See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/297678196

Influence of Process Parameters and Sr Addition on the Microstructure and

Casting Defects of LPDC A356 Alloy for Engine Blocks

Article in Journal of Materials Science and Technology -Shenyang- · March 2016

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmst.2016.03.010

CITATIONS READS

42 1,426

3 authors:

Giulio Timelli Daniele Caliari

University of Padova University of Padova
163 PUBLICATIONS 1,546 CITATIONS 23 PUBLICATIONS 78 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jovid Rakhmonov
Northwestern University
24 PUBLICATIONS 201 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

High Tech Die Casting 2020 Conference View project

Fluxing and de-coating treatments in aluminium recycling View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Giulio Timelli on 31 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Materials Science & Technology

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. j m s t . o r g

Influence of Process Parameters and Sr Addition on the

Microstructure and Casting Defects of LPDC A356 Alloy for Engine
Blocks
Giulio Timelli *, Daniele Caliari, Jovid Rakhmonov
Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova, Stradella S. Nicola, 3 I-36100 Vicenza, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O
The effects of Sr addition and pressure increase on the microstructure and casting defects of a low-pressure
Article history: die cast (LPDC) AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy have been studied. Metallographic and image analysis techniques have
Received 25 September 2015 been used to quantitatively examine the microstructural changes and the amount of porosity occurring at
Received in revised form different Sr levels and pressure parameters. The results indicate that an increase in the filling pressure induces
1 December 2015 lower heat dissipation of the liquid close to the die/core surfaces, with the formation of slightly greater
Accepted 4 December 2015 dendrite arms and coarser eutectic Si particles. On the other hand, the increase in the Sr level leads to finer
Available online 8 March 2016 microstructural scale and eutectic Si. The analysed variables, within the experimental conditions, do not
affect the morphology of eutectic Si particles. Higher applied pressure and Sr content generate castings
Key words: with lower amount of porosity. However, as the filling pressure increases the flow of metal inside the die
Aluminium alloys
cavity is more turbulent, leading to the formation of oxide films and cold shots. In the analysed range of
Engine block
experimental conditions, the design of experiment methodology and the analysis of variance have been
Microstructure
Casting defects
used to develop statistical models that accurately predict the average size of secondary dendrite arm spacing
Sr addition and the amount of porosity in the low-pressure die cast AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy.
Process parameters Copyright © 2016, The editorial office of Journal of Materials Science & Technology. Published by
Elsevier Limited.

1. Introduction of lower strength of Al alloys compared to cast iron. Today, Al alloys

The engine block is the largest and most intricate single com-
ponent used in an internal combustion engine. It affects 3%–4% of
the total weight of the average vehicle. Thus it plays a key role in
all weight-reduction considerations. As a consequence of the current
engine evolution trend in overall new vehicles[1], cylinder blocks must
permit increased power and reduced displacement, which is almost
entirely due to the shift towards engines with fewer cylinders; future
expected powers are up to 65 kW/l for direct injection diesel engines
and 75 kW/l for boosted gasoline direct injection engines[2].
In order to resist to high combustion pressure, the develop-
ment of high strength materials and innovative processes for the
production of cylinder blocks is demanded[3].
Aluminium alloys are increasingly used to produce cylinder blocks
due to the favourable ratio between mechanical strength and low
density, and good thermal conductivity. Aluminium casting alloys
as a substitute for the traditional cast iron can mean a reduction
in engine block weight in the range between 40% and 55%, in spite
* Corresponding author. Ph.D.; Tel.: +39 444 998769; Fax: +39 444 998889.
E-mail address: timelli@gest.unipd.it (G. Timelli).
are commonly used for gasoline engine blocks and their applica-
tion is strongly growing for the production of diesel engine blocks[1,2].
Base materials commonly used for engine blocks are hypoeu-
tectic Al–Si foundry alloys, which include AlSi8Cu3 and AlSi6Cu4
alloys. These alloys are mostly applied for engine blocks produced
with gravity casting processes. In contrast, almost all high-pressure
die cast engine blocks are produced with the wide diffused
AlSi9Cu3(Fe) alloy.
Engine blocks cast from the AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy achieve very high
strength and ductility values at room temperature after a T6 heat
treatment. Higher resistance to cracking in the plastic regime offered
by this alloy enables engine blocks to operate under severe thermal
fatigue loading conditions[4]. In order to satisfy the increasing product
requirements, a proper control of the as-cast microstructure by the
application of preliminary processes, such as eutectic addition, is
generally necessary[5]. It is well known how the addition of certain
elements, such as sodium and strontium, completely changes the
morphology of eutectic Si crystals from faceted acicular flakes to a
fibrous rod-like form, thereby improving mechanical properties, es-
pecially fracture toughness and elongation[6].
Many foundry processes can be potentially used for the pro-
duction of engine blocks. However, low-pressure die casting (LPDC)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2016.03.010
1005-0302/Copyright © 2016, The editorial office of Journal of Materials Science & Technology. Published by Elsevier Limited.
516 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523

Table 1
Chemical composition of the experimental alloys (wt%); Alloy 0 corresponds to the supplied AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy

Alloy Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Zn Cr Ni Ti B Sr Al

0 6.96 0.111 0.016 0.016 0.301 0.01 0.001 0.003 0.112 0.0016 0.0003 Bal.
1 6.95 0.105 0.015 0.015 0.430 0.01 0.001 0.003 0.187 0.0154 0.0084 Bal.
2 6.89 0.110 0.017 0.016 0.432 0.01 0.001 0.003 0.179 0.0156 0.0166 Bal.

