Observation of Defects in Cast Iron Castings by Surface Analysis

Observation of Defects in Cast Iron Castings by Surface Analysis
(Blow Hole, Shrinkage, Orange Peel, Cold Shut, Cracks and Veining)
H. Kambayashi, Y. Kurokawa
Tsuchiyoshi Industry Corporation, Hiroshima, Japan
H. Miyake
Kansai University, Osaka, Japan
Copyright 2005 American Foundry Society
ABSTRACT
Surface analysis of defects in cast iron produced in cast iron castings is effective for evaluation of defects in castings and
implementing preventive measures. The present authors previously reported in AFS Transactions studies on pinhole defect,
penetration defect ,and inclusion defect.1~3 In the present report, we describe the results of analysis employing Energy
Dispersive X-ray Spectrometer-Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM • EDS), a surface analyzer, on blowhole defect, shrinkage
defect, orange peel defect, cold shut defect, crack defect, and veining defect.
INTRODUCTION
The present authors previously reported in AFS Transactions that application of surface analyzers such as SEM • EDS ,and
X-ray Micro Analyzer (EPMA) to casting defects produced in cast iron castings is effective for evaluating casting defects and
implementing countermeasures and preventive measures against such defects.1~3 Use of surface analyzers, which is a
micrographic analytical method, is especially effective for judging casting defects involving chemical reaction in portions that
are difficult to judge with the naked eyes. For this reason, we first applied surface analyzers to pinhole defect, penetration
defect, and inclusion defect involving chemical reaction, and explained (the results) in AFS Transactions. In addition to the
defects, the authors also applied surface analyzers to blowhole defect, shrinkage defect, orange peel defect, cold shut defect,
surface fold defect, crack defect (including tear defect), and veining defect. These are macrographic defects that can be judged
to some extent even with the naked eye, and the information obtained by surface analysis of such defects may be rather little but
will be helpful for evaluation of casting defects and implementing preventive measures against them. We will therefore apply
surface analyzers also to such defects and explain typical examples in AFS Transactions.
BLOW HOLE DEFECT
Gas defects are roughly classified into blowhole defect, pinhole defect, and microporosity defect. Of those defects, blowhole
defect is a defect produced by a macrographic factor, and generates comparatively large gas bubbles. Namely, the main causes
of this defect are entrainment of air by turbulent flow of molten metal during pouring, and entrainment of gas produced from
molds, gas produced from slag and dross, etc. Moreover, although pinhole defects are comparatively small gas bubbles, there
are cases where they merge and grow into large gas bubbles, to eventually turn into blowhole defects.
The factors causing pinhole defects are of (A) physical type, (B) oxidation reaction type, (C) dissolution type, (D) slag
formation type, and (E) other types. The oxidation reaction type is subclassified into 2 kinds; i.e., (B-1) solidification film
oxidation type produced on consolidation skin, and (B-2) remaining (residual) liquid oxidation condensation type produced
inside the casting. The slag formation type is subclassified into 4 kinds; i.e., (D-1) manganese silicate based slag, (D-2)
inoculant-spheroidizer based slag, (D-3) manganese sulfide based slag, and (D-4) sand inclusion-(foreign matter) inclusion
based slag. Microporosity defect is a defect involving extremely small gas bubbles, generating a gas dissolved in the molten
metal among the gaps between dendrites.
AFS Library Copy: 20050968A.pdf, Page 1 of 19 Pages, Provided to User for Internal Use and Not Public Redistribution or Resale.
Copyright © 2005 American Foundry Society.
EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF BLOWHOLE DEFECT
Figure 1 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from shell core gas. This defect was produced in the upper
part of the core. The material is FCH2C, and the master mold and the core are shell molds. SEM observation reveals the
presence of linear inclusion inside the defect. The linear inclusion is believed to be manganese silicate based slag, in view that
Mn, Si, O, etc. are detected in EDS analysis. This defect was produced when the pouring temperature dropped. A drop in
pouring temperature facilitates generation of slag in the molten metal. The slag is believed to have assumed a linear shape as
the gas bubbles caught the slag in the molten metal and moved it. The temperature drop increased viscosity of molten metal
and generation of solidification film, which in turn promoted generation of blowhole defects.
Figure 2 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from alkaline phenol core gas. This defect was produced in
the upper part of the core. The material is FC250, the master mold is a green sand mold, and the cores are alkaline phenol
molds. This defect is very large, and only a portio of the visual field of the defect is observed by SEM observation. Figure 2
(B) shows dendrites, with shrinkage after generation of a blowhole. EDS analysis detected Cu, Mo, Ti, and O, indicating the
existence, inside the defect, of elements having low free energy of formation of oxides. These are elements caught in the
course of moving of gas bubbles in the molten metal. This defect was produced at a resinn content of 1.8% by volume in the
alkaline phenol mold, became slight at no more than 1.5%, and was not produced at 1.2%. Therefore, it is a typical blowhole
defect by core gas. In order to reduce the resin volume to 1.2%, the silica sand was changed to one which exhibits strength at
low resin content.
Figure 3 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from green sand mold. This defect was produced in the
thick portion at the center of the product. The material is FC200, the master mold is a green sand mold, and the cores are shell
molds. The inside of the defect is covered with oxides, as observed by SEM observation. Moreover, dendrites are observed
partially, along with influences of shrinkage after blowhole generation. The convex position in Figure 3 (C) is believed to
have been produced as position of the gas bubbles were pushed in and deformed with an increase in molten metal volume at the
time of eutectic solidification. EDS analysis detected Cu, Al, O, etc., indicating, elements with low free energy of formation of
oxides are segregated inside the defect. This defect is presumed to be a blowhole defect produced with steam gas which is
produced from the green sand mold, in view of oxidation inside the defect. Because a shell core is used, another possibility is
that core gas is also associated with the defect. We prevented the defect by providing a cavity inside the bar-shaped shell core
and discharging the respective gases.
Figure 4 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from air entrainment. This defect was produced in the
upper part of the product in the direction opposite the gate. The material is FC300, the master mold is a green sand mold, and
no core is used. In the optical photo in Figure 4 (A), cold shot exists inside the defect. At some points a plurality of cold shots
exist inside the defect, and ,unlike in Figure3, spheroidal ones exist. Therefore, it is not a defect caused by an increase in
molten metal volume at the time of eutectic solidification. The interior of the defect is covered with oxides, as observed by
SEM observation indicated in Figure 4 (C). In EDS analysis, Figure 4 (B) analyzes cold shot which is a component of the base
metal. In Figure 4 (C), Cu, Al, Ti, O, etc. are detected, indicating that elements with low free energy for forming oxides are
segregated inside the defect. Although similar to that of Figure 3, this defect was produced as entrainment of cold shot and air
occurred at the gate by turbulent flow at the time of pouring, and they moved in the mold, forming a blowhole defect containing
cold shots.
Figure 5 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from spheroidizer (Mg). This defect, produced in the
upper portion of the product, consists of open holes. The material is FCD700, the master mold is a green sand mold, and no
core is used. Graphite partially exists inside the defect, as observed by SEM observation. In EDS analysis, Mg was detected,
and an extremely large volume of O exists. This is presumed to be a blowhole defect by Mg vapor, or a blowhole defect by
gas produced with the reactions indicated below, etc. This blowhole defect is an open one produced as gas bubbles moved
outside through the mold after generation of the defect.
MgC2 + H2O → MgO + C2H2 (g) C2H2(g) → 2C + H2 (g) (1)

