Scanned by CamScanner

Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Objective:

The objective of performing periodic test of foundry sand is to determine the essential qualities of
foundry sand as properties changes during use. To have uniform properties, control in sand
properties is necessary.

Introduction:

The need for systematic evaluation of the working qualities of moulding materials under foundry
conditions has led to the development of a wide range of tests.
Sand testing falls into two categories:
1. Checking consistency of sand by determining its basic chemical and physical characteristics.
2. Measuring the bulk properties of an aggregate by evaluating physical and chemical properties
of a sand mix.
The bulk properties of an aggregate are sensitive to small variations in mixing conditions and
specimen preparation. Rigid standardization is needed at all stages. Even under these conditions
results usually show considerable scatter.
Some of the most important tests routinely performed in foundry:

(a) Consistency tests:

1. AFS sieve analysis and GFN
2. Moisture content
3. AFS clay content and Methylene blue test
4. Loss on ignition
5. Compactibility

(b) Bulk / mould property tests

1. Mould hardness
2. Green and dry compression strengths
3. Permeability
4. Flowability
5. Collapsibility
6. Shatter index
7. Surface stability index
Some of them are describe below:

Sieve analysis: The size, size distribution, and shape of the sand grains are important in controlling
the quality of the mould. Course grained sand provides metal penetration, poor surface finish and
fine grained sand provides better surface finish, low permeability, higher binder content. The grain
size and shape contributes to the amount of sand surface area. The grain size and size distribution
controls the permeability of the mould.

Clay content: Clay may contain active clay, dead clay, silt, seacoal, cellulose, cereal, ash, fines
and all materials that float in water. Only the active clay gives active bonding capacity to the
system. So dead clay and fines should be removed and active clay and new additives should be
added periodically.

Moisture content: Moisture content affects every property of green sand (except GFN of base
sand). Excess water produces an oxidizing atmosphere in the mould, excess gas evolution, lower
permeability, high dry and hot strength, low mold hardness and poor flowability.
Two factors that affect the moisture requirement are:
1. The type and amount of clay, and
2. The type and amount of additives in the sand mix.

Mould hardness: Proper mold hardness will give castings a better finish, more accurate
dimensions and reduced penetration, drops and swells. Excessive hardness can cause cracks, scabs,
blows, pinholes and penetration.

Permeability: The grain size, shape and distribution of the foundry sand, the type and quantity of
bonding materials, the density to which the sand is rammed and the percentage of moisture used
for tempering the sand are important factors in regulating the degree of permeability. In case of
used sand, fines and dead clay affects the permeability. An increase in permeability usually
indicates a more open structure in the rammed sand, and if the increase continues, it will lead to
penetration-type defects and rough castings. A decrease in permeability indicates tighter packing
and could lead to blows and pinholes.
Sand strength: Sand strength test is the measure of holding power of various bonding materials
in green and dry sand. It determines the cohesiveness or natural binding capacity of the sand grains.
There are four types of test for sand strength:
1. Compression
2. Shear
3. Tensile and
4. Over hang bar test
Of these tests, the compression test is by far most widely used and is very convenient for routine
testing of all types of normal bonded and synthetic moulding sand.
Experiment Procedure:
Sieve analysis:
The test of determining the AFS grain fineness number is performed on a dried sand sample from
which all clay substances have been removed. A set of standard testing sieve is used to screen the
sand. These sieves are stacked in sequence with the coarsest sieve at the top and placed in a sieve
shaker. About 100 g sand is placed at the top sieve and, after 15 minutes of vibration, the weight
of the sand retained in each sieve is obtained. The AFS grain fineness number of the sand tested
can then be determined by taking the percentage of sand retained on each screen, multiplying each
by a multiplier (which is simply the next available sieve old mesh number greater than the one
being weighed out), adding the total, and then dividing by the total percentage of sand retained on
the sieves.
Test for Clay Content
The equipment necessary for determining the percentage of clay in moulding sand consists of a
drying oven, a balance and weights, and a sand washer. Clay content test is carried out as follows:
1. 50 g of this dried sand is placed in a wash bottle.
2. To this sand, 475 c.c. of distilled water and 25 c.c. of 3.0 % caustic soda solution are added.
3. The mixture is stirred for 5 min in a rapid sand washer.
4. The liquid is then siphoned off after 10 min. The bottle is refilled twice more and siphoned the
liquid off.
5. The sand is placed in the oven for drying.
6. The sand is weighed when it is completely dried and the percentage of clay is determined by
the difference in the initial and final weights of the sample.

Test for Moisture Content

1. Fifty grams of tempered sand, accurately weighed and placed in the pan.
2. The timer for the blower of the moisture teller is set for the required time to dry the sand
(approximately 15 min) and air at 110 C is blown over and through the sand.
3. The sand is dried after this and weighed again.
4. The difference in the initial and final readings and determine the percentage of moisture in the
sand

Sand Hardness Test

The hardness achieved by ramming the moulding sand mixture can be measured by using an
indentation-type mould hardness tester where a spring-loaded 1/2 inch diameter steel ball is
pressed into the AFS Standard sand sample and the hardness number is read directly from a dial
gage which reads from 100 to 0. If no penetration occurs, the hardness reading is set arbitrarily to
100. If the ball sinks completely into the sand up to the limiting surface of the tester, the reading
is set to 0; i.e. the sand is very soft. A “hard rammed” mould generally reads 90, while a “soft”
mould reads 50 to 60. Severe penetration by the liquid metal and washing of the sand occur when
the hardness reading is below 50.
Sand Strength Test
For green compression strength test, the AFS Standard sand specimen is prepared. The test is
performed on the sand specimen by using Universal sand strength machine. This machine consists
of a pusher arm and weight arm, both hanging from a pivot bearing at the top of the machine. The
weight arm applies load on the specimen while pusher arm pushes the specimen against the weight.
As the weight arm is pushed up higher, the load increases until the specimen breaks. Then the
compression strength in ton/in2 may be read at the magnetic marker whose left side shows the
maximum upward travel of the weight arm.

For dry compression strength test, the AFS standard specimen is placed in the oven and dried it
for about one hours at 110 C. The specimen is cooled and tested it on the same day they are made.
The specimen is placed in the upper position of the sand strength machine and broken the specimen
as in the case of green strength test. The dry strength values are read in psi off the dry strength
scale.

Calculation:
Sieve Analysis:
Size of Sample: 100g
USA sieve series Sand retained on Percentage of Multiplier Product
No each sieve, g sand retained (A) (A) (AxB)
0 0 0
0 0 0
30 0.57 0.57 20 11.4
40 5.65 5.65 30 169.5
70 54.88 54.88 50 2744
140 30.77 30.77 100 3077
200 3.98 3.98 140 557.2
270 2.03 2.03 200 406
Pan 1.36 1.36 300 408
Total 99.24 7373.1

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡 7373.1

AFS Grain Fineness Number = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 = = 74.29 AFS
99.24

Moisture Content:
Before Drying, Weight of Sand = 50 gm
After Drying, Weight of Sand = 49.71 gm
Amount of Moisture = (50-49.71) gm =0.29 gm
0.29
% of Moisture = 50 𝑥100 = 0.58%

Clay Content:
Initial weight of sand= 50.16 gm
Final weight of sand= 49.16 gm
Clay content= (50.16-50.16) gm =0.7 gm
0.7
% of clay = 50.16 𝑥100 = 1.396%

Data Sheet for Mould Hardness:

Sample Clay Moisture No of Mould Hardness
Description content content Ramming
Top Bottom Average Difference
B1 Sand 6 6 3 21 24 22 3.3
23 26
22 26 25.3
5 24 31 25 5
26 28
25 31 30
7 32 35 29.7 6.97
29 37
28 38 36.67

Data Sheet for Green and Dry Compressive Strength:

Sample Clay Moisture No of GCS DCS
Description content content Ramming
g/cm2 Average g/cm2 Average
B1 Sand 6 6 3 81.58 95.17 0.1 0.1
91.77
112.17
5 112.17 122.37 0.1 0.1
 122.37
132.56
7 122.37 125.77 0.1 0.1
122.37
132.56
Scanned by CamScanner
Objective:

1. To understand the variables affecting solidification

2. To understand the importance and limitations of Chvorinov’s Rule for predicting the
solidification time of a casting

Introduction:

The amount of heat that must be removed from a casting to cause it to solidify is directly
proportional to the amount of superheat and the amount of metal in the casting, or the casting
volume. Conversely, the ability to remove heat from a casting is directly related to the amount of
exposed surface area through which the heat can be extracted and the insulating value of the mould.
These observations are reflected in Chvorinov's Rule, which states that tf, the total solidification
time, can be computed by:

𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 𝐶( )𝑛
𝐴

where V is the volume of the casting; A is the surface area; and C is the mould constant, and n is
a constant, which varies from 1.5 to 2.0 (2 in Chvorinov’s work). The total solidification time is
the time from pouring to the completion of solidification and mould constant C depends on the
characteristics of the metal being cast (its density, heat capacity, and heat of fusion), the mould
material (its density, thermal conductivity, and heat capacity), the mould thickness, and the amount
of superheat.

Experimental Procedure:

1. Prepare moulds using greensand moulding process days in advance.

2. Insert one K-type thermocouple tip at the centre of the mould cavity to record the temperature
of the solidifying casting.

3. Melt the required amount of materials using crucible/induction furnace and pour the liquid into
the mould at about 1200 °C.

4. Use a Temperature VS Time chart to record the temperature of the solidifying casting at an
interval of 10 second until the temperature of the casting is decreased to 500 C.
Result:

Cooling Curve (Sphere 300 cm3)

1000
900
800
Temperature(oC)

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Time(s)

Fig: Cooling curve of 300 cm3 Sphere

Cooling curve (Sphere 800cm3)

1000
Temperature (℃)

800

600

400

200

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Time (sec)

Fig: Cooling curve of 800 cm3 Sphere

Cooling curve (Cylinder 300cm3)

1000
800
Temperature

600
400
200
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Time

Fig: Cooling curve of 300 cm3 Cylinder

 cylinder (800 cm3 )
1000

temperature (celcius) 800

600

400

200

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
time (s)

Fig: Cooling curve of 800 cm3 Cylinder

Fig: Cooling curve of 300 cm3 Elongated plate

Elongated plate(800 cm3)

750
700
650
Axis Title

600
550
500
450
400
10 100 1000
Axis Title

Fig: Cooling curve of 800 cm3 Elongated plate

 cube 300cm3
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Fig: Cooling curve of 300 cm3 Cube

Cube ( 800 cm3 )

1000
Temperature ( celcius )

800
600
400
200
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time ( s )

Fig: Cooling curve of 800 cm3 Cube

Cooling Curve
800
700
Temperature(oC)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
360
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340

Time(second)

Fig: Cooling curve of 300 cm3 Square plate

 Cooling curve
750
700
Temperature (˚C) 650
600
550
500
450
400
10 100 1000 10000
Time (sec) in log scale

Fig: Cooling curve of 800 cm3 Square plate

Data Sheet

Volume of Solidification time (sec)

casting (cm3)
Sphere Cylinder Cube Square plate Elongated
plate

300 370 380 220 180 170

800 610 680 600 410 390
Discussion:
1.

Fig:Solidification
Solidification time
timeVS
vs.Casting
Volume volume
1000

y = 0.76x - 8

100
Sphere
Time(s)

Cylinder
Cube
Square
10
Elongated Plate
Linear (Cube)

1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Volume(cm3)

Fig: Solidification Time VS Casting Volume

2.

Soldification time vs. Area (Constant volume)

1000 1000

100 y = -1.0142x + 577.03 100

Time(s)

300
800

10 10 Linear (300)
Linear (800)

1 1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Area(cm2)

Fig: Solidification Time VS Casting Area

 Soldification Time vs. Area (Constant Shape)
1000

y = 1.5362x - 193.75
100
Sphere
Time(s)

Cylinder
Cube
Square
10
Elongated Plate
Linear (Cube)

1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Area(cm2)

Fig: Solidification Time VS Casting Area

3.

Soldification Time vs V/A (Constant Volume)

10000 10000

1000 1000

y = 247.26x1.2369
Time(s)

300
100 100
800
Power (300)

10 10 Power (800)

1 1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
V/A(cm)

Fig: Solidification Time VS V/A

 Solidification Time vs. V/A(Constant Shape)
1000

y = 224.07x1.5365
100
Sphere
Time(s)

Cylinder
Cube
Square
10
Elongated Plate
Power (Sphere)

1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
V/A(cm)
Fig: Solidification Time VS V/A

Solidification time increases with increasing V/A ratio as predicted by chvorinov’s

rule. But for different shapes solidification time increases differently.
4. Combined expression for chvorinov’s rule:
𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 𝑐( )𝑛
𝐴
𝑉
𝑙𝑛𝑡𝑓 = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛
𝐴
Sphere:
Volume (cm3) tf (sec) V/A
300 370 1.386
800 610 1.919

ln⁡(370) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.386) ………..(1)

ln⁡(610) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.919) …………(2)
Solving (1) & (2)
𝑙𝑛𝑐 = 5.119⁡; ⁡𝑛 = 1.537
𝑐 =⁡ 224.068
𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 224.068( )1.537
𝐴
Cylinder:
Volume (cm3) tf (sec) V/A
300 380 1.189
800 680 1.644

ln⁡(380) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.189) ………..(1)

ln⁡(680) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.644) …………(2)
Solving (1) & (2)
𝑙𝑛𝑐 = 5.629⁡; ⁡𝑛 = 1.796
𝑐 =⁡ 278.459
𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 278.459( )1.796
𝐴

Cube:
Volume (cm3) tf (sec) V/A
300 220 1.114
800 600 1.548

ln⁡(220) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.114) ………..(1)

ln⁡(600) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.548) …………(2)
Solving (1) & (2)
𝑙𝑛𝑐 = 5.064⁡; 𝑛 = 3.049⁡
𝑐 =⁡ 158.287
 𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 158.287⁡( )3.049⁡⁡
𝐴

Square plate:
Volume (cm3) tf (sec) V/A
300 180 0.7535
800 410 1.287

ln⁡(180) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(0.7535) ………..(1)

ln⁡(410) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.287) …………(2)
Solving (1) & (2)
𝑙𝑛𝑐 = 5.63⁡; ⁡𝑛 = 1.538
𝑐 =⁡ 278.153
𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 278.153( )1.538
𝐴
Elongated plate:
Volume (cm3) tf (sec) V/A
300 170 0.737
800 390 1.266

ln⁡(170) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(0.737) ………..(1)

ln⁡(390) = 𝑙𝑛𝑐 + 𝑛𝑙𝑛(1.266) …………(2)
Solving (1) & (2)
𝑙𝑛𝑐 = 5.604⁡; ⁡𝑛 = 1.535
𝑐 =⁡ 271.55
𝑉
𝑡𝑓 = 271.55( )1.535
𝐴
Objectives:
1. To have hands on experience on the carbon dioxide process of mould making
2. To understand the ingredients of carbon dioxide moulding sand.
3. To study the effect of process parameters (sodium silicate content and carbon dioxide blowing time)
on the properties (green compressive strength and mould hardness) of moulding sand aggregate.

Introduction:
Sodium Silicate- CO2 Process was conceived in 1898 and by 1956, it became a novel process for mold and
core moulding. At that time sodium Silicate CO2 Process was the only alternative to conventional green
sand and oil-bonded sand processes. The inherent drawbacks of the process are poor flowability of the
moulding medium around the pattern, Poor breakdown (shakeout) of the molding medium after casting

and storage problems due to poor bench life of molds and cores when over gassed. Development of organic
binder systems addressed all the negative points of CO2 process. But the associated metallurgical problems
and environmental problems with organic binders again drew the attention of foundries towards sodium
silicate- CO2 process. Hence it can be inferred that the decision on CO2 –activated binder systems hinges
on environmental concerns, cost, properties and processing considerations.

The physical and chemical changes involved in the process of strength development in sand bonded with
sodium silicate are vaguely understood. The individual grains of sand covered with a thin coating of sodium
silicate are made to tie with each other in the process of mold or core making. The familiar strength,
measured as a gross property, is the manifestation of a large number of bonds within the mould or core
mass. Confusion and often misinterpretation have been very common in the foundry technology dealing
with sodium silicate. The new product which is mentioned most often in the way strength development is
silica gel. The new product that is formed when loosely rammed mass of sodium silicate mixed sand is
cured with CO2 gas is silica gel. Hardening reaction can be expressed as

Na2SiO3+H2o+CO2--> Na2Co3+[SiO2+H2O]

Silica Gel Properties of mould depends upon process parameters normally % of sodium silicate, quantities
OF co2 gas (gassing time), mixing time, mould properties greatly influence soundness of casting. Especially
strength and permeability properties are important. If strength is more permeability is less and vice versa is
also true. Too low strength leads to defects like sand drop and if permeability is too low lead to defects like
blowholes, gas porosity etc.
Experimental Procedure:

1. Dry sand was mixed with 4% Sodium silicate.

2. Using the mixture, three AFS Standard moulding specimens were prepared.
3. CO2 was blown into each mould for 30 seconds.
4. Green compressive strength was and mould hardness(top) was determined for each specimen.

Result:

Group sodium silicate, CO2 blowing time, Green Mould hardness

%wt sec compressive (top)
2
strength, (gm/cm )
01 4.0 30 520.23 68.67
02 90 176.21 60
03 120 1241.84 68.33
04 3.0 60 335.63 50.33
05 6.0 1325.75 71.33
06 9.0 436.32 76
Discussion:

Effect of Sodium silicate

1400 100
90
1200
80
1000

Hardness (C scale)
70
GCS (gm/cm2)

800 60
GCS
50
600 Mold Hardness
40
Linear (GCS)
400 30
20 Linear (Mold Hardness)
200
10
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
% Sodium Silicate
1.
Fig: Effect of Sodium silicate on Green compressive strength & Mould hardness

Effect of CO2 blowing time

1400 70
69
1200
68

1000 67
Hardness (C scale)
GCS (gm/cm2)

66
800 GCS
65
64 Mold Hardness
600
63 Linear (GCS)
400 62 Linear (Mold Hardness)
61
200
60
0 59
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
CO2 blowing time (s)

Fig: Effect of CO2 blowing time on Green compressive strength & Mould hardness
2. From graph, it is seen, Green compressive strength & mould hardness both increases with increasing
silicate content. It is seen that the passing of CO2 gas is critical and green compressive strength increases
with time and but the hardness of the mould decreases due to overgassing. Overgassing forms sodium
bicarbonate and sodium carbonate, which embrittle the gel.

Optimum value of process parameter are

wt% of Sodium Silicate- 9.0

CO2 blowing time- 100 sec

3. Moulding sand of Sodium silicate-CO2 process has poor collapsibility. Additives are often added to
improve mould collapsibility. Molasses, wood flour, starch, cereals and coal dust have been employed for
this purpose, but proprietary one-shot high ratio silicates containing starch hydrolysate were later developed
to combine high bond strength with stability and excellent breakdown properties. However, these accelerate
the deterioration of mould strength in high humidity conditions.

Conclusion:
One of the easiest modern moulding processes for instructional and small foundries is the sodium silicate/
CO2 process. In this process, liquid sodium silicate is mixed with the sand. The sand is rammed into a
mould and cured by passing CO2 gas through the mould. Sodium silicate mould are very strong. The bond
is so strong that hot tearing and collapsibility can be an issue. Moulds prepared by sodium silicate process
have adequate strength and hardness to provide good dimensional tolerances and better surface finish to the
casting. The mould can be made well in advance because of their high bench life. The sodium silicate
process is expensive as fresh silica sand is needed every time. Sand reclamation remains as the most serious
limitation to a process otherwise noted for its relatively slight environmental impact.
Objective:

The aim of this experiment is to study the effect of mould materials and pouring temperature on
microstructure, dendrite arm spacing and mechanical properties of casting.

Introduction:

Aluminium and Aluminium alloy castings have dominated the automotive sector for decades.
Approximately two thirds of all aluminium castings are used in automotive industries and it
continues to grow at the expense of iron castings. Although aluminium castings are
significantly more expensive than ferrous castings, there is a continuing market requirement to
reduce vehicle weight and to increase fuel efficiency. It is this requirement which drives the
replacement of ferrous parts by aluminium. Aluminium is quite suitable for fairly thin castings as
well and the production of castings does not introduce any problems due to hot tearing. It has a
good resistance to corrosion and has a high strength and also offers good machinability. It is
imperative to possess knowledge about solidification phenomena and their effect on mechanical
properties while designing cast automotive parts. Knowledge of solidification phenomena
can help a designer to ensure sound casting and this in turn will ensure that the casting will
achieve the desired properties for its intended application. In this experiment the effect of foundry
variables, such as mold materials and pouring temperature on the microstructure, dendrite arm
spacing, percentage porosity and mechanical properties of pure Al alloy was investigated.
Experimental Procedures:

1. Prepare in advance two greensand moulds to cast in each mould4 round test bars of 15 mm in
diameter and 150 mm in length. Use bottom pouring and unpressurised gating system.
2. Melt about 4 Kg pour Aluminium and pour the liquid metal at 850oC in one greensand mould.
3. Wait for the temperature of the remaining liquid to drop about 700oC
4. Pour the remaining liquid to the other greensand mould
5. Using similar pouring system and materials, prepare 8 round bars of same dimensions using metal
moulds.
6. Prepare tensile test samples from test bars with Do=10 mm and Lo=50 mm
7. Conduct tensile tests and calculate UTS and %E
8. Use 5 cylindrical samples for density measurement. Then determine the approximate percentage
of porosity in each samples.
9. Perform brinell hardness test using 2 cylindrical samples.
10. Prepare metallographic sample and observe the dendrites under an optical microscope and take
photographs of different areas of the sample. Calculate the length of DAS accordingly to the
formula
𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒
𝐷𝐴𝑆 =
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑚𝑠 𝑋 𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

Calculation:

Brinell Hardness number

Load Steel ball Diameter, Depression diameter BHN= 2𝑃

𝜋𝐷(𝐷−√𝐷 2 −𝑑 2 )
P (kg-f) D (mm) d (mm)
kgf/mm2
500 10 5.57 18.78
5.5 19.31
5.5 19.31
5.43 19.86
5.43 19.86
Data table:
Moulding Pouring Reading Ultimate tensile Elongation at
System Temperature oC strength failure
MPa %
Sand mould 850 1 87.228 15
2
3
4
5

