Fig. 4. displays an illustrated schematic with the original scheme used to cast the valve housing, where molten steel poured into the sprue cup and flowed through the lateral runner to the mold cavity. The cavity's initial air was exhausted from the vent hole to liberate the gating system's pressure. The dimensions of the gating system were showed in Fig. 4. In our CAE simulations, we selected the trial conditions in Table 1., which are widely used in the fabrication of investment casting in our trial casting.
Table 1. Trial casting and simulation conditions for every casting projects
Casting material
|
Pouring temperature (°C)
|
Shell mold temperature (°C)
|
Shell mold thickness (mm)
|
316L
|
1680
|
1180
|
6
|
Fig. 5. respectively present interpretations of the gating systems in Case A, Case B, Case C, and Case D. To ensure a reasonable comparison, all numerical simulations of the casting schemes in Fig. 5. were produced using the same conditions in real trial casting. Case A and C have similar assembly patterns, so do CASE B and D. Case C and D are the version of Case A and B to extend the casting distance for adding ceramic core to avoid the difficulty of processing the inner hole of the valve housing. Extending casting distance is designed for placing ceramic cores in the wax model. In Case of D, the outer screw holes are additionally filled in, and the screw holes are processed after casting to avoid defects on the inner side of screw holes. The brown color shape in Case C and D are CAE models of ceramic cores.
Fig. 6. shows the predicted defect regions that appeared by the solidification shrinkage. The modulus method in C3P indicates these shrinkage defect areas. In light of the casting theory, the ununiformed cooling temperature areas usually cause shrinkage defects. It is considering to avoid those defects is what a good pattern of assembling needs. Fig. 6. (a) displays the PES distributions of the gating system in Case A. Shrinkage porosity appeared inside the ring at the front side of casting and the inner side of the screw hole, as shown in Fig. 7. (a). It can be attributed to the tangible that the geometric thickness and cooling rate around the screw hole are higher than the screw hole itself during the cooling phase. Therefore, the molten metal in the riser cannot supplement the screw hole.
Fig. 6. (b) presents the PES distributions of the gating system under Case B as the pattern's front view. Under Case B, the combination of pattern with the assembly method of placing the thick side of the casting in the middle diminished the PES values observed in the ring and the part near the screw hole in Case A. However, we reduced the rate of shrinkage by changing the assembly method.
Fig. 7. shows a graph of the way of pattern assembly versus the percentage of shrinkage elements and indicates that the shrinkage percentage of the casting will be reduced by nearly 45% with the different assembly methods. Changing the placement method and placing the thick side of the casting in the middle of the pattern can make the solidification trend more continuous. The feeding function of the runner can be better. The area where the isolated liquid region is reduced from Case A to B and the location where shrinkage porosity occurs will also be reduced.
Fig. 8 (a) illustrates the shell mold's cracking during trial casting in Case A for real trial casting photograph, as indicated in the red ellipse inset. One of the attributing reasons for the shell mold cracking is the unanticipated change of the velocity magnitude. The corresponding simulated results in Fig. 8. (b) show the velocity magnitude higher than 2500mm/s in red rectangle inset, and magnify view reveals the maximum value can exceed 2850mm/s. A similar trend was also observed in Fig. 8. (c) pressure magnitude can locally accumulate 1.11 MPa in red rectangle inset. Besides, the precipitous gradient of the pressure and velocity magnitude (velocity gradient is about 1025.5 1/s, the pressure gradient is about 0.015 MPa/mm) has a similar position with the cracking part of shell mold in Fig. 8. (a).
Fig. 9. illustrates shell mold temperature with time in Case B with measured temperature with a thermal camera (solid line) and simulated temperature (dotted line). Generally speaking, the simulated temperature higher than the measured temperature, and the temperature difference was in the range of 100 -200°C for P1-P3 positions. The possible discrepancy was mainly attributed to forced convection of the wind in the open space, measurement error due to the heat photography distance.
Fig. 10. shows the expected defect areas from Case A to Case D occurred by the solidification shrinkage. The results of Fig. 10. (a)(b) have been discussed in Fig. 6. Fig. 10. (c) shows the Case C PES distributions as the front view of the pattern. Casting defects appeared inside the ring at the front side of casting and the inner side of the screw hole, as shown in Fig. 10 (c). These areas with shrinkage defects in Case C are similar to Case A's location while extensively distributed and can be primarily attributed to the solidified tendency to become less continuous due to the distance between the castings being extended. As the distance between the castings becomes more extensive, the heat preservation effect caused by heat radiation is also reduced, causing the solidification tendency to become worse. It also causes the influence of runner feeding in Case C to be worse than the Case A.
Fig. 10. (d) shows the Case D PES distributions as the front view of the pattern. The phenomenon observed between Case B & D is similar to Case A & B. The reason for the slight increase in the percentage of shrinkage defects is the extending of the casting distance.
Fig 11. Informs the shrinkage porosity prediction in Case A to Case D. When the distances between castings increase in patterns, the percentages of elements with shrinkage increase (Case C has 5% more PES than Case A, and Case D has 20% more than Case B). Though Case D has more PES, it can prevent the shrinkage defects on the inside of the screw hole, and we must choose the final case in Case C or D due to avoid the difficulty of processing the inner hole on the casting by adding ceramic cores.
Fig. 12. (a)-(d) reveal the positions of the virtual thermo-dynamic sensor (VTDS) placed in each gating systems: (a) Case A, (b) Case B, (c) Case C, (d) Case D. In the schematic diagram, marked the VTDS from number 1 to 5 on the red dots. The VTDS were placed in the center of the runner, gate, and structure of the valve housing, where there can describe the solidification trend of the entire casting clearly.
Fig. 13. (a)–(d) presents temperature alternations of molten metal at the VTDS in different casting scheme as a time function: (a) Case A, (b) Case B, (c) Case C, (d) Case D. The results in Fig. 17 illustrated the following significant findings: (1) The time required for the molten iron from the liquidus temperature (1412 °C) drops to the solidus temperature (1338 °C) of the alloy 316L at point 4 & 5 was as follows: 150 s (Case A) and 175 s (Case B), as shown in Fig. 13 (a) and (b). This time discrepancy demonstrates that the pattern assembly method will delay solidification for 25 s and allow enough molten metal flow into the mold cavity. (2) The time required for the molten iron from the liquidus temperature (1412 °C) drops to the solidus temperature (1338 °C) of the alloy 316L at point 4 & 5 was as follows: 100 s (Case C) and 138 s (Case D), as shown in Fig. 13 (c) and (d). This time discrepancy demonstrates that the pattern assembly method will delay solidification for 38 s and allow enough molten metal flows into the mold cavity. (3) We can also find that Case C and D's cooling rate at points 4 and 5 is faster than that of Case A and B, resulting in a slight drop in Case C and D's casting quality compared to Case A & B. It can be approved in Fig.13. (4) The cooling rate of point 1, 2, and 3 are slower than point 4,5 in Fig. 13., it proves that when the casting starts to solidify, the molten metal can continue to be fed into the casting due to the higher temperature of the runner and pouring cup, reducing the generation of shrinkage defects. The slower cooling rate significantly reduced the likelihood of shrinkage porosity and shrinkage cavity
Fig. 14. (a)(c) illustrate the predicted spots of shrinkage defect distribution on the workpiece's surface in simulation. The areas where shrinking defects formed are shown in blue areas. Fig. 14. (b)(d) reveals the casting defects on the surface of the valve housing in the photograph. These effects can be attributed to the placement method of the assembly pattern. In Case C, the thicker part of the casting was placed on the tree's outer side, where a larger cooling rate would be. An isolated liquid region occurred at the rapidly cooling place and caused shrinking porosity.
Fig. 15. present some of the cavitation defects on the surface manufactured by investment casting, including microporous forming due to shrinkage between the corner screw hole's inner side due to geometric inequality of the casting. Designers must have the ability to make precise predictions concerning shrinkage during the cooling process to develop solutions to eliminate the defects.
Ceramic cores were utilized in our Cases C, D because inner holes are hard to be processed. However, the ceramic cores were easily broken while molten iron pouring in when the first trial casting in Case C and Case D. Ceramic core fracturing problem caused valve housing shape deformed as shown in Fig. 16. The best solution for this problem is to change the composition of the ceramic cores, and the results are satisfactory.
Fig. 17. (a) illustrates wrinkled surface defects in shell mold cracks caused by a high-temperature gradient in the solidification process during trial casting in Case D for real trial casting photograph. Simulation results in regions with a large temperature gradient (Case D) coincides in the same position with some surface defects on actual casting. After pouring 645 seconds in simulation, the orange rectangle inset's temperature can rise from 1037°C to 1178°C within a 3cm distance shown in Fig. 17. (b) and the temperature gradient is about 47°C/cm. The red rectangle inset in Fig. 17. (c) reveals the temperature after pouring 364 seconds can rise from 1059°C to 1161°C within 3cm distance, and the temperature gradient is about 34 °C/cm. The large temperature gradient may cause the casting to expand unevenly, which will cause some micro cracks on the surface of the shell mold and cause the wrinkled surface defects of the casting.
Fig. 18. According to Case D, submit photographs of trial casting to certify the simulation results with a filled corner screw hole: Fig. 18. (a) simulation model of Case D without surface defects, Fig. 18. (b) the finished product of casting after machining, Fig. 18. (c)(d) enlarged images showing the perfect screw hole of Case D. After machining, the inner wall of the screw hole in Case D is perfect without defects, which meets customer needs for this casting. There aren't any apparent shrinkage defects in the finished product, as revealed in Fig. 15(b)–(d). Moreover, no black spots in the X-ray photograph detected inside the valve housing by nondestructive testing, as shown in Fig. 18. (e)–(f). The quality of the trial stainless steel (316L) valve housing from Case D contributes convincing evidence supporting the effectiveness of our casting strategy of the valve housing.
Fig. 19 illustrates shell mold temperature with time in Case D with measured temperature with the thermal camera (solid line) and simulated temperature (dotted line). Generally speaking, the simulated temperature lower than the measured temperature, and the temperature difference was about 100°C for P1-P3 positions. The possible discrepancy was mainly attributed to the difference in environmental conditions in the open space. The idealization of the environment temperature setting in simulation causes the shell mold temperature to drop rapidly at the cooling process beginning after the distance between the castings extended.
To validate the accuracy of simulation results, the valve housing was investment casted in the casting factory using the CAE derived casting parameters. X-ray was used to evaluate the adequacy of optimized casting conditions in reducing or avoiding casting defects. Fig. 20. (b) presents a photograph of the wax pattern. Fig. 20. (c) presents a front-view of casting at the left side and back view of casting at the right side without surface defects of the final casting under Case D. Fig. 20. (d) demonstrates X-ray images of the casting results, which prove the efficacy of the casting parameters under Case D. No black spots in the X-ray photograph were detected inside the valve housing under Case D, as shown in the image in Fig. 20. (d). The quality of the trial stainless steel (316L) valve housing from Case D contributes convincing evidence supporting the effectiveness of our casting strategy of the valve housing