You are on page 1of 21

Dear Author,

Here are the proofs of your article.

• You can submit your corrections online, via e-mail or by fax.

• For online submission please insert your corrections in the online correction form. Always
indicate the line number to which the correction refers.

• You can also insert your corrections in the proof PDF and email the annotated PDF.

• For fax submission, please ensure that your corrections are clearly legible. Use a fine black
pen and write the correction in the margin, not too close to the edge of the page.

• Remember to note the journal title, article number, and your name when sending your
response via e-mail or fax.

• Check the metadata sheet to make sure that the header information, especially author names
and the corresponding affiliations are correctly shown.

• Check the questions that may have arisen during copy editing and insert your answers/
corrections.

• Check that the text is complete and that all figures, tables and their legends are included. Also
check the accuracy of special characters, equations, and electronic supplementary material if
applicable. If necessary refer to the Edited manuscript.

• The publication of inaccurate data such as dosages and units can have serious consequences.
Please take particular care that all such details are correct.

• Please do not make changes that involve only matters of style. We have generally introduced
forms that follow the journal’s style.
Substantial changes in content, e.g., new results, corrected values, title and authorship are not
allowed without the approval of the responsible editor. In such a case, please contact the
Editorial Office and return his/her consent together with the proof.

• If we do not receive your corrections within 48 hours, we will send you a reminder.

• Your article will be published Online First approximately one week after receipt of your
corrected proofs. This is the official first publication citable with the DOI. Further changes
are, therefore, not possible.

• The printed version will follow in a forthcoming issue.

Please note
After online publication, subscribers (personal/institutional) to this journal will have access to the
complete article via the DOI using the URL: http://dx.doi.org/[DOI].
If you would like to know when your article has been published online, take advantage of our free
alert service. For registration and further information go to: http://www.link.springer.com.
Due to the electronic nature of the procedure, the manuscript and the original figures will only be
returned to you on special request. When you return your corrections, please inform us if you would
like to have these documents returned.
Metadata of the article that will be visualized in
OnlineFirst
ArticleTitle Nucleation and Growth of Graphite in Eutectic Spheroidal Cast Iron: Modeling and Testing
Article Sub-Title
Article CopyRight The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International
(This will be the copyright line in the final PDF)
Journal Name Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A
Corresponding Author Family Name Carazo
Particle
Given Name Fernando D.
Suffix
Division Instituto de Mecánica Aplicada
Organization Universidad Nacional de San Juan
Address Av. Libertador Gral. San Martín 1109 (Oeste), C.P. J5400ARL, San Juan,
Argentina
Division
Organization CONICET
Address Godoy Cruz 2290, CABA, C1425FQB, Argentina
Email fcarazo@unsj.edu.ar

Author Family Name Dardati


Particle
Given Name Patricia M.
Suffix
Division GIDMA and Departamento de Ingeniería Mecánica
Organization Universidad Tecnológica Nacional Facultad Regional Córdoba
Address Maestro M. López esq. Cruz Roja Argentina s/n, Ciudad Universitaria,
Córdoba, Argentina
Email
Author Family Name Celentano
Particle
Given Name Diego J.
Suffix
Division Departamento de Ingeniería Mecánica y Metalúrgica, Research Center for
Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials (CIEN-UC)
Organization Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Address Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile
Email
Author Family Name Godoy
Particle
Given Name Luis A.
Suffix
Division Institute for Advanced Studies in Engineering and Technology, FCEFyN
Organization National University of Cordoba and CONICET
Address Av. Vélez Sarsfield 1601, Córdoba, Argentina
Division
Organization CONICET
Address Godoy Cruz 2290, CABA, C1425FQB, Argentina
Email

Received
Schedule Revised
Accepted
Abstract A new model of graphite growth during the continuous cooling of eutectic spheroidal cast iron is presented
in this paper. The model considers the nucleation and growth of graphite from pouring to room
temperature. The microstructural model of solidification accounts for the eutectic as divorced and graphite
growth rate as a function of carbon gradient at the liquid in contact with the graphite. In the solid state, the
microstructural model takes into account three stages for graphite growth, namely (1) from the end of
solidification to the upper bound of stable eutectoid intercritical, (2) during the stable eutectoid
intercritical, and (3) from the lower bound of stable eutectoid intercritical to room temperature. The micro-
and macrostructural models are coupled using a sequential multiscale approach. Numerical results for
graphite fraction and size distribution are compared with experimental results obtained from a cylindrical
cup, in which the graphite volumetric fraction and size distribution were obtained using the Schwartz–
Saltykov approach. The agreements between the experimental and numerical results for the fraction of
graphite and the size distribution of spheroids reveal the importance of numerical models in the prediction
of the main aspects of graphite in spheroidal cast iron.
Footnote Information Manuscript submitted June 9, 2015.
Journal: 11661
Article: 3430

Author Query Form

Please ensure you fill out your response to the queries raised below
and return this form along with your corrections

Dear Author

During the process of typesetting your article, the following queries have arisen. Please
check your typeset proof carefully against the queries listed below and mark the
necessary changes either directly on the proof/online grid or in the ‘Author’s response’
area provided below

Query Details required Author’s response


Front matter Please check and confirm that the
authors and their respective affiliations
have been correctly identified and
amend if necessary.
General Please check the usage of the term
‘intercritical’ throughout the article
and amend if necessary.
Line nos. Please check the phrase ‘radius of
384 and 432 graphite spheroids’ in the sentences
‘Substituting Eq. [5] into Eq. [6]…’
and ‘Thus, the radius of graphite
spheroids…’ and amend if necessary.
Figure 7 Please check and confirm the edits
made to the caption of Figure 7 and
amend if necessary.
Line nos. Please check the term ‘continuous-
836–837 isothermal-continuous cooling
processes’ in the sentence ‘Regarding
the stage of growth of spheroids…’ for
clarity and amend if necessary.
1
2 Nucleation and Growth of Graphite in Eutectic
3 Spheroidal Cast Iron: Modeling and Testing
4
5 FERNANDO D. CARAZO, PATRICIA M. DARDATI, DIEGO J. CELENTANO,
6 and LUIS A. GODOY
7
8 A new model of graphite growth during the continuous cooling of eutectic spheroidal cast iron
9 is presented in this paper. The model considers the nucleation and growth of graphite from
10 pouring to room temperature. The microstructural model of solidification accounts for the

F
11 eutectic as divorced and graphite growth rate as a function of carbon gradient at the liquid in
12 contact with the graphite. In the solid state, the microstructural model takes into account three

O
13 stages for graphite growth, namely (1) from the end of solidification to the upper bound of
14 stable eutectoid intercritical, (2) during the stable eutectoid intercritical, and (3) from the lower
15 bound of stable eutectoid intercritical to room temperature. The micro- and macrostructural

O
16 models are coupled using a sequential multiscale approach. Numerical results for graphite
Author Proof

17 fraction and size distribution are compared with experimental results obtained from a
18 cylindrical cup, in which the graphite volumetric fraction and size distribution were obtained

PR
19 using the Schwartz–Saltykov approach. The agreements between the experimental and
20 numerical results for the fraction of graphite and the size distribution of spheroids reveal the
21 importance of numerical models in the prediction of the main aspects of graphite in spheroidal
22 cast iron.
23