Moulding Pouring Reading Density Porosity

System Temperature oC Kgm- Average % Average
3
Kgm-3 %
Sand Mould 850 1 2.646 2.63 2.04 2.66
2 2.624 2.89
3 2.628 2.74
4 2.646 2.04
5 2.606 3.61

Moulding Pouring Reading Brinell Hardness Number

System Temperature oC BHN Average BHN
Sand mould 850 1 18.78 19.424
2 19.31
3 19.31
4 19.86
5 19.86

Moulding Pouring Reading Dendritic Arm Spacing ( DAS)

System Temperature oC µm Average µm
Sand Mould 850 1 170 159.1
2 168
3 168.6
4 140
5 184
6 124
Result:

Moulding Pouring Ultimate Elongation Density Porosity Hardness Dendrite

System temperature tensile at Failure Arm
strength Spacing
(DAS)
o
C MPa % gcm-3 % BHN µm
Greensand 700 90.8115 30 2.6 4.2 17.954 177
Mould 850 87.228 15 2.63 2.66 19.424 159.1
Metal 700 130.165 24 2.57 5 21.32 59.18
Mould 850 111.742 16.5 2.6558 1.635 20.74 49.04

Ultimate Tensile strength

140

120
Tensile strength, MPa

100

80
700
60 850

40

20

0
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.1 Tensile strength of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.

Density
2.68

2.66

2.64
Density kgm-3

2.62

2.6 700
850
2.58

2.56

2.54

2.52
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.2 Density of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.
 %Elongation
35

30

25

20
700
% 15 800
10

0
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.3 %Elongation of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.

%Porosity
6

3 700
%

850
2

0
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.4 %porosity of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.

Hardness
22

21
BHN, kg-f/mm2

20

19 700
850
18

17

16
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.5 Hardness of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.
 Dendrite Arm Spacing (DAS)
200
180

Dendritic arm spacing , µm

160
140
120
100 700
80 850
60
40
20
0
Green sand system metal mould

Fig.6 Dendrite arm spacing of pure Al in sand and metal mould at different pouring temperature.

Ultimate tensile strength

140
120
100
UTS, MPa

80
60
40
20
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.7 Ultimate tensile strength of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal mould

%Elongation
35
30
25
20
%

15
10
5
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.8 %Elongation of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal mould
 Density
2.68

2.66

density, gm/cm3
2.64

2.62

2.6

2.58

2.56
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal MOuld

Fig.9 Density of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal mould

porosity
6

3
%

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.10 Porosity of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal mould

Hardness
21.5
21
20.5
20
BHN

19.5
19
18.5
18
17.5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.11 Hardness of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal mould
 Dendrite arm spacing (DAS)
200

150

DAS, µm
100

50

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pouring temperature

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.12 Dendrite arm spacing of pure Al at different pouring temperature in sand and metal
mould
Ultimate tensile strength
140
120
100
UTS, MPa

80
60
40
20
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.13 Ultimate tensile strength of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

%elongation
35
30
25
20
%

15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.14 %Elongation of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

 Density
2.68
2.66

density, gm/cm3
2.64
2.62
2.6
2.58
2.56
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.15 Density of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

Porosity
6
5
4
3
%

2
1
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.16 Porosity of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

Hardness
21.5
21
20.5
20
BHN

19.5
19
18.5
18
17.5
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.17 Hardness of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

 Dendrite arm spacing (DAS)
200

150

DAS, µm 100

50

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Superheat

Sand Mould Metal Mould

Fig.18 Dendritic arm spacing of pure Al at different superheat in sand and metal mould

Discussion:
It can be seen that Ultimate tensile strength of the metal mold casting specimens is higher than
that of sand mold casting specimen because of finer microstructure in metal mold casting
specimen. Hardness also shows same type of behavior like tensile strength for the same reason.
Metal mold specimen has higher density than sand mold because metal mold casting contains
lower porosity than sand mold. The elongation of the metal mold is lower than sand mold casting
because of higher hardness.

The Ultimate tensile strength increases with increasing pouring temperature and degree of superheat.
The higher the pouring temperature, the more is the activity of liquid metal, which results in more
nucleating spots in the liquid metal. It is well known that the refinement is achieved by the multiplication
of the nucleation sites in the liquid melt. According to the solidification theory, the critical nucleus
diameter is inversely proportion to the melt undercooling and the decreasing Gibbs free energy. Thus, the
increasing undercooling will be beneficial for nucleation due to decreasing size of critical nucleation and
also provide a larger crystallization driving force. This means that pouring at higher temperature will result
in the formation of small nucleation sites in large numbers. On the contrary, pouring at low temperatures
will result in the formation of nucleation sites in small numbers but they will be larger in size than the
former. The DAS is effectively reduced due to the increase in amount of the nucleation at high pouring
temperature. Therefore, the DAS is decreased with increasing pouring temperature and increased UTS.
Hardness also shows same type of behavior like UTS. Density increases with increasing pouring
temperature due to reduction of porosity. %Elongation decreases with high pouring temperature because
of high hardness.

Tensile strength, elongation, density all increases with increasing DAS. The reason is as the DAS
becomes smaller, the residual liquid is split up into progressively smaller (often isolated) regions.
So, the presence of foreign nuclei that helps heterogeneous nucleation of interdendritic phases
(including gas pores) becomes increasingly less probable. Thus, unless the concentration of
segregated solute reaches a value at which homogeneous nucleation can occur, the new phase
will not appear .Thus as DAS decreases, there becomes a cut-off point at which gas pores cannot
appear. Effectively, there is simply insufficient room for the bubble.

