range for all
three samples as shown in Figure 9, but it’s higher than
0.09% leading to intergranular phosphide eutectic
78 M. V. SHELADIYA ET AL.

Percentage of P Percentage of P Percentage of

0.3 0.5 Phosphorous
0.25 0.4 0.3
0.2 0.3 0.25
0.2
0.15 0.2 0.15
0.1 0.1 0.1

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F
0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm

0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm

0.50 mm
1 mm
1.50 mm
2 mm
2.50 mm
3 mm
3.50 mm
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 9. Percentage of phosphorous vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Percentage of Sulfur Percentage of Sulfur Percentage of Sulfur

0.22 0.22 0.18
0.2 0.2
0.16
0.18 0.18
0.16 0.16 0.14
0.14 0.14
0.12
0.12 0.12
0.1 0.1 0.1
K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F
0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm
1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 10. Percentage of sulphur vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Percentage of Cr Percentage of Cr Percentage of Cr

0.12 0.13 0.105
0.1 0.12 0.1
0.11 0.095
0.08
0.1 0.09
0.06 0.09 0.085
0.04 0.08 0.08
0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm

0.50 mm

1.50 mm

2.50 mm

3.50 mm
1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm

1 mm

2 mm

3 mm
K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

K7186 BL200F

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 11. Percentage of chromium vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

phase (Steadite) which is hardest substance.The major
trace element sulphur is found higher up to 2 mm
depth in samples 1 and 2, and near maximum, in
sample 3 as shown in Figure 10. As per Figure 11, the
chromium value is almost within range for all the
samples.
● In response to an industrial machinability survey
endorsed by the American Foundry Society (AFS),
several grey iron foundries mentioned machinabil­
ity problems when P levels increased above 0.09%.
● The ill effect of sulphur is also reported for the for­
mation of type D and type E graphite and increasing
the skin thickness in the earlier own research. [24]

Spectroscopy graphs of different major

elements interpretation
● Silicon was found to greatly widens the tempera­
ture difference between iron graphite and iron
carbide eutectics as much as 30°C. [22]
● Much of the literature describes the effects of
P on the tendency of cast irons to form an
intergranular phosphide eutectic phase
(Steadite). [23]
Microscopy result
The individual all three samples have been polished
and tested in an inverted metallurgical microscope.
The samples have been tested without etchant for
graphite flake and graphite distribution as shown in
Figure 12 and with nital (90% Methanol & 10% Nitric
Acid) etchant for ferrite (white) and pearlite (black) as
shown in Figure 13.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH 79

Kish Graphite – A Hyper

Graphite flakes Pearlite Eutectic Composition

0.5 mm 1.0 mm 1.5 mm 2.0 mm

2.5 mm 3.0 mm 3.5 mm

Figure 12. Microscopic image of sample 1 at different depths measured from the inner surface.

0.5 mm 1.0 mm 1.5 mm 2.0 mm

2.5 mm 3.0 mm 3.5 mm

Figure 13. Microscopic image of sample 1 with nital etchant at different depths.

Graphite Types Distribution Vs Depth S1 Graphite Types Distribution Vs Depth S2 Graphite Types Distribution Vs Depth S3

16 12 8
Graphite Types Distribution

Graphite Types Distribution

Graphite Types Distribution

14 7
10
12 6
8
10 5

8 6 4
3
6 4
2
4 2
1
2
0 0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
B 10.45 4.23 6.23 2.55 6.54 4.49 9.08 B 1.45 3.19 7.02 4.93 5 4.92 4.7
B 0.88 2.77 7.85 3.98 10.58 10.38 13.83
C 5.98 6.12 4.1 4.28 1.45 2.3 2.31
C 5.18 3.15 5.22 1.88 2.03 2.19 1.34 C 1.38 3.49 1.43 2.48 2.23 1.8 2.29
D 0.03 0.2 0.02 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0.27 0.33 0 D 0 0.01 0.16 0.05 0.3 0.14 0.03
E 1.18 0.95 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Figure 14. Graphite type distribution (balanced A-type) vs. depth measured from inner castsurface.
80 M. V. SHELADIYA ET AL.

