54 Figure 4. Comparison of simulation results with shop floor results. Contact: DAVID C. SCHMIDT [email protected] temperature, we see that we are now predicting shrinkage areas right down in the area that the production casting was showing. In fact, simulation now shows a massive loss of density in the middle, which literally would be a hole just like we saw in the castings. A comparison of the results from the 3 sets of simulations is shown in Figure 4. So, by using the high end of the Pouring Temperature and the low end of the Chemistry Range, we are best able to predict shop floor problems. Knowing that there are going to be variations, we normally want to design the process for the worst of those conditions. So, for future simulations, what the foundry is going to do is use the lower end of the chemistry spectrum in the higher end of the pouring temperature spectrum, because that produces the poorest simulation results, then design the gating and risering to attack those worst-case scenarios. Two-way communication between the shop floor and the engineering office improves simulation accuracy and makes simulation a more valuable tool for producing quality castings.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDI4Njg=