Conclusion:
The effect of foundry variables such as mold materials and pouring temperature on the
microstructure, dendrite arm spacing (DAS) and mechanical properties of commercial pure Al
have been determined. Metal mold castings have refined microstructure than sand mold castings
owing to increased cooling rate/solidification rate. Hence, commercial Al has fine dendrite
structure when casted in metal mold and also has better mechanical properties. Metal mold
castings also have less % porosity which leads to sound castings. It is clearly evident from that
pouring temperature has a marked effect on SDAS and mechanical properties. Higher pouring
temperature leads to finer dendrite arm spacing and as a result the UTS and Hardness of the alloy
increases with a decrease in % elongation.
Obj
ect
ive:

Toc
asti
ronus
ingdi
ffer
entr
aw mat
eri
alsandaddi
ti
vesandt
ost
udyt
heef
fec
tsof
pr
oces
svar
iabl
esont
henat
ureandpr
oper
tiesofc
asti
ron.

I
ntr
oduc
tion:

Cas
tir
oni
sagr
oupofi
ron-
car
bonal
loy
swi
thac
arbonc
ont
entgr
eat
ert
han2%.The
al
loy c
ons
tit
uent
s af
fec
tit
scol
orwhen f
rac
tur
ed:whi
tec
asti
ron has c
arbi
de
i
mpur
iti
eswhi
chal
low c
rac
kst
opas
sst
rai
ghtt
hrough,gr
eyc
asti
ronhasgr
aphi
te
f
lakeswhi
chdef
lec
tapas
singc
rac
kandi
nit
iat
ecount
les
snewc
rac
ksast
hemat
eri
al
br
eaks
,andduc
til
ecas
tir
onhass
pher
icalgr
aphi
te"
nodul
es"whi
chs
topt
hec
rac
k
f
rom f
urt
herpr
ogr
ess
ing.Car
bon(
C)r
angi
ngf
rom 1.
8to4wt
%,ands
il
ic
on(
Si)1–3
wt
% ar
ethemai
nal
loy
ingel
ement
sofc
asti
ron.Whi
let
hist
echni
cal
lymakest
he
Fe–C–Sis
yst
em t
ernar
y,t
hepr
inc
ipl
eofc
asti
rons
oli
dif
icat
ionc
anbeunder
stood
f
rom t
hes
impl
erbi
nar
yir
on–c
arbonphas
edi
agr
am.Si
ncet
hec
ompos
iti
onsofmos
t
c
asti
ronsar
ear
oundt
heeut
ect
icpoi
nt(
lowes
tli
qui
dpoi
nt)oft
hei
ron–c
arbons
yst
em,
t
hemel
ti
ngt
emper
atur
esus
ual
lyr
angef
rom 1,
150t
o1,
200°
Cwhi
chi
sabout300°
C
l
owert
hant
hemel
ti
ngpoi
ntofpur
eir
onof1,
535°
C(2,
795°
F).Cas
tir
ont
endst
obe
br
itt
le,ex
ceptf
ormal
leabl
ecas
tir
ons
.Wi
thi
tsr
elat
ivel
ylow mel
ti
ngpoi
nt,good
f
lui
dit
y,c
ast
abi
li
ty,ex
cel
lentmac
hinabi
li
ty,r
esi
stanc
eto def
ormat
ion and wear
r
esi
stanc
e,c
asti
ronshav
ebec
omeanengi
neer
ingmat
eri
alwi
thawi
der
angeof
appl
ic
ati
onsandar
eus
edi
npi
pes
,mac
hinesandaut
omot
ivei
ndus
trypar
ts,s
uchas
c
yli
nderheads(
dec
li
ningus
age)
,cy
li
nderbl
ocksandgear
boxc
ases(
als
odec
li
ning
us
age)
.Iti
sres
ist
antt
odes
truc
tionandweakeni
ngbyox
idat
ion.

Pat
ter
n:
Wedge-
shapedc
ast
ing(
seeFi
g.1)

RawMat
eri
als
:
1.Pi
gir
on(
C=3.
8,Si=2.
5,Mn=1.
5%)

2.Fer
romanganes
e(Mn=80%)

3.Fer
ros
il
ic
on(
Si=60%)
.
Addi
ti
ves
:
I
noc
ulant
,deox
idi
zer
,sl
agf
ormer

Fi
gur
e 1:The wedge-
shaped c
ast
ing and i
tsc
ros
s-

Ex
per
iment
alPr
ocedur
e:

1.Pr
epar
e gr
eens
and moul
dsus
ing t
he wedge-
shaped pat
ter
n day
sbef
oret
he
ex
per
iment

2.Mel
tabout10kgpi
gir
oni
nal
adl
eus
ingi
nduc
tionf
urnac
e.Remov
eladl
efr
om t
he
f
urnac
eaf
termel
ti
ngatabout1450C.Adddeox
idi
zerands
lagf
ormert
othel
adl
e,
mi
xthor
oughl
yandt
hens
kim of
fthes
lag.Meas
uret
het
emper
atur
eofl
iqui
d
bef
orepour
ingi
ttot
hemoul
dat1300C.

3.Putt
hel
adl
ebac
ktot
hef
urnac
ewi
tht
her
emai
ningl
iqui
d.Remov
eladl
efr
om t
he
f
urnac
eaf
termel
ti
ngatabout1450C.Addabout60gf
err
omanganes
etot
hemel
t.
St
irt
hemel
tthor
oughl
yremov
ethedr
ossandpourat1300C.Labelt
hisc
ast
ingas
C-
2

4.Putt
hel
adl
ebac
ktot
hef
urnac
ewi
tht
her
emai
ningl
iqui
d.Remov
eladl
efr
om t
he
f
urnac
eaf
termel
ti
ngatabout1450C.Addabout100gf
err
osi
li
cont
othemel
t.St
ir
t
hemel
tthor
oughl
yremov
ethedr
ossandpourat1300C.Labelt
hisc
ast
ingasC-
3
5.Af
terc
ool
ingr
emov
ecas
tingf
rom t
hemoul
d.Saw t
hec
ast
ingass
howni
nFi
g.1
andpol
is
hitf
ormet
all
ogr
aphyandhar
dnes
smeas
urement
.