Mg (g) + H2O → MgO + H2 (g) (2)
MgO + C → Mg + CO (g) (3)
Figure 1. Defect of blow hole caused by core gas generated from shell mold.
Figure 2. Defect of blow hole caused by core gas generated from alkali phenol mold.
Figure 3. Defect of blow hole caused by gas from green sand mold.
Figure 4. Defect of blow hole caused bycold shot and entrainment of air.
Figure 5. Defect of blow hole caused by Mg gas.
Figure 6. Defect of blow hole caused by acetylene gas.
Figure 6 shows an example analysis of blowhole defect originating from spheroidizer (acetylene gas). This defect, produced
inside the product in the thick portion near the gate, consists of closed holes. The material is FCD450, the master mold is a
green sand mold, and no core is used. Graphite exists in the entire portion inside the defect, as observed by SEM observation.
In EDS analysis, C was detected, but no Mg was detected. By sampling the gas inside the blowhole and analyzing its
composition by gas chromatography, we found that about 80% consists of H2 gas. Therefore, we believe that H2 gas produced
according to formula (1) or (2) above moved inside the molten metal, and caused a blowhole defect at the final solidified
portion of the thickness.
SHRINKAGE DEFECT
Shrinkage defect is a defect produced as the metal forms a closed loop at a specific point during solidification, generating a
cavity because of absence of a feed of molten metal corresponding to the solid shrinkage. It is hardly distinguishable from a
gas defect, because a gas is diffused in the generated cavity. No cavity is formed in a vacuum state. Measures effective for
preventing formation of shrinkage defect include supply of molten metal by optimal riser design, lowering of solid shrinkage
ratio by low-temperature pouring, increase of volume expansion ratio at the time of eutectic solidification by adjustment of C
volume, reduction of solid shrinkage ratio by adjustment of composition of solidifying metal, and increase of eutectic cells by
adjustment of inoculant.
Moreover, as an example of production of shrinkage defect due to molding, we may mention moving of mold wall. After the
cavity of the mold is filled with molten metal, a shrinkage defect is produced as the mold wall moves, producing a space in the
cavity. Moving of mold wall is liable to take place with a green sand mold, which generates a condensed layer of water content,
but rarely occurs with a self-hardening mold. Furthermore, with molds using an organic binder, in some cases a delay of
solidification due to heat preserving effects by combustion of binder causes production of shrinkage defect. The same is true
also in a case where a mold of low thermal conductivity is used.
EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF SHRINKAGE DEFECT
Figure 7shows an example analysis of shrinkage defect originating from a closed loop in the thick portion of the product. This
defect was produced in the thick portion of the product pinched by cores in the upward direction of the pouring posture. The
material is FCH2C, the master mold is a green sand mold, and the cores are shell mold and cold box mold. SEM observation
revealed dendrites inside the defect, but no non-metallic inclusion or lined graphite film were observed. Since no graphite film
was found, we believed that no bonding of dendrites occurred in the final period of eutectic solidification, with no time for
crystallization of graphite into the cavity. In EDS analysis, Al, Si, Mn, Cr, Cu, etc. were detected. Those elements are
elements segregated in the portion that solidified last. This defect is a shrinkage defect which grew from a shrinkage defect
produced in the portion that solidified last and was heat-preserved with combustion of cores, by diffusion of core gas to the
inside of the defect.
Figure 8 shows an example analysis of internal shrinkage defect originating from closed loop and core gas in the thick portion
of the product. This defect was produced in the thick portion pinched by cores. The material is FC300, the master mold is a
green sand mold, and the cores are shell molds. SEM observation revealed dendrites and graphite film were found inside the
defect. In EDS analysis, a large amount of C was detected, but no segregated elements were detected. Since a large amount
of graphite film exists inside the defect, we believe that crystallization of graphite occurred after defect generation. Namely, a
cavity which is a defect was generated during the eutectic solidification and assumed a fixed state, and graphite precipitated into
the cavity by the end of solidification thereafter. Unlike that of Figure7, this defect is believed to have been produced, as a
large amount of core gas diffused into the defective part, equilibrating the gas pressure inside the cavity with the stress due to
solid shrinkage, thus generating a defect at an earlier timing of solidification compared with that of Figure 7.
Figure 9 shows an example analysis of external shrinkage defect originating from closed loop in the thick portion of the product.
This defect was produced in the thick portion in contact with the green sand mold. The material is FC250, the master mold is
a green sand mold, and the cores are shell molds. SEM observation revealed dendrites inside the defect. EDS analysis
detected a large amount of O, but no segregated elements. A large amount of O was detected because this is a defect produced
in an atmosphere open to the outside. In addition, the dendrite is of acute angle, which is typical of dendrites in an external
defect.
Figure 10 summarizes cases of analysis of shrinkage defects originating from a variety of causes. Figure 10 (A) shows a case
of (material: FC300, master mold: furan mold, cores: shell molds), and shrinkage defect having a length of about 100 mm were
produced in large number. The inside of the defect is oxidized, and numerous of shrinkage defects were produced under the
influence of the pouring gas in the absence of any riser effects.
Figure 10 (B) shows a case of (material: FC, master mold: furan mold, core: furan mold), with a semispheroidal shrinkage
defect having a length of 20 mm or so produced on the as-forged surface. This defect was produced in a thick portion and at a
point where the solvent of the painted mold penetrated. It is an external shrinkage defect subjected to the influence of heat
preservation by combustion of solvent and gas.
Figure 10 (C) shows a case of (material: FC230, master mold: green sand mold, cores: shell molds), and the inside of a
shrinkage defect produced in a thick portion near the gate. A graphite film exists inside the defect, and is influenced by gas
defect as in the case of Figure 8.
Figure 10 (D) shows a case of (material: FC250, master mold: green sand mold, cores: shell mold and cold box mold), and a
defect whose inner face is smooth and has with a length of 20 mm or so. Ti, Cr, etc. were detected together with dendrites, and
this is a shrinkage defect by unusual elements. Segregation of unusual elements in the portion solidified last develops into a
shrinkage defect with a change in the solid shrinkage ratio in that portion.
Figure 10 (E) shows a case of (material: FC, master mold: green sand mold, cores: shell molds), which is a shrinkage defect on
the surface of the cores. Dendrites are found and a large amount of Cu was detected. It is subjected to influences of a change
in the solid shrinkage ratio in the same manner as that of Figure 10 (D).
Figure 10 (F) shows a case of (material: FC300, master mold: green sand mold, cores: shell molds), and Cu, MnS, which are
inoculant components, are detected inside the defect. It is subjected to influences of a change in the solid shrinkage ratio in the
same manner as that of Figure 10 (D) and (E).
Figure 7. Defect of internal shrinkage caused by close loop and core's influence.
Figure 8. Defect of internal shrinkage caused by close loop and core gas.
Figure 9. Defect of external shrinkage caused by close loop.
Figure 10. Defects of shrinkage caused by various factors.
ORANGE PEEL DEFECT
Orange peel defect is a defect where the as-forged surface has bumps and holes. This defect is characterized by depressions in
the solidified film over a comparatively wide range caused by the produced gas, at the boundary face between the mold and the
molten metal, from the mold, the molten metal, and the reaction between mold and molten metal. Moreover, in some cases
this defect is also subjected to influences of shrinkage defect in hot spots or the influences of Al in the heat-generating material.
The causes of occurrence of this defect can be summarized as follows:
(1) Boiling of solidified film
(2) Oxidation of solidified film and discharge of gas
(3) Drop of permeability following melting of mold due to shortage of refractoriness of mold
(4) Generation of low-fusion-point material and production of gas due to reaction between mold and molten metal
(5) Generation of slag and production of gas in solidified film
(6) Influence of shrinkage defect
(7) Influence of Al in heat-generating material
EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF ORANGE PEEL DEFECT
Figure 11 shows an example analysis of orange peel defect originating from shortage of refractoriness and excess water content
in the mold. This defect was produced in large quantities on the surface of the drag. The material is chromium cast iron, the
master mold is a green sand mold, and no core is used. As determined by SEM observation, the defective portion has
characteristics of an as-forged surface, and no inclusion, etc. is found. From the absence of inclusion, we can see that this
defect is not associated with any low-fusion point material due to reaction between slag/mold and molten metal. In EDS
analysis, a large amount of O was detected, and no other unusual elements were detected. Usually, O is detected in the
as-forged surface because of oxidation of solidified film and, although detection of O itself is not unusual, the spectrum of O in
the defective portion is higher as compared with the as-forged surface in a normal portion. In view that the water content of
green sand mold exceeded 5% and that the permeability was under 80 at the time of production of this defect, we judged that
