Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) pp 123-128 | Cite as
The Simulation as Prediction Tool to Determine the Method of Riser Calculation More Efficient
Abstract
The riser must be adequate to satisfy the liquid and solidification shrinkage requirements of the casting. In addition, the riser itself will be solidifying, so the total shrinkage requirement to be met will be for the riser/casting combination. The total feeding requirement will depend on the specific alloy, the amount of superheat, the casting geometry, and the molding medium. The shape of a casting will affect the size of the riser needed to meet its feed requirements for the obvious reason that the longer the casting takes to solidify, the longer the riser must maintain a reservoir of liquid metal. A variety of methods have been devised to calculate the riser size (shape factor method, geometric method, the modulus method) needed to ensure that liquid feed metal will be available for as long as the solidifying casting requires. In this research has been calculated the riser geometry by different methods for a piece type wheel and the simulation has been used to determine which of the methods it is more efficient.
Keywords
Simulation casting quality risers designPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Beckermann, C., O. Shouzhu, and K.D. Carlson, Feeding and risering of high-alloy steel castings. Metallurgical and materials transactions B, 2005. 36B(97).Google Scholar
- 2.Wloadawer, R., Directional Solidification of Steel Castings ed. P. Press. 1966.Google Scholar
- 3.Beckermann, C., et al., Development of New Feeding-Distance Rules Using Casting Simulation: Part I. Methodology. Metallurgical and Materials transactions B, 2002. 33B.Google Scholar
- 4.Tavakoli, R. and P. Davami, Optimal riser design in sand casting process by topology optimization with SIMP method I: Poisson approximation of nonlinear heat transfer equation. Struct Multidisc Optim, 2008. 36: p. 193–202.Google Scholar
- 5.Gunasegaram, D.R. and B.J. Smith. MAGMASOFT helps assure quality in a progressive Australian iron foundry. in 32nd National Convention of the Australian Foundry Institute. 2001. Fremantle, Australia.Google Scholar
- 6.Coello Machado, N.I. and L.H. Suárez Lisca. Casting parts quality improvement using forecast and control process parameters. in 5th International doctoral students workshop on logistics. 2012. Magdeburg, Germany: Prof. Dr. -Ing. habil. Prof. E. h. Dr. h. c. mult. Michael Schenk.Google Scholar
- 7.MONTGOMERY, D., Design and analysis of experiments. Fifth Edition. 1997, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar