Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
of
FOUNDRY ENGINEERING
Published quarterly as the organ of the Foundry Commission of the Polish Academy of Sciences
ISSN (1897-3310)
Volume 10
Issue 4/2010
77 82
14/4
P. Jelnek*, T. Elbel
VB Ostrava University of Technology, FMMI
Foundry Department
*Corresponding author. E-mail address: petr.jelinek@vsb.cz
Received 16.06.2010; accepted in revised form 25.06.2010
Abstract
Application of the Chvorinovs rule for calculation of the total time of casting solidification made also possible to determine chilling
effect of foundry moulds (coefficient of heat accumulation of the mould, bf) with use of mixtures with new kinds of non-quartz base sands
(Magnesite, Chromite, Olivine, Dunite, Kerphalit). Processes by several authors (G. Halbart, A. I. Vejnik, G. A. Anisovich) were used for
mathematical treatment of measurement results and determination of bf. The highest values were achieved for magnesite moulds followed
by chromite ones; the lowest values, approximately half-ones, represented the Dunite moulds. At the same time the results made possible
to determine the Chvorinovs mean solidification constants (k) that are in direct proportional dependence on bf and indirect proportional
to solidification time (1).
Keywords: Coefficient of heat accumulation of moulds, Non-quartz base sands (Magnesite, Chromite, Olivine, Dunite, Kerphalit),
Chvorinovs mean solidification constants
1. Introduction
A mould and its physical and chemical properties decide not
only the surface quality of castings but their internal quality too.
For simulating the foundry processes, casting crystallization and
cooling in particular, it is necessary to know above all the chilling
effect of the mould thermal conductivity (), temperature
diffusivity (a) and coefficient of heat accumulation of the mould
(bf) (heat diffusivity coefficient). The bf coefficient is also
necessary for determining the solidification constant when
calculating the solidification time of castings (hot spots).
77
(1)
R =
(2)
S
The above mentioned Chvorinovs rule (1) was latter on
criticized by the author himself to the effect that it corresponds to
one-dimensional heat transfer [6]. Heat transfer on concave mould
surfaces curved inward (e.g. at a cylinder, a ball) is different and
it can be faster than in case of a flat one-dimensional wall (a case
of a plate). Difference of heat flows is caused by a fact that with
the same value of relative thickness of a casting the sphere
solidifies most quickly, the cylinder more slowly and the plate
solidifies as a last one. In such a way a more general relation for
calculating the solidification time has resulted as follows:
= . k . R2
1 =
V1
S1
2
1 L + c1 t 1 t s
2
4 ts 2 c2 2
)]2
(4)
2 c2 2
(5)
/ R2 = . k
(6)
and the shape coefficient for the plate casting is = 1 and for
other forms (cylinder, ball) it is < 1. Then the mean
solidification coefficient for the same casting material is
dependent on the coefficient of heat accumulation of the mould bf
and it can be a criterion of chilling effect of the mould as already
given by Chvorinov on several examples [3].
(3)
1
The authors of the paper prefere for bf the term heat accumulation
because it better represents heat absorption in sand moulds.
78
Table 2.
Bulk density of cores
Mixture mark
No 1
No 2
No 3
No 4
No 5
No 6
No 7 **
No 8 *
[b]
Bulk density of cores
[kg/m3]
2694
1779
2011
3067
2555
2911
1777
3131
* Chromite AFS 50
** Kerphalit KF 200/400 m, AFS 50
400
[a]
38
Fig. 1. Mould of the plate test casting with a false core (a) and a
core box with a compacted core (b) with premoulded channels for
thermocouples.
3. Experimental methods of
determination of the coefficient of
heat accumulation of the mould
(thermal diffusivity coefficient)
Many authors when calculating the coefficient of heat
accumulation of the mould (bf) result from determination of
solidification time of test castings of the semi-endless plate form
with linear thermal field [8 12]. Solidification time of the plate
was determined by direct measurement of temperatures in the
casting thermal axis and it was checked by calculation from
chemical composition of metal with use of a method designed by
L. Kucha and L. Repick [13].
G. Halbart [8] assumes that temperature of the mould metal
interface (ti) is equal to solidification temperature (ts). Generally
79
bf
R1
. 1 L + c1 t1 t s
R1
1
L
=
=
=
c1
t1
1
=
=
(7)
2 ti
where:
)]
bf =
R1
2
where:
c1 ln
tL
t1
2
+
1 [L
+ c1 t L t s
ts
)]
(8)
1 = p + t
t = mass density of solidifying metal (within t1 tL)
tL = liquidus temperature of metal
bf
*
, to the S* + S1
n2 + 1
quadrangle surface in which the parabola is situated (fig. 2.):
*
*
S + S1
*
S1 =
n2 + 1
R 1 1 L
=
ti
2n 2
n2 + 1
. 1
(11)
(9)
*
If the S* and S1 surfaces are determined from the experiment
then it is possible to determine the parabola degree as follows:
n2 =
80
*
S1
(10)
Table 3.
Table of measured values
Mould
Solidus
temperature
Solidification
time
[C]
1 [s]
1 -Magnesite
1479.2
127
2 Dunite
1473.1
368
3 Olivine
1473.5
340
4
Chromite
1474.1
215
1470.5
294
5
Chromite
Olivine
6
Chromite
1475.3
173
7
Kerphalit
1473.9
345
8
Chromite
1476.6
198
Temperatures achieved
in the moment of
solidification ending
Thermocouple No
Temperature
[C]
99.5
1 40 mm
from the
face
99.5
2 30.5
99.0
3 21.5
492
4 13.5
5 ti
1178.6
mould/metal
interface
1
98.5
2
97.5
3
231
4
552.5
5 ti
1401
1
98.5
2
99.5
3
184.5
4
626.5
5 ti
1388.6
1
87.5
2
98.5
3
100
4
329.5
5 ti
1329.9
1
57.5
2
92.5
3
208
4
509.5
5 ti
1408.2
1
22
2
30
3
81.5
4
274
5 ti
1308
1
92.5
2
106
3
302.5
4
676.5
5 ti
1370
1
27.5
2
64
3
102
4
364.5
5 ti
1282
[%]
100
78.8
68.1
66.0
55.0
51.9
49.4
47.4
Table 5.
bf results according to A. I. VEJNIK (equation 8)
Coefficient of heat accumulation
Mould composition
bf [W.s0.5.m-2.K-1]
1 Magnesite
2339
6 Chromite
2044
8 Chromite
1903
4 Chromite
1834
5 Chromite Olivine
1587
7 Kerphalit
1453
3 Olivine
1453
2 Dunite
1397
[%]
100
87.4
81.4
78.4
67.8
62.1
62.0
59.7
Table 6.
bf results according to G. A. ANISOVICH (equation 11)
Coefficient of heat accumulation
Mould composition
bf [W.s0.5.m-2.K-1]
[%]
1 Magnesite
2212
100
6 Chromite
1738
78.5
8 Chromite
1725
78.0
4 Chromite
1472
66.6
7 Kerphalit
1273
57.5
5 Chromite Olivine
1222
55.3
3 Olivine
1152
52.1
2 Dunite
1093
49.2
81
k =
References
[1]
(12)
[3]
1 Magnesite
6 Chromite
8 Chromite
4 Chromite
5 Chromite Olivine
3 Olivine
7 Kerphalit
8 Dunite
The work has been worked out with a financial support from The
Grant Agency of the Czech Republic in the framework of the
project Graphite nucleation and possibilities of control its
morphology in ferrous alloys registration No 106/08/0789
[2]
R1
Mould composition
Acknowledgements
[4]
[5]
[6]
m s 12
0.00168
0.00144
0.00135
0.00129
0.00110
0.00103
0.00102
0.00099
4. Conclusion
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
82