The earlier research shows that the HSC of the ● In extremely rapid cooling cases, the formation of
mould has significant effects on the graphite flakes the stable eutectic is suppressed resulting in no
sizes in the microstructure of G.I. Graphite flake sizes graphite flakes, instead, massive carbides are
in turn affect the properties of G.I. [25] From formed. [ASM Handbook Vol. 1 A]
Figure 12, it can be seen that graphite distribution
is being more uniform with increase graphite flake
size reaching towards 3.5 mm as per Figures 14, 15, Hardness test (Rockwell hardness test)
and 16.
The hardness test of the prepared samples has been
performed on Rockwell hardness tester for hardness
value in Brinell Hardness Number, Ball Diameter,
Microscopy result – Graphite type distribution
D = 2.5 mm, Load, F = 187.5 kg and F/D2 = 30.
Microscopy result – Interpretation Figure 17 represents a Brinell Hardness Number
(BHN) at different depths measured from the inner
cast surface. For all three samples, the BHN is maxi­
● Type A graphite, with its randomly oriented
mum at the near-surface and the observed trend is
flakes, is preferred due to an optimal balance
continuously decreasing.
between strength and wear resistance. There are many reasons including defects that are
● Type A is associated with the slowest cooling
responsible for increasing or fluctuation of the hard­
rates within the bulk of casting, while types B, ness at the surface and near the surface but the for­
D and E occur near the surface of the casting mation of carbides is severe for especially the
next to the mould wall, where cooling rates are machinability aspect. The formation of Carbides is not
the quickest. [28] an intrinsic distinctive of grey-iron castings. Even high-

Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution Vs Depth Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution Vs Depth Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution Vs Depth
S1 S2 S3

4 6 3
Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution
Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution

3.5
Pearlite & Ferrite Distribution
5 2.5
3
4 2
2.5
2 3 1.5

1.5
2 1
1
1 0.5
0.5
0 0 0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
Ferrite 2.72 3.68 1.41 2.33 3.57 1.67 3.71 Ferrite 5.29 3.33 2.16 1.88 0.84 0.56 0.63 Ferrite 2.37 2.09 2.17 1.59 0.8 2.71 1.07

Figure 15. Ferrite and balanced pearlite vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Graphite Flake Size Vs Depth S1 Graphite Flake Size Vs Depth S2 Graphite Flake Size Vs Depth S3

45 40 50

40 35 45

35 40
30
30 35
25
25 30
20
20 25
15 20
15
10 15
10
10
5 5
5
0 0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm 0.5 mm1.0 mm1.5 mm2.0 mm2.5 mm3.0 mm3.5 mm

Figure 16. Graphite flake size vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH 81

HARDNESS VS DEPTH FROM

SURFACE
170
165

HARDNESS IN BHN
160
155
150
145
140
0.5 mm 1.0 mm 1.5 mm 2.0 mm 2.5 mm 3.0 mm 3.5 mm
S1 BHN 167 162 154 155 152 148 145
S2 BHN 167 161 158 156 150 148 148
S3 BHN 168 160 156 155 153 152 148

Figure 17. Brinell hardness number vs. depth measured from inner cast surface.

Table 2. Influencing parameters and its range.

Factor Values
strength grey-iron castings can be produced essen­
C 3.6, 3.9, 4.2 tially free of iron carbides, creating opportunities for
Si 1.6, 1.9, 2.2 weight reduction as well as improved machining pro­
Mn 0.52, 0.58, 0.64
P 0.12, 0.16, 0.20
ductivity and better surface finishes. [26]
S 0.12, 0.16, 0.20
Type A 84, 90, 96
Pearlite 95, 97, 99
Hardness as a function of spectroscopy and
microscopy results

Table 3. Analysis of variance result.

The hardness value at the different positions have been
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
evaluated as a function of spectroscopy and microscopy
Regression 7 594.142 84.877 3.40 0.027 results using design of expert in minitab software. The
C 1 15.130 15.130 0.61 0.450 influencing factors and their range have been selected
Si 1 22.156 22.156 0.89 0.364
Mn 1 119.487 119.487 4.78 0.048
based on the literature and opinion of industrial person­
P 1 1.504 1.504 0.06 0.810 nel working in the field as shown in Table 2. Multi-
S 1 183.332 183.332 7.34 0.018 variable analysis in minitab software suggests
Type A 1 65.938 65.938 2.64 0.128
Pearlite 1 1.508 1.508 0.06 0.810 3^7 = 2187 experiments. The design created and avail­
Error 13 324.811 24.985 able results are fed as per the run order of the software.
Total 20 918.952
The objective of the design of experiment is identification

Figure 18. Contour plot of sulphur and manganese versus hardness.

