| Literature DB >> 32182851 |
Krzysztof Janerka1, Łukasz Kostrzewski2, Marcin Stawarz1, Jan Jezierski1.
Abstract
The article presents issues related to melting ductile iron grade EN-GJS-400-15, with different proportions of feedstock (steel scrap and pig iron). The main attention was paid to determining the impact of silicon carbide on the structure and properties of melted cast iron. In the conducted melts, carbon and silicon deficiencies were supplemented with a suitably chosen carburizer, ferrosilicon, and SiC metallurgical silicon carbide. The percentage of silicon carbide in the charge ranged from 0 to 0.91%. The basic condition for the planning of melts was to maintain the repeatability of the chemical composition of the output cast iron and cast iron after the secondary treatment of liquid metal with various charge compositions. Based on the tests, calculations, and analyses of the results obtained, it was concluded that the addition of SiC may increase the number and size of graphite precipitates. Increasing the SiC content in the charge also caused a change in the solidification nature of the alloy and the mechanism of growth of spheroidal graphite precipitates, causing their surface to form a scaly shell. The influence of the addition of silicon carbide on the reduction of the temperature of liquidus in the alloys was also observed. Silicon carbide had a positive effect on the structure and properties of melted alloys. The introduction of SiC into the melting in the studied range caused an increase in the content of carbon and silicon without causing an increase in the amount of impurities in the alloy.Entities:
Keywords: cast iron structure; crystallization; ductile iron; silicon carbide
Year: 2020 PMID: 32182851 PMCID: PMC7085072 DOI: 10.3390/ma13051231
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
List of charge materials and additives.
| Melt No. | Charge Material | Additive | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pig, | Scrap 1, kg | Scrap 2, kg | Ret, | Carb, | FeSi, | SiC, | |
| 1 | 1200 | 200 | - | 700 | - | - | - |
| 2 | 1200 | 200 | - | 700 | - | - | - |
| 3 | 200 | - | 900 | 1050 | 50 | 8 | - |
| 4 | 200 | - | 900 | 1050 | 50 | 5 | - |
| 5 | 200 | - | 900 | 1100 | 40 | 8 | 10 |
| 6 | 200 | - | 900 | 1100 | 40 | - | 10 |
| 7 | 200 | - | 900 | 1100 | 35 | - | 15 |
| 8 | 200 | - | 900 | 1100 | 35 | - | 15 |
| 9 | - | - | 1200 | 1000 | 45 | - | 20 |
| 10 | - | - | 1200 | 1000 | 45 | - | 20 |
Results of chemical and thermal analysis of the base cast iron.
| Melt No. | C, | Si, | Mn,% | P, | S, | Cr, | Cu, | TL | TS | CE | Sc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.85 | 1.54 | 0.26 | 0.027 | 0.020 | 0.027 | 0.05 | 1152 | 1125 | 4.19 | 1.024 |
| 2 | 3.88 | 1.35 | 0.19 | 0.040 | 0.007 | 0.023 | 0.02 | 1152 | 1125 | 4.19 | 1.024 |
| 3 | 3.72 | 1.43 | 0.24 | 0.027 | 0.020 | 0.027 | 0.05 | 1160 | 1126 | 4.12 | 1.005 |
| 4 | 3.83 | 1.49 | 0.24 | 0.036 | 0.014 | 0.027 | 0.04 | 1246 | 1124 | 4.38 | 1.072 |
| 5 | 3.84 | 1.54 | 0.28 | 0.026 | 0.018 | 0.034 | 0.12 | 1155 | 1126 | 4.17 | 1.017 |
| 6 | 3.87 | 1.47 | 0.25 | 0.031 | 0.012 | 0.028 | 0.09 | 1142 | 1128 | 4.28 | 1.047 |
| 7 | 3.94 | 1.59 | 0.30 | 0.038 | 0.019 | 0.032 | 0.10 | 1140 | 1124 | 4.44 | 0.990 |
| 8 | 3.83 | 1.41 | 0.16 | 0.022 | 0.014 | 0.024 | 0.03 | 1134 | 1127 | 4.18 | 1.022 |
| 9 | 3.90 | 1.34 | 0.18 | 0.020 | 0.018 | 0.027 | 0.03 | 1143 | 1127 | 4.27 | 1.045 |
| 10 | 3.83 | 1.73 | 0.19 | 0.019 | 0.014 | 0.037 | 0.06 | 1127 | 1123 | 4.41 | 1.081 |
Figure 1Impact of SiC content (increase of additive in subsequent melts) on liquidus TL and solidus TS temperature.
Chemical analysis of cast iron after the spheroidization process.
| Melt No. | C, | Si, | Mn, | P, | S, | Cr, | Cu, | Mg, |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.48 | 2.53 | 0.25 | 0.028 | 0.011 | 0.031 | 0.06 | 0.052 |
| 2 | 3.66 | 2.64 | 0.20 | 0.040 | 0.009 | 0.028 | 0.02 | 0.052 |
| 3 | 3.52 | 2.52 | 0.24 | 0.028 | 0.011 | 0.031 | 0.06 | 0.052 |
| 4 | 3.56 | 2.45 | 0.24 | 0.034 | 0.009 | 0.032 | 0.04 | 0.045 |
| 5 | 3.68 | 2.66 | 0.28 | 0.027 | 0.012 | 0.035 | 0.12 | 0.058 |
| 6 | 3.71 | 2.55 | 0.26 | 0.031 | 0.013 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.052 |
| 7 | 3.67 | 2.59 | 0.29 | 0.036 | 0.011 | 0.036 | 0.10 | 0.050 |
| 8 | 3.58 | 2.44 | 0.17 | 0.022 | 0.012 | 0.025 | 0.03 | 0.047 |
| 9 | 3.72 | 2.55 | 0.18 | 0.020 | 0.010 | 0.028 | 0.03 | 0.058 |
| 10 | 3.57 | 2.53 | 0.19 | 0.019 | 0.012 | 0.038 | 0.06 | 0.050 |
Test results of mechanical properties.
| Melt No. | UTS, | e, | YS, | BHN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 474 | 23.5 | 336 | 171 |
| 2 | 450 | 24 | 317 | 163 |
| 3 | 450 | 24 | 317 | 163 |
| 4 | 460 | 21.5 | 317 | 165 |
| 5 | 470 | 23 | 329 | 170 |
| 6 | 451 | 22 | 311 | 159 |
| 7 | 464 | 24 | 324 | 163 |
| 8 | 428 | 23 | 287 | 154 |
| 9 | 441 | 18 | 306 | 161 |
| 10 | 453 | 20.5 | 312 | 163 |
Figure 2Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and Brinell hardness number (BHN) in individual melts.
Figure 3Microstructure of sample 1 non-etched (a) and etched (b).
Figure 4Microstructure of sample 5 non-etched (a) and etched (b).
Figure 5Microstructure of sample 9 non-etched (a) and etched (b).
Results of the quantitative analysis of the structure (average values).
| Melt No. | Number of graphite precipitates per mm2 | Surface of graphite precipitates, | Coefficient of shape | Content of pearlite, % | Content of ferrite, |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 310 | 216.4 | 0.886 | 4.12 | 95.88 |
| 3 | 407 | 182.6 | 0.938 | 2.38 | 97.62 |
| 5 | 300 | 240.9 | 0.946 | 4.51 | 95.49 |
| 6 | 385 | 235.8 | 0.954 | 3.78 | 96.22 |
| 8 | 367 | 240.9 | 0.945 | 1.63 | 98.37 |
| 9 | 384 | 264.5 | 0.949 | 0.30 | 99.70 |
Figure 6Images of sample fractures 1 magnification 250× (a) and 4600× (b).
Figure 7Images of sample fractures 5 magnification 235× (a) and 4300× (b).
Figure 8Images of sample fractures 10 magnification 265x (a) and 5200x (b).