6.Takemac
roandmi
crogr
aphandmeas
ureBr
inel
lhar
dnes
satt
hei
ndi
cat
edpoi
nts
.
 Compl
etedat
aSheet

Cas
ting Pr
oper
tie Pr
oper
tiesatt
hei
ndi
cat
edpoi
nts(
Fig1)
des
cri
pti
o s t
o be
a b c d e f
n meas
ured

C-
1 Phas
es Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te,
pr
esent f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite,
Or
igi
nal
Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t
Cas
ting
ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake

Ty
pe of Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c
c
asti
ron gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey
c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast
i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron

Har
dnes
s 157.
55 157.
55 157.
55 157.
55 157.
55 169.
302
r
eadi
ng

C-
2 Phas
es Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te,
Or
igi
nal pr
esent f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite,
Cas
ting Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t
wi
thFeMn ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake
added
Ty
pe of Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c
c
asti
ron gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey
c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast
i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron

Har
dnes
s 177.
97 177.
97 164.
54 164.
54 164.
54 193.
061
r
eadi
ng

C-
3 Phas
es Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te, Pear
li
te,
Or
igi
nal pr
esent f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite, f
err
ite,
Cas
ting Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t Gr
aphi
t
wi
th FeSi ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake ef
lake
added Ty
pe of Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c Pear
li
ti
c
c
asti
ron gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey gr
ey
c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast c
ast
i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron i
ron

Har
dnes
s 146.
964 146.
964 146.
964 137.
013 137.
013 157.
55
r
eadi
ng
Di
scus
sion:

I
nfl
uenc
eofc
ool
ingr
ateandi
noc
ulat
eont
hes
truc
tur
eandpr
oper
tiesofc
asti
ron:
Thi
nsec
tionc
ool
sfas
tert
hant
hic
ksec
tion.Fort
hisr
eas
oni
nwedges
hapec
ast
ingf
poi
ntsc
ool
sfas
tert
hanot
herpoi
nts
.Compar
ingt
hemi
cros
truc
tur
eoffpoi
ntwi
th
ot
herpoi
nts
,itc
anbes
eent
hatfpoi
ntc
ont
ainl
oweramountofgr
aphi
tef
laket
han
ot
herpoi
nts
.Then,fpoi
ntshashi
gherhar
dnes
sthanot
herpoi
nts
.

C1s
ampl
eispr
epar
edwi
thouti
noc
ulant
swher
eC2,C3s
ampl
eispr
epar
edus
ing
i
noc
ulant
s.Whenc
ompar
ingmi
cros
truc
tur
eofC1,C2,andC3i
tcanbes
eenC3
s
ampl
econt
ainshi
gheramountofgr
aphi
tef
laket
hanot
hers
ampl
es.ButC3hasl
ower
har
dnes
sthanC1,C2s
ampl
e.

Hi
gherc
ool
i
ngr
atedi
scour
agegr
aphi
ti
zat
ion.Sot
hins
ect
iont
hatc
ool
sfas
tcont
ains
l
owamountofgr
aphi
tef
lakei
nthemat
rix
.Fort
hisr
eas
oni
nwedges
hapedc
ast
ingf
poi
ntc
ont
ainhi
gheramountofgr
aphi
tef
lake.Agai
n,r
api
dcool
ingi
ncr
eas
ehar
dnes
s
and t
ens
il
est
rengt
h as c
ement
iter
emai
ns i
nst
ruc
tur
e.I
noc
ulat
ion pr
omot
es
gr
aphi
ti
zat
ion.So,i
noc
ulat
ioni
ncr
eas
esamountofgr
aphi
tef
lakei
nthemat
rix
.But
duet
otheabs
enc
eofc
ement
ites
truc
tur
ebec
omes
oftandhar
dnes
sandt
ens
il
e
s
trengt
hdec
reas
e.

Reas
on t
o add i
noc
ulant
s j
ust bef
ore pour
ing: I
noc
ulant
s r
eac
h max
imum
ef
fec
tiv
enes
simmedi
atel
yaf
tert
reat
mentandf
adequi
ckl
yov
eraper
iodof10–20
mi
nut
es.So,i
noc
ulant
sisaddedbef
orepour
ing.

Conc
lus
ion:

I
nthi
sex
per
iment
,3wedges
hapedc
ast
ingC1,C2,C3wer
epr
epar
ed.C1s
ampl
ewas
pr
epar
edwi
thoutus
inganyi
noc
ulantwher
eC2,C3s
ampl
ewer
epr
epar
edus
ingFeMn
andFeSii
noc
ulant
s.Then,mi
crogr
aphandhar
dnes
swer
etakeni
n6di
ffer
entpoi
nts
.
I
tcanbes
eent
hatt
hins
ect
ionwher
ecooi
ngr
atei
shi
gherc
ont
ainsl
oweramountof
gr
aphi
tef
lakeasgr
aphi
ti
zat
ioni
sint
err
upt
ed.Butt
hins
ect
ions
howshi
gherhar
dnes
s
s
inc
ecement
iter
emai
nint
hes
truc
tur
e.C2andC3s
ampl
econt
ainhi
gheramountof
gr
aphi
tef
lakeasi
noc
ulant
spr
omot
esgr
aphi
ti
zat
ion.Si
ncec
ement
itei
sbr
oken,C2
andC3s
howl
owhar
dnes
scompar
etoC1s
ampl
e.
Objective:

 To have a general understanding of some common casting defects such as oxide film,
porosity, and residual stress.
 To understand the causes of occurrence of casting defects and the ways to prevent their
formation during casting and the methods of removing them.