is one of the most promising processes. This foundry technology
is characterized by controlled filling of die cavity and solidifica-
tion under pressure, with the solidification front moving from the
most distant point of the casting to the ingate. Therefore, LPDC is
an enhanced process that is generally used for parts with premium
requirements[7]. The principle of this process is based on Pascal’s
pressure theory. The permanent die and the filling system are placed
over a sealed holding furnace containing the molten metal. To fill
the die, gas pressure is applied over the metal bath and the metal
is then forced to rise through one or more riser tubes, runners and
gating system, and consequently feeds the die cavity. The pres-
sure is then maintained to pressurize the casting and improve feeding
during late-stage solidification. Once the casting is completely so-
lidified, the overpressure in the furnace is removed, and the residual
molten metal in the tube flows back down to the furnace by the
action of gravity.
Many process parameters may affect the casting quality in LPDC,
such as exerting pressure velocity, holding pressure, pressure holding
time, melt temperature, die temperature[8–11]. A key process pa-
rameter during LPDC is the setting up of the exerting pressure in
the crucible that allows controlling the filling time of the die cavity
and to ensure a laminar flow of molten metal through the feed tube
into the die. If the filling speed is not adequately determined and
adjusted, the quality of the die cast part will be rather poor.
In this study, the effects of Sr addition and pressure increase on
the microstructure and casting defects of a LPDC A356 alloy have
been investigated. A statistical approach based on the analysis of
variance has been implemented to develop functional equations
useful to estimate the scale of secondary dendrite arm spacing and
the amount of porosity as function of the initial Sr content in the
alloy and the pressure parameters used during LPDC.
2. Experimental
values in the range of 2.63–2.65 g/cm3 were measured during the
experiments.
The analysed component is an in-line 4-cylinder diesel engine
block (Fig. 1), which was produced by LPDC technology using ex-
perimental alloys 1 and 2, respectively. The casting was multiple-
gated from the side of the crankshaft support to ensure good filling
and proper feeding during solidification. A steel gauze filter was
placed before the gating system after each casting. The weight of
the machined Al alloy casting was about 21.1 kg.
The casting process was cyclic and began with the pressuriza-
tion of the furnace. The excess pressure in the holding furnace forced
the molten metal to fill the die cavity. The casting cycle was divided
into the following steps: (1) Filling the riser tube in 10 s up to a pres-
sure of 0.02 MPa; (2) Filling the die cavity up to two different final
pressures (also called holding pressure), 0.035 and 0.05 MPa, re-
spectively, at a constant pressure ramping time (35 s); thus, the
pressurizing speed (P/t) was set up at 429 and 857 Pa/s, respec-
tively. A rapid increase of the pressure up to the final value at
constant pressure ramping time allows obtaining higher metal ve-
locity at the gate vg according to the following equation[12]:
dP (t ) ⎛ A ⎞A
= ρg ⎜ 1 + c ⎟ t v g (1)
dt ⎝ Af ⎠ Ac
where P(t) is the pressure as function of time t, ρ is the density of
molten metal, g is the gravitational constant, A c is the cross-
section area of the cavity, Af is the cross-section area of the crucible
and At is the cross-section area of the riser tube. Higher metal flow
velocity allows decreasing the filling time, which is defined as V/(Ag
vg), where V and Ag are the volume of die cavity and the gate area,
respectively; (3) Holding the final pressure for 160 s to assist the
feeding of solidification shrinkage in the die cavity. Therefore,
the material solidifies under the holding pressure; (4) Discharging