82 M. V. SHELADIYA ET AL.

of the most influencing parameter and formulate
a regression equation. Table 3 shows the analysis of
variance result indicating based on p-value (<0.05) that
most influencing parameter is sulphur followed by man­
ganese. Equation 2 indicating estimates of the hardness
based on spectroscopy and microscopy results factor.
Equation 2 shows the regression equation of hardness
as a function of input variables. Figure 18 shows the
contour plot of S and Mn versus hardness suggests for
the least hardness, the S value should be 0.12% and Mn
value of 0.64%.
Hardness ¼ 165 þ 5:95 C 6:21 Si 142:5 Mn
11:4 P þ 250:7 S þ 0:532 Type A
0:26 Pearlite
(Equation 2)
means of proper combination of the binder
and catalyst and also proper reclamation of
the sand.
(2) Controlling the silicon percentage at the surface
and subsurface as its lower percentage will lead
to formation of iron carbide in the place of iron
graphite. It can be controlled by limiting the
time and the driving force of mould-metal inter­
action reaction to be taken place.
(3) Controlling the carbon percentage by suitable
selection of thinner based graphite paint, con­
trolled solidification and proper reclamation of
the sand.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Conclusion
ORCID
The mould-metal interface reaction is essential as it
Manojkumar V. Sheladiya
will decide casting microstructure and mechanical
9154-3355
properties. It is found through literature that based
on concentration difference some elements are likely
to transfer from mould to metal and metal to mould.
References
The role of the chilling action of the mould, the
degree of superheat or pouring temperature and
the static and dynamic pressures resulting from
mould and pouring conditions also become a vital
player for the development of the complex surface
structure. The research shows that the hardness is
continuously decreasing from 0.5 mm to 3.5 mm
thickness and some machinist prefers to bore
3.0 mm first cut for the reduction in tool wear. The
spectroscopy results indicate that the amount of
important elements i.e. C, Si, Mn, P, S, and Cr are
continuously fluctuating up to 3.5 mm depth and
then hold almost constant. Microscopy results are
also an excessive amount of type B, C, D, and
E types of graphite distribution and a higher percen­
tage of ferrite. After the complex multivariate regres­
sion analysis, on the basis of P Value (Error Indicator)
with 95% confidence level it can be said that sulphur
and manganese are the key values for the formation
of the hard surface. The free sulphur, which is not
combined with Mn and value higher than 0.15% pro­
moting high hardness.
Based on technical literature and suitable experi­
ments, the following strategies are endorsed at mould­
ing lines, to control the atypical surface layer
formation:
(1) Controlling the free sulphur percentage as
the sulphur which don’t get combined with
manganese contributing to formation of type
D and type E graphite. It can be controlled by
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
[1] Staff MC. 50th census of world casting production.
Modern Casting. Schaumburg IL: American Foundry
Society; 2016. p. 25–29.
[2] Acharya SG, Vadher JA, Sheladiya M. A furan no-bake
binder system analysis for improved casting quality.
Int J Metalcast. 2016;10(4):491–499.
[3] Holtzer M, Górny M, and Dańko R. Microstructure and
properties of ductile iron and compacted graphite iron
castings: the effects of mold sand/metal interface phe­
nomena. GEWERBESTRASSE 11, Cham, Switzerland:
Springer; 2015.
[4] Almanza A, Pérez MJ, Almanza E. Microstructure and
mechanical properties of gray Iron cylinder blocks
casting. Int J Metalcast. 2015;9(1):84–86.
[5] Stefanescu D, Wills S, Massone J, et al. Quantification of
casting skin in ductile and compacted graphite irons
and its effect on tensile properties. Int J Metalcast.
2008;2(4):7–28.
[6] Svensson I, Sjögren T. On modeling and simulation of
mechanical properties of cast irons with different
morphologies of graphite. Int J Metalcast. 2009;3
(4):67–77.
[7] Biswas S, Monroe C, Prucha T. Use of published experi­
mental results to validate approaches to gray and
ductile iron mechanical properties prediction.
Int J Metalcast. 2017;11(4):656–674.
[8] Gundlach R, Meyer M, Winardi L. Influence of Mn and
S on the properties of cast iron part III—testing and
analysis. Int J Metalcast. 2015;9(2):69–82.
[9] Lima ML, Albertin E, Correa ER, et al. Pearlite refining
strategies for hypoeutectic gray cast Iron.
Int J Metalcast. 2020;14(3):1–8.
[10] Lima FFO, Bauri LF, Pereira HB, et al. Effect of the cooling
rate on the tensile strength of pearlitic lamellar graphite
cast iron. Int J Cast Met Res. 2020;33(4–5):201–217.

[11] Strande K, Tiedje N, Chen M. A contribution to the
understanding of the combined effect of nitrogen
and boron in grey cast iron. Int J Metalcast. 2017;11
(1):61–70.
[12] Fraś E, López H. Eutectic cells and nodule count—an
index of molten iron quality. Int J Metalcast. 2010;4
(3):35–61.
[13] Ferro P, Borsato T, Bonollo F, et al. A solidification
time-based method for rapid evaluation of the mechan­
ical properties of gray iron castings. Int J Metalcast.
2019;13(4):845–852.
[14] Boeri RE, López MG, Tenaglia NE, et al. Solidification,
macrostructure, and shrinkage formation of ductile
and compacted irons. Int J Metalcast. 2020;14
(4):1172–1182.
[15] Thomser C, Bodenburg M, Sturm JC. Optimized dur­
ability prediction of cast iron based on local
microstructure. Int J Metalcast. 2017;11(2):207–215.
[16] Shirato K, Miyashita Y, Nishimizu T, et al. Study on
fatigue design method of an engine component pro­
duced by flake graphite cast iron for different loading
modes and mean stresses. Int J Metalcast. 2018;12
(4):753–764.
[17] Boonmee S, Stefanescu D. Effect of casting skin on
fatigue properties of CG iron. Int J Metalcast. 2013;7
(2):15–26.
[18] Nasu S, Fujita S, Furusato N, et al. Effect of casting skin
condition on fatigue strength of gray cast iron.
Int J Metalcast. 2017;11(1):155–161.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CAST METALS RESEARCH 83
[19] Bon, D. G., Ferreira, M. H., Bose Filho, W. W., &
Guesser, W. L. (2019). Fracture Micromechanisms
Evaluation of High-Strength Cast Irons Under
Thermomechanical Fatigue Conditions.&nbsp;
International J Metalcast, 14(3):1–10
[20] De Almeida AT, Ferreira FJ, Fong JA, and Brunner CU .
(2008, May). Electric motor standards, ecodesign, and
global market transformation. In 2008 IEEE/IAS Industrial
and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference 04-
08 May Clearwater Beach, FL, USA (pp. 1–9). IEEE.
[21] Jin XU. An investigation of the abnormal structure at
the surface layer of nodular iron casting produced by
furan resin bonded and sulfonic acid cured sand
mould. J Foundry. 2005;12:1245–1249.
[22] Janowak JF, and Gundlach RB. A modern approach to
alloying gray iron. Transactions of the American
Foundrymen's Society. 1982January;90():847–863.
[23] Gundlach RB, and Scholz WG. Phosphide eutectic in
gray cast irons containing molybdenum and/or
chromium AFS Transactions . 1973 81 395–402 .
[24] Sheladiya MV, Acharya SG, Mehta K, and Acharya GD
Evaluate Sulphur diffusion at mould-metal interface in
no-bake mould system. Archives of Foundry
Engineering. 2019;19(1): 63–70.
[25] Adedayo AV. Relationship between graphite flake sizes
and the mechanical properties of grey iron. Int J Mater
Sci Appl. 2013;2(3):94–98.
[26] Janowak JF. Cast iron metallurgy for improved
machinability. J Appl Metalwork. 1986;4(3):238–244.