this is an orange peel defect produced as the as-forged surface was oxidized by steam, because of excess of water content in the
mold and insufficient high-temperature permeability of the mold. This defect was prevented by the use of facing sand with an
increased added volume of new sand.
Figure 12 shows an example analysis of orange peel defect originating from generation of slag. This defect was produced in
large quantities on the side face near the gate. The material is FCD500, and the master mold and the cores are phenol urethane
molds. As determined by SEM observation, at some points non-metallic inclusion adheres to the defective portion. In view
that EDS analysis detects a large amount of Mn, Si, and O, we can see that manganese silicate slag adheres to the defective
portion. This defect is believed to have been produced as fine manganese silicate slag was generated in the molten metal, for
such reasons as drop of pouring temperature, oxidation of molten metal, and increase of Mn value, and this manganese silicate
slag adhered to the mold near the gate at the time of pouring, and reaction between the slag and C in the molten metal produced
gas, leading to production of orange peel defect.
Figure 13 shows an example analysis of orange peel defect originating from corner shrinkage defect. This defect was
produced in large quantities in the cope. The material is FC200, the master mold is green sand mold, and no core is used.
SEM observation reveals crystallization of graphite. Adhesion of non-metallic inclusion is also found. In EDS analysis, Si, Al,
Mg, O, and C are detected as segregated elements. In view of the large amount of Si, the non-metallic inclusion is Si-based
slag. This defect is believed to have been produced as Si-based slag was generated either in the solidified film or by reaction
between the mold and the molten metal, and then this Si-based slag produced CO gas by reaction with C in the molten metal,
leading to production of orange peel defect under the influence of corner shrinkage in corner portion.
Figure 14 shows an example analysis of orange peel defect originating from Al in an exothermic sleeve. This defect was
produced in large quantities in the cope. The material is FCD450, the master mold is green sand mold, and the cores are shell
molds. SEM observation reveals presence of non-metallic inclusion in the form of creases in the defective portion. In EDS
analysis, Si, Al, Cu, and O are detected as segregated elements. This product uses an exothermic sleeve, and this defect is an
orange peel defect produced with reaction between the gas produced from the exothermic sleeve, Al content and steam. Since
the exothermic sleeve is mixed into the green sand mold sand at the time of shake-out, orange peel defect is produced even in
the case where no exothermic sleeve is used, with green sand mold sand in which a large volume of exothermic sleeve is mixed.
As protective measures against this defect, we performed drying of the exothermic sleeve, reduction of water content in green
sand mold, addition of new sand, improvement of permeability, etc.
Figure 11. Defect of orange peel caused by excessive moisture and low refractory of mold.
Figure 12. Defect of orange peel caused by slag formation.
Figure 13. Defect of orange peel caused by influence of coner shrinkage.
Figure 14. Defect of orange peel caused by Al of exothermic sleeve.
COLD SHUT (AND SURFACE FOLD)
Cold shut defect is a defect produced, at a point of confluence of the poured molten metal, by having a border seam without
confluence of the molten metal. It is often produced with a rise of viscosity and a drop of fluidity of the molten metal, occuring
as a result of a drop of pouring temperature. The cases where the defect is produced because of the mold and countermeasures
for it are as follows:
(1) A gas produced from the mold stagnates (in the molten metal), preventing fluidity of the molten metal. (Increasing
permeability by reducing the production volume of gas.)
(2) High thermal conductivity of the mold and high solidification speed. (Use molding sand of low thermal conductivity.)
(3) Drop of fluidity of molten metal due to oxidation at the edge of molten metal by the gas from the mold. (Increase the
reducing atmosphere.)
(4) Easy wetting with a small contact angle between molten metal and mold. (Make it difficult for the molten metal from
wetting the mold, with the use of mold coating agent, etc.)
EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF COLD SHUT (AND SURFACE FOLD) DEFECT
Figure 15 shows an example analysis of cold shut defect originating from a drop of pouring temperature. This defect was
produced in the cope. The material is FCHIC, the master mold is green sand mold, and the cores are shell mold and cold box
mold. SEM observation revealed existence of non-metallic inclusion. AS seen from the result of EDS analysis, the
non-metallic inclusion consists of silica sand manganese silicate slag. We believe that this defect was produced at the point of
confluence of the poured molten metal, for such reasons as drop of viscosity of molten metal due to drop of pouring temperature,
