This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Denison Industries can produce cores up to 600 lbs. with a binder percentage of 0.4-0.45%.


Walker said. “But really, we were trying to find the best binder for our prod- uct. In turn, that meant dealing with our variables that we had never really addressed before to understand them fully. We challenged ourselves to bring our binders down, for our benefit and for the environment.” Denison invited three binder suppliers to provide a solution to its requirements but eventually settled on a mixture of its own design with a lower binder percentage. Te met- alcaster watched every aspect of the process both in the lab and on the plant floor, running tests for strength and core quality and studying how the binder held up over time and per- formed at shakeout. “We started out trying to get to at least 0.7% binder and then see what we could do,” said Tim Purcell, Porter Warner Industries, Arlington, Texas, who consulted with Denison Industries during the testing. “Ten we said we’ll keep going until we can’t go any longer.” Operators were consulted to be sure no variables were missed in the testing.


Denison performed tests in the lab on test bars and tests in the shop on 600- lb. (272-kg) core assemblies. “By testing on the floor, we were


able to start working with the high temperatures and moisture ranges that we would see,” Walker said. “All of that has an impact on how the mold sets up and the strength built into the mold.” Based on the results of a round of


tests, Denison separated the chemi- cals in the binder mixture, weighed them, and mixed a new trial binder by increasing or decreasing the percent- age of a chemical. “We repeated the process over and


over, and I charted out the variables from the data to see what was tak- ing place in the process,” Walker said. “After a week’s worth of collection, I’d look back and see how each variable correlated. From there we started devel- oping what the next mix should be.”


Bringing Down the Binder In each test conducted, the casting


company purposely learned where failure occurred to establish a nominal


We’re so comfortable with [our binder] now, operators hardly ask questions about it.”—Mike Walker, Denison Industries


38 | MODERN CASTING July 2011


operating range. Tests for failure were conducted offline so shop personnel would remain unbiased toward the various binder mixtures being tested. As Denison passed through round


after round of tests, ratcheting down the amount of binder chemical, it discovered the plant could operate at a high level with much less binder than it had been using. Eventually, the plant was producing 600-lb. cores in the summer with 0.4-0.45% binder— down from 0.65%—resulting in cast- ings with C60 surface finish or better. “I didn’t know what to expect,”


Walker said. “We were standing on the edge of a cliff. But we took the data and remained unbiased about what the process could do.” Walker said Denison has suc-


cessfully produced cores with binder percentages as low as 0.38 but holds at 0.4% to manage at a comfortable level. “If someone would have told me


they would be able to make a core at 0.38% binder, I would have said they were crazy,” Purcell said. According to Purcell, most aluminum nobake casting facilities use binder levels from 0.7 to 1%. Te lower binder level means


both decreased VOCs in the casting facility and an increase in the two- part binder’s flash points (the point at which chemical vapors will ignite) to 389.98F (198.9C) for Part 2 and 200.1F (93.4C) for Part 1.


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