This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
rear charge well. A continuous protective N2


Degassing to reduce hydrogen concentrations in the melt was carried out by bubbling Ar2


gas via a perforated lance in the gas atmosphere


each measurement), as shown in Figure 3. The same mea- surements were performed for the RPT sample densities of 2.66, 2.71 and 2.72g/cc. The density of 2.70g/cc was below the reported hydrogen concentration threshold in the melt needed to produce gas porosity.21-23


It was found that for the Al-7Si-4Cu alloy a 2.70g/ cc RPT density reading corresponded to the mean hydrogen concentration of 0.123ccH2


Before the initial chemical composition (Al-7Si-1Cu alloy) was altered (according to Table 1) the Aluminum Thermal Analysis Platform (AlTAP) was used for thermal character-


existed over the bath surface to ensure that further hydrogen absorption and oxidation did not occur. Casting would not commence until the Reduced Pressure Test (RPT) sample density achieved 2.70g/cc. The RPT sample’s density was correlated with the Alspek® in-situ melt hydrogen analyzer data.15


/100g Al (repeated 3 times for


ization of three test samples. The mass of the AlTAP test samples was 250 ± 12gms. Each sample was poured into a steel cup made of thin rolled 304 steel. The calculated solidi- fication rate between the non-equilibrium liquidus and soli- dus was 0.15°C/s that was designed to simulate the casting component bulkhead solidification conditions. Low expan- sion fused silica foam (Rescor 310-M) was used on the top and bottom of the solidifying test sample to promote Newto- nian radial heat transfer.


Once the test sample’s cooling curve was established, a first derivative (dT/dt) was determined using the simplified least squares method. The smoothing of the cooling curve data was performed using the Savitzky et al.,24


methodol-


ogy. Abrupt changes in the dT/dt plots provide characteris- tic temperature points, caused by latent heat released from a specific phase growth. The fraction solid (fs


in Figure 4. The base line curve represents the tested material that hypothetically does not go through semi-sol-


) curves were


determined via a baseline method reported by Kierkus et al.,23


              





International Journal of Metalcasting/Fall 10


35

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85