entrainment of sand at the edge of molten metal at the time of pouring, generation of slag by oxidation of molten metal, etc.
Figure 16 shows an example analysis of cold shut defect originating from drop of pouring temperature and core gas. This
defect is a stripe-shaped defect produced directly under the parting plane of the core. The material is FCD600, the master mold
is green sand mold, and the cores are shell molds. SEM observation reveals that no clear inclusion exists in the defective
portion. EDS analysis of the defective portion detected Cu and O. Cu is segregated in the oxidized portion because of the low
standard generating energy of oxides. This defect tended to be produced in case where pouring temperature dropped. As
protective measures against this defect, we reduced the resin volume in the core. We believe that a drop of the volume of core
gas reduced oxidation of molten metal and also reduced the gas pressure in the mold cavity, improving fluidity of the molten
metal and thus preventing production of this defect.
Figure 17 shows an example analysis of cold shut defect originating from drop of pouring temperature and core gas. This
product is an engine block, and the defect was produced in the thin portion (water jacket section) of the cope. The material is
FC230, the master mold is green sand mold, and the cores are shell mold and cold box mold. The defect assumes the shape of
a stripe on the as-forged surface, and a wide through hole was found whe we cut the defective part. We believe that non
confluence of the molten metal in the thin portion resulted in production of cold shut defect. The core of the water jacket is
coated with an aqueous coating agent, and the defect tended to be reduced with extension of drying time of this coating agent.
This defect is believed to have been produced as the gas produced from the mold stagnated in the narrow cavity, lowering
fluidity of the molten metal.
Figure 18 shows an example analysis of cold shut defect originating from adsorption of slag. This product is a disc rotor, and
the defect was produced in the corner portion of the fins. The material is FC250, the master mold is green sand mold, and the
cores are shell molds. SEM observation revealed adhesion of graphite film and non-metallic inclusion was found in the
defective portion. EDS analysis reveals that the non-metallic inclusion consists of manganese silicate slag [Figure 18 (B)] and
silica sand [Figure 18 (C)]. We believe that, when the molten metal flows through the slit-shaped fin portion formed by the
cores, slag was caught in the form of stripe along the flow of the molten metal at the corner where the resistance to the flow of
molten metal becomes largest, producing a defect in the shape of a surface fold.
Figure 15. Defect of Cold shut caused by low pouring temperature and sand inclusion.
Figure 16. Defect of Cold shut caused by low pouring temperature and core’s gas.
Figure 17. Defect of cold shut caused by low pouring temperature and core’s gas.
Figure 18. Defect of surface fold caused by slag adsorption.
CRACKS (AND TEAR) DEFECT
Figure 19 shows that typical tear defects include hot tear due to solid shrinkage in the vicinity of the solidus, hot tear due to
embrittlement by sulfurizing, cold tear by gouging or shock, and cold tear due to premature shake-out. As a preventive
measures, provide the mold with collapsibility (change of process, use of cushioning material), because the problem is liable to
occur with molds with little collapsibility (especially furan mold).
EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF CRACKS & TEAR DEFECT
Figure 20 shows tear defect originating from segregation of trace elements. The material is FCV400, and the master mold and
the cores are phenol urethane molds. The SEM image in Figure 20 (B) clearly chows the presence of a tear. The EDS
analysis shows that Cu, S and Cr, which are trace elements, are segregated, and Si and O are condensed in the tear. Cu and Cr
are extremely rich. This defect is believed to have been produced because of segragation of trace elements Cu, Cr and
difference in solid shrinkage ratio from the base material in the defective portion.
Figure 21 shows tear defect originating from inhibition of spheroidization. This defect assumes the form a stripe found on the
worked surface. As observed by SEM, no crack was produced but a hair line crack was recognized with the naked eyes. The
material is FCV400, and the master mold and the cores are phenol urethane molds. Figure 21 (B) shows an image of SEM &
DES analysis of the defective portion, while Figure 21 (B) shows that of a normal portion near the defective portion. The
graphite in the defective portion assume the shape of flake, but in the shape of compacted vermicular in the normal portion.
Moreover, the EDS analysis shows that Cu is segregated in the defective portion. Cu is a spheroidization-inhibiting element.
This is a defect observed as a hair crack line which developed as a stripe from a difference in gloss on the worked surface,
because of the difference in the shape of graphite.
Figure 19. Defect of hot cracking caused by solidification shrinkage,

and cold cracking caused by shock.
Figure 20. Defect of crack caused by segregation of trace element.
Figure 21. Defect of crack caused by anti-graphite spheroidizing.
VEINING DEFECT
Figure 22 shows examples external swells, veining defect, and penetration defect produced on one a single mold with the
material of FC250, the master mold of green sand mold and the cores of shell molds. The respective defects are produced on
the surface of the shell cores. Figure 22 (A) shows an optical photo of the defective portion. The position where the defects
were produced is the point where the riser, the thin portion of the product, the thick portion of the product, and the shell cores
continue to one another. A delay in the solidification at the thick portion allows the thin part to solidify first, and the thick
portion forms a closed loop at the time of eutectic solidification. This constrains expansion of the molten metal and cause it to
concentrate on the surface of the cores, leading to production of the 3 different types of defect. In the present case, external
swells are produced when the mold is fragile and the mold wall moves, veining is produced if the mold is cracked, and
penetration occurs with melting of the mold sand.
Figure 22. Defect of veining caused by volume expansionof eutectic solidification.
CONCLUSIONS
Surface analyzing equipment, which can analyze a fine area, is effective for analyzing pinhole defect, penetration defect, and
inclusion defect, whose production mechanisms can be estimated through observation of a fine area. In the present study,
authors show example analyses by SEM & EDS, which are methods of surface analysis, of blowhole defect, shrinkage defect,
orange peel defect, cold shut & surface fold defect, and crack defect and veining defect, which are comparatively macrographic
defects, and clarified that surface analyzing equipment can be helpful in implementation of preventive measures against casting
defects.
REFERENCES
1. Kurokawa, Y., Kambayashi, H., Ozoe, N., Ota, H., Miyake, H., “Observation of Pinhole Defects in Cast Iron Castings
by Surface Analysis,”:AFS.Trans. vol.111 (2003), Paper 03-011(05).Pdf, p1-9.
2. Kambayashi,H.,Kurokawa,Y.,Ota,H.,Miyake,H., “Surface analysis evaluation of penetration defects occurring in cast
iron,”:AFS.Trans., vol. 111 (2003), Paper 03-013(05).pdf, p1-14.
3. Kambayashi,H.,Une,H.,Kurokawa,Y.,Ito,S.,Mikamoto,H.,Miyake,H., “Mold Surface Analysis Evaluation of
Inclusion Defects Occurring in Cast Iron Produced in Green Sand Molds,”:AFS.Trans. 112 (2004), Paper 04-017(05)
p1-13.

Observation of Defects in Cast Iron Castings by Surface Analysis

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Observation of Defects in Cast Iron Castings by Surface Analysis

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Observation of Defects in Cast Iron Castings by Surface Analysis

Copyright 2005 American Foundry Society

BLOW HOLE DEFECT

MgC2 + H2O → MgO + C2H2 (g) C2H2(g) → 2C + H2 (g) (1)

Figure 6. Defect of blow hole caused by acetylene gas.

EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF SHRINKAGE DEFECT

Figure 9. Defect of external shrinkage caused by close loop.

EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF ORANGE PEEL DEFECT

Figure 12. Defect of orange peel caused by slag formation.

Figure 14. Defect of orange peel caused by Al of exothermic sleeve.

EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF COLD SHUT (AND SURFACE FOLD) DEFECT

Figure 18. Defect of surface fold caused by slag adsorption.

EXAMPLE ANALYSIS OF CRACKS & TEAR DEFECT

Figure 19. Defect of hot cracking caused by solidification shrinkage,

Figure 21. Defect of crack caused by anti-graphite spheroidizing.

Figure 22. Defect of veining caused by volume expansionof eutectic solidification.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen