Redesigning Aluminum Foundry Alloys For Material Cost Reduction

Redesigning
Aluminium Foundry Alloys

for
Material Cost Reduction
SARGAM METALS P.LTD

Sargam Metals Pvt. Ltd.
A Compilation of the Papers presented at

the Workshop organised by
Sargam Metals Pvt. Ltd
on the 21st of November 2001
at Chennai.
‘FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY’

© All rights reserved. No reproduction in full or in part without the explicit consent of
M/s Sargam Metals Pvt. Ltd., 2, Ramavaram Road, Manapakkam, Chennai 600089,
India. Tel.: +91-44-249-1796; Fax: +91-44-249-1651;
email: sargam_metals@vsnl.com
-2-
Contents
1 Foreword 4
2 Aluminium Foundry Alloys – Position in the Aluminium

Chain 5
3 Why Redesign? – The Impact of Alloy Specifications on Cost 12
4 Role of alloying elements and impurities 23
5 A Comparison of major international specifications

for Aluminium Foundry Alloys 29
6 The Process of Redesigning – a suggested approach 43
-3-
Foreword
Though Aluminium foundry alloys have been made in India for more than five decades and
are widely used today, especially in the automotive industry, the level of awareness among
the users of the alloys about alloy specifications is very low. The effect alloying and
impurity element specifications have, not only on the properties of the alloy, but more
importantly, on the cost of the alloy, is not clearly known, understood and appreciated.
Till the opening up of the economy in the early nineties, Aluminium foundry alloys were
essentially made in India only from primary metal, which was an anomaly in itself.
Because of this historical mind set Indian users, even today, are not fully aware of the role
of recycling and the fact that the world over, Aluminium foundry alloys are the biggest
consumers of recycled material. This quite often leads users to specify unnecessarily close
impurity tolerances even for castings that do not warrant such restrictions. This adversely
affects the cost of the alloy.
Secondly, improvements in foundry technology, machining capabilities, process

capabilities and in product application environments are rarely reflected through
corresponding changes in alloy specifications. Again, the main reason for this is the lack of
awareness.
To counter this, as a first step, SARGAM METALS organised a workshop on 21st November
2001 at Chennai entitled “REDESIGNING ALUMINIUM FOUNDRY ALLOYS FOR
MATERIAL COST REDUCTION”. The purpose was to educate the user on Aluminium
foundry alloys, its position in the recycling chain, impact of alloy specifications on alloy
costs and also to provide a comparison of current major international Alloy specifications.
The ultimate objective was to encourage users of Aluminium castings to examine their
alloy specifications to see if their current specifications – of alloying elements and impurity
limits – can be changed to enable higher user of Aluminium secondary material without
affecting the functional requirements of the casting.
The positive response to the workshop has prompted SARGAM to compile and bring out
the papers presented in the workshop in the form of this book.
Mr. A.V.Kannan, General Manager Sales at SARGAM and Mr. V.S.Rajan, Manager-
Quality and R&D at SARGAM put together a lot of the material presented here.
SARGAM also gratefully acknowledges the encouragement and support given by its
esteemed customers to the workshop and to this compilation and hopes that this
compilation will benefit them.
-4-
Aluminium Foundry Alloys – Position in the Aluminium Chain
Introduction
In order to fully understand and appreciate the concepts explained in subsequent papers, it
is essential to have a clear background picture of the Aluminium family, the concept of
recycling and where Aluminium foundry alloys fit in, in the Aluminium chain. This paper
attempts to give you just such a background information.
The History of Aluminium

Aluminium is the most abundant metal in the earth’s crust and is the third most abundant
element after Oxygen and Silicon. Unfortunately, it is an extremely reactive element
because of which it is not found in the free state. The most common forms in which
Aluminium occurs and from which it is commercially extracted are Hydrated Aluminium
Oxide more commonly known as Bauxite and Cryolite, which is a mixture of Sodium
Fluoride and Aluminium Fluoride.
It is because of its high reactivity, and it not being available in the free state that, though
the existence of Aluminium was established by Sir Humphrey Davy in 1808, it was first
commercially produced only towards the last decade of the 19th century. In 1886, two
unknown young scientists, Charles Hall of the US and Paul Heroult of France working
separately developed in parallel the electrolytic refining process. In this process, direct
current electricity is passed from a consumable carbon anode into molten alumina or
aluminium oxide splitting the oxide into molten metal and carbon dioxide. Though,
continuous progress has been made in reducing the amount of electricity used, there is no
viable alternative to this electrolytic process for producing Aluminium.
Aluminium is a relatively young metal – in commercial production for only about a 120
years compared to Copper, which has been used for several thousand years. In spite of this,
today Aluminium production is greater than all other non-ferrous metals and is in fact
greater than the combined production of Copper, Lead and Tin.
Aluminium’s usage has steadily increased, especially after World War II when it was
considered a strategic metal, and today it finds wide applications in the automotive
industry, to make beverage cans, packaging foil, sheets, conductor cables, building profiles
etc.
Aluminium in Automobiles
The advantageous properties of Aluminium, which I don’t intend listing here, are the key
reasons for the sustained increase in the use of Aluminium. The statue of Eros in London’s
Piccadilly Circus [Picture 1] was cast from Aluminium in 1893 and is still as good as new.
It may be of interest to know that Aluminium has been used in automobiles for over a
hundred years.
-5-
Picture 1
Statue of Eros at Picadilly Circus – Cast from Aluminium in 1893
It is reported that Aluminium crankcases were first used in automobiles as far back as
1897. An Aluminium cylinder block was first made in 1903 and an Aluminium rear axle
housing in 1904. The Ford Model T used Aluminium in its transmission. Aluminium
pistons were tried in 1913 on racing cars. You must reflect on this for a moment to fully
appreciate the kind of impact Aluminium must have had to generate this kind of application
development.
Today there are more than a hundred types of auto parts made of Aluminium and the list is
growing. An average automobile in the U.S now has more than a 100 Kg of Aluminium in
it representing 8 to 10% of the weight of the car. Ford Motor Company is reportedly
working on an Aluminium Intensive Vehicle – the P2000 – that will weight only 900 Kg –
60% of other cars of its size – and will use some 350 Kg of Aluminium parts.
The History of Aluminium Recycling

It is well known that the manufacture of Aluminium from bauxite is a highly energy
intensive process. In fact, roughly 50% of the cost of pure Aluminium is energy cost. On
the one hand, therefore, you have increasing uses cropping up for Aluminium and on the
other you have the high cost of getting pure Aluminium. The natural solution for this
problem is recycling.
Again, it will be of interest to know that the Aluminium recycling industry has its origins in
1904 - a mere 16 years after commercial primary Aluminium production began! In the
early years, reclamation of Aluminium was relatively insignificant because the supply of
scrap was extremely limited. However, many scrap metal collectors and processors realised
even then that Aluminium had economic values that made it very attractive for recycling.
-6-
Almost a hundred years later, those same desirable properties - low energy for conversion,
good product performance and favourable economics – make Aluminium recycling even
more attractive. If you pause to think for a moment, you will appreciate that recycling of
Aluminium provides a continuous source of Aluminium, helping the Aluminium industry
maintain its growth. This growth of the Aluminium industry and Aluminium applications
in turn increases the availability of aluminium scrap thus supporting the secondary
Aluminium smelting industry. Bear in mind further, that recycling conserves significant
energy as well. Thus the recycling industry is and will continue to be a significant supply
factor in the Aluminium chain.
The Aluminium recycling industry got a big boost immediately after World War II. The
war resulted in a huge generation of aluminium scrap, especially the aero scrap. New alloys
to profitably use the scrap were developed. Alloys, especially for die-casting, produced
entirely from secondary aluminium came into being. The prices of these alloys were low,
thus spurring the development of new die cast products. Other uses for secondary
Aluminium were developed. The number of Aluminium items produced from recycled
metal grew rapidly. Aluminium’s growth in importance never looked back.
The point to be noted here is that the recycling of Aluminium is almost a parallel
development. It is not a 21st century green movement fad. On the contrary, recycling of
Aluminium because of its favourable economic impact is an essential part of the Aluminium
supply chain and is undoubtedly a critical component of the Aluminium industry and it
should be understood and appreciated as such.
The Aluminium Recycling Chain

Recycling of Aluminium and the development of foundry alloys are linked and related
activities. In order to appreciate this, you must have a clear picture of the Aluminium
recycling chain.
The first link in the chain is the production of Primary Aluminium pigs and ingots from
bauxite. As you are aware, this is a highly energy intensive process and requires the setting
up of capital intensive smelters, of which there are not too many. In India for instance, we
have five primary producers – HINDALCO, NALCO, BALCO, INDAL and MALCO.
The pure Aluminium ingots produced by the primary producers go mainly into the
production of Aluminium wrought products. The wrought products include sheets, plates,
rods, bars, extrusions, wires and foil. Wrought mills producing these products can be
integrated down stream facilities established by primary producers or separate stand-alone
plants. In India, HINDALCO has good down stream capability integrated with its
Renukoot facility while units like Jindal are separate stand-alone extrusion plants.
A relatively smaller portion of the pure ingots goes into the production of Aluminium cast
products.
The first source of scrap generation is the manufacturing scrap arising during the
production of these wrought products whether at the primary producer or at the stand-alone
-7-
wrought mill. This is generally known as “new” scrap. It essentially consists of solids,
clippings and cuttings, sawings, residues such as dross, skimming and spillage and floor
rejections. This “new” scrap, except usually for the sawings and dross, is generally
consumed by the wrought product producer himself who will add it back to the melt.
Similarly, during the production of cast products, “new” manufacturing scrap arises such as
runners and risers, rejected castings, borings and turnings from machining operations,
residues such as dross, skimming and floor rejections. Again except for the borings and
dross the rest are usually consumed by the foundry itself.
Whatever “new” scraps from the wrought mills or casting shops that are not consumed in-
house are sold to dealers. We will track what happens to this in just a moment.
The wrought and cast products made move onto other factories where they become part of
end products. For example, extrusions may end up getting assembled as window or
doorframes; sheets may become part of a roof, or an aircraft body panel. A cast product
may end up in a motor cycle or car. Similarly, beverage cans, cooking utensils, electrical
transmission lines, household Aluminium foils are all products, which would have started
out from a wrought mill or a cast shop. This second stage manufacturing generally takes
place in several stages in different locations. For example a pressure die cast housing made
in China can become a CD drive in a Seagate plant in Taiwan and then part of a PC
assembled in Malaysia.
Again, while these second stage manufacturing and assembly takes place more “new” scrap
can arise. This time essentially as trimmings and clippings in the case of wrought products,
turnings and borings and of course rejections. The second stage manufacturer generally,
cannot consume this scrap and this scrap too finds its way to the dealer market.
Finally, the finished products that get made all have a finite life. Of course the life varies –
from weeks or months for beverage cans and most packaging products to a few years for
electronic and white goods to many years for automobiles or building products. At the end
of life we have the post-consumption or “old” scrap. This “old” scrap invariably ends up at
the scrap dealer.
Now, depending on the product, differing amounts of retrieval efforts may be required for
separating out the aluminium content in the product. If you take a scrapped automobile, for
instance, a lot of effort is required as there are so many different types of material making
up a car, each of it having a different recycling value. On the other hand a used beverage
can or a packaging foil, is generally, fully Aluminium as it is, and requires no special
separation efforts.
We now have several loose ends in the Aluminium chain. From the first stage
manufacturing, we have some amounts of “new” scrap especially turnings, borings and
dross that require off-site processing. From subsequent stages of manufacturing and
assembly, you can have more “new” scrap including line rejections and finally you have
the post-consumer “old” scrap from which the Aluminium content has been extracted.
Where do these go?
-8-
The largest users of such dealer-collected scrap are secondary Aluminium producers. The
secondary aluminium producer converts such scrap into specification ingots. He would try
to use the lowest grade scrap to meet the required final specification, adding higher grades
and even pure Aluminium, as may be required, only to “sweeten” the melt. The secondary
Aluminium producer essentially caters to the Aluminium cast product manufacturer. The
reason for this is not very difficult to see. Wrought Aluminium alloys generally have close
impurity limits and much smaller alloying additions. A large portion of both “old” and
“new” scraps therefore, cannot be used to make wrought alloys. The cast alloys however
have high percentages of alloying elements and tolerate a far higher level of impurity
elements thus permitting the use of a wider range of scraps in its manufacture.
We can now close the loop by moving all the scrap to the secondary aluminium producers.
The entire recycling chain is depicted figuratively in FIGURE 1. These producers convert
the scrap into graded casting alloys that go to the foundries or casting shops.
FIGURE - 1
THE ALUMINIUM CHAIN
Primary Aluminium Secondary

Producer Aluminium Producer
Pure Ingots Alloy Ingots
Manufacture of Manufacture of cast

wrought products by products in foundries
wrought mills
New Scrap New Scrap
Mill Products Castings
Consumers of mill products and castings -

Manufacturers of end products
End Products New Scrap
Useful Life
End of Life Scrap Scrap Dealer
-9-
Actually today the situation is slightly different. While till about 15 years ago, the casting
alloy manufacturer was the main buyer of Aluminium scraps, today he has competition
from the wrought mill as well. The value of recycling is so high that scrap dealers now
separate scraps into purer grades and sell these to the wrought product manufacturers.
Leading wrought product manufacturers the world over now have secondary plants
recycling selected scrap back to specification billets. In India too, Indal has a secondary
melting facility in Taloja which processes scrap into extrusion and sheet grade billets.
However, typically, secondary cast or foundry alloy producers have a greater flexibility in
using different types of scrap while secondary wrought producers only prefer higher grades
of scrap. In fact many wrought alloy billet plants are specially designed to process one type
of scrap only. For example there are specialised plants that convert used beverage can scrap
into specification billets. In a typical can recycling facility for instance, the steps involved
would be: debaling, separation into can, tab and end stocks as each is of a different
specification, delaquering, melting, casting and rolling.
A point to bear in mind is that effective scrap recycling is a specialised job and a process
involving skill. The type of scrap, its nature and typical specifications will all be known to
the skilled recycler. He would also know exactly how to use the scrap and what pre-
processing to do to improve yields. And of course today, the additional requirement is to do
all this in an environmentally acceptable manner. Many people outside are not aware of
this and comparing the price of raw scrap with ingots think it’s a simple business.
Unfortunately, it is not!
Recycling – Facts and Figures

The fact that recycling is an integral part of the Aluminium supply chain, especially
overseas, can be understood from the following interesting and eye-opening facts on
recycling.
The recycling of beverage cans, because of its short life cycle, is tightly controlled in many
countries and represents one of the success stories in recycling. Consider this: the all-
Aluminium beverage can was first introduced in 1963. Recycling of such cans began in an
organised manner in 1968 in California. In 1972, Aluminium cans had a 20% market share
of all beverage cans in the US. Today, thanks to the recycling program and the resulting
cost savings, steel cans are totally out in the US and Aluminium beverage cans have a
100% hold on the market. Last year 100.8 billion cans were manufactured in the US out of
which some 62.6 billion cans were recycled representing 62.1% of the total production.
Recycling rates from building and transport applications are equally impressive. In 1998,
11.6 million tons of old and new scrap was recycled fulfilling 40% of the global demand
for Aluminium. Of this some 38% came from the transport sector and some 32% from the
building sector.
- 10 -
In the US the transportation industry is the largest user segment for Aluminium accounting
for some 30.9% of the total Aluminium consumed. Significantly, almost 90% of
automotive aluminium is recycled metal. Today the Aluminium industry is working with
the automobile manufacturers to enable easier dismantling of Aluminium components from
cars in order to improve their sorting and recovery. It is no surprise therefore, that, though
Aluminium represents 10% of the weight of the typical car Aluminium scrap accounts for
30 to 50% of the total car’s scrap value.
In Europe in 1996, it was decided that all the individual country standards for Aluminium
alloys would be replaced by a common Euro standard. One of the reasons for this is to
reduce the number of different specifications in operation in Europe which will eventually
make recycling easier and more effective as the number of types of scrap compositions will
also reduce.
In summary it is to be clearly understood that recycling is a vitally important part of the

Aluminium industry and is not some clandestine operation being carried out by a shady
producer! Though, Excise and Customs products nomenclature unfortunately classifies
scrap as “waste and scrap”, Aluminium scrap is definitely not a “waste” but is actually a
vital raw-material especially for the foundry alloy industry.
World over foundry alloys are designed with an eye on scrap availability. India’s protected
economy did not recognise this all these years but now it is time to change. To change how
we view alloy specifications, to change how we handle our scrap generation and to change
how we view Aluminium scrap. We hope that the following papers will be a step in this
direction.
- 11 -
Paper 2
Why Redesign? – The Impact of Alloy Specification on Cost
Introduction
The concept of recycling and the production of Aluminium foundry alloys using secondary
material has been covered in the previous paper. With this as a background we will now try
and see how the alloy specifications affect the type of secondary material that can be used
and the impact of this on the alloy cost. We will simultaneously examine the possibility of
redesigning the chemical composition limits to derive cost advantage without affecting
product quality.
Before proceeding look at pictures 1,2 3 and 4. These are critical castings like pistons,
transmission housings and cylinder heads. You would expect that they would have been
cast using special alloys with low impurity limits. Actually, they are all made from 100%
secondary alloys of Grades A380 and A384, alloy compositions similar to the familiar LM-
24. The fact that these critical castings like pistons, transmission housings and cylinder
heads are produced using secondary alloys with pretty high impurity limits, is an eye-
opener to those who still think that such critical castings are to be produced only from
foundry alloys manufactured from primary Aluminium and virgin alloying elements!
Transmission Housing-Type I
Cu-2.33%, Si-9.09%, Mg-0.05%, Mn 0.22%, Fe-1.01%, Zn-1.12%

Alloy Type - A380.0
Picture 1
- 12 -
Transmission Housing - Type – II
Cu-2.48%, Si-11.37%, Mg-0.10%, Mn-0.21%, Fe-0.81%, Zn-2.4%

Alloy Type-383.1
Picture 2
ENGINE CYLINDER
Cu-2.50%, Si-6.13%, Mg-0.27%, Fe-0.42%, Zn-0.22% - Alloy Type –

AC2B
Picture 3
- 13 -
PISTON
Cu-3.19%, Si-8.71%, Mg-0.05%,Mn-0.18%, Fe-0.90%, Zn.1.85%

Alloy Type - A-380.1
Picture 4
The History of Alloy production in India

Let us look at the history of Aluminium alloy production in India. Till about 1990, alloys in
our country, contrary to what was happening in the rest of the world, were produced
practically only from primary Aluminium and alloying elements. Even the so-called
‘secondary alloys’ like ADC-12 were converted from pure Alumimium ingots to which the
required amounts of Copper and Silicon were added. In fact at Sargam there have been
many occasions when we have used an Iron-Aluminium master alloy to get the iron limit
up in the PDC alloys! In those days the alloy buyers did not approve using scrap to make
alloys. Secondly, local generation of Aluminium scrap was extremely small and import of
scrap was not possible. Thus there was practically no need to worry about impurity levels.
The year 1991 witnessed a new era of liberalization, opening out free accessibility to
imported aluminium scrap in various forms. Simultaneously it became easily possible to
import sophisticated analytical instruments like Emission spectrometers facilitating melts
to be analysed within minutes. This period also witnessed multi-national companies
coming in through collaborations or direct establishment of their manufacturing units in our
country and Indian companies actively chasing global markets resulting in alloy
specifications taking on a wider international flavour.
- 14 -
The beneficial effect, of course, of the liberalisation is that there are now a variety of
models to choose from, be it a small pager or a luxury car. The flip side is that
manufacturing units are under intense pressure to keep costs down. Cost reduction is thus
practically an on-going process, almost a necessity for survival.
The first impact of this liberalised scenario as far as Aluminium alloys are concerned was
the acceptance that Aluminium alloys can be made from secondary material. This is in fact
the way alloys have been made overseas for many decades. Immediately, there has been an
effect on cost.
Take for example, Aluminium Alloy ADC-12 ingots – a familiar specification. This alloy
contains 1.5 to 3.5% Cu, 9.6 to 12.0% Si with liberal impurity limits. If this alloy is made
from pure Aluminium to which 3% of Copper and 11% of Silicon is added, it will probably
cost the user Rs.95 per Kg.
Today, it is accepted that this alloy can be comfortably made using Aluminium secondary
material. In fact, today no ADC12 user will pay more than Rs.78 to Rs.80 for this alloy!
This clearly shows that the price difference of an alloy made from secondary is on the
lower side by Rs.15 to Rs.16/- per kg, definitely 17% cheaper than the alloy cost, if
produced from virgin inputs. Of course, there are still certain alloys, which necessarily
need to be made from virgin inputs – for instance the alloy A356, which is used to make
automotive wheels. But then these are the so-called ‘premium’ alloys, which are also
priced very high.
Thus, in the last ten years or so, Indian alloy users have got used to the fact that it is
beneficial and, in fact, a must, that foundry alloys should be made from Aluminium
secondary material. Scrap is no longer a dirty word. It is now accepted that alloys like
ADC12 and LM24 are entirely secondary based alloys. Overseas, as a matter of fact,
practically all alloys, with the exception of premium alloys, are made from secondary
material. In India, however, due to the lack of availability of purer grades of scrap in large
quantities at reasonable prices, alloys like LM4, AC4B etc. are to some extent secondary
based while alloys like LM6, LM25 etc. use a much larger quantity of primary material.
While all this is well known, we will now try and see how you can squeeze some more cost
benefits in all your alloys by taking an even closer look at alloy specifications.
Some Common Scrap Types

Before we get into this let us first take a quick look at some of the important types of
Aluminium secondary material that are generally available:
Used Aluminium components – usually automotive components. These will typically have
a composition of around 2 to 3% Copper, 7 to 8% Silicon, 0.5 % or so of Magnesium, 1 to
1.5% of Iron and anywhere from 0.8 to 3% Zinc. Such components will generally offer a
yield of 90% or so and will cost around 75 to 80% of pure Aluminium. Typical cost today
may be around Rs.62 to Rs.65 per Kg.
- 15 -
Aluminium sheet scraps: These will have a typical composition of around 0.8 to 1.0% of
Magnesium and 0.8 to 1.0% of Manganese. These will also result in a yield of around 90%
and will cost just a little more than component scraps. Typical costs may be around Rs.65
to Rs.70 per Kg.
Aluminium extrusions and profiles: These will typically have 0.5 to 0.7 % of Magnesium
and Manganese. However the material will be clean resulting in yields of 95% yields. The
cost will be around 90% of pure Aluminium. Typical costs may be around Rs.75 to Rs.80
per kg.
Clean Aluminium scrap: This includes lithographic sheets and Aluminium cable scrap.
These are 99.5% pure and the yield will also be 95% +. However the price will also be 90
to 95% or so of pure Aluminium. Typical costs will be Rs.80 to Rs.85 per Kg.
Aluminium Turnings & Borings: These are basically machine shops arisings and is often
mixed with iron and other impurities like zinc, brass and copper. If carefully segregated
and smelted could yield 70 to 75%. Its cost could be 50% to 60% of pure Aluminium.
A Typical ADC12 Melt

With this as the background let us look at a typical melt for ADC12 using secondary
material. The melt-size, let us assume, is 1500 Kg.
Let us assume that we start the melt using 1000 kg of old and used automobile die cast
component scrap. (This is the normal practice.) We generally take this 1st input
composition to be totally unknown. Thus, after melting the charge of 1000 Kg, we have in
the furnace clean liquid metal approximately of 920.0 kg (after melt losses). A sample is
drawn from this molten metal and referred to the laboratory for analysis by Emission
Spectrometer.
The analytical result of the base metal, which we will refer to as input I, is given below: -
I. Cu – 2.01, Si – 7.22, Mn – 0.50, Mg – 0.40, Ni – 0.15, Fe – 1.0%, Zn – 0.9%
We require totally 1500 kg of ADC-12 alloy out of which we now have 920 kg of base
metal inside the furnace, which works out to 61.3% of the total required. We thus need to
make up another 580 to 600 Kg of metal. The important question is what is the final
composition required.
The standard ADC12 as per JIS is:

Cu – 1.5 to 3.5%, Si – 9.6 – 12.0%, Mn – 0.5% max, Mg – 0.3% max,
Fe – 1.3% max, & Zn – 1% max
Contrary to what you may be thinking, what we are concerned about at this point of time is
not the alloying element percentages but the impurity percentages! Addition of alloying
elements like Copper and Silicon can be made up at any point of time by adding pure
Copper and pure Silicon to the extent necessary. However, if there are any impurities over
- 16 -
the permissible limits, it must be understood that they cannot be eliminated but only
diluted.
Let us examine two cases of final specification requirements:
Case Cu Si Mn Mg Fe Zn
Case I 2 to 3% 11 to 12% 0.3% 0.3% max 0.8% max 0.8% max
max
Case II 2 to 3% 11 to 12% 0.4% 0.3% max 0.9% max 0.9% max
max
In the first case the customer requires Manganese and Magnesium to both be under 0.3%
each, with Fe and Zinc each to be under 0.8%.
The existing metal representing 61.3% of the total melt will contribute to the final
composition as follows:
I: Cu 1.23%, Si 4.43%, Mn 0.30%, Mg 0.25%, Fe 0.61%, Zn 0.55%.
While we are OK with the Fe and Zinc limits, we have, unfortunately, already hit the limit
for Manganese and almost hit the limit for Magnesium. Thus any material we can add now
should not have Manganese and should have very little Magnesium. It is most likely that
we will need to use litho sheets or cables.
The melt make-up will look something like this:
Item % of melt after melt loss Cu Si Mn Mg Fe Zinc

I 61.3 1.23 4.43 0.3 0.25 0.61 0.55
Cu 1.5 1.50
Si 7.0 6.90 0.10
Litho 30.2 0.09
TOTAL 100.0 2.73 11.33 0.3 0.25 0.80 0.55
The cost of this melt will be at least Rs.75 per kg (excluding production costs).
The customer in Case II has a slightly more relaxed specification. This requires Manganese
at 0.4%, Magnesium at 0.3% and Iron and Zinc at 0.9% each. For meeting this
specification, we are a little better placed. We now have the choice of adding a little more
of Type I casting scrap till we hit the Magnesium and/ or Manganese cap or we can add
some sheet scrap or extrusion scrap and make up the rest with litho or wire scrap.
- 17 -
The melt make-up will look something like this:
Item % of melt after melt loss Cu Si Mn Mg Fe Zinc

I 61.3 1.23 4.43 0.3 0.25 0.61 0.55
I (more) 20.0 0.4 1.45 0.09 0.08 0.20 0.18
Cu 1.1 1.1
Silicon 5.5 5.4 0.06
Litho 12.1 0.01
TOTAL 100.0 2.73 11.28 0.39 0.33 0.88 0.73
The cost of this melt will be at least Rs.2 or 3 lower than the previous melt at around Rs.72
per Kg. This is because we have been able to use more of the lower priced Aluminium
casting scrap type of material and less of the expensive lithographic sheet material.
Impurity Limits affect Cost

We were able to achieve this reduction by just a 0.1% relaxation in a few impurity limits.
Whether the alloy is LM4 or ADC12 or AC4B, the concept is similar. Even a 0.1%
difference in impurity limits can translate into a Rs.2 or 3, or sometimes even greater,
difference in cost per Kg. If you use 30 MT of the alloy per month we are talking of a
saving of Rs.10 lakhs or more per year just by working on the permissible impurity limits!
Let us be clear about two things here:

First, we are not suggesting that all impurity limits be opened up indiscriminately. On the
contrary, It should be a carefully studied and controlled act and will depend on several
factors. In fact in subsequent papers we will outline some suggestions on how to go about
this.
Second, we are not making this statement of asking for a re-look at impurity limits without
basis. We are stating this, fully conscious of its implications.
In the next paper we will be highlighting the effects of various alloying elements and
impurities in Aluminium and will also present various international standards including the
new EN standards. This will clearly show you what is possible, what is not and what has
already been done in different parts of the world. This will be a good guideline to you
while considering the possibility of re-designing or re-defining your specifications, with a
view to saving of cost.
A Closer Look at Impurity Limits

Now, let us ask ourselves the question what would happen if impurity limits are relaxed
slightly. Let us look at three specific impurities - Iron, Zinc and Magnesium.
Iron, is actually quite OK up to a certain limit. What is the limit is the question. Earlier, the
limitation in PDC alloys for iron was mainly due to the fact that when aluminium alloys
were melted in a cast Iron crucible, Aluminium would pick up iron from the melting pot.
The combination of iron, Manganese and Zinc would form sludge resulting in the
accumulation of unusable Aluminium. However, today, almost all die-casters use graphite
or silicon carbide crucibles. Hence relaxing Fe limits marginally for PDC alloys need not
- 18 -
be a cause for concern. If you take a look at the revised American specification, as well as
the revised ENAC specifications for an alloy like LM-4, Fe is relaxed up to 1% even for
gravity die-casting. Hence a little relaxation of even 0.1% in Fe would help us to use at
least 5% more of lower cost secondary material. Of course, for castings that require heat
treatment to achieve better mechanical properties, the relaxation should be based on careful
study.
What about Magnesium? The presence of Magnesium to a level of 0.8 to 1.0% will not
affect the casting characteristics of Aluminium. On the contrary, Magnesium with Silicon
and Copper will enhance the hardness of the alloy due to age hardening. As you will see in
the next paper, all the BS 1490 specifications have been completely revised in the year
1998 as the unified BSEN 1706-98. All alloys have been grouped based on the alloying
elements present in each grade and each alloy type is covered by at least 2, 3 or more
specifications with different impurity levels. In most of the alloys, presence of Mg has been
relaxed, obviously, keeping in mind that presence of Mg does not in any way affect the
casting characteristics of the alloy. There is another reason for this relaxation, which we
will see in a moment. Except in the case of alloys where natural age hardening will affect
subsequent operations or where a specific range of Magnesium is required to achieve
specific properties after heat treatment, minor relaxation in Magnesium content will not
generally cause any casting problem. It should also be borne in mind that Magnesium
levels will keep going down with every melt and with every addition of foundry returns.
Let us take the case of Zinc. Zinc has no significant benefits by being present in
Aluminium alloy ingots except for marginally adding to the weight of the component
produced. This particular element is generally permitted in pressure die-casting alloys
from 1 to 3% and in recent gravity die-casting specifications like A319 up to 1% or more.
Compare this with earlier specifications of, say, LM-4, which restricted Zinc to 0.5%
maximum. In some critical alloys like LM-9, LM-6 & LM-25 the presence of Zn is still
controlled at 0.1% and even in these alloys, if Zn % is relaxed by 0.1%, usage of secondary
can be increased comfortably by 10 to 20% and cost of the alloy can be comfortably
brought down.
These changes can be attempted in all alloys. Even alloys like LM6 or LM25. In these
alloys, for instance, the difference between the alloy cost with 0.1% max. Copper and 0.2%
max. Copper will be at least Rs.3 to Rs.4.
A Strong Case for Redesigning

This is not something radical that we are proposing. In fact the BS1490 specifications,
which was and still is, considered sacrosanct in the Indian foundry industry, evolved based
on the type of scrap available immediately after World War II. In other words, foundry
alloy specifications are made up with a clear eye on scrap availability and their
specifications. For instance over the last several decades use of Aluminium extrusions and
sheets for building and transport applications and thin sheets for beverage cans have
increased. This means more extrusion scrap will be generated as buildings are torn down or
automobiles scrapped and more beverage-can scrap as cans are recycled. Most of these
specifications will have 0.5 to 1.0% Magnesium. This is precisely the reason why in latest
- 19 -
revisions of many alloy specifications, Magnesium limits (as an impurity element) have
been increased. This is to permit the use of the kind of scrap that is now generated by
industry.
We have customers whose alloys specify stringent Magnesium control, but the components
are not heat-treated! So why not relax the Magnesium limits?
In fact, while close control is maintained on alloy compositions, what about the
composition of the castings that you actually get? Many of you can try this. If you are
buying castings or getting them converted it is likely that destructive chemical analysis
may not be part of your QC plan. While chemical composition of alloy ingots are carefully
checked, components are checked for dimension, casting defects etc. and rarely for
composition. Just check a few from your next lot. There may be some surprises with
elements out of range. But, if you had not checked the composition, you would have
accepted the casting as sound!
Please reflect on the fact that while casting technologies have changed, crucibles have
changed, fluxes have changed, and application technologies have changed alloy
specifications have remained static! Take the case of the automotive piston. Machining
technology has changed and finer finishes are possible, lubrication technologies have
improved by leaps and bounds and the friction levels in the engine cylinders are much
lower but have we tried to see if there is any implications on piston alloy specifications at
all! Internationally specifications are reviewed and updated routinely and regularly but
unfortunately, here neither is there locally driven change nor is there an effort to keep
abreast of changes taking place abroad!
Thus, the first thing we have to drop is the mind set that alloy specifications are written in
stone and are not to be touched. They can and should be examined every once in a while,
just as you would periodically examine quality procedures to see if they require change.
Finally let us be absolutely clear that our idea of suggesting to re-design or re-specify the
material composition for cost purpose does not mean that all specifications are to be
relaxed. The objective should be to workout a practical composition to save the cost of the
material without diluting the quality. Efforts should be made to critically examine each
and every grade of alloy both as regards to the alloying elements as well as impurity levels
and re-specify wherever practically possible to achieve cost control as long as the
redesigned or re-specified compositions do not affect the products performances.
Suggestions on Scrap Handling

Before closing the paper let us spend a few minutes to discuss a related issue - the value of
the scraps you may be generating. After all, we have just highlighted how important scrap
is to alloy makers. So it is extremely important that you view your own scrap arising in a
new light! You may be interested to learn that you can squeeze money out of this as well
by following some simple practices.
All of you are aware, day in and day out, Aluminium Foundries, OE & spares
manufacturers turn out considerable quantities of Aluminium scrap, the value of which is
- 20 -
even today under-estimated. Do take a look at this side of your operation and ensure that
all the scraps that are generated by a foundry and machine shops are properly segregated,
sorted and stored in recommended conditions to realize their value in full. Please do not
leave these materials as trash or junk. Mind you, these are all your hidden treasures which
will help you to sustain in today’s competitive market conditions.
Let us look at a few of the common types of scrap generated and ‘Best Practices’ to handle
them.
In a foundry, fettling operations will result in an accumulation of runners and risers. These
are called foundry returns and are usually reused in the foundry itself. However, best
practice requires that these be collected and stored as far as possible alloy wise. This
becomes even more important if the ratio of runner/ riser to component is high. With
careful segregation, the runners and risers can be comfortably used with original alloy
ingots in ratios ranging from 30:70 to even 50:50, depending on the finer requirement of
the component.
While many foundries do some amount of recycling of the runners and risers, most do not
consider spillage and floor sweeping as a recyclable input at all! We have observed that, as
a conservative estimate, a fifty-ton-per-month foundry will lose 500 Kg or about 1% as
spillage and floor sweeping. These are either swept out or disposed at low rates, while if
they are collected carefully and stored properly, their disposal value can increase
considerably.
The biggest concern for any foundry is the dross generation. This is basically a mixture of
metal and metal oxide. For every 1000 kg of Aluminium ingots melted, the average dross
generated varies between 30 to 40 kg. Thus, a typical Aluminium casting foundry melting
100 tonnes of alloy ingots or other solid Aluminium material, generates 3 to 4 MT of dross.
The two important aspects here are: (a) to minimise the quantity of dross generated per
melt, through the use of covering fluxes, temperature control etc. and (b) maximise the
recovery of metal from the dross, which as I pointed out is a mixture of metal and metal
oxide. Do remember, however, that in spite of your best efforts in sweating out entrapped
metal from hot dross using recovering fluxes at the foundry, there will still be recoverable
metal going out in the remaining dross. The secondary recovery or off-site recovery can be
anything from 15 to even 30 or 40% of the cold dross. It is now a well-accepted fact that a
foundry’s profits are in the dross generated!
Foundries, which are producing or melting quantities exceeding 5 MT per day, can
consider installation of a suitable hot dross compression unit. We will be happy to provide
you information and suggestions on such useful equipment.
Another very important area is the machined turnings and borings generated by the
machine shops that may be in-house or external. Turnings are generally generated during
turning operations and are generally fairly thick. Borings are relatively fine and arise
during boring operations or during finer finishing operations. The handling practice of such
machine-shop waste is generally not up to the mark in even large companies. The first
- 21 -
mantra here is ‘SEGREGATE AND STORE’. If you can segregate alloy-wise that would
be the best. If not, definitely you must separate Ferrous borings from non-ferrous and
within the non-ferrous borings separate Zinc or Copper or Brass from Aluminium. The
second mantra is ‘DRAIN OUT COOLANT OIL’. As you are aware, coolant oils are
basically hydro-carbons and when they get mixed with Aluminium borings (a) they add to
the weight of the material and (b) at the time of smelting, these hydro-carbons produce
Carbon Monoxide and Carbon-di-oxide gases, which are major pollutants. Equally
important such burning of the oil while melting adds to the oxidation and reduces the yield
and hence the value of the turnings and borings! Today, thanks to the tightening of
pollution norms and the introduction of ISO14000 standards, many companies are trying to
remove the oil before disposing the borings thereby, knowingly or unknowingly, increasing
the yield! Our strong suggestion would be that you must pay attention to this aspect.
Coolant oil can be removed by centrifuging, storing on a slope, pressing into a briquette
etc. The third mantra is ‘STORE CAREFULLY’. In many companies, dross and machined
borings are waste products to be dumped in some remote corner of the factory yard to be
hurriedly disposed off every time there are some visitors! Please spend some money in
organising a covered storage area that will permit segregated storage. And finally dispose
promptly without accumulating for months on end.
Conclusion
Alloy specifications should be designed bearing in mind that they are to be made as far as
possible from secondary metal.
Impurity limits should not be tighter than absolutely necessary to achieve product
performance.
Controlled relaxation wherever possible will yield significant cost savings.
Finally, handle your own scrap arising with care and understand that they are valuable!
- 22 -
Paper 3 Part 1
ROLE OF ALLOYING ELEMENTS AND IMPURITIES
Introduction
In this paper we will look at some of the important alloying and impurity elements which
make up most Aluminium foundry alloys. The objective is to understand the role of the
alloying elements and impurity limits.
Why Alloying?
Pure Aluminium has low strength and hardness. Its machinability is also poor. The foundry
characteristics of pure Aluminium are also very poor and presents many gating and feeding
problems, which is inherent in many pure metals. Pure Aluminium therefore is mainly used
in foundries only for a few castings such as rotor castings which are pretty straightforward
and where the high ductility and electrical and thermal conductivity are important
characteristics required. No other engineering products can be cast out of pure Aluminium.
Alloying with other elements improves the mechanical properties as well as foundry
characteristics of Aluminium. The effect of alloying in general is to increase the fluidity of
the molten metal and increase the strength and hardness of the casting. Machinability is
also improved on alloying.
Those characteristics of an alloy, which determines the ease, or difficulty, of producing

acceptable castings are called ‘Casting Properties’ while those properties, which are of
interest to the designer or user of castings are the ‘Engineering Properties’. Both these sets
of properties are improved by alloying in Aluminium alloys.
Let us now look at some of the common alloying elements and their role individually.
Copper
Copper is an important alloying element in many Aluminium alloy families. Addition of
Copper progressively increases the strength and hardness of the alloy until the Copper
additions reach approximately 12%. Further addition of copper makes the alloy too brittle
for any engineering purpose. Copper greatly improves the machinability of the alloy and
also improves the elevated temperature properties.
Under equilibrium conditions about 5.6% copper is soluble in Aluminium at the eutectic
temperature of 548°C. [See Figure 1] This solubility is reduced to below 0.5% Cu at room
temperature. This wide decrease in solid solubility from 5.6% to 0.5% on solidification is
the principle reason on which the solution annealing and precipitation hardening heat
treatment processes are based. Between 2.8 to 5% of Copper is necessary to give good
response to heat treatment by forming CuAl2 compound, which permits ‘precipitation
hardening’.
- 23 -
FIGURE – I
ALUMINIUM-COPPER EQUILIBRIUM ( PHASE) DIAGRAM -Al RICH END
800
T
E LIQUID
M 700
P 660
E 600 Cu+ liquid
R 548
A
T
500 5.65
U Al
R 400
E
O
300
AL+ Cu COMPOUND
C
200
100
AL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
WEIGHT % COPPER Cu
Copper imparts high strength and improved machinability when added to Al-Si alloys.
(Alloy 3.5% Cu, Si 6.0% is a preferred general-purpose alloy for sand castings while a
3.5% Cu; Si 8.5% is preferred for pressure die castings)
Copper as an impurity element has the detrimental effect of reducing corrosion resistance.
For optimal corrosion resistance the Copper content should be less than 0.05%. As Copper
content increases there is a gradual increase in corrosion attack.
Silicon
Silicon is the most important alloying addition to Aluminium foundry alloys. The reason
for this is very simple. Silicon dramatically improves fluidity and casting characteristics of
Aluminium. When Silicon is added to Aluminium the strength and hardness of the alloy
improves progressively.
- 24 -
Another interesting aspect of Silicon additions is its effect in lowering the alloy’s melting
point. Addition of silicon to Aluminium steadily reduces the melting point of the alloy
from the 660 °C for pure Aluminium to 577°C for a Silicon content of 11.6 %. This
temperature of 577°C is the eutectic temperature for binary Aluminium-Silicon alloys. [See
Figure 2]
FIGURE – 2
ALUMINIUM-SILICON EQUILIBRIUM ( PHASE) DIAGRAM
1500 1430
1400
T
1300
E 1200
M 1100 LIQUID
P 1000
E 900
R 800
A 700
T 660
U 600 LIQUID + SILICON
R
E
577
500 11.60% silicon eutectic
O 400
C 300 AL+SI COMPOUND
200
100
AL 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
WEIGHT % SILICON Si
HYPO
EUTEC
TIC HYPER EUTECTIC
The optimum Silicon content for an alloy depends on the casting process adopted. For
general slow cooling castings 5 to 7% Silicon is adequate. For faster cooling castings 7 to
9% would be required while for pressure die casting 8 to 12% Silicon is required.
Binary Aluminium-Silicon alloys combine the advantages of high corrosion resistance,

good weldability and low specific gravity. Fluidity increases and hot-cracking tendency as
well as solidification shrinkage decreases steadily till the eutectic point (11-13%). This
makes it easier to produce castings free from shrinkage and hot-cracks. This is why
Aluminium-Silicon alloys are particularly useful to produce pressure tight castings.
Aluminium-Silicon alloys do not machine as well as Aluminium alloys not containing
Silicon. In fact when Silicon is present in large percentages, it is advisable to use carbide
tools for machining.
- 25 -
The mechanical properties of Aluminium-Silicon alloys can be further improved by a melt-

treatment process called “ MODIFICATION”1. Sodium salts or metallic sodium was used
to modify the silicon structure for many years, but due to its fading effect and its
interaction with phosphorus resulting in reduction of modifying effect it is now being
replaced, especially in critical applications, with strontium. Strontium at a level of 0.008-
0.04% modifies the Aluminium-silicon eutectic system. Higher levels might result in
porosity and can also affect the degassing efficiency and the fluidity of the metal.
Aluminium-Silicon alloys with more than the eutectic level of Silicon (more than 12%
Silicon) are known as hypereutectic alloys. These high silicon alloys have out standing
wear resistance, a lower thermal expansion coefficient and very good casting
characteristics. These alloys have traditionally received limited attention and use because
the presence of the extremely hard primary silicon phase reduces tool life during
machining. Also, these alloys require special foundry practice/technique to control the
microstructure and casting soundness. Improvements in machine-tool technology and the
introduction of polycrystalline diamond cutting tools have done much to alleviate the
problems of poor tool life when these alloys are machined. As a matter of fact, but for the
poor tool life, the alloys actually result in excellent surface finish and their chip
characteristics are also very good. These alloys have excellent fluidity as well.
To guarantee the best machinability and mechanical properties these hypereutectic

Aluminium-Silicon alloys must be treated to control primary silicon size. This treatment,
termed refinement is accomplished by adding phosphorus at a level of 0.015-0.03% in the
form of phosphor-copper. Phosphorus from this addition in the form of AlP3 compound
nucleates the primary silicon particles during solidification. However, when hypereutectic
alloys are high-pressure die-cast such primary Silicon refinement is not needed. This is
because the rapid solidification inherent in a pressure die-casting process results in fine
structure even when the melt is not treated with phosphorus.
Magnesium
Magnesium at small percentages is the basis for strength and hardness development in
heat-treated Aluminium-Silicon alloys like the familiar LM25 alloy of the erstwhile
BS1490 or the A356 wheel alloy. In these alloys during heat treatment involving solution
treatment and precipitation hardening Mg2Si precipitates as a hardened phase enhancing
physical properties. The usual range of Magnesium for optimal Mg2Si formation is 0.4% to
0.7%.
In the Aluminium-Silicon-Copper alloy system, Magnesium addition in combination with
Copper affords greater response to heat treatment. A typical example is the C355 alloy - Cu
1-1.5%, Si 4.5-5.5%, Mg 0.45-0.6%.
There are also Aluminium-Magnesium alloy systems like A514 or LM5 of the erstwhile
BS1490 where Magnesium is a major alloying element. These alloys are characterized by
1
‘Modification’ is the process of changing the shape of the silicon particles when they solidify in a matrix of
Aluminium from its normal ‘dendritic’ or tree-like structure to a well-rounded shape.
- 26 -
excellent corrosion resistance, good machinability and attractive appearance when

anodized. Controlled melting and pouring practices are needed to compensate for the
greater oxidizing tendency of these alloys when molten. One particular aspect with respect
to these Aluminium-Magnesium alloys is the allowable limit of Silicon in the system.
Alloys like A511 (Mg 4%, Si 0.5%) and ENAC51400 (Mg 4.5-6.5%, Si 1.5%) permit a
small amount of Silicon. The reason is these alloys are generally used for parts in which the
major requirement is corrosion resistance or decorative appearance. Hence the
addition/presence of silicon will not in any way affect the performance.
Manganese
Binary Aluminium-Manganese alloys are not used in the foundry. Manganese is normally
considered as an impurity in casting compositions and is controlled to low levels in most
gravity cast compositions. Manganese forms a complex compound with Aluminium and
Iron and alters the shape of the Iron constituent from a plate like structure to a ‘Chinese
Script’ structure. This results in improving the ductility and impact resistance of the alloy.
Manganese is an important alloying element in wrought compositions. To permit the use
of wrought material in the manufacture of foundry alloys most specifications permit
Manganese as an impurity with typical maximum limits ranging from 0.3 to 0.5%.
Nickel
Introduction of up to 2.5 % Nickel increases the ability of an alloy to resist the effects of
exposure to elevated temperatures. It also reduces the coefficient of thermal expansion.
Thus Nickel at 1 to 2% levels are often found only in piston alloys and in components
which are in high temperature service.
Titanium & Boron

Titanium is used to refine the grain structure of Aluminium casting alloys with or without
the combination of smaller amounts of Boron. Addition of Titanium for grain refinement
reduces cracking tendencies in castings.
Strontium
As mentioned earlier Strontium is used as a permanent modifier for eutectic and some
hypoeutectic Aluminium-Silicon alloys. By means of modification the Aluminium-Silicon
constituent can be changed from needles and plates to a fine spherical shape with
improvements in casting characteristics and mechanical properties. Addition of strontium is
typically in the range of 0.01 to 0.03%. After the strontium addition, usually in the form of
a master alloy, the melt should be left undisturbed for a short period (say 10-15 minutes) as
the degree of modification increases with holding time.
Role of impurities
Let us now examine the role of a few important impurity elements in Aluminium alloys.
Iron
Iron is the omnipresent impurity in Aluminium right from the Ore processing to the
finished component stage. The degree or permissible level of Iron in Aluminium alloys
depends on the casting process employed and also on the application of the product.
- 27 -
Iron increases the hot-tear resistance which is helpful, but decreases ductility. This is
because iron combines with other elements forming insoluble embrittling constituents that
act as severe stress raisers. Thus in premium quality alloys like the Aluminium-Silicon-
Magnesium A356 ‘wheel alloy’, where increased ductility is a requirement, Iron is
restricted to 0.2% or less.
Iron is generally restricted to 0.5 to 0.8% in most sand and gravity casting alloys as another
undesirable effect of high Iron content is the coarsening of as cast grain size. However this
negative effect on grain size can be countered by Titanium grain refining additions and
current specifications even allow up to 1% Iron in gravity casting specifications.
In high-pressure die casting, as the Aluminium alloy is injected into the mould under
pressure, because of the high affinity Aluminium has for Iron, it tends to attack and
dissolve the die steel. This can cause the metal to stick to the die and component ejection
becomes a problem. This is known as soldering to the die. This tendency is reduced if the
alloy has about 0.8 to 1.0% of Iron already alloyed in it. Thus pressure die casting alloy
specifications generally permit 1 to 1.3% Iron.
Zinc
No significant benefits are obtained by the addition of Zinc to Aluminium. However, Zinc
also brings in room temperature aging properties. Hence in these alloys high strengths can
be achieved without heat treatment. Thus there is an alloy known as Tenz alloy with 6 to
8% of Zinc along with small amounts of Copper (0.6%) and Magnesium (0.4%). This alloy
is useful for making castings with shapes difficult to solution heat treat.
However, in practically all other Aluminium alloys Zinc is an impurity element. Most
common alloy specifications permit Zinc up to 3 %, as it has no deleterious effects on
properties. This limit enables a good amount of die cast scrap to be used in the alloy
preparation.
Lead, Tin and Bismuth

Bismuth and Lead form small, insoluble globules in a casting microstructure. This acts as
chip breakers that reduce the length of chips during machining facilitating increased cutting
speeds and reduced usage of cutting fluids. Thus both Bismuth and Lead up to 0.5% levels
are used in some specifications but mostly these are impurity elements at 0.3%.
Tin is also credited with improving machinability of Aluminium casting alloys but its
usage is only in alloys where its soft nature imparts bearing properties. In most
compositions Tin is an impurity element.
- 28 -
Paper 3 Part 2
A Comparison of Major International Specifications for Aluminium

Foundry Alloys
In this presentation the following six alloy families have been chosen for comparison:
• 3% Copper, 6% Silicon alloy family
• 3% Copper, 8 to 12% Silicon alloy family
• 11% Silicon alloy family
• 7% Silicon, 0.5% Magnesium alloy family
• 3 to 5% Magnesium alloy family
• High silicon alloy family
The following standards have been referred for comparison purposes:

• EN1676:1997 Aluminium and Aluminium alloys – Alloyed ingots for Remelting –
Specifications.
• EN1706:1998 Aluminium and Aluminium alloys – Castings – Chemical composition
and Mechanical Properties.
• The Aluminium Association, Registration Record Series, Designations and Chemical
Composition Limits for Aluminium Alloys in the Form of Castings and Ingot –
February 1999 revision.
• JIS H 5202:1999 Aluminium Alloy Castings
• JIS H 5302:2000 Aluminium Alloy Die Castings
[Note: In 1996, member countries of the European Union, brought out a unified joint
standard for Aluminium foundry alloy ingots (the EN1676) and a similar standard for
castings (the EN1706) replacing the various individual country standards such as the
BS1490 of UK and the DIN1725 of Germany.]
For each alloy family a selection of the specifications in each of the standards listed above
have been compared. The main purpose of this is to make the user aware of the wide range
of specifications that are now available for each alloy family. By studying them carefully
the user can convince himself that depending on the application, alloys with different
impurity limits can and should be chosen thus permitting optimal use of secondary material
with corresponding cost savings.
It should further be noted that EN specifications now clearly have two standards – one for
alloy ingots and the other for castings. The U.S Aluminium Association record also
provides separate specifications for alloy ingots and castings. Typically the casting
specifications will provide for slightly higher impurity limits taking into account the
invariable pick up of impurity limits like Iron during casting. In the case of Magnesium,
the casting limits will generally be lower than the ingot limit providing for loss of
Magnesium during melting.
While a detailed study is left to the reader, the following two examples will be of interest:
- 29 -
Case 1:
LM4 was the only 3% Copper, 6% Silicon specification in the erstwhile BS1490. Its
specification (BS1490-1988) was:
Copper 2 to 4%, Silicon 4 to 6%, Manganese 0.2 to 0.6%, Iron 0.8%, Magnesium 0.2%,
and Zinc 0.5%.
The revised EN specifications have 5 alloys in this family. While the alloying element
range is by and large similar, impurity limits vary. Iron varies from 0.9% in AB45000 to
0.55% in AB45400. Zinc varies from 2% in AB45000 to 0.2% in AB45400. In other
words, AB45000 has liberal impurity limits while AB45400 has comparatively narrower
limits. The alloy that is meant to be heat treated – AB45100 specifies a minimum
Magnesium limit while the others do not. AB45200 permits Magnesium up to 0.4% while
AB45000 permits Magnesium up to 0.55%.
Similar is the case of the specifications in AA and JIS. Both specifications have alloys
with close impurity limits and ones with wide impurity limits. In alloys A319.1 and 320.1
for instance, Zinc is permitted up to 3% while AC2B of JIS permits Zinc up to 1%. The
maximum Iron limits specified is 0.9% in both the ENAB series (AB45000) and the AA
series (B319.1 and 320.1) and 1% in JIS (AC2B).
This clearly shows that alloying and impurity limits should be fixed depending on the
application and with proper foundry practice producing sound castings with 1% Iron and
3% Zinc is possible.
Incidentally, the EN standard mentions that the tonnage of castings produced in each
specification decreases down the table. In other words, maximum tonnage (all over
Europe) is of AB45000 – the most liberal specification - and the least tonnage is of
AB45400 the tightest specification.
Case 2:
JIS ADC12 is the most common pressure die casting specification in India. It specifies a
maximum impurity limit of 1% for Zinc. In the latest edition a new specification ADC12Z
has been added which is identical to ADC12 in all aspects except it permits Zinc up to 3%.
Obviously, this is to permit a greater use of secondary material and a corresponding
reduction in cost.
The reader is encouraged to study the physical property data wherever given to see which
specification changes affect mechanical properties significantly and which do not.
Important Note
The specifications that follow are extracts from the relevant international standards and are
given for comparison purposes only. It does not purport to be the complete standard. The
reader is advised to refer to the original standard for their actual application and use.
- 30 -
C O M P A R IS O N O F IN T E R N A T IO N A L S T A N D A R D S - A L U M IN IU M C A S T IN G A L L O Y S
A L U M IN IU M C A S T IN G A L L O Y S - 3 % C o p p e r , 6 % S ilic o n
C H E M IC A L C O M P O S IT IO N O F IN G O T S
E n s e r ie s Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
En AB45000 3 .0 -5 .0 5 .0 -7 .0 0 .5 5 0 .2 -0 .6 5 0 .9 0 0 .4 5 0 .2 0 2 .0 0 0 .1 5 0 .3 0 0 .1 5 R E M
En AB45100 2 .6 -3 .6 4 .5 -6 .0 0 .2 0 -0 .4 5 0 .5 5 0 .5 0 0 .1 0 0 .2 0 .2 0 0 .1 0 0 .0 5 R E M
En AB45200 2 .5 -4 .0 4 .5 -6 .0 0 .4 0 0 .2 -0 .5 5 0 .7 0 0 .3 0 0 .1 5 0 .5 5 0 .2 0 0 .1 0 R E M
En AB45300 1 .0 -1 .5 4 .5 -5 .5 0 .4 -0 .6 5 0 .2 -0 .5 5 0 .5 5 0 .2 5 0 .0 5 -0 .2 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .0 5 R E M
En AB45400 2 .6 -3 .6 4 .5 -6 .0 0 .0 5 0 .2 -0 .5 5 0 .5 5 0 .1 0 0 .2 0 .2 0 0 .1 0 0 .0 5 R E M
A A S E R IE S Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
3 0 8 .1 4 .0 -5 .0 5 .0 -6 .0 0 .1 0 .5 0 .8 0 .2 5 1 .0 REM
3 0 8 .2 4 .0 -5 .0 5 .0 -6 .0 0 .1 0 .3 0 .8 0 .2 0 .5 REM
3 1 8 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 5 .5 -6 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .6 0 0 .5 0 .8 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 0 .9 0 REM
A 3 1 9 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 5 .5 -6 .5 0 .1 0 .5 0 .8 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 3 .0 0 REM
3 1 9 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 5 .5 -6 .5 0 .1 0 .5 0 .8 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 1 .0 0 REM
3 1 9 .2 3 .0 -4 .0 5 .5 -6 .5 0 .1 0 .1 0 .6 0 0 .1 0 0 .2 0 .1 0 REM
B 3 1 9 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 5 .5 -6 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .5 0 .8 0 .9 0 0 .5 0 0 .2 5 1 .0 0 REM
3 2 0 .1 2 .0 -4 .0 5 .0 -8 .0 0 .1 -0 .6 0 .8 0 .9 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 3 .0 0 REM
J IS S E R IE S Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
AC2A 3 .0 -4 .5 4 .0 -6 .0 0 .2 5 0 .5 5 0 .8 0 0 .3 0 0 .2 0 0 .5 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 5 0 .0 5 R E M
AC2B 2 .0 -4 .0 5 .0 -7 .0 0 .5 0 0 .5 0 1 .0 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 0 1 .0 0 0 .2 0 0 .2 0 0 .1 0 R E M
- 31 -
COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL SPECIFICATIONS
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS- 3% COPPER 6% SILICON
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

EN SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
TEMPER TENSILE ELONG HARDNESS
ALLOY CONDITION N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
En Ac 45000 3.0-5.0 5.0-7.0 0.55 0.2-0.65 1.00 0.45 0.25 2.00 0.15 0.30 0.15 REM AS CAST 170 1 75
En AC 45100 2.6-3.6 4.5-6.0 0.15-0.45 0.55 0.60 0.10 0.25 0.20 0.05 0.10 0.05 REM T6 320 1 110
En AC 45200 2.5-4.0 4.5-6.0 0.40 0.2-0.55 0.80 0.30 0.20 0.55 - 0.20 0.1 REM T6 230 <1 90
En AC 45300 1.0-1.5 4.5-5.5 0.35-0.65 0.55 0.65 0.15 0.05-0.25 0.15 - 0.15 0.05 REM T6 230 <1 100
En AC 45400 2.6-3.6 4.5-6.0 0.05 0.55 0.60 0.10 0.25 0.20 0.05 0.10 0.05 REM T4 230 6 75
AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al TEMPER TENSILE ELONG HARDNESS

CONDITION N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
308 4.0-5.0 5.0-6.0 0.1 0.5 1.00 0.35 0.25 1.00 - - - REM AS CAST 193 2 70
A 319.0 3.0-4.0 5.5-6.5 0.1 0.5 1.00 0.35 0.25 3.00 - - - REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
319 3.0-4.0 5.5-6.5 0.1 0.5 1.00 0.35 0.25 1.00 - - - REM AS CAST 234 2.5 85
318 3.0-4.0 5.5-6.5 0.1-0.6 0.5 1.00 0.35 0.25 1 - - - REM T6 276 3 95
JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn TEMPER TENSILE

Al ELONG HARDNESS
CONDITION N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
AC2A 3.0-4.5 4.0-6.0 0.25 0.55 0.80 0.30 0.20 0.55 0.15 0.15 0.05 REM AS CAST 180 2 75
AC2A T6 270 1 90
AC2B 2.0-4.0 5.0-7.0 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.35 0.20 1.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 REM AS CAST 150 1 70
AC2B T6 240 1 90
- 32 -
C O M P A R IS O N O F IN T E R N A T IO N A L S T A N D A R D S
A L U M IN IU M C A S T IN G A L L O Y S 3 % C O P P E R 8 -1 2 % S IL IC O N
C H E M IC A L C O M P O S IT IO N O F IN G O T S
E n s e rie s Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
En AB 46000 2 .0 -4 .0 8 .0 -1 1 .0 0 .1 5 -0 .5 5 0 .5 5 0 .6 0 -1 .1 0 0 .5 5 0 .2 1 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 REM
EnAB 46100 1 .5 -2 .5 1 0 -1 2 .0 0 .3 0 .5 5 0 .4 5 -1 .0 0 .4 5 0 .2 1 .7 0 0 .1 5 0 .2 5 0 .2 5 REM
En AB46200 2 .0 -3 .5 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .5 5 0 .1 5 -0 .6 5 0 .7 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 1 .2 0 0 .2 5 0 .1 5 REM
En AB46300 3 .0 -4 .0 6 .5 -8 .0 0 .3 5 -0 .6 0 0 .2 0 -0 .6 5 0 .7 0 0 .3 0 0 .2 0 .6 5 0 .1 5 0 .1 0 REM
En AB46400 0 .8 -1 .3 8 .3 -9 .7 0 .3 0 -0 .6 5 0 .1 5 -0 .5 5 0 .7 0 0 .2 0 0 .1 0 -0 .1 8 0 .8 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 0 REM
En AB46500 2 .0 -4 .0 8 .0 -1 1 .0 0 .1 5 -0 .5 5 0 .5 5 0 .6 -1 .2 0 .5 5 0 .2 3 .0 0 0 .1 5 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 REM
En AB46600 1 .5 -2 .5 6 .0 -8 .0 0 .3 5 0 .1 5 -0 .6 5 0 .7 0 0 .3 5 0 .2 1 .0 0 0 .2 5 0 .1 5 REM
AA S E R IE S Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
3 2 0 .1 2 .0 -4 .0 5 .0 -8 .0 0 .1 -0 .6 0 .8 0 .9 0 .3 5 0 .2 5 3 .0 REM
3 3 2 .1 2 .0 -4 .0 8 .5 -1 0 .5 0 .6 -1 .5 0 .5 0 .9 0 .5 0 .2 5 1 .0 REM
3 3 2 .2 2 .0 -4 .0 8 .5 -1 0 .0 0 .9 -1 .3 0 .1 0 .6 0 .1 0 .2 0 .1 REM
3 3 3 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 8 .0 -1 0 .0 0 .1 0 -0 .5 0 0 .5 0 .8 0 0 .5 0 .2 5 1 .0 0 - - REM
A 3 3 3 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 8 .0 -1 0 .0 0 .1 0 -0 .5 0 0 .5 0 .8 0 0 .5 0 0 .2 5 3 .0 0 - - - REM
A 3 8 0 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 2 .9 0 - - 0 .3 5 R E M
A 3 8 0 .2 3 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 0 .1 0 .6 0 0 .1 0 - 0 .1 0
B 3 8 0 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 0 .9 0 - - 0 .3 5 REM
C 3 8 0 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 2 .9 0 - - 0 .3 5 REM
D 3 8 0 .1 3 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 -9 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 0 .9 0 - - 0 .3 5 REM
3 8 3 .1 2 .0 -3 .0 9 .5 -1 1 .5 0 .1 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .3 0 - 2 .9 0 - - 0 .1 5 REM
A 3 8 3 .1 2 .0 -3 .0 9 .5 -1 1 .5 0 .1 5 -0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .3 0 - 2 .9 0 - - 0 .1 5 REM
3 8 3 .2 2 .0 -3 .0 9 .5 -1 1 .5 0 .1 0 .1 0 .6 -1 .0 0 .1 0 - 0 .1 0 - - 0 .1 REM
3 8 4 .1 3 .0 -4 .5 1 0 .5 -1 2 .0 0 .1 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 2 .9 0 - 0 .3 5 REM
3 8 4 .2 3 .0 -4 .5 1 0 .5 -1 2 .0 0 .1 0 .1 0 .6 -1 .0 0 .1 0 - 0 .1 0 - 0 .1 0 REM
A 3 8 4 .1 3 .0 -4 .5 1 0 .5 -1 2 .0 0 .1 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 0 .9 0 - 0 .3 5 REM
B 3 8 4 .1 3 .0 -4 .5 1 0 .5 -1 2 .0 0 .1 5 -0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 - 0 .9 0 - 0 .3 5 REM
C 3 8 4 .1 3 .0 -4 .5 1 0 .5 -1 2 .0 0 .1 5 -0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .0 0 0 .5 0 2 .9 0 0 .3 5 REM
3 8 5 .1 2 .0 -4 .0 1 1 .0 -1 3 .0 0 .3 0 .5 1 .1 0 0 .5 0 2 .9 0 0 .3 REM
J IS S E R IE S Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
A D C -1 0 2 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 0 -9 .5 0 0 .3 0 0 .5 1 .3 0 0 .5 0 - 1 .0 0 - - 0 .2 0 REM
A D C -10 Z 2 .0 -4 .0 7 .5 0 -9 .5 0 0 .3 0 0 .5 0 1 .3 0 0 .5 0 - 3 .0 0 - - 0 .2 0 REM
A D C -1 1 2 .5 -4 .0 7 .5 0 -9 .5 0 0 .3 0 0 .6 0 1 .3 0 0 .5 0 0 .2 1 .2 - - 0 .2 0 REM
A D C -1 2 1 .5 0 -3 .5 0 9 .6 -1 2 .0 0 .3 0 0 .5 0 1 .3 0 .5 0 - 1 .0 - - 0 .2 0 REM
A D C -12 Z 1 .5 0 -3 .5 0 9 .6 0 -1 2 .0 0 .3 0 0 .5 0 1 .3 0 .5 0 - 3 .0 - - 0 .2 0 REM
- 33 -
COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS - 3% Copper, 8 - 12% Silicon

En series Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
Temper
Cond. TENSILE ELONG HARDNESS
N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
En Ac 46000 2.0-4.0 8.0-11.0 0.05-0.55 0.55 1.30 0.55 0.25 1.20 0.15 0.35 0.25 REM AS CAST 240 1 80
En AC 46100 1.5-2.5 10-12.0 0.3 0.55 1.10 0.45 0.25 1.70 0.15 0.25 0.25 REM AS CAST 240 1 80
En AC 46200 2.0-3.5 7.5-9.5 0.05-0.55 0.15-0.65 0.80 0.35 0.25 1.20 0.05 0.25 0.15 REM AS CAST 240 1 80
En AC 46300 3.0-4.0 6.5-8.0 0.30-0.60 0.2-0.65 0.80 0.30 0.25 0.65 0.15 0.10 REM AS CAST 180 1 80
En AC 46400 0.8-1.3 8.3-9.7 0.25-0.65 0.55 0.8 0.2 0.10-0.2 0.8 0.10 0.10 REM AS CAST 135 1 60
En AC 46600 1.5-2.5 6.0-8.0 0.35 0.15-0.65 0.8 0.35 0.25 1.0 0.25 0.15 REM ASCAST 150 1 60
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Temper TENSILE ELONG HARDNESS
AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al Cond. N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
A380.0 3.0-4.0 7.5-9.5 0.1 0.5 1.30 0.5 - 3.00 - - 0.35 REM ASCAST 331 3 80
A380.0 3.0-4.0 7.5-9.5 0.1 0.1 1.30 0.50 - 3.00 - - 0.35 REM ASCAST 324 4 75
A383.0 2.0-3.0 9.5-11.5 0.10-0.30 0.5 1.30 0.30 3.00 - - 0.15 REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
A 384.0 3.0-4.5 10.50-12.0 0.1 1.3 1.30 0.50 - 1.00 - - 0.35 REM ASCAST 324 1 No Data
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al Cond. N/mm2 -ATION% BHN
ADC-10 2.0-4.0 7.50-9.50 0.30 0.5 1.30 0.50 - 1.00 - - 0.20 REM AS CAST 241 1.5 73.6
ADC-10Z 2.0-4.0 5.0-7.0 0.50 0.50 1.30 0.50 - 3.00 - - 0.20 REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
ADC-11 2.5-4.0 7.50-9.50 0.30 0.60 1.30 0.50 - 1.2 - - 0.20 REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
ADC-12 1.50-3.50 9.6-12.0 0.30 0.50 1.3 0.50 - 1.0 - - 0.20 REM AS CAST 228 1.4 74.1
ADC-12Z 1.50-3.50 9.60-12.0 0.30 0.50 1.3 0.50 - 3.0 - - 0.20 REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
- 34 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS - ALUMINIUM 11% SILICON
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF INGOTS
En series Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
En AB44000 0.03 10.0-11.80 0.45 0.10 0.15 - 0.15 0.07 REM

EnAB 44100 0.1 10.5-13.5 0.10 0.55 0.55 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.2 REM
En AB44200 0.03 10.5-13.5 - 0.35 0.40 0.15 0.10 REM
En AB44300 0.08 10.5-13.5 - 0.55 0.45-0.9 0.15 0.15 REM
En AB44400 0.08 8-11.0 0.10 0.50 0.55 0.05 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.05 REM
AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
413.2 0.1 11.0-13.0 0.07 0.1 0.7-1.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM
A 413.1 1.00 11.0-13.0 0.10 0.35 1.00 0.50 - 0.40 - - 0.15 REM
A 413.2 0.10 11.0-13.0 0.05 0.05 0.60 0.05 - 0.05 - - 0.05 REM
B 413.1 0.10 11.0-13.0 0.05 0.35 0.40 0.05 0.25 0.10 - - - REM
JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
AC3A 0.25 10.0-13.0 0.15 0.35 0.80 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.15 0.10 0.10 REM
AC4A 0.25 8.0-10.0 0.30-0.60 0.30-0.60 0.55 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.15 0.10 0.05 REM
- 35 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS Al 11.0% SILICON

En series Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al condition N/mm2 -ATION % BHN
En Ac44000 0.05 10.0-11.80 0.45 0.10 0.19 0.15 0.07 REM AS CAST 150 6 45
EnAC 44100 0.15 10.5-13.5 0.10 0.55 0.65 0.10 0.2 0.15 0.10 REM AS CAST 150 4 50
En AC44200 0.05 10.5-13.5 0.35 0.55 0.15 0.10 REM AS CAST 240 1 80
EnAC 44300 0.1 10.5-13.5 0.55 1.00 0.15 0.15 REM AS CAST 240 1 60
EnAC 44400 0.1 8-11.0 0.1 0.5 0.65 0.05 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.05 REM AS CAST 220 2 55

AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al condition N/mm2 -ATION % BHN
413 1.00 11.0-13.0 0.10 0.35 2.00 0.50 - 0.50 - - 0.15 REM ASCAST 296 2.5 80
A 413.0 1.00 11.0-13.0 0.10 0.35 1.30 0.50 - 0.50 - - 0.15 REM ASCAST 241 3.5 80
REM No Data No Data No Data No Data
B 413.0 0.10 11.0-13.0 0.05 0.35 0.50 0.05 0.25 0.10 - - - REM No Data No Data No Data No Data

JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al condition N/mm2 -ATION % BHN
AC3A 0.25 10.0-13.0 0.15 0.35 0.80 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.15 0.10 0.10 REM AS CAST 170 5 50
AC4A 0.25 8.0-10.0 0.30-0.60 0.30-0.60 0.55 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.15 0.10 0.05 REM AS CAST 170 3 60
AC4A T6 240 2 90
- 36 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS -7% SILICON,0.5% MAGNESIUM
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF ALLOY INGOTS
ENAB 42000 0.15 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.65 0.35 0.45 0.15 0.05-0.20 0.15 - 0.15 0.05 REM
ENAB 42100 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.10 0.15 - 0.10-0.18 0.07 - - REM
ENAB42200 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.50-0.70 0.10 0.15 - 0.10-0.18 0.07 - - - REM
356.1 0.25 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.45 0.35 0.5 - 0.25 0.35 - - REM

356.2 0.1 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.05 0.13-0.25 - 0.20 0.05 - - REM
A356.1 0.20 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.10 0.15 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM
A356.2 0.1 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.05 0.12 - 0.2 0.05 - - - REM
B 356.2 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.03 0.06 - 0.04-0.20 0.03 - - - REM
C 356.2 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.30-0.45 0.03 0.04 - 0.04-0.20 0.03 - - - REM
F 356.2 0.1 6.5-7.5 0.17-0.25 0.05 0.12 - 0.04-0.20 0.05 - - - REM
357.1 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.45-0.60 0.03 0.12 - 0.2 0.05 - - - REM
A357.2 0.1 6.5-7.5 0.45-0.70 0.05 0.12 - 0.04-0.20 0.05 - - - REM
B 357.2 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.45-0.60 0.03 0.06 - 0.04-0.20 0.03 - - - REM
C357.2 0.03 6.5-7.5 0.50-0.70 0.03 0.06 - 0.04-0.20 0.03 - - - REM
358.2 0.1 7.6-8.6 0.45-0.60 0.1 0.2 0.12-0.20 0.1 0.05 - - REM
A444.2 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.05 0.1 0.2 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM
AC4C 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.40 0.6 0.5 0.05 0.20 0.30 - - REM
AC4CH 0.1 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.45 0.10 0.2 0.05 0.20 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.05 REM
- 37 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS- 7% SILICON 0.5% MAGNESIUM
TEMPER
CONDITIO TENSILE ELONGA- HARDNESS
EN SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al N N/mm2 TION% BHN
ENAC 42000 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.65 0.35 0.55 0.15 0.05-0.25 0.15 - 0.15 0.05 REM T6 220 1 75
ENAC 42000 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.65 0.35 0.55 0.15 0.05-0.25 0.15 - 0.15 0.05 REM T6 220 1 75
ENAC 42100 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.45 0.10 0.19 - 0.08-0.25 0.07 - - REM T6 230 2 75
ENAC42200 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.45-0.7 0.10 0.19 - 0.08-0.25 0.07 - - - REM T6 250 1 85
TEMPER
TENSILE ELONGA- HARDNESS
AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al CONDITIO
N/mm2 TION% BHN
N
356 0.25 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.45 0.35 0.6 - 0.25 0.35 - - REM T6 262 5 80
A 356.0 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.45 0.10 0.2 - 0.20 0.10 - - REM T6 283 10 90
B 356.0 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.25-0.45 0.05 0.09 - 0.04-0.20 0.05 - - - REM No-data No-data No-data No-data
A357.0 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.4-0.7 0.1 0.2 - 0.04-0.20 0.1 - - - REM T6 283 3 100
B357.0 0.05 6.5-7.5 0.4-0.6 0.05 0.09 - 0.04-0.20 0.05 - - - REM No-data No-data No-data No-data
TEMPER
TENSILE ELONGA- HARDNESS
JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al CONDITIO
N/mm2 TION% BHN
N
AC4C 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.40 0.6 0.5 0.05 0.20 0.30 - - REM ASCAST 150 3 55
AC4C 0.2 6.5-7.5 0.2-0.40 0.6 0.5 0.05 0.20 0.30 - - REM T6 230 2 85
- 38 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS - 3-5% MAGNESIUM
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION INGOTS
ENAB51000 0.08 0.45 2.7-3.5 0.45 0.45 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM

ENAB 51100 0.03 0.45 2.7-3.5 0.45 0.4 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM
ENAB51200 0.08 2.5 8.5-10.5 0.55 0.45-0.9 0.1 0.2 0.25 0.1 0.1 REM
ENAB51300 0.05 0.35 4.8-6.5 0.45 0.45 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM
ENAB51400 0.03 1.3 4.8-6.5 0.45 0.45 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM
511.1 0.15 0.3-0.7 3.6-4.5 0.35 0.4 - 0.25 0.15 - - REM

511.2 0.1 0.3-0.7 3.6-4.5 0.1 0.3 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM
512.2 0.10 1.4-2.2 3.6-4.5 0.10 0.35-0.7 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM
513.2 0.1 0.3 3.6-4.5 0.1 0.3 - 0.2 1.4-2.2 - -
514.2 0.1 0.3 3.6-4.5 0.1 0.3 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM
516.1 0.3 0.3-1.5 2.6-4.5 0.15-0.40 0.35-0.7 0.25-0.40 0.1-0.2 0.2 - 0.1 REM
A 535.1 0.1 0.2 6.6-7.5 0.1-0.25 0.15 - 0.25 - - - REM
AC7A 0.1 0.2 3.5-5.5 0.6 0.3 0.05 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.05 REM
- 39 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS - 3-5%MAGNESIUM
TEMPER ELONG
TENSILE HARDNESS
EN SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al CONDITI -ATION%
N/mm2 BHN
ON
ENAC 51000 0.1 0.55 2.50-3.50 0.45 0.55 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM AS CAST 140 3 50
ENAC 51100 0.05 0.55 2.50-3.50 0.45 0.55 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM AS CAST 150 5 50
ENAC 51300 0.1 0.55 4.5-6.5 0.45 0.55 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM AS CAST 160 3 55
ENAC51400 0.05 1.5 4.5-6.5 0.45 0.55 - 0.2 0.1 - - - REM AS CAST 160 3 60
TEMPER ELONG
TENSILE HARDNESS
AASERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al CONDITI -ATION%
N/mm2 BHN
ON
511 0.15 0.3-0.7 3.5-4.5 0.35 0.5 - 0.25 0.15 - - REM ASCAST 145 3 50
514 0.15 0.35 3.5-4.5 0.35 0.5 - 0.25 0.15 - - REM ASCAST 172 9 50
516 0.30 0.30-1.5 2.5-4.5 0.15-0.4 0.35-1.0 0.25-0.40 0.1-0.2 0.2 - - 0.1 REM T6 No-data No-data No-data
TEMPER ELONG
TENSILE HARDNESS
JIS SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al CONDITI -ATION%
N/mm2 BHN
ON
AC7A 0.1 0.2 3.5-5.5 0.6 0.2 0.05 0.20 0.10 0.15 0.05 REM ASCAST 210 12 60
- 40 -
ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS - HIGH SILICON
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION - INGOT

ENAB 48000 0.8-1.5 10.5-13.5 0.9-1.5 0.35 0.6 0.7-1.3 0.2 0.35 - - REM
A 390.1 4.0-5.0 16-18 0.50-0.65 0.1 0.4 - 0.2 0.1 - - REM

B390.1 4.0-5.0 16-18 0.5-0.65 0.50 1 0.1 0.20 1.40 - - 0.3 REM
392.1 0.4-0.8 18-20.0 0.9-1.2 0.2-0.6 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.4 - - 0.3 REM
393.1 0.7-1.1 21.0-23.0 0.8-1.3 0.1 1 2.0-2.5 0.10-0.20 0.1 REM
393.2 0.7-1.1 21-23 0.8-1.3 0.1 0.8 2-2.5 0.1-0.2 0.1 - - - REM
AC8A 0.8-1.3 11.0-13.0 0.7-1.3 0.15 0.8 0.8-1.5 0.20 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM
AC8B 2.0-4.0 8.5-10.5 0.5-1.5 0.5 1.0 0.1-1.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM
AC9A 0.5-1.5 22-24 0.5-1.5 0.5 0.8 0.5-1.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM
AC9B 0.5-1.5 18-20 0.5-1.5 0.5 0.8 0.5-1.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM
- 41 -
COMPARISONOF INTERNATIONALSTANDARDS
ALUMINIUMCASTINGALLOYS- HIGHSILICON
CHEMICALCOMPOSITION MECHANICALPROPERTIES
ELONGATION
TEMPER TENSILE HARDNESS
ENSERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al %
CONDITION N/mm2 BHN
ENAC48000 0.8-1.5 10.5-13.5 0.8-1.5 0.35 0.7 0.7-1.3 0.25 0.35 - - REM T5 200 <1 90
ENAC48000 T6 280 <1 100
TEMPER TENSILE ELONGATION HARDNESS

AASERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
CONDITION N/mm2 % BHN
A390.0 4-5.0 16-18 0.45-0.65 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 - - REM ASCAST 200 <1.0 110
392 0.4-0.8 18-20 0.8-1.2 0.2-0.6 1.5 0.5 0.20 0.50 - - 0.3 REM ASCAST 290 <0.5
393 0.7-1.1 21-23 0.7-1.3 0.10 1.3 2-2.5 0.1-0.2 0.1 No-data No-data No-data No-data
TEMPER TENSILE ELONGATION HARDNESS

JISSERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al
CONDITION N/mm2 % BHN
AC8A 0.8-1.3 11.0-13.0 0.7-1.3 0.15 0.8 0.8-1.5 0.20 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM T6 270 No-data 110
AC9A 0.5-1.5 22-24 0.5-1.5 0.5 0.8 0.5-1.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM T6 170 No-data 95
AC9B 0.5-1.5 18-20 0.5-1.5 0.5 0.8 0.5-1.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 REM T6 270 No-data 120
- 42 -
Paper 4
The Process of Redesigning – a Suggested Approach.
Introduction
In the preceding papers we have seen how alloys are manufactured and how the alloy
specifications determine to a great extent, the input material and thus, effectively, the cost
of the alloy as well. We have also looked at the role of the different alloying elements, the
effect of impurity elements and also compared current versions of different International
Aluminium Alloy standards to give you an idea of what the rest of the world is doing. The
range of specifications even within a family or Alloy group allowing a wider choice to the
user is a key point to be noted.
At this juncture, it is possible many of you would be, to some extent, at least, convinced
that there is some logic in reviewing your alloy specifications to determine whether any of
the limits – whether of alloying elements or impurities – are over specified and require
change. Remember, as was described in Paper 2, even seemingly minor changes can make
a substantial impact on cost.
This, the last paper is an attempt to provide you with some kind of road map on how to go
about the process of redesigning your alloy specifications to obtain a reduction in your
material costs.
A Few Pre-requirements
Before, we get into the details there are a few points you need to bear in mind. First, this
suggested road map is only one possible approach. There are many of you with several
years of industry experience in design and development who may have better methods of
going about the process. Also, what we propose may not be specifically applicable in toto
to your component. Thus, please bear in mind that what we are going to spell out is just a
suggested approach. The approach we intend spelling out is logical but cautious. It will
definitely work but some may consider it time consuming. However, we felt that it would
be best to lay down an exhaustive approach from which you can leave out steps if you are
so inclined. Frankly, we will be surprised if you don’t need to modify it to suit your
organisation and product needs.
Secondly, do bear in mind that the objective of the exercise is cost saving and is meant to
benefit your company. It is not an exercise to benefit the alloy manufacturer. After all, as a
customer, you have every right to demand whatever specification you want, and, it is up to
the alloy maker to supply it. And in fact, we at Sargam take pride in producing premium
quality alloys and consistently producing alloys with tight specification limits. Thus, the
purpose is not to get you to indiscriminately open up your specifications. That would be
inviting disaster! What we have been talking about, and the question you are going to be
addressing is which specification is optimal for you, from a price-performance point of
view.
- 43 -
This in fact brings me to the third point you should bear in mind. If at the end of the
exercise you arrive at the conclusion that your existing specification is the most optimal,
you should not consider the exercise as a waste of time! Remember, ruling out a specific
option after careful examination is definitely progress!
Fourth, this exercise cannot be done in isolation. You would need to involve the alloy
manufacturer and the caster.
Finally, it needs to be stressed that you must undertake this exercise with an open mind. If
you get in with a prefixed idea that the whole exercise is a waste of time and that your
existing specification is the most optimal, it is very likely that at the slightest hint of any
hiccups in the development process you will give up. Remember a half-hearted approach
will probably do more harm than good. If you are not convinced about the potential
benefits of the exercise, better not try it at all. At the other extreme if you go in convinced
that whichever changes you first attempt are the correct ones, you may end up brushing
aside any adverse results that crop up during your trials. Thus, during the entire process of
the study, you must be totally objective and avoid bias. It is also important that you
convince your caster also to approach the exercise with an open mind.
The Steps in Redesigning

Let us now look at the typical steps involved in the exercise.
The FIRST step is to make this re-specification exercise the responsibility of a specific
person or team.
The SECOND step is to identify the components for study. While you can and probably,
should, investigate all components over a period of time, obviously, you must prioritize.
What are the parameters based on which you prioritize, is of course a management
decision, unique to each organisation.
Some of the parameters could be:

Consumption: Greater the monthly consumption (in tons) of a component, greater will be
the potential savings. You might therefore want to take up such castings for study first.
Casting intricacy: You may wish to start with castings that do not present too many
complications in the foundry. If for instance, you have a component that your caster finds
difficult to make consistently, with acceptable levels of rejection, he is unlikely to try out
changes in specifications with an open mind.
Application area: There could be certain castings, where the nature of the application, or its
function, makes it not the right candidate for study, at least not till you have gained
confidence in your and your foundry’s ability to successfully handle the redesign process.
Maturity of component: If the particular casting is still under development from other
design or application perspectives, you might want to wait till this process is complete and
- 44 -
the use of the component stabilises for some period before attempting a reevaluation
exercise. On the other hand, if the casting, or the component or product in which the
casting is fitted is, let us say, being phased out, it may make no sense to put in any kind of
efforts in it.
There could be other parameters such as the amount of time and resources you can spare
etc. Any way it is best that based on certain clearly spelt out parameters you make out a
priority list for the castings.
Step 3: For the identified casting, it is best to do a quick check of the earlier design files,
and drawings. You will be surprised to find the wealth of information available, which
could save you a whole lot of time. For instance, certain specifications could have been
changed earlier for certain reasons. If those reasons still exist, you may not want to, or need
to, try and reverse those changes. On the other hand, if those reasons no longer exist,
reversing the specification change could be an easy first step. There could also be basic
information regarding the standard based on which the specification was developed and the
year in which it was developed. This will give you pointers to comparing the standard then
and now and identifying change parameters to try out. I would like to reiterate that this step
is very important and even if the archival information is not very well organised, it is well
worth putting in the effort to track it down.
Step 4: the next step is to do a status check. First check supply details and inspection and
quality records for the particular component over a reasonable period of time, for hints on
which areas to pursue and which to avoid. Second, check the chemical composition of
accepted castings presently in use. For this, pull out random samples from accepted lots of
recent supplies and conduct chemical analysis on them. If there are any parameters out of
the stated specification but with the casting still meeting acceptance criteria it will give you
greater confidence and may be even a direction to proceed. Third, machine test specimens
from accepted castings and, if possible, ask your caster to separately cast a test-bar along
with the next supply and check both for all required mechanical properties. Please bear in
mind, however, that the mechanical properties of a specimen machined from a casting will
be inferior to the properties attained in a separately cast test-bar. Repeat the chemical and
physical property check on at least two supplies. More, if consistent values are not
obtained.
Step 5: It will be a good idea to visit the caster and observe the foundry practice currently
in place. If required this job can be carried out by a foundry specialist. Also visit and note
down heat treatment cycles and machining operations. Details of cutting speed, feed and
cutting tools and equipment in use can come in handy.
Step 6: Next, summarise the gathered information to form the base line data or control data.
This will list out (a) all the functional requirements of the casting (b) the physical
properties as stated in requirements or being met by existing accepted castings, whichever
is lower (c) existing rejection rates after casting, after machining etc. This will be the basis
for comparison to determine whether the changes carried out subsequently were successful
or not and hence should be prepared with care.
- 45 -
Step 7: The next step is to discuss with the alloy maker, sharing the ‘historical’
information, if any, and the baseline data and then deciding on the parameters to try and
alter. One or more revised specifications to be tried should be listed out. It is extremely
important at this stage to refer to international standard specifications for similar alloys
while carrying out this exercise. Bear in mind that this is not some arbitrary exercise but a
very studied activity to be done in consultation with the alloy maker. The cost implications
of each of the revised specifications should be understood and noted. Remember, the
purpose of the entire exercise is to reduce costs and therefore, before you get to the next
step, you must know what the potential rewards for successfully completing the changes
will be.
Step 8: The next step is to carry out trials. The required quantity of the new specification
alloy should be obtained and given to the foundry along with a batch of the regular
material. Castings should be produced using both batches, if possible, simultaneously in
two crucibles or at least as close together as possible to avoid the effect of other variations
in foundry parameters from affecting the results. Test bars should also be cast from both
melts. You should ensure that the foundry follows identical foundry practices for both
melts. The two sets of castings and the test bars should be separately identified. If any heat
treatment is required, both sets of castings and test bars should be heat treated
simultaneously. Subsequent machining operations can then be carried out on the two sets of
castings taking care to preserve the identification. Physical properties of the test bars
should then be compared. For the two sets of castings, quantum and percentage of stage
rejections should be tabulated and studied.
Step 9: The previous set of operations should be repeated at least once more on fresh lots of
metal. The results of both trials should then be critically compared with the base line data.
If there are unacceptable or inexplicable variations between the two field trials, further
trials should be conducted till repeatability is achieved.
Step 10: The next step depends on the results of the trials. If the results are satisfactory,
depending on the nature of the component, field trials or accelerated performance trials can
be carried out. The batch size can then be increased and random castings selected from the
batch and tested. Consistent satisfactory results should increase the confidence levels
sufficiently to freeze the revised specifications.
At this point pleased recall the discussions on current international standards. You would
have noted that currently almost all international specifications specify separate limits for
alloy ingots and finished castings. It is recommended that at the end of your exercise as
well, you end up with revised specifications for the alloy ingots and castings separately.
This will help avoid disputes and ensure better control over all your processes.
In case the results are not satisfactory, a failure or defect analysis should be carried out
involving the alloy supplier and the caster. This will determine whether any modifications
will help. It should be borne in mind that if required, minor modifications in foundry
- 46 -
practice – pouring temperatures, for example – or even minor modifications in the tooling
may be worth carrying out considering the future savings possible.
Another aspect to track is the pick-up in impurity limits and drop in Magnesium limits due
to the addition of runners and risers at the foundry. The key point to note is that this is an
exercise in material specification engineering. Like any other engineering project, this too
should be carried out in a controlled manner with a clear plan and a sustained effort.
Without this the chances of success will be remote.
Conclusion
This then is a broad outline of a suggested approach to the design exercise. You may, as I
stated earlier, wish to modify by adding or subtracting steps to suit your individual needs.
Please feel free to do so. We are not the users of the castings, and you know your products
better than we do. However, we know Aluminium alloys and would like to state
categorically that the alloy specifications are not static to be kept in a black box never to be
touched or reviewed. Nor are they uncontrollable or incomprehensible. The specifications
are just like any other engineering parameter and should change to reflect changing
material availability, foundry practices and product application areas. We hope that through
this workshop we would have convinced you about this. Needless to say, Sargam with its
years of experience, up to date information on international standards and its well-equipped
laboratory is at your service to work with you in any such design project you may take up.
- 47 -
2, Ramavaram Road, Manapakkam,
Chennai 600089, Tamil Nadu, INDIA
Tel: +91-44-249-0885, +91-44-249-1547; Fax: +91-44-2491651
email: sargam_metals@vsnl.com
web site: www.sargammetals.com
48

Redesigning Aluminum Foundry Alloys For Material Cost Reduction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Redesigning Aluminum Foundry Alloys For Material Cost Reduction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Redesigning

Aluminium Foundry Alloys

SARGAM METALS P.LTD

A Compilation of the Papers presented at

‘FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY’

2 Aluminium Foundry Alloys – Position in the Aluminium

3 Why Redesign? – The Impact of Alloy Specifications on Cost 12

4 Role of alloying elements and impurities 23

5 A Comparison of major international specifications

6 The Process of Redesigning – a suggested approach 43

Secondly, improvements in foundry technology, machining capabilities, process

Aluminium Foundry Alloys – Position in the Aluminium Chain

The History of Aluminium

The History of Aluminium Recycling

The Aluminium Recycling Chain

THE ALUMINIUM CHAIN

Primary Aluminium Secondary

Manufacture of Manufacture of cast

New Scrap New Scrap

Mill Products Castings

Consumers of mill products and castings -

End Products New Scrap

End of Life Scrap Scrap Dealer

Recycling – Facts and Figures

In summary it is to be clearly understood that recycling is a vitally important part of the

Why Redesign? – The Impact of Alloy Specification on Cost

Cu-2.33%, Si-9.09%, Mg-0.05%, Mn 0.22%, Fe-1.01%, Zn-1.12%

Transmission Housing - Type – II

Cu-2.48%, Si-11.37%, Mg-0.10%, Mn-0.21%, Fe-0.81%, Zn-2.4%

Cu-2.50%, Si-6.13%, Mg-0.27%, Fe-0.42%, Zn-0.22% - Alloy Type –

Cu-3.19%, Si-8.71%, Mg-0.05%,Mn-0.18%, Fe-0.90%, Zn.1.85%

The History of Alloy production in India

Some Common Scrap Types

A Typical ADC12 Melt

I. Cu – 2.01, Si – 7.22, Mn – 0.50, Mg – 0.40, Ni – 0.15, Fe – 1.0%, Zn – 0.9%

The standard ADC12 as per JIS is:

Let us examine two cases of final specification requirements:

I: Cu 1.23%, Si 4.43%, Mn 0.30%, Mg 0.25%, Fe 0.61%, Zn 0.55%.

The melt make-up will look something like this:

Item % of melt after melt loss Cu Si Mn Mg Fe Zinc

The melt make-up will look something like this:

Item % of melt after melt loss Cu Si Mn Mg Fe Zinc

Impurity Limits affect Cost

Let us be clear about two things here:

A Closer Look at Impurity Limits

A Strong Case for Redesigning

Suggestions on Scrap Handling

ROLE OF ALLOYING ELEMENTS AND IMPURITIES

Those characteristics of an alloy, which determines the ease, or difficulty, of producing

ALUMINIUM-COPPER EQUILIBRIUM ( PHASE) DIAGRAM -Al RICH END

Binary Aluminium-Silicon alloys combine the advantages of high corrosion resistance,

The mechanical properties of Aluminium-Silicon alloys can be further improved by a melt-

To guarantee the best machinability and mechanical properties these hypereutectic

excellent corrosion resistance, good machinability and attractive appearance when

Titanium & Boron

Lead, Tin and Bismuth

A Comparison of Major International Specifications for Aluminium

The following standards have been referred for comparison purposes:

COMPARISON OF INTERNATIONAL SPECIFICATIONS

ALUMINIUM CASTING ALLOYS- 3% COPPER 6% SILICON

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

CHEMICAL COMPOSITION MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

AA SERIES Cu Si Mg Mn Fe Ni Ti Zn Cr Pb Sn Al TEMPER TENSILE ELONG HARDNESS