Introduction:
Casting is a process which carries risk of failure occurrence during all the process of
accomplishment of the finished product. Hence necessary action should be taken while
manufacturing of cast product so that defect free parts are obtained. A casting defect is an
undesired irregularity in a metal casting process. Some defects can be tolerated while others can
be repaired, otherwise they must be eliminated. Mostly casting defects are concerned with
process parameters. Hence one has to control the process parameter to achieve zero defect
parts. For controlling process parameter one must have knowledge about effect of process
parameter on casting and their influence on defect. To obtain this all knowledge about casting
defect, their causes, and defect remedies one has to be analyze casting defects. Casting defect
analysis is the process of finding root causes of occurrence of defects in the rejection of casting
and taking necessary step to reduce the defects and to improve the casting yield.

Pattern: Round plate, 3 bar frame

Alloy Composition: Aluminium Alloy
Flux : Degaser

Experimental Procedures:
1. Greensand molds for casting two round bars were prepared.
2. A dirty master alloy was formed by repeated melting and freezing of aluminium alloy.
3. Dirty aluminium was melted and then two round bars were prepared.
4. Another two bars were prepared using fresh aluminium and similar green sand conditions.
5. Observed the presence of casting defects, porosities and oxide films on the surface of the bars.
6. Tensile test specimens were prepared and tested. UTS and yield strength were noted.
7. Determined the density and porosity of cylindrical bars taken from the castings.
(For Residual Stress)
1. A bottom poured, greensand mold was prepared for residual stress.
2. Melted pure aluminium and poured it into the mold at 850 degrees Celsius temperature.
3. Molds were broken and castings were taken out. The sprue and gates were removed.
4. Scribed two lines on the thick bar of the casting and measured their spacing very accurately
using a micrometer. The distance found= �1.
5. Cut the thick bar between the lines and measured the distance between the lines again. The
distance between the lines = �2.

Calculation:
Tensile load (KN) Area(m2) Tensile strength, Elongation, cm %Elongation,
MPa Gauge length-8 cm

9.1 1.26x10-6 73.98 0.5 5.88

11.2 1.45x10-4 77.24 0.4 5
10.8 1.23x10-4 87.80 0.5 5.88
Average 79.7 12.5

Result:

Data Sheet for Mechanical Properties:

Alloy Tensile
Elongation, % Density, g/cc Porosity, %
Condition Strength, MPa
Pure Al 80.76 7.23 2.5216 5.55
Dirty Al 79.76 5.59 2.625 12.5
Data Sheet for Residual Stresses Test:
Pouring Strain, Residual Stress,
o L1, cm L2, cm
Temperature, C ε= (L2-L1)/L1= α∆T σ=εE, MPa
850 14.09 14.11 1.49*10-3 97.9
Here, α= coefficient of thermal expansion of the alloy, and ∆T is the temperature difference during
casting (i.e., pouring temperature-room temperature).
 Fig1: Microstructure of Pure Al and dirty Al casting before etching

Fig2: Microstructure of Pure Al and dirty Al casting after etching

Discussion:
Effect of melt quality on the quality of cast product : Observing the data table for mechanical
test, it canbe seen that Pure Al Casting has higher tensile strength and elongation than Dirty Al
casting. As the dirty Al casting contains higher amount of porosity, oxide films and inclusions,
casting contains greater amount of defects. For this reason, Dirty Al casting has lower tensile
strength and elongation. Finally poor quality melting significantly affects the mechanical
properties of casting.
Effect of composition of alloy on the quality of cast product: Observing the microstructure, it
can be seen that Dirty Al casting contains higher amont of inclusion, oxide films than pure Al
caating. For this reason, Dirty Al casting product has poor mechanical properties than Pure Al
casting.
Methods to Eliminate oxide film in casting: In order to reduce oxide formation the metal can be
melted with a flux, in a vacuum, or in an inert atmosphere. Other ingredients can be added to
the mixture to cause the dross to float to the top where it can be skimmed off before the metal
is poured into the mold. If this is not practical, then a special ladle that pours the metal from the
bottom can be used. Another option is to install ceramic filters into the gating system. Otherwise
swirl gates can be formed which swirl the liquid metal as it is poured in, forcing the lighter
inclusions to the center and keeping them out of the casting.If some of the dross or slag is folded
into the molten metal then it becomes an entrainment defect.
Methods to Eliminate porosity in casting:
• Increase metal pouring temperature.
• Modify metal composition to improve fluidity.
• Pour metal as rapidly as possible without interruption. Improve mould filling by modification
to running and gating system.
• Remove slag from metal surface.
• Reduce gas pressure in the mould by appropriate adjustment to moulding material properties
and ensuring
• Adequate venting of moulds and cores.
• If possible, modify casting design to avoid thin sections.
• Ensure metal moulds are adequately pre-heated and use insulating coatings.

Some Methods to eliminate residual stress problems:

1. Heat treatment: By heating the casting to an appropriate temperature and holding for a know
period of time to allow the entire part tl reach this temperature most of the residual stresses
canbe relieved.
2. Mechanical treatment: Mechanical methods to relieve undesirable surface tensile stresses and
replace them with beneficial compressive residual stresses include shot peening and laser
peening. Each works the surface of the material with a media: shot peening typically uses a metal
or glass material; laser peening uses high intensity beams of light to induce a shock wave that
propagates deep into the material.
Conclusion:
In this experiment, standard casting sample were prepared using Pure and Dirty Al. Then,
Mechanical properties and residual stress test were performed to determine mechanical
properties and residual stress. It can be seen that dirty Al casting has poor mechanical properties
than pure Al casting as dirty Al casting contains higher amount of porosity, oxide layer and
inclusions.