2.1. Alloys and casting parameters

In the present work, an AlSi7Mg0.3 cast alloy (EN AB-42100,

equivalent to the US designation A356) was supplied as commer-
cial alloy ingots and used as a baseline. The ingots were pre-
heated at 150 ± 10 °C in a tower furnace with a capacity of 50 t, and
subsequently brought to the melting temperature at 780 ± 10 °C. The
chemical composition of the supplied alloy (Alloy 0), measured on
separately poured samples by optical emission spectrometry, is
shown in Table 1.
The molten metal was tapped from the furnace and N-degassed
for 8 min with a rotary degasser (Foseco MTS Rotor Ø190, at
600 rpm). During degassing, weighed AlMg20 waffle ingots and
AlTi5B1 rods were added into the base alloy to ensure that the Mg
level reached the desired content about 0.45 wt%, and the Ti and
B levels were nominally 0.2 wt% Ti and 0.018 wt% B. Furthermore,
Sr addition was obtained by introducing AlSr10 rods in the melt en-
suring the Sr content reached two different levels, nominally 90 and
170 ppm (Alloy 1 and 2, respectively). The chemical compositions
of the experimental alloys are shown in Table 1. The liquid metal
was then transferred to an electrical holding furnace inside a
LPDC unit and held at 715 ± 5 °C. A reduced-pressure test was per-
formed to evaluate the molten quality in the holding furnace. Density Fig. 1. CAD section of the in-line 4-cylinder diesel engine block analysed.
 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523
Fig. 2. Locations where the specimens for metallographic investigations were drawn.
the pressure of the furnace in 5 s; (5) After the complete solidifi-
cation, the side dies were opened, the top die was raised vertically
and the casting was ejected (40 s); (6) The die was blown (30 s),
the steel gauze filter and the sand cores were placed appropriate-
ly (95 s); (7) The die was closed and the cycle was restarted.
Typical cycle time was about 460 s. During solidification, circu-
lating water at room temperature through internal channels in the
dies was used to control the cooling rates of the casting and to sta-
bilize the temperature of the dies in the range of (300–450) ± 5 °C.
The dies were made of AISI H11 tool steel.
2.2. Metallographic characterization
In order to evaluate the combined effect of pressure increase and
Sr addition on the microstructure and casting defects, the cylin-
der blocks were sectioned transversally along the in-line cylinders.
In general, the cylinder bridges show relatively thin thickness and
are thermally and mechanically stressed regions. Therefore, the eval-
uation of microstructure is mandatory, as required by most of the
customers’ specifications[2]. Samples from the region indicated in
Fig. 2 were drawn for metallographic investigations from three dif-
ferent castings, mechanically prepared to a 3 μm finish with diamond
paste and, finally, polished with a commercial fine silica slurry
(Struers OP-S).
To quantify the microstructural features, the image analysis was
focused on the secondary dendrite arm spacing (SDAS) measured
by the line intercept method, and on the size and aspect ratio of
the eutectic Si particles. Size is defined as the equivalent circle di-
ameter (d), and the aspect ratio (α) is the ratio of the maximum to
the minimum Ferets. To obtain a statistical average of the distri-
bution, a series of at least 15 micrographs of each specimen was
taken, and each measurement included more than 1000 particles.
The secondary phases, such as Mg2Si particles, were excluded from
the measurements.
Porosity was also studied in the same region, which corre-
sponds to a hot spot in the casting. To obtain a statistical average,
a series of 20 micrographs of each specimen were taken covering
an area of about 6.6 mm × 2 mm. Quantitative metallographic tech-
niques were also used to determine average pore area and roundness.
The latter is defined as p2/(4πA), where p and A are perimeter and
area of the pore, respectively.
3. Design of Experimental Matrix and ANOVA
The design of experiments (DOEs) is a statistical approach to the
experimental investigation that allows analysing which process input
517
Table 2
Independent variables selected in the DOE to study the effect on SDAS
Parameter Variable Lower Higher
designation level level
A Sr (wt%) 0.009 0.017
B Pressurizing speed (Pa/s) 429 857
has a significant impact on the process output. An analysis of vari-
ance (ANOVA) should be performed by considering the independent
factors (inputs) and their interaction that influence the response
(output). The ANOVA is a statistical methodology that enables to
investigate and to model the relationship between the output and
one or more input variables[13].
In the present study, a factorial ANOVA approach was imple-
mented to investigate the effects of the Sr level and the pressurizing
speed on the microstructural scale (SDAS), additionally the influ-
ence of the Sr level and the holding pressure on the amount of
microporosity.
Each independent variable was analysed at two levels. The in-
dependent variables, along with their values at selected levels used
in the statistical approach, are given in Tables 2 and 3. With the aim
of taking into account the highest degree of interaction, a full bal-
anced factorial plan was implemented. Besides the Sr content and
the pressure parameters as independent variables, their interac-
tion was also considered and studied.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Microstructural investigations
The following discusses the microstructural investigations in-
cluded in the present study.
4.1.1. General microstructure
Typical microstructures of the analysed region drawn from the
cylinder block are shown in Fig. 3, which refer to AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy
after 170 ppm Sr addition and obtained with different pressure
ramps. In general, the microstructure consists of a primary phase,
α-Al solid solution, and an eutectic mixture of aluminium and silicon.
The α-Al precipitates from the liquid as the primary phase in the
form of dendrites. Intermetallic compounds, such as Fe- and Mg-
rich intermetallics, are also observed. The Fe-bearing particles are
present in the microstructure mainly in the form of needle-
shaped β-Al5FeSi, even if some Chinese script α-Al15(Fe,Mn)3Si2
particles were detected. A high fraction of Mg-rich structures was
detected in the form of Chinese script Mg2Si and π-Al8Si6Mg3Fe as
products of binary eutectic reactions. In addition to these binary
eutectic structures, some complex eutectic clusters were also ob-
served on the polished sections, as formed from the ternary L →
α-Al + Mg 2 Si + π-Al 8 Si 6 Mg 3 Fe and quaternary L → α-Al + π-
Al8Si6Mg3Fe + Mg2Si + Si eutectic reactions, respectively.
4.1.2. Effect of pressure increase on SDAS
The scale of the microstructure was evaluated by means of SDAS
measurements (see Table 4). Considering the relatively low heat ex-
traction in the analysed region which is surrounded by sand cores,
Table 3
Independent variables selected in the DOE to study the effect on microporosity
Parameter Variable Lower Higher
designation level level
A Sr (wt%) 0.009 0.017
B Holding pressure (MPa) 0.035 0.050
518 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523

point of metals and alloys. This relationship has been described with
Clausius–Clapeyron equation[17]. For Al–Si binary alloys, the calcu-
lated increase in melting temperature has been estimated to be about
0.06 °C/MPa[15]. Therefore, when pressure is applied to a liquid alloy
at temperature just above its melting temperature, some degree of
undercooling results, thus providing a greater amount of nuclei.
Higher cooling rate, especially if coupled with a prompt undercool-
ing, can cause significant refinement in the microstructure.
In the present work, the increase in the melting temperature has
been calculated to be 0.0021 and 0.003 °C for the holding pres-
sures of 0.035 and 0.05 MPa, respectively, and therefore it is
negligible. On the other hand, the highest pressure used here is defi-
nitely low, if compared to that applied in squeeze casting, for
increasing the cooling rate by improving the contact between the
casting and the sand cores placed in the die cavity.
The rapid increase of the pressure up to the final value at con-
stant pressure ramping time (35 s) allows obtaining rapid filling
speed of the metal inside the die cavity and thus lower filling time.
This results in lower heat dissipation of the liquid close to the die/
core surfaces. Therefore, the local cooling rate is reduced, which
means that the local solidification time increases. The slower cooling
rates obtained with steeper pressure ramp lead to significant coars-
ening in the microstructure if compared with that obtained by
smoother pressure ramp.
Decreasing the filling time allows reducing the dissipation of melt
superheat. It is reported how the grain size and the SDAS coarsen
with increasing melt temperature, and the main cause of these phe-
Fig. 3. Typical microstructures of 170 ppm Sr modified AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy (Alloy 2)
obtained at (a) 429 and (b) 857 Pa/s pressurizing speed, respectively. nomena is the decreasing cooling rate, which affects the nucleation
and growth of grains[18]. In addition, the increased melt tempera-
ture deactivates available solidification sites, decreasing the frequency
significant coarsening of the dendrite arms occurred during solid- of grain nucleation.
ification as revealed from the coarse microstructural scale. While To include the effect of melt superheat on the solidification time
a lower filling pressure leads to a finer microstructure, the appli- ts, Tiryaltioglu et al.[19] revised the Chvorinov Rule’s and proposed
cation of a higher pressure, which is further held during casting the following equation:
solidification, induces the formation of slightly greater dendrite arms,
independent of the Sr level (see Fig. 3). t s = B ′k 1.31V 0.67 expξU (B ′ = 9.6 s cm −2, ξ = 0.00276°C −1
(3)
The range of cooling rates was estimated by secondary den- for A 356 alloy )
drite arm spacing, λ2, which strictly depends on the cooling rate
according to the empirical equation given below[14] where B′ is a mould constant (s cm‒2), k is the shape factor which
is defined as the ratio between the surface area of the sphere having
λ2 = 39.4R −0.317 (2) the same volume as the casting and the surface area through which
heat is lost by the casting, V is casting volume (cm3), ξ is an em-
where R represents the mean cooling rate of the primary α-Al den- pirical constant (°C‒1), U is superheat (°C).
drites during solidification. The average SDAS values and the Therefore, the pouring temperature directly affects the solidifi-
estimated cooling rates are listed in Table 4. cation time of the alloy and thus the growth of the primary α-Al
These results seem to be in contradiction with that reported in crystals.
literature where it is stated how a significant refinement in the struc- On industrial casting production it is difficult to obtain high so-
ture can be obtained in Al–Si foundry alloys by increasing the applied lidification rate throughout the casting, and therefore fine SDAS, for
pressure[15,16]. Even if these conclusions were drawn by applying several reasons: (1) the complexity of the shape of cylinder blocks,
squeeze casting technologies where the applied pressures are greater having many cavities in close proximity; (2) the need for direction-
than those used in LPDC, the structure refinement is generally at- al solidification to avoid casting macrodefects, and thus satisfactory
tributed to several factors. First, a significant increase in the cooling quality in the final component; (3) efficient heat removal is possi-
rate is obtained through improved contact between the casting and ble only if close to the die walls; (4) the gating, and eventually riser,
the die surface. The second factor is related to the thermody- designs are influenced by the part geometry.
namic nature of the applied pressure, which changes the melting Several investigations have been published about the factors that
influence SDAS and the relationship between SDAS and mechani-
Table 4 cal properties of Al alloy castings[20–22].
Average SDAS values measured under different experimental conditions (standard
deviation in parentheses); cooling rate, calculated according to Eq. (2) is reported 4.1.3. Effect of pressure increase on eutectic Si
Sr (wt%) Pressurizing SDAS Cooling rate, Due to Sr addition, the eutectic Si exhibits a fibrous morpholo-
speed (Pa/s) (μm) R (°C/s) gy for the analysed pressure ramps with coarser particles by
0.009 429 58 (4) 0.30 decreasing the filling time, i.e. increasing the pressurizing speed,
0.017 429 48 (5) 0.54 at the same Sr level (Fig. 4). The size distributions of the eutectic
0.009 857 67 (7) 0.19 Si particles were investigated and found to follow similar lognor-
0.017 857 55 (5) 0.35
mal distributions, independent of the filling time. The hypothesis
 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523
Fig. 4. Silicon crystals in the eutectic region of 170 ppm Sr modified AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy
(Alloy 2) obtained at (a) 429 and (b) 857 Pa/s pressure, respectively.
that the equivalent diameter of eutectic Si follows the lognormal
distribution cannot be rejected with the Anderson–Darling test sta-
tistic for all four data sets. The fitted distributions are shown in
Fig. 5(a). The coefficient of determination R2 was used to evaluate
the quality of the fitting, and it is 0.99, suggesting a good agree-
ment of the particle distribution with the lognormal distribution
adopted.
By decreasing the cooling rate, that is, increasing the pressur-
izing speed, the distribution of the eutectic Si size becomes more
spread for both the Sr levels analysed. The equivalent diameter of
eutectic Si particles with the maximum frequency shifts to higher
d values and the absolute value of the maximum frequency de-
creases. The average size, at 90 ppm Sr level (Alloy 1), moves from
about 1.0 to 2.5 μm for 429 and 857 Pa/s pressure increasing, re-
spectively, and from about 0.7 to 1.7 μm for the 170 ppm Sr modified
alloy (Alloy 2). It can be established that increasing the filling speed,
the microstructure is characterized by slightly coarser eutectic Si,
while reducing the flow rate, the formation of a high number of fine
Si particles is predominant.
The distribution of aspect ratio of eutectic Si particles also follows
a lognormal distribution with a threshold, since the minimum value
of α is 1. The threshold was here taken as 0.9, slightly below unity,
so that the fit can allow the presence of particles with an aspect
ratio of 1. The impact of the filling time, within the analysed range,
on the morphology of eutectic Si is negligible. Therefore, an in-
crease in the filling speed is related more to the size of the particles
than to the aspect ratio, which is steady in the range of 1.9 to 2.1.
4.1.4. Effect of Sr addition on SDAS
The average SDAS values measured at different Sr levels are re-
ported in Table 4 with the corresponding cooling rates calculated
according to Eq. (2). In general, the microstructural scale de-
creases by increasing the Sr content in the alloy, independent of the
applied pressure ramp. The lowest SDAS value is ~48 μm when Sr
level is 0.017 wt% and the pressure increase is set up at 429 Pa/s.
519
Fig. 5. Distributions of (a) equivalent diameter and (b) aspect ratio for eutectic Si
particles estimated as function of the pressurizing speed and Sr levels. Lognormal
fitting curves are drawn.
Recently, Sui et al.[23] reported a general tendency of SDAS to grad-
ually decrease and then increase by Sr addition in a gravity die cast
AlSi12Cu4Ni2Mg0.8 alloy and the minimum value was measured
at 0.02 wt% Sr. Fabrizi et al.[24] observed similar results for SDAS and
grain size in a high-pressure die cast AlSi9Cu3(Fe) after 130 ppm
Sr addition.
The size of the dendrites is, besides the cooling rate of solidifi-
cation, dependent on the level of alloying elements present in the
melt, even if this effect is not easily recognized due to the leading
effect of the cooling rate. Rearranging Eq. (2) into a general form
by taking into account the solute concentration, the secondary den-
drite arm spacing can be expressed as[25]
λ2 = G × M × R −n (4)
where G is a constant (also called geometric factor) and M is ex-
pressed for a multicomponent alloy through:
n
M = B × ∑ c 0bi,i (5)
j =1
where B is a constant developing on the alloy and bi is the expo-
nent of the concentration c0 of the i-th component.
During the solidification of primary phase, the alloying ele-
ments are not uniformly distributed between the solid and liquid
520 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523

phases. Excess of solute moves away from the solid–liquid inter-

face into the melt increasing the solute content among the dendrite
arms already formed. This supersaturation affects the constitution-
al undercooling at the solid–liquid interface, which is the driving
force for the spacing adjustment mechanism in the region between
the dendrite arms. The dendrite is able to branch sufficiently to
reduce this undercooling to a very low value. It is also expected that
the elements with a higher solubility in the Al melt are less effec-
tive in reducing the size of SDAS[26]. Higher concentration of alloying
elements, e.g. Cu and Si as analysed by Sivarupan et al.[27], and Al–
Si eutectic modifiers, e.g. Sb as reported by Boontein et al.[28], will
cause the formation of finer dendrites with lower SDAS.
Therefore, the reduction in SDAS after the addition of a rela-
tively low Sr level (~0.017 wt%) is believed to be the result of the
constitutional undercooling promoted by Sr which segregates at the
solidification interface due to very low partition coefficient in
the Al–Sr system (<0.0046 as calculated from Reference 29).

4.1.5. Effect of Sr addition on eutectic Si

The influence of Sr level on the eutectic Si size can be deduced
from the lognormal distributions shown in Fig. 5(a). The distribu-
tions of the eutectic Si size become more spread by decreasing the
Sr content, independent of the pressure parameters. However, the
change of the eutectic Si size through variation of the Sr level is more
evident at lower filling time (i.e. greater pressure increase), where
slower cooling rates occur. The refining effect after Sr addition is
almost comparable in the experimental conditions where the cooling
Fig. 6. Typical pore morphology in the analysed region of the 90 ppm Sr modified
rate is higher. Upon increasing the Sr content from 90 to 170 ppm, AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy (Alloy 1): (a) shrinkage porosity and (b) gas porosity. The micro-
the average size of eutectic Si particles decreases about 29% at lower graphs refer to a casting produced with 0.035 MPa holding pressure.
pressurizing speed, and about 32% at the highest pressure increase.
As it is possible to observe in Fig. 5(b), the variation in the aspect
ratio of eutectic Si is negligible within the analysed Sr range. There- content. In castings solidified under 0.035 MPa, the porosity frac-
fore, in addition to the eutectic Si refinement, Sr is responsible for tion is in the range between 0.3% and 0.5%, and the components
the morphological addition. However, in contrast to the refining obtained with the highest holding pressure (0.05 MPa) show a po-
mechanism, the applied pressure ramp seems not to compromise rosity level between 0.1% and 0.4%. In the present work, the
the Sr addition of eutectic Si morphology. experimental results indicate that the applied pressure reduces the
driving force for pore nucleation and growth.
4.2. Casting defects The average area and roundness of pores in the analysed region
of three different castings for each experimental condition are
Fig. 6 shows the typical morphologies of various porosities in given in Table 5. The pores in the castings produced with higher
the polished surfaces of the samples. The pores have typical “shrink-
age” (Fig. 6(a)) or “gas” (Fig. 6(b)) porosity aspects and were
homogeneously distributed throughout the analysed section. While
the former are coupled with a lack of interdendritic feeding during
mushy zone solidification, gas porosity is the evolution of hydro-
gen due to a sudden decrease in hydrogen solubility during
solidification[5]. Microporosity is a leading cause in the reduction
of mechanical properties, particularly fatigue resistance[30], as well
as a loss of pressure tightness, which is a key requirement in the
cylinder blocks, especially in the space between the cylinders.
To assess the efficiency of feeding for the different experimental
conditions, the area fraction of porosity was measured in the analysed
region of the cylinder blocks. The method based on the shape of pores
is theoretically able to discriminate between the two forms of po-
rosity. However, such a distinction was not considered to be relevant
because most porosity is in any case assumed to be closely related to
the presence of oxide films[31]. The difficulty of differentiating accu-
rately between these defects was therefore avoided[29].

4.2.1. Effect of holding pressure on microporosity

Fig. 7 summarizes the influence of holding pressure and Sr
content on porosity in the castings. In general, the amount of po-
rosity is low, therefore confirming LPDC as a useful foundry process
for the production of Al blocks for high performance engines. Further, Fig. 7. Influence of holding pressure and Sr levels on the porosity in the analysed
higher applied pressure generates castings with lower porosity region of cylinder blocks.
 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523
Table 5
Influence of holding pressure and Sr levels on the average size and roundness of pores
Sr (wt%) Holding Average pore Roundness
pressure (MPa) size (μm2)
0.009 0.035 6843 2.5
0.017 0.035 3054 2.2
0.009 0.050 3498 1.9
0.017 0.050 1649 1.7
pressure are smaller and more rounded than the pores in the cast-
ings obtained at lower holding pressure.
The final applied pressure during casting solidification is aimed
to feed and transport further material into the die cavity to com-
pensate for the subsequent solidification shrinkage and thermal
contraction, thus producing sound castings. In LPDC, the risers or
feeders are limited with respect to sand casting or gravity die casting.
Contrary to high-pressure die casting or squeeze casting where the
intensification pressures are greater (up to ~120 MPa), the pres-
sure applied in LPDC is low enough to prevent the evolution of
dissolved hydrogen or to effectively compress any entrapped air.
Pore growth is governed by Eq. (6), which represents a balance
between the pressures that promote and oppose pore formation[32]:
Pg + Ps ≥ Papp + PH + Ps-t
where Pg is the equilibrium pressure of dissolved gases, Ps is the pres-
sure drop due to solidification shrinkage, Papp is the applied pressure,
PH is the pressure due to metallostatic head, and Ps-t is the pres-
sure due to pore–liquid surface tension. Thus, the pore formation
can occur when the sum of the pressures referred to solidification
shrinkage and hydrogen rejection is larger than the combined effects
of applied pressure, metallostatic head and surface tension. For a
wetting liquid, Ps-t can be expressed as 2γ/r where γ is the surface
tension and r is the pore radius[32]. Therefore, the pore size can be
calculated as follows:
2γ
r=
Pg − (Ps + Papp + PH )
The size and amount of porosity is expected to be inversely pro-
portional to the applied holding pressure.
On the other hand, it can be reasoned that impurities may affect
porosity formation. They may alter the surface tension, so the term
Ps-t, and the stability of the protective oxide layer, affecting the term
Pg; they may act as active nucleate site for pores allowing pore for-
mation at a lower gas pressure, Pg, or hydrostatic shrinkage pressure,
Ps, than would otherwise be the case; they may affect the evolu-
tion of the microstructure during solidification, altering in this
manner the term Ps.
In the present work, density measurements carried out by reduced-
pressure testing revealed a strict range of density values, 2.63–2.65 g/
cm3. Therefore, it can be assumed that the number of heterogeneous
pore nucleation sites in the liquid bath inside the holding furnace
remained constant over the entire experimental campaign.
As the pressurizing speed increases, the flow of metal inside the
die cavity can be more turbulent, eventually leading to the entrain-
ment of inclusions and gases, and an increase in porosity. Fig. 8 shows
the typical filling-related defects, such as oxide films and cold shots,
as revealed in the castings produced with greater pressure in-
crease. As evidenced by Liu et al.[12], the gate velocity increases with
the effective pressure under higher pressurizing speed, leading to
gate velocities greater than critical value (0.5 m/s)[31]. This leads to
greater turbulence which is the main cause of oxide film entrain-
ment and formation of cold shots. However, the application of higher
pressure may eventually prevent the potential increase in porosi-
521
(6)
Fig. 8. Typical filling-related defects, (a) oxide films and (b) cold shot, observed in
the castings produced with higher pressurizing speed.
ty by restricting pore growth[33]. It is clear from Eq. (7) that the size
of the pores, and hence the amount of porosity, is not linearly pro-
portional to the applied pressure.
4.2.2. Effect of Sr addition on microporosity
The effect of Sr on the amount of porosity can be observed in
Fig. 7. Contrary to expectations derived from the literature, the
(7)
average porosity decreases by increasing Sr content from 90 up to
170 ppm in the alloy, and this behaviour seems to be independent
of the applied holding pressure.
Strontium addition is generally associated with an increase in
porosity, especially above that of the unmodified alloy, and also a
redistribution of porosity from macroscopic shrinkage porosity to
well-dispersed microporosity[5]. Further, higher amount of poros-
ity was generally detected by increasing the Sr content in the liquid
bath[34]. Recently, Dinnis et al.[35] demonstrated how a different dis-
tribution of eutectic solid throughout the dendritic network due to
changes in nucleation and growth modes can affect feeding and po-
rosity formation. Gradually increasing the Sr content, the eutectic
grains begin to nucleate and grow away from existing primary α-Al
dendrites, independent of them, with a relatively smooth solidifi-
cation front[36,37]. This mechanism may lead to an increase in porosity
because the growth of the eutectic grains can obstruct feed paths
causing a decrease in permeability and feeding efficiency.
In the present work, the porosity differences in the Sr-containing
AlSi7Mg0.3 engine blocks can be related to the eutectic solidifica-
tion mode by considering the ability of the riser tube in the LPDC
machine through the runners and gating system to supply feed metal
to the analysed region between the cylinders, which represents a
hot spot in the casting. The multiple runners connected to the riser
tube and the ingates solidify early and cannot supply feed metal
to the region between the cylinders. After the runners’ solidifica-
tion, the hot spot of the engine block acts as a riser for the casting.
In high Sr-modified alloy (Alloy 2), the low permeability of the
solidifying microstructure, due to independent nucleation of
522 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523

Fig. 9. (a) Main effects plot displaying the influence of Sr content and pressurizing
Fig. 10. (a) Main effects plot displaying the influence of Sr content and holding pres-
speed on SDAS; (b) Pareto chart evaluates the significant variables and their pos-
sure on the amount of porosity; (b) Pareto chart evaluates the significant variables
sible interactions (p-value of 0.05 is drawn as a reference line).
and their possible interactions (p-value of 0.05 is drawn as a reference line).

eutectic grains, reduces the flow of metal out of the hot spot to feed
the rest of the casting. In contrast, in the low Sr modified alloy (Alloy
1), the relatively permeable microstructure enables liquid to flow
from the hot spot to feed the remainder of the casting. Therefore,
the porosity in the analysed region is lower by increasing the Sr level
from 90 up to 170 ppm in the AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy.
The average area and roundness of pores measured at different
Sr contents are listed in Table 5. Pores are smaller and more rounded
by Sr increasing, independent of the applied pressure. This behaviour
seems to not be associated with the dissolved hydrogen in the bath.
The reduced-pressure test, which has been shown to be a reason-
able and useful method for hydrogen measurement[38], revealed
almost a steady-state value during the experiments. Upon increas-
ing the Sr level, the pores become more rounded due to the
progressive change in the morphology of the solidification front.
Dahle et al. [37] explained how the eutectic grains, nucleating
independently of the α-Al dendrites, grow with a relatively smooth
solidification front because the fibrous morphology of the eutec-
tic silicon does not grow ahead of the eutectic aluminium.

Table 6
Analysis of variance for SDAS (coded units)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F-value p-value

Main effects 2 1806.25 1806.25 903.13 32.74 0.000

Sr 1 1221.03 1221.03 1221.03 44.26 0.000
Pressurizing speed 1 585.22 585.22 585.22 21.21 0.000
2-Way interactions 1 9.03 9.03 9.03 0.33 0.571
Sr· pressurizing speed 1 9.03 9.03 9.03 0.33 0.571
Residual error 36 993.10 993.10 27.59
Pure error 36 993.10 993.10 27.59
Total 39 2808.38

Table 7
Analysis of variance for porosity (coded units)

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F-value p-value

Main effects 2 1.11289 1.11289 0.55644 32.96 0.000

Sr 1 0.92480 0.92480 0.92480 54.79 0.000
Holding pressure 1 0.18809 0.18809 0.18809 11.14 0.001
2-Way interactions 1 0.04601 0.04601 0.04601 2.73 0.103
Sr·holding pressure 1 0.04601 0.04601 0.04601 2.73 0.103
Residual error 68 1.14783 1.14783 0.01688
Pure error 68 1.14783 1.14783 0.01688
Total 71 2.30673
 G. Timelli et al. / Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32 (2016) 515–523
4.3. Analysis of variance
The analysis of the data by means of ANOVA revealed a com-
plete and exhaustive evaluation of the relationship between the
independent variables, such as pressure parameters and Sr content,
and the dependent variables, i.e. SDAS and amount of porosity, within
the experimental conditions. Figs. 9 and 10 show the results of SDAS
values and amount of porosity, in terms of main effect diagrams and
Pareto charts. Further, Tables 6 and 7 summarize the results of
ANOVA for SDAS and porosity. As generally reported in the ANOVA
tables[13], the number of degrees of freedom from each source (DF),
the sum of squares (SS), the mean squares (MS), the results of Fisher
test (F-value) and the p-values are shown. Furthermore, both the
sequential (Seq SS) and the adjusted sums (Adj SS) and mean (Adj
MS) of squares are also indicated. A detailed description of the sta-
tistical method used was given elsewhere[13].
Figs. 9 and 10 show the relative power of each factor, or inter-
action, to affect the variation in the microstructural scale or porosity
level. At the studied levels, the variable most significantly affecting
the analysed properties is the Sr content in the AlSi7Mg0.3 alloy. At
higher level, while Sr tends to decrease both SDAS and porosity, the
effects of the pressure parameters depend on the specific charac-
teristic. Upon increasing the pressurizing speed during die cavity
filling, the SDAS value increases; on the other hand, the porosity
decreases by increasing the holding pressure. The effects of the re-
lationships among the factors, i.e. Sr·Pressurizing speed and Sr·Holding
pressure, appear statistically insignificant, with a p-value higher than
0.05 for both the features analysed (see Figs. 9(b) and 10(b)).
On the basis of the significance level provided by the analysis
of variance, a linear regression model can be developed describ-
ing the relationship between the response and the predictor
variables. The reliability of the model is based on the coefficient of
determination, R2, which measures the quality of the least-squares
fitting to the experimental data. In the considered range of exper-
imental conditions, the size of SDAS and the amount of porosity can
be described by the following semi-empirical equations:
λ2 (μm ) = 59 − 1024 × (Sr ) + 0.025 × (Pressurizing speed)
Porosity ( % ) = 0.96 − 28.33 × (Sr ) − 6.81 × (Holding pressure)
where Sr is in wt%, Pressurizing speed is in Pa/s and Holding pres-
sure is in MPa. In order to verify the reliability of the regression
models of Eqs. (8) and (9), the experimental Sr contents
(see Table 1) and the experimental pressure parameters during LPDC
were used to predict the SDAS and the level of porosity. These results
were compared with the measured ones to describe the quality of
the developed models by means of R2 values, which are 0.99 and
0.95 for the average SDAS value and porosity, respectively.
5. Conclusions
(1) The increase in the pressurizing speed reduces the filling time
and induces the formation of slightly greater dendrite arms,
independent of the Sr level.
(2) Coarsening of the eutectic Si particles is observed by increas-
ing the pressurizing speed.
(3) The microstructural scale decreases by increasing the Sr
content in the alloy, independent of the applied pressure ramp.
(4) Upon increasing the Sr level in the alloy, the average size of
eutectic Si decreases more at lower filling time, which is ob-
tained by increasing the pressurizing speed.
(5) The impact of both applied pressure and Sr content, within
the analysed conditions, on the morphology of eutectic Si is
negligible.
(6) Higher holding pressure and Sr content generate cylinder
bridges with lower porosity content.
View publication stats
523
(7) As the pressurizing speed increases, the flow of metal inside
the die cavity can be more turbulent, leading to the forma-
tion of oxide films and cold shots.
(8) In the considered experimental conditions, the average size
of SDAS and the amount of porosity can be significantly de-
scribed by a regression model that considers the concentration
of Sr and the pressure parameters applied during LPDC.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge Dr. R. Molina and Dr. M. Badiali from
Teksid Aluminum Spa (Carmagnola, Italy) for the support to this re-
search, and thank Dr. A. Guglielmi for the experimental contribution
to this work.
References
[1] J. Alson, A. Hula, A. Bunker, Light-duty automotive technology, carbon dioxide
emissions, and fuel economy trends: 1975 through 2014, <http://www.epa
.gov/otaq/fetrends-complete.htm#summary>, Trends Report, October, 2014.
[2] European Aluminium Association, The Aluminium Automotive Manual, 2nd ed.,
2011, pp. 1–23. <http://european-aluminium.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/
AAM-Applications-Power-train-2-Engine-blocks.pdf>.
[3] W. Kasprzak, D. Emadi, M. Sahoo, M. Aniolek, Mater. Sci. Forum 618–619 (2009)
595–600.
[4] G. Nicoletto, E. Riva, Metall. Ital. 103 (2011) 41–48.
[5] J.E. Gruzleski, B.M. Closset, The treatment of liquid aluminum-silicon alloys,
Des Plaines: American Foundrymen’s Society, Illinois, 1990.
[6] S. Hegde, K.N. Prabhu, J. Mater. Sci. 43 (2008) 3009–3027.
[7] M. Merlin, G. Timelli, F. Bonollo, G.L. Garagnani, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 209
(2009) 1060–1073.
[8] P.H. Fu, A.A. Luo, H.Y. Jiang, L.M. Peng, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 205 (2008)
224–234.
[9] J.H. Kuo, F.L. Hsu, W.S. Hwang, Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 2 (2001) 131–145.
[10] A.M. Du, N. Wei, Z.P. Zhu, K. Zhou, Adv. Mater. Res. 1004–1005 (2014) 1172–
1177.
[11] G. De Looze, Shape casting—The John Campbell Symposium—TMS 2005 Annual
Meeting, San Francisco, California, U.S.A., February 13–17, 2005.
[12] S.G. Liu, F.Y. Cao, X.Y. Zhao, Y.D. Jia, Z.L. Ning, J.F. Sun, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 626
(2015) 159–164.
[13] D.C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, 8th ed., Hoboken, NJ,
2012.
(8) [14] Q.G. Wang, D. Apelian, D.A. Lados, J. Light Met. 1 (2001) 85–97.
[15] M.R. Ghomashchi, A. Vikhrov, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 101 (2000) 1–9.
[16] T. Reguła, J.J. Sobczak, A. Fajkiel, P. Dudek, Arch. Foundry Eng. 11 (2011) 55–60.
(9) [17] R.T. DeHoff, Thermodynamics in Materials Science, McGraw-Hill, New York,
1993, pp. 142–150.
[18] D.G. Eskin, V.I. Savran, L. Katgerman, Metall. Mat. Trans. A 36 (2005) 1965–1976.
[19] M. Tiryaltioglu, E. Tiryakioglu, D.R. Askeland, AFS Trans. 97–95 (1997) 907–913.
[20] F. Grosselle, G. Timelli, F. Bonollo, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527 (2010) 3536–3545.
[21] L.A. Dobrzanski, R. Maniara, J. Sokołowski, W. Kasprzak, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 191 (2007) 317–320.
[22] L.A. Dobrzański, R. Maniara, J.H. Sokolowski, Arch. Mater. Sci. Eng. 28 (2007)
105–112.
[23] Y. Sui, Q. Wang, G. Wang, T. Liu, J. Alloy. Compd. 622 (2015) 572–579.
[24] A. Fabrizi, S. Ferraro, G. Timelli, Mater. Charact. 85 (2013) 13–25.
[25] V. Rontó, A. Roósz, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 13 (2001) 337–342.
[26] Y. Wen, Dendrite and silicon particle refinement using Al-insoluble elements
in hypoeutectic aluminum silicon alloys, M.Sc. Thesis, University of Windsor,
1996.
[27] T. Sivarupan, C.H. Cáceres, J.A. Taylor, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 44 (2013)
4071–4080.
[28] S. Boontein, N. Srisukhumbovornchai, J. Kajornchaiyakul, C. Limmaneevichitr,
Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 24 (2011) 108–112.
[29] S.M. Liang, M. Engstler, V. Groten, J. Barrirero, F. Mücklich, A. Bührig-Polaczek,
R. Schmid-Fetzer, J. Alloy. Compd. 610 (2014) 443–450.
[30] J.Y. Buffière, S. Savelli, P.H. Jouneau, E. Maire, R. Fougères, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 316
(2001) 115–126.
[31] J. Campbell, Complete Casting Handbook—Metal Casting Processes, Metallurgy,
Techniques and Design, 1st ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2011.
[32] D.M. Stefanescu, A.V. Catalina, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 24 (2011) 144–150.
[33] W. Jiang, Z. Fan, D. Liao, D. Liu, Z. Zhao, X. Dong, Mater. Des. 32 (2011) 926–934.
[34] S. Shivkumar, L. Wang, D. Apelian, JOM 43 (1991) 26–32.
[35] C.M. Dinnis, M.O. Otte, A.K. Dahle, J.A. Taylor, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 35 (2004)
3531–3541.
[36] K. Nogita, A.K. Dahle, Mater. Charact. 46 (2001) 305–310.
[37] A.K. Dahle, K. Nogita, J.W. Zindel, S.D. McDonald, L.M. Hogan, Metall. Mat. Trans.
A 32 (2001) 949–960.
[38] X.G. Chen, F.J. Klinkenberg, S. Engler, L. Heusler, W. Schneider, JOM 46 (1994)
34–38.