D
24 DOI: 10.1007/s11661-016-3430-x
26
25 Ó The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International 2016

27
28
I. INTRODUCTION
NODULAR cast irons are alloys in which the main
TE
to monitor the evolution of these three characteristics
during and at the end of the cooling process.
Studies dealing with the thermo-metallurgical evolu-
40
41
42
EC
29 components are Fe, C, and Si. From a technological tion of the complete cooling process of spheroidal 43
30 perspective, the quality and mechanical properties of eutectic cast iron[2–6] have limited microstructural capa- 44
31 nodular cast irons depend on the type and characteris- bilities to model phase changes. During solidification, 45
32 tics of (1) graphite spheroids and (2) metallic they consider a non-divorced eutectic and do not take 46
33 constituents.
RR

into account mass conservation of carbon at a 47


34 According to ASTM A247-10,[1] three of the main microstructural level. At the solid state, they do not 48
35 characteristics of graphite in iron castings are (1) the account for microstructural characteristics at the end of 49
36 graphite form type (or types), (2) the graphite distribution, solidification, such as chemical heterogeneities at the 50
37 and (3) the graphite size class. To the best of the authors’ microstructural level. Moreover, in order to identify the 51
38 knowledge, previous contributions have not addressed the
CO

growth stages and laws of this phase, they represent 52


39 coupling of phase transformations in liquid and solid states neither the growth of graphite spheroids up to the 53
initiation of the stable eutectoid transformation, nor the 54
bounds of the stable and the metastable eutectoid 55
intercriticals. The computation of growth rate of 56
57
UN

FERNANDO D. CARAZOM, Adjoint Professor and Researcher, graphite spheroids is limited to carbon diffusion through
is with the Instituto de Mecánica Aplicada, Universidad Nacional de the shell of solid solution of carbon in Fea (BCC iron), 58
San Juan, Av. Libertador Gral. San Martı́n 1109 (Oeste), C.P. namely ferrite, towards the spheroids. 59
J5400ARL, San Juan, Argentina, is also with the CONICET,
Venugopalan studied the growth of graphite spher- 60
C1425FQB Godoy Cruz 2290, CABA Argentina. Contact e-mail:
fcarazo@unsj.edu.ar PATRICIA M. DARDATI, Professor, is with oids during the continuous cooling of spheroidal cast 61
the GIDMA and Departamento de Ingenierı́a Mecánica, Universidad iron.[7] The same author modeled the growth of graphite 62
Tecnológica Nacional Facultad Regional Córdoba, Maestro M. López spheroids in an isothermal process.[8] In both works, 63
esq. Cruz Roja Argentina s/n, Ciudad Universitaria, Córdoba, there is a simplified representation of the graphite 64
Argentina. DIEGO J. CELENTANO, Associate Professor, is with
the Departamento de Ingenierı́a Mecánica y Metalúrgica, Research growth. 65
Center for Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials (CIEN-UC), The simulation of the complete cooling of an eutectic 66
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, spheroidal cast iron was presented by Wessen and 67
Macul, Santiago, Chile. LUIS A. GODOY, Professor and Researcher, Svensson.[9] In this work, the authors take into account 68
is with the Institute for Advanced Studies in Engineering and
Technology, FCEFyN, National University of Cordoba and CON-
the growth of spheroids from the end of solidification to 69
ICET, Av. Vélez Sarsfield 1601, Córdoba, Argentina, is also with the the beginning of the stable eutectoid transformation by 70
CONICET. means of CALPHADÒ. 71
Manuscript submitted June 9, 2015.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—1

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
72 Lacaze and Gerval modeled the growth of graphite The model has been implemented in a computational 131
73 spheroids from the end of solidification up to environ- environment where the results of the thermo-metallur- 132
74 mental temperature.[10] The authors considered that up gical simulations of cooling of an eutectic spheroidal 133
75 to the stable eutectoid transformation, the spheroids cast iron are compared with results obtained in 134
76 grow to the expense of carbon diffusion from austenite laboratory. 135
77 at the interphase with graphite to graphite.
78 Notice that Venugopalan[8] and Lacaze and Gerval[10]
79 are the only two works in which the growth of graphite II. METHODOLOGY FOR THE THERMO- 136
80 spheroids, from the end of solidification to the start of METALLURGICAL PROBLEM 137
81 stable eutectoid phase change, has been taken into
82 account. However, they do not couple these stages of The thermo-metallurgical cooling model developed in 138

F
83 graphite growth with microstructural solidification this research is based on two different but related scales. 139
84 models. This is a severe limitation because in any cast At a macrostructural level, the equation of energy 140

O
85 alloy the phase changes in the solid state depend on the conservation is solved to obtain the temperature (T) and 141
86 microstructural characteristics at the end of the cooling rate (T)_ fields. These variables are subsequently 142
87 solidification. employed as data at the microscale model, in which 143

O
88 This short literature review attempts to highlight some phase changes during solidification and in the solid state 144
89 aspects of the current state of the art: are formulated and solved at a representative volume 145
Author Proof

element (RVE).[11,12] The main assumptions adopted 146

PR
90  Conservation of carbon mass at a microstructural
91 level has not been included in existing models. This is along the cooling process are as follows: (1) the 147
92 a crucial aspect to evaluate carbon gradient and temperature is constant at each time step and its value 148
93 consequently diffusion towards both spheroids and is given from the macroscale problem solution; (2) the 149
94 austenite located far from the interphase with carbon mass conservation is satisfied; and (3) there is 150
95 graphite. equilibrium at the interphases. 151
With T and Fe-C-Si and Fe-Fe3C-Si systems (see 152

D
96  Growth of spheroids in contact with liquid has not
97 been considered for equiaxial dendritic morpholo- Appendix A), it is possible to obtain the gradients of 153
98 gies which are typical in austenite for any spheroidal carbon concentration at different interphases, the vari-
TE 154
99 cast iron compositions. Furthermore, microsegrega- ables required to evaluate the growth rate of phases and 155
100 tions in the liquid state and their effect on the microconstituents, their volume fractions, and the 156
101 thermodynamics and kinetics of the solid-state phase energy released due to the latent heat during the phase 157
102 transformations are not currently modeled. These changes. This energy released is part of the macrostruc- 158
tural formulation for the solution of the energy 159
EC

103 limitations do not allow investigations of how


104 solidification processes affect graphite growth in equation. 160
105 the solid state. The macrostructural problem is solved by a finite 161
106  Finally, in order to distinguish the growth laws of element discretization.[13] The microstructural problems 162
107 spheroids during the stable eutectoid phase change, of phase changes are developed as phenomenological 163
RR

108 current models account for neither the carbon theories based on thermodynamics and physical metal- 164
109 diffusion from austenite at the interphase with lurgy. Their results are taken to the macrostructural 165
110 graphite towards the graphite spheroids, nor the level in terms of rule of mixtures,[14] written as a 166
111 stable eutectoid intercritical. For temperatures lower function of the volume fraction of microconstituents 167
112 than the lower bound of the stable eutectoid inter- and their respective latent heat values. 168
CO

113 critical, the present models only represent the carbon In Carazo et al.,[15] there may be seen a scheme of the 169
114 diffusion towards the spheroids through the ferrite relation between the thermal and microstructural fields 170
115 envelope. in a phase-change problem solved by the finite element 171
method, whereas the coupling scheme of the 172
116 This paper presents a new model for nucleation and thermo-metallurgical problem is written in terms of the 173
UN

117 growth of graphite spheroids in an eutectic cast iron. rate of the element phase-change vector: 174
118 The model aims to Z
ðeÞ
119  model growth of spheroidal graphite spheroids from L_ PC ¼ NT qLf_PC dX; ½1Š
120 the end of solidification to the end of austenite Xe
121 transformation (solid solution of C in Fec or FCC
122 iron), where NT is the transpose of the shape function matrix, 176
123  couple the growth of graphite spheroids in solid state q is the density, L is the phase-change latent heat, Xe is 177
124 with a microstructural model of solidification (in- the integration domain (corresponding to a finite 178
125 cluding nucleation and growth of graphite spheroids element), and f_PC is the time derivative of the 179
126 during solidification), and phase-change function which is obtained from ad hoc 180
127  provide a phenomenological description of the phase transformation models. In the macroscopic met- 181
128 growth process of graphite spheroids in solid state, allurgical phase-change models, fPC is an explicit func- 182
129 together with its implications for austenite transfor- tion of T. On the contrary, in the metallurgical 183
130 mations. phase-change models defined from a microstructural 184

2—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
185 standpoint, fPC is written in terms of T and a set of which is shifted to the zone of the faceted phase because, 240
186 microstructural state variables. as mentioned above, it is the phase with higher fusion 241
187 The phase changes considered in this work are defined entropy.[25] 242
188 from microstructural models. Assuming that a local Following the description provided above in this 243
189 state field is the mean volumetric value in a statistically section, the microstructure of a spheroidal cast iron is 244
190 representative microstructural domain of the material formed by a divorced eutectic and, depending on the 245
191 simple at the macroscopic level (RVE), in this work, the characteristics of the solidification process, may (or may 246
192 rate of the element phase-change vector can be not) show eutectic cells as have been reported from 247
193 expressed as various experiments. 248

@ ðAami ami Þ _
Z
ðeÞ
L_ PC ¼ NT qL TdX; B. Microstructural Model 249

F
@T
Xe Most metallurgical research at micro level dealing 250

O
with solidification of spheroidal cast irons considers a 251
195 where Aami and ami are the set of state variables and the non-divorced eutectic with cooperative growth. The 252
196 corresponding parameters of the phase-change models underlying assumption is that the spheroids that nucle- 253
197 (e.g., solidification and transformations in solid state).

O
ate are instantly surrounded by austenite.[2–4,18,20,25–43] 254
198 Thus, the phase-change effects described at the micro- However, according to the process described in Sec- 255
Author Proof

199 scopic level can be taken into account at the macroscopic tion III–A, the thermodynamics and kinetics of the 256

PR
200 level in the energy balance as a variable source term.[13] eutectic transformation would not be related to a 257
non-divorced eutectic. In agreement with this line of 258
thought, the phase-change model should account for 259
201 III. SOLIDIFICATION OF EUTECTIC independent nucleation of austenite and graphite in the 260
202 SPHEROIDAL CAST IRON liquid and, in addition, independent equiaxial dendritic 261
growth of austenite and spherical growth of graphite in 262

D
203 A. Phenomenological Approach at the Microstructural the liquid and in contact with the austenite. 263
204 Level The main features of the microstructural model for 264

TE
205 In spheroidal cast irons, the eutectic transformation solidification of an eutectic spheroidal cast iron adopted 265
206 develops according to a divorced eutectic, also known as in this work are presented below. In this model, 266
207 anomalous.[16,17] This is a difference with flake cast irons originally proposed by Dardati,[11] a divorced eutectic 267
208 in which the eutectic transformation occurs as a regular is considered. A scheme of a two-dimensional grain of 268
209 eutectic which is characteristic of a faceted–faceted austenite, together with graphite spheroids and carbon 269
EC
210 morphology, i.e., flake graphite–austenite. concentration profile, is shown in Figure 1. 270
211 In spheroidal cast irons, eutectic crystallization is
212 produced from the independent nucleation of graphite
213 spheroids and equiaxed austenite dendrites at different
214 points, undercooling, and time stages.[18–22] There have
RR

215 been observations showing that graphite spheroids


216 nucleate around austenite dendrites and vice versa in
217 some cases. This does not seem to be a direct phe-
218 nomenon but rather it is due to the gradient of C
CO

219 composition which produces primary nucleation and


220 growth of austenite and graphite.[21]
221 The microstructure of spheroidal cast irons at the end
222 of the solidification, which shows graphite spheroids in an
223 austenite matrix, is characterized by a divorced eutectic
224 according to the theory of solidification.[23,24] This is
UN

225 justified because in a divorced eutectic, once the faceted


226 face (which is spheroidal graphite in this case with high
227 fusion entropy) nucleates, it requires a large undercooling
228 to grow with respect to the non-faceted phase (austenite).
229 The non-faceted phase nucleates and grows according to
230 the metastable extrapolation of the liquidus line. This
231 occurs until the formation and growth of the faceted
232 phase becomes favored at a higher undercooling. At this
233 stage, the growth of both phases occurs in the zone of the
234 metastable extrapolation of the equilibrium Fe-C-Si
235 system at temperatures lower than eutectic temperatures.
236 Due to the carbon enrichment of the remaining liquid
237 in areas around equiaxed austenite dendrites that have Fig. 1—Scheme of the representative volume element and the carbon
238 nucleated, this path of solidification enters the zone of distribution profile during the eutectic solidification of a spheroidal
239 coexistence or coupled growth (austenite–graphite), graphite cast iron.[11]

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—3

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
271 The main assumptions considered in the work of carbon diffusion in solid state. The graphite spheroids 309
272 Dardati[11] are as follows: (1) instantaneous nucleation of surrounded by interdendritic or intergranular liquid 310
273 austenite; (2) continuous nucleation of graphite; (3) (zones z2 and z3 in Figure 1, respectively) continue their 311
274 equiaxial dendritic growth of austenite; (4) the growth growth as a function of the respective carbon diffusion 312
275 rate of the main branches of dendrites is given by the in those zones. 313
276 equation of kinetics of growth of an isolated dendrite; (5) The carbon concentration profile is taken to be 314
277 spherical growth of graphite; (6) the carbon diffusion in uniform (unlike that shown in Figure 1 which was only 315
278 solid state is neglected; (7) carbon mass balance is employed to model the growth of the austenite den- 316
279 preserved at a representative volume element; (8) uniform drite). Notice that although the interphases are assumed 317
280 carbon composition in the interdendritic liquid; and (9) to be in equilibrium (same as in the growth model of 318
281 spherical carbon diffusion in the intergranular liquid. spheroids in solid state),[12] the modeling of phase 319
The main results of the model proposed by Dardati[11]

F
282 changes in which nucleation of austenite and graphite 320
283 are as follows: (1) austenite and graphite volume spheroids takes place allows incorporating the charac- 321

O
284 fractions, (2) number and size distribution of graphite teristic incubation time of phase changes out of equilib- 322
285 spheroids; (3) alloy composition of the first and last zone rium. In this case, the carbon concentrations are 323
286 that become solid; and (4) grain size of austenite. obtained by means of a procedure proposed by Heine[45] 324

O
287 According to Figure 2, which shows a schematic part which is based, for temperatures lower than the eutectic 325
288 of a pseudo-binary Fe-C-Si system, the composition of one, on a metastable extrapolation reported by 326
Author Proof

289 the alloy considered in this study varies along the three Hultgren.[46] 327

PR
290 zones z1, z2, and z3 in Figure 1. The main features of the
291 nucleation and growth models of graphite spheroids
292 during an eutectic solidification are presented in Sec-
293 tions III–C and III–D. Details of such models may be IV. GROWTH OF GRAPHITE SPHEROIDS 328
294 found in Dardati et al.[44] FROM THE END OF SOLIDIFICATION UP TO 329
THE UPPER BOUND OF THE STABLE 330

D
EUTECTOID INTERCRITICAL 331
295 C. Nucleation of Graphite Spheroids
A. General Considerations 332
296
297
As mentioned above, the nucleation of graphite
spheroids is modeled as a continuous process. The
TE 
For a temperature T lower than the eutectic temper- 333
298 process starts when the alloy temperature reaches the ature (TE0 ) and higher than the upper bound of the 334
299 eutectic temperature (point C¢ in Figure 2), it stops stable eutectoid intercritical (TaaT ), the equilibrium car- 335
300 under recalescence and, finally, it restarts if the temper- bon concentration in austenite at the interphase with 336
EC

301 ature is lower than the lowest temperature at which the c=g
graphite (CC ) is shown in Figure 2. The carbon 337
302 process had previously stopped, before the end of
concentration profile for such temperature range and a 338
303 solidification (z2 and z3 in Figure 1). In this context,
quarter of a graphite spheroid surrounded by austenite 339
304 nucleation is assumed to occur in the interdendritic and
are both depicted in Figure 3. If the temperature 340
305 intergranular zones (zones z2 and z3, respectively).
RR

decreases, Figure 2 shows that the carbon solubility in 341


austenite decreases along the line E¢S¢. As the cooling of 342
306 D. Growth of Graphite Spheroids the cast part progresses, for each temperature between 343
c=g
307 Graphite spheroids in zone z1 are assumed to not TE0 and TaaT , the values of CC will be given by the 344
equilibrium carbon concentrations in austenite at the 345
CO

308 grow since the solidification model does not consider


UN

Fig. 2—Schematic of an isopleth Fe-C section of the Fe-C-Si equilib- Fig. 3—Schematic representations of one quarter of a graphite
rium phase diagram with the composition of interest for a tempera- spheroid surrounded by austenite and the associated carbon profile
ture TaaT  T  TE0 . for a temperature between TE0 and TaaT .

4—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
346 interphase with graphite in the Fe-C-Si system (see content in the austenite decreases in accordance with an 391
347 Appendix A). increase in size of the spheroids. Thus, CcC must be 392
computed whenever there is a change in the size of the 393
348 B. Growth Rate of Graphite Spheroids spheroids taking into account that its initial value is 394
obtained from that at the end of the solidification. 395
349 Based on the consideration made at the beginning of Spheroids stop their growth when CC
c=g
CcC >0. 396
350 this section and assuming that the difference between
c=g
351 CC CcC <0, where CcC is the carbon content in
352 austenite, the flow of carbon from the austenite to the
V. GROWTH OF GRAPHITE SPHEROIDS DUR- 397
353 graphite spheroids, indicated as /1C in Figure 3, is ING THE STABLE EUTECTOID PHASE CHANGE 398
354 computed by a Fick-type equation[47] in the form:

F
The growth of graphite spheroids during the stable eu- 399
@CcC 

1 c
/C ¼ DC qc ; ½2Š tectoid phase change can be considered in two steps that 400

O
@r r¼Rg are separately described below. 401
356 where DcC is the diffusion coefficient of carbon in

O
357 austenite, qc is the density of austenite, and A. Growth of Graphite Spheroids During the 402
c  Stable Eutectoid Intercritical 403
Author Proof


@CC 
358 @r r¼Rg is the gradient of carbon in austenite at

PR
Figure 4 shows a schematic Fe-C section of the 404
359 the interphase with graphite. Carbon that diffuses from Fe-C-Si equilibrium phase diagram for a temperature 405
360 austenite to the graphite spheroids is incorporated into between the upper and lower bounds of the stable eu- 406
361 the latter as tectoid intercritical. 407
When the temperature is between the upper and lower 408
 
c=g
/1C ¼ qg Cg qc CC R_ g ; ½3Š
bounds of the stable eutectoid intercritical (TaaT and TaA1 , 409

D
363 where Cg and qg are the carbon concentration and respectively), the growth of graphite spheroids is due to 410
the carbon diffusion caused by the difference between 411
364 density of graphite, respectively, and R_ g is the rate of c=g c=g
the values of CcC and CC , as long as CC CcC <0 (see

TE
365 change of graphite spheroids radius (i.e., the rate at 412
366 which the graphite/austenite interphase advances Figure 3). If the temperature reaches TaaT , the ferrite 413
367 towards austenite). From Eqs. [2] and [3], it results grains can nucleate on the surface of the spheroids in 414
such a way that the graphite is covered by ferrite grains 415
@Cc 

1 depending on its size and on the number and size of 416
R_ g ¼ DcC qc   C 
EC
½4Š
qg Cg qc CC
c=g @r r¼Rg ferrite nuclei that nucleate on the surface of each 417
spheroid. 418
@CcC 
  Unlike what was discussed in Section IV, carbon 419
369
371 where @r r¼Rg is the only unknown in the right-
370 diffusion could take place now through ferrite and 420
austenite. The growth rate of graphite spheroids in the 421
RR

372 hand side of Eq. [4] whose evaluation requires knowl-


373 edge of the profile shape of carbon through the austen- stable eutectoid intercritical is computed by considering 422
374 ite. Considering that the rate of carbon diffusion from that the equilibrium carbon concentration in ferrite in 423
375 the austenite to the graphite spheroids is higher than
376 the rate of advance of the spheroids towards austenite,
CO

377 it is possible to assume that carbon diffusion is a


378 quasi-stationary process. Thus, according to Shew-
c
379 mon,[48] the gradient of CC for a quasi-stationary
380 solute profile with the boundary conditions on the
381 spheroid shown in Figure 3 is
UN

 
c=g
@CcC 
 CcC CC
¼ : ½5Š
@r r¼Rg Rg

383
384 Substituting Eq. [5] into Eq. [4], the radius of graphite
385 spheroids rate from the end of solidification until the
386 upper bound of stable eutectoid intercritical is given by
 
c=g
D c CcC CC
R_ g ¼ C  : ½6Š
Rg q =q Cg Cc=g
g c C Fig. 4—Schematic of an isopleth Fe-C section of the Fe-C-Si equilib-
rium phase diagram with the indication of stable and
388 metastable equilibrium carbon concentrations (solid and broken
389 The growth of spheroids occurs at the expense of lines, respectively) for a temperature between the upper and lower
390 carbon diffusion from the austenite, so that the carbon bounds of the stable eutectoid intercritical.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—5

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
F
O
O
Fig. 5—Schematic of an isopleth Fe-C section of the Fe-C-Si equilib-
rium phase diagram with the indication of stable and Fig. 6—Indication of the carbon gradient that gives rise to /4C and
Author Proof

metastable equilibrium carbon concentrations (solid and broken the carbon distribution during graphite growth for a temperature

PR
lines, respectively) for a temperature lower than the lower bound of lower than the lower bound of the stable eutectoid intercritical (see
the stable eutectoid intercritical. Fig. 5).

a=c
424 contact with austenite (CC ) is lower than the equilibrium grow as a function of carbon diffusion to the graphite 457
425 carbon concentration in ferrite in contact with graphite through ferrite if Ac=g ¼ 0 (flow /4C in Figure 6) and 458
a=g
426 (CC ). This may be seen in Figure 5 which shows a through ferrite and austenite if Ac=g 6¼ 0 (flows /4C and /1C 459

D
427 schematic Fe-C section of the Fe-C-Si equilibrium phase shown in Figures 3 and 6, respectively). 460
428 diagram for a temperature lower than the lower bound of TE
429 the stable eutectoid intercritical, by extrapolation of the 1. Growth rate of graphite spheroids completely 461
a=g covered by ferrite 462
430 line of CC at temperatures higher than the lower bound
431 of the stable eutectoid intercritical. In a graphite spheroid that has been completely 463
432 Thus, the radius of graphite spheroids rate is given by covered by ferrite grains that nucleated on its surface, 464
the flow of carbon allowing for the growth of graphite 465
EC

 
c CcC CC
c=g spheroids is given by 466
D
R_ g ¼ C   Ac=g ½7Š @CaC 

Rg q =q Cg Cc=g 4 a
/C ¼ DC qa ; ½8Š
g c C
@r r¼Rg
RR

434 where the coefficient Ac=g takes into account the fraction
435 of the spheroid surface in contact with austenite, i.e., where qa is the density of ferrite, DaC is the diffusion 468
a 
436 0  Ac=g  1, such that Ac=g ¼ 1 for the start of the coefficient of carbon in ferrite, and @C C @r is the
r¼Rg 469
437 transformation, while Ac=g ¼ 0 is achieved when the
gradient of carbon concentration in ferrite in contact 470
438 spheroid is completely covered by ferrite grains, and with graphite (straight line at r = Rg in Figure 6). 471
CO

439 Ac=g is calculated as proposed in Appendix B. In Eq. [7], Under the same assumptions of Section IV–B, in this 472
440 a spheroid that is fully covered by ferrite (Ac=g ¼ 0) a=g a=c
case the gradient of Eq. [8] depends on CC and CC 473
441 means that it is not in contact with austenite and this
442 (see Figure 6) and, therefore, the growth rate of the 474
implies that there is no carbon diffusion from such phase
c=g graphite spheroid radius results in 475
443 to the graphite spheroids. The value of CC in Eq. [7] is
UN

 
444 obtained by extrapolation of the line of maximum a=c a=g
qc CC CC R
445 solubility of carbon in austenite for temperatures lower R_ g ¼ DaC    a : ½9Š
446 than TaaT , depending on the values of silicon concentra- qa Cg Ca=g Rg Ra Rg
C
447 tion in austenite in contact with graphite CSi or in the
448 first zone of solidification (see Appendix A). The carbon 477
449 profile considered in this growth step is shown in
450 Figure 6. 2. Growth rate of graphite spheroids partially covered 478
by ferrite grains 479
If a graphite spheroid has not been completely 480
451 B. Growth of Graphite Spheroids at Temperatures Lower covered by ferrite grains that nucleated on its surface, 481
452 than the Lower Bound of the Stable Eutectoid the flow of carbon to the spheroid occurs through ferrite 482
453 Intercritical and austenite. In this case, the growth rate of the 483
454 As the ferrite grains have nucleated on the spheroids, graphite spheroid radius may be written as 484
455 when the temperature is lower than the lower bound of the
R_ g ¼ R_ g c Ac=g þ R_ g a Aa=g ;
 
456 stable eutectoid intercritical (see Figure 5), the spheroids ½10Š

6—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
487
488 where Aa=g is the fraction of the spheroid surface in (zone 5 in Figure 7(c)). The metallurgical study encom- 522
486
489 contact with ferrite which is calculated as proposed in passes the characterization of the graphite spheroids and 523
490 Appendix C. The growth rates of the right-hand side of the determination of graphite, ferrite, and pearlite phase 524
491 Eq. [10] are computed from Eqs. [6] and [9], respectively. fractions in five zones of Figure 7(c). 525
492 From the value of the radius of the graphite spheroids To characterize the graphite spheroids, the cast parts 526
493 (Eqs. [6], [7], [9], 10]), it is possible to calculate the were divided in two parts following a longitudinal plane. 527
494 volume fraction of graphite as shown in Appendix C Each half specimen (see Figure 7(c)) was roughed by 528
495 and, then, the value of CcC according to Appendix D. conventional procedures, subsequently polished with alu- 529
mina, and, finally, observed using an optical microscope. 530
In order to identify and characterize the graphite 531
spheroids, the micrographs (9100) corresponding to the 532
496 VI. EXPERIMENTAL AND COMPUTATIONAL

F
five zones shown in Figure 7(c) were analyzed and 533
497 PROCEDURES processed using the software ImageJ.[49,50] Three impor- 534

O
498 A. Experiments tant aspects were considered during these stages: 535

499 The alloy employed in the tests was molten in a 1. The results obtained were limited to objects for 536
which the aspect ratio was larger than 0.9. 537

O
500 high-frequency induction furnace with 1500 kg capacity.
501 Its composition was approximately 23.3 pct of SAE 2. The minimum diameter to consider an object as a 538
Author Proof

502 1010 scraps, 23.3 pct of retrieved nodular cast iron, graphite spheroid was defined as 6 lm. 539

PR
503 6.6 pct of pig iron, and 41.8 pct of charcoal. To obtain 3. The size of each pixel was 0.3478 lm. 540
504 the adequate carbon content, 1.6 pct of carbon (with a For the five zones shown in Figure 7(c), the following 541
505 90 pct of performance), 2 pct of steel plates, and procedure was considered: 542
506 0.15 pct of SiCa and thick Fe-Si (with 75 pct of Si)
507 were added to adjust the Si composition of the base 1. Micrographs without chemical etching were used to 543
508 metal in the molten furnace. The base metal was analyze and characterize graphite spheroids. 544

D
509 overheated to 1923 K (1650 °C) during approximately 2. Micrographs with chemical etching were used to 545
510 20 minutes where 1.5 pct Fe-Si-Mg-Ce was used as a quantify the microconstituents corresponding to the 546
metal matrix. 547

TE
511 nodularizing agent.
512 Inoculation and nodularization were done by the The characterization of the graphite spheroids 548
513 sandwich method. In the reaction ladle, 0.7 pct of fine included the following: 549
514 FeSi (with 75 pct of Si) was added. The cast metal was
515 poured into the cast ladle to fill the cups shown in 1. Quantification of the graphite fraction per unit 550
EC
516 Figures 7(a) and (b). Five cups typically used to area. 551
517 determine the carbon equivalent were also employed in 2. Measurement of the area of each object. This 552
518 this study. Table I shows the main components of the allowed estimating the diameter of each sphere as 553
519 alloy used in the experiments (in weight percentage). equivalent to the identified object by application of 554
520 The thermal history was recorded by means of cooling the criterion to determine the equivalent diameter of 555
RR

521 and cooling rate curves at the central zone of the part a sphere of the same projected area. 556

Table I. Average Chemical Composition (Main Elements) of the Molten Alloy (Values in Wt. Pct)
CO

Element C Si Mn S P Cr Cu Sn Mg CE
Wt. Pct 3.67 2.8 0.21 0.01 0.038 0.025 0.01 0.0009 0.052 4.61
UN

Fig. 7—Cylindrical cup used to determine carbon equivalent and specimen poured used in the laboratory experiments. (a) Top view in which the
bifilar ceramic and the thermocouple covered by refractory cement can be observed. (b) Longitudinal midplane section view. (c) Longitudinal
midplane section view of the specimen with its dimensions (in mm) and the indication of five microstructurally characterized zones.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—7

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
557 With the diameter of the identified objects (obtained Figure 7(c)) since it was the only zone for which the 595
558 with ImageJ in each micrography), it was possible to cooling curve was measured. 596
559 obtain
560 1. Number of spheroids per unit volume as a function B. Computational Procedure 597
561 of their sizes, Due to axial symmetry of the part employed in the 598
562 2. Distribution of graphite fractions in terms of the cast (see Figures 7(a) and (b)), only a half of the 599
563 spheroid sizes, longitudinal plane was discretized with quadrilateral 600
564 3. Distribution of the accumulated graphite fraction in four-noded elements where 2838 and 525 were used to 601
565 terms of the spheroid sizes, and represent the cast part and the mold, respectively; see 602
566 4. Volume graphite fraction. Figures 8(a) and (b). Contact elements were used to 603

F
567 All the values mentioned were obtained from the size simulate the heat flow between the part and the cup, 604
568 distribution of spheroids per unit area and volume (with whereas surface elements were considered to deal with 605

O
569 the exception of the graphite fraction, which only is the heat extraction through convection in the external 606
570 obtained from the size distribution of spheroids per unit surface of the part and the mold in contact with the 607
571 volume). ambient temperature. 608

O
572 A brief description of the methodology used to obtain All the thermo-physical properties and material 609
573 the number of spheroids per unit volume as a function parameters used in the numerical simulations are given 610
Author Proof

574 of their sizes is presented below. in Appendix E. 611

PR
575 For each micrography, once the largest diameter of an
576 object (dmax ) was identified and the desired number of
577 classes to investigate the size distribution was selected VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 612
578 (nclasses ), the interval D between one diameter di 1 and
the next di is D ¼ dmax=nclasses , obtaining Table II. A. Numerical Results 613
579

D
580 Known D, the diameter of spheroids, the number of Numerical cooling and cooling rate curves computed 614
581 classes, and the area of the micrographs, the size at the nodes indicated in Figure 8(b) are, respectively, 615
582 distribution of spheroids per unit area of the corre- plotted in Figures 9 and 10. Both plots also show an
TE 616
583 sponding micrography area was calculated (NgrAi ). This enlargement of the areas of interest. Table III summa- 617
584 allowed the calculation of the number of graphite rizes the solidification time values. From Figure 9, there 618
585 spheroids per unit volume (NgrVi ) according to is a relation between the local time of solidification (tf ) 619
indicated in Table III and the plateau of the character- 620
586 Schwartz–Saltykov approach.[51]
EC

587 istic region of solidification. From the end of 621


Next, the distributions of graphite fractions (per unit
588 area fgrAi and volume fgrVi ) were obtained allowing,
589 finally, the evaluation of thePaccumulated graphite
590 fractions per unit area (fgrA ¼ ni¼1 classes
fgrAi ) and volume
Pnclasses
RR

591 (fgrV ¼ i¼1 fgrVi ). A statistical analysis, aimed at


592 increasing the representativity and reliability of the
593 measurements, was performed in order to obtain a single
594 value at the central zone of the each cast part (zone 5 in
CO

Table II. Graphite Spheroid Diameters Delimiting Each


Class
6
Diameter (m) 9 10
UN

Class Smaller Larger


1 6 10.72
2 10.72 15.44
3 15.44 20.16
4 20.16 24.88
5 24.88 29.6
6 29.6 34.32
7 34.32 39.04
8 39.04 43.76
9 43.76 48.48
10 48.48 53.2
11 53.2 57.92
12 57.92 62.64
13 62.,64 67.36
14 67.36 72.08 Fig. 8—FE mesh used in the simulations. (a) Axisymmetric FE mesh
15 72.08 76.8 of the specimen and mold. (b) Location of the nodes where the
results are analyzed.

8—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
622 solidification and up to the beginning of the stable eu- kinetics). Plots of the graphite fraction evolution at the 648
623 tectoid transformation, the curves do not exhibit any nodes shown in Figure 8(b) are shown in Figure 11. 649
624 special feature of interest. During the eutectoid trans- Processes of nucleation and growth of graphite 650
625 formations, the segment of the cooling curves have a spheroids are indicated following the three steps iden- 651
626 direct relation with the initiation time of the stable eu- tified in this paper (Sections III–D, IV, and V): solid- 652
627 tectoid transformation listed in Table III (tini
a ). The first
ification, from the end of solidification up to the 653
628 nodes starting the stable eutectoid phase change are beginning of the stable eutectoid transformation, and, 654
629 those having the highest cooling rate at the beginning of finally, eutectoid transformations. 655
630 its transformation (see Table III and Figure 10). During In the first step, the growth rate of the graphite 656
631 the solidification as well as during the stable and fraction has a direct relation with cooling rate of the 657
632 metastable eutectoid transformations, the nodes that corresponding nodes (see Figure 10 and Table III). This 658

F
633 show the highest recalescence values in both cases are seems to be justified because a higher cooling rate 659
634 those placed in the central region of the specimen (i.e., increases the undercooling and, thus, the driving force 660

O
635 nodes identified as HC, HM, and HE) which is, in fact, for graphite nucleation. The evacuation of the energy 661
636 the hot spot as the cooling process progresses. There- released during the phase change (due to both latent 662
637 fore, the cooling rate (see Figure 10), and consequently heats of solidification of graphite and austenite) is 663

O
638 the latent heat released during the phase changes, higher in regions of the part with higher cooling rate, 664
639 becomes slower in the central zone of the casting. with the consequence that the criterion established to 665
Author Proof

640 The above thermal consideration is relevant because end the nucleation (presence of recalescence) is less 666

PR
641 of the influence of temperature on diffusive phase likely to occur in these regions than in the others with 667
642 changes. The driving force for nucleation increases with lower cooling rate. The plateau which is observed at the 668
643 over-cooling, which increases with the thermal cooling
644 rate, and stops at recalescence. The growth rate of
645 spheroids increases with atomic mobility, i.e., higher
646 temperatures (we consider the influence of Si on the

D
647 thermodynamics of phase changes only, not in its

Table III. Solidification Time (tf ), Initiation Time of the


Stable Eutectoid Transformation (tinia ), and Cooling Rate
Before Solidification Start (T) _
TE
EC
Node tf (s) tini
a (s) T_ (K/s)
TE 124 442 2.6
TM 130 448 2.5
TC 144 450 2.47
RR

BE 148 456 2.92


BM 152 460 2.66
HE 176 464 2.2
HM 180 466 1.76
HC 180 468 1.72 Fig. 10—Cooling rate curves with magnification of solidification and
CO

eutectoid zones.
UN

Fig. 9—Cooling curves with magnification of solidification and


eutectoid zones. Fig. 11—Graphite fraction evolution.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—9

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
669 end of this step occurs because the microstructural lower carbon quantities in austenite as the carbon 709
670 model of solidification considers that the spheroids stop quantity in the form of graphite phase increases. For the 710
671 their growth if they are not in contact with liquid (zone 1 stable and metastable eutectoid transformations, as 711
672 in Figure 1). This seems reasonable on account of the expected, correlation is the lowest out of the three 712
673 soft and hard impingement that takes place towards the stages taken into account in this plot (0.77, as compared 713
674 end of any diffusive phase change. with 0.88 and 0.85) because the most influential 714
675 During the second step, the spheroids grow by carbon variables for graphite growth in this transformation 715
676 that leaves the austenite (line E’S’ in Figure 2). The are not directly related with the cooling rate at the start 716
677 growth rate of spheroids at the initiation of this second of solidification. 717
678 stage is lower than that of solidification, because this is a Plots of the percentage of the total graphite fraction 718
679 solid-state diffusive process in which the atomic mobility that has been transformed between the end of solidifi- 719

F
680 is lower than that in a liquid state, and decreases with cation and the start of the stable eutectoid phase change 720
681 decreasing temperature and value of the diffusion in terms of the elapsed time for this stage are presented 721

O
682 coefficient of carbon in austenite. in Figure 14, together with the trend line and associated 722
683 Finally, during the stable and metastable eutectoid mean value as a function of time. 723
684 phase changes in the third step, the growth rate of the It is seen that there is a direct relation between the 724

O
685 graphite spheroids increases with respect to that at the final graphite fraction that has been transformed during 725
686 end of the second step and, as already discussed in this stage and elapsed time of this stage. The mean value 726
Author Proof

687 Section V, takes place in two parts.

PR
688 The graphite fraction, its trend in terms of the cooling
689 rate at the initial instants of solidification, and its mean
690 value (see Table III) for the nodes indicated in
691 Figure 8(b) are shown in Figure 12.
692 The trend (a straight line obtained by a least square
693 approximation) shows that by increasing cooling rates

D
694 the graphite fraction also increases. The value of the
695 correlation coefficient ( 0.87) highlights this fact. The TE
696 horizontal line, on the other hand, is associated with the
697 mean graphite fraction value of 11.73 pct.
698 Figure 13 shows percentage of the final graphite
699 fraction in terms of the cooling rate transformed at the
700 final instants of solidification, from the end of solidifi-
EC

701 cation up to the start of stable eutectoid phase change,


702 and during the stable and metastable eutectoid phase
703 changes.
704 As the cooling rate decreases during solidification, the
705 graphite fraction increases. However, from the end of
RR

706 solidification up to the upper bound of stable eutectoid Fig. 13—Percentage of the final graphite fraction as a function of
the cooling rate transformed at the final instants of the three stages
707 intercritical, an increasing trend is predicted. From a of graphite growth for the nodes shown in Fig. 8(b).
708 phenomenological point of view, this could be due to the
CO
UN

Fig. 14—Percentage of the final graphite fraction transformed from


the end of solidification up to the start of the stable eutectoid trans-
Fig. 12—Graphite fraction as a function of the cooling rate at the formation as a function of the elapsed time for this stage for the
initial instants of solidification for the nodes shown in Fig. 8(b). nodes shown in Fig. 8(b).

10—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
F
O
O
Fig. 15—Discrete and continuous quantities of graphite spheroids
Author Proof

per unit volume as a function of their sizes for nodes BE, TM, and Fig. 16—Comparison of simulated and experimental cooling curves
HC (according to the classes listed in Table II). at the central zone of the specimen with magnification of solidifica-

PR
tion and eutectoid zones (zone 5 in Fig. 7(c) and node HC in
Fig. 8(b)).
727 is 18.6 pct of the final fraction, which is very close to the
728 value of 19 pct indicated in Figure 13.
729 Discrete and continuous distributions of graphite
730 spheroid quantities as a function of their size (as

D
731 specified in Table II) are shown in Figure 15 for nodes
732 BE, TM, and HC identified in Figure 8(b), which are
733 those exhibiting, as shown in Table III, the highest,

TE
734 mean, and the lowest cooling rates, respectively.
735 There is a similar distribution for the three nodes,
736 with a tendency of peaks to shift towards larger
737 diameters when cooling rate, at the start of solidifica-
738 tion, increases, and consequently graphite volumetric
EC
739 fraction also increases. The peak of the continuous
740 distribution tends to be higher and to shift towards
741 smaller diameters as the cooling rate at the start of
742 solidification is lower. The shift of the peak in the
RR

743 continuous distribution to larger diameters (higher


744 classes in Table II) and values of graphite volumetric
745 fraction at nodes BE, TM, and HC (see Figure 11)
746 evidence that graphite volumetric fraction tends to Fig. 17—Comparison of simulated and experimental cooling rate
747 increase as the distribution of numbers of spheroids curves at the central zone of the specimen (zone 5 in Fig. 7(c) and
CO

748 shifts towards the higher classes. node HC in Fig. 8(b)).

the experiments. This could suggest an underestimate of 766


749 B. Comparison Between Numerical and Experimental
the latent heat of the stable eutectoid phase change. 767
750 Results
Discrete numbers of spheroids per unit area and 768
UN

751 Computed cooling curves and cooling rate curves at volume, as obtained from experiments and simulation at 769
752 the central region of the sample are, respectively, zone 5 in Figure 7(c) and node HC in Figure 8(b), are 770
753 compared in Figures 16 and 17 with those correspond- illustrated in Figure 18 following the definition of 771
754 ing to three experiments. classes and diameters listed in Table II. The three 772
755 The complete curve in Figure 16 shows good agree- discrete distributions and their interpolated continuous 773
756 ment between experiments and computations. As shown forms in Figure 19 show similar trends, but the peak in 774
757 in Figure 17, there is also a good prediction of the local the simulation is shifted towards classes with larger 775
758 and global solidification times, evidenced at the charac- diameters. 776
759 teristic zones in Figure 17. Regarding the stable and Figure 20 shows discrete distributions of graphite 777
760 metastable eutectoid phase changes, the small change in fractions from experiments and simulations at the 778
761 slope in the numerical cooling rate curves shows that the central region, whereas continuous distributions are 779
762 stable eutectoid transformation starts at 468 seconds. plotted in Figure 21. The experiments show three peaks, 780
763 Although there are differences between cooling curves in while the simulations show only two. The peak in the 781
764 the eutectoid region, the starting time of the stable eu- experiments associated with large diameters occurs 782
765 tectoid phase change in the simulation is close to that of because of primary spheroids (a hypereutectic 783

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—11

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
F
O
O
Fig. 20—Comparison of simulated and experimental discrete distri-
Author Proof

Fig. 18—Comparison of simulated and experimental discrete size


distribution of graphite spheroids per unit area and volume (accord- bution of graphite fraction.

PR
ing to the classes listed in Table II) at the central zone of the speci-
men.

D
TE
EC
RR

Fig. 21—Comparison of simulated and experimental continuous dis-


Fig. 19—Comparison of simulated and experimental continuous size tribution of graphite fraction from Fig. 20.
distribution of graphite spheroids per unit area and volume at the
CO

central zone of the specimen.

784 composition is indicated by the values in Table II of cast


785 alloy). The two peaks in the simulations tend to merge
786 because the second peak has shifted towards a mean
UN

787 value of diameters due to the peak associated with class


788 7 in Figure 20.
789 Figure 22 shows good agreement between experi-
790 ments and computations of discrete accumulated distri-
791 bution fractions of graphite at the center of the
792 specimen, except for the values of class 7 in the curve
793 of computational results. This can be better observed in
794 Figure 23, which shows continuous distributions of
795 accumulated graphite fraction associated with the dis-
796 crete distributions shown in Figure 22.
797 Graphite fractions obtained from the experimentally
798 measured size distribution of graphite spheroids per unit
799 area and volume and from simulation at the center of
800 the part are plotted in Figure 24. Good agreement may Fig. 22—Experimental and simulated discrete accumulated graphite
801 be observed between experiments and simulations. fraction at the central zone of the specimen.

12—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
change between the first and last regions to freeze. Such 821
differences in weight percentage of Si are associated with 822
a retarded nucleation process between the stable and 823
metastable eutectoid, among other consequences. Thus, 824
by coupling the microstructural models of phase change 825
in solid state with results from the microstructural 826
model of solidification based in a divorced eutectic, it is 827
possible to take into account heterogeneities in compo- 828
nents at micro level. This seems to be a crucial feature 829
required by predictive models which aim to run inde- 830
pendently of experiments. 831

F
Regarding the stage of growth of spheroids from the 832
end of solidification up to a temperature TaaT , this new 833

O
model allows understanding the phenomenon that takes 834
place during the phase changes in thermo-metallurgical 835
processes with cooling interruptions, such as continu- 836

O
ous-isothermal-continuous cooling processes or heat 837
Fig. 23—Experimental and simulated continuous accumulated gra-
treatment processes. An interruption during a cooling 838
Author Proof

phite fraction at the central zone of the specimen.


process produces carbon accumulation in zones of 839

PR
austenite away from the interphase with graphite, thus 840
promoting the formation of cementite or highly dis- 841
torted austenite by the presence of carbon atoms 842
dissolved in an FCC iron among other problems. A 843
similar analysis may be conducted for isothermal 844
processes in the stable eutectoid intercritical. 845

D
The importance of the characteristics of thermal 846
evolution of a part or of locations of a part having 847

TE
different cooling rates was highlighted. If the cooling 848
rate becomes high, the carbon content of austenite at the 849
interphase with graphite at the start of the stable eutec- 850
toid phase change will be low; this is due to the longer 851
time that carbon has to diffuse towards the spheroids, 852
EC
thus reducing carbon in the solid solution in austenite, 853
decreasing the driving force for carbon diffusion during 854
this stage. Low cooling rate, on the other hand, may 855
cause or promote carbon accumulation in austenite at 856
RR

the interphase with graphite to the extent of having 857


Fig. 24—Comparison of experimental (at the central zone of the cementite nucleation. These are only two examples that 858
specimen) and simulated (for eight nodes shown in Fig. 8(b)) gra- illustrate the need to identify the percentages of the final 859
phite fraction. number of graphite associated to each of the three stages 860
considered, as well as the importance, the degree of 861
CO

802 VIII. CONCLUSIONS dependence, and the influence that a phase change has 862
on the subsequent ones. 863
803 A new thermo-metallurgical model has been reported The theoretical developments, as well as the compu- 864
804 in this paper, which is fully coupled from the point of tational results, represent advances with respect to the 865
805 view of micro-modeling and takes into account nucle- present state of the art in models, theoretical formula- 866
806 ation and growth of graphite spheroids along the entire 867
UN

tions, and phenomenological descriptions of the growth


807 cooling process. There are conceptual and methodolog- of graphite spheroids. Not only is it possible to know 868
808 ical contributions in this formulation which apply to the about the final graphite fraction, but it can also be 869
809 study of nucleation and subsequent growth of graphite characterized and serve to perform parametric studies in 870
810 spheroids in cast irons. This may improve understanding chemical composition, size and type of molds, geometry 871
811 and validations of theoretical formulations concerning of the cast part, etc., thus increasing the information 872
812 the role played by chemical composition and hetero- which may be extracted at a micro level. Both aspects 873
813 geneities in diffusive phase transformations that follow have different technological implications. 874
814 solidification, for continuous cooling processes as well The final graphite fractions computed at zones in a 875
815 as in processes under isothermal or controlled cooling. part having several cooling rates are encouraging. The 876
816 For the first time, the influence of Si on phase changes shape of the distribution of the graphite number per unit 877
817 at solid states from solidification has been taken into volume shows agreement with experiments (with one 878
818 account using a macro–micro approach. This is impor- exception, i.e., the number of spheroids for class 7), as 879
819 tant because the weight percentages of the different well as the graphite fraction distributions and the 880
820 components (not just Si) at the end of solidification accumulated graphite fraction. 881

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—13

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
883
882 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a=c 3
CC ¼ 1:92  10 1:59  10 2 CSi 4:12
884 The authors thank the contribution of Prof. Jacques 6 3 2
885 Lacaze in obtaining the equations reported in Appen-  10 T 2:62  10 ðCSi Þ þ 2:31
886 dix A. The company Sánchez and Piccioni allowed  10 T þ 2:5  10 5 CSi T
9 2
887 using its facilities to carry out the casts. Fernando D.

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

TaaT ¼ 1:10  1011 þ 2:74  1035 ðCSi Þ2 3:25  1035 CSi þ 1:46  1034 þ 1:74  1023 CSi 1:02  1023 =8:53  1019

F
O
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

TaA1 ¼ 3:47  1011 þ 1:60  1022 ðCSi Þ2 2:19  1021 CSi þ 5:85  1019 þ 7:4  1016 CSi 15
9:85  10 =7:69  1012

O
Author Proof

PR
888 Carazo and Luis A. Godoy are members of the re- 905
c=a 1
889 search staff of CONICET. Diego J. Celentano thanks CC ¼ 1:29  10 þ 5:13  10 3 CSi
890 CONICYT (Chilean Council of Research and Tech-
891 nology) for the support provided by Project Fondecyt 2:56  10 4 T þ 2:9  10 4 ðCSi Þ2
892 1130404. þ 1:24  10 7 T2 þ 3:27  10 4 CSi T

D
907
893 APPENDIX A: PHASE DIAGRAMS  Fe-Fe3C-Si:
TE 908
c=h 3 1
894 The equilibrium carbon concentrations for eutectoid CC ¼ 7:34  10 þ 1:82  10 CSi þ 1:7
895 phase changes together with the lower and upper
896 bounds of the stable and metastable eutectoid intercrit-  10 T þ 2:92  10 2 ðCSi Þ2
6

897 icals of the Fe-C-Si and Fe-Fe3C-Si systems are as þ 1:72  10 8 T2 þ 4:17  10 5 CSi T
EC

898 follows:
910
899  Fe-C-Si: a=h
CC ¼ 2:99  10 3
þ 1:37  10 4 CSi 9:84
c=g 3
CC ¼ 1:60  10 þ 8:13  10 5 CSi 6:46  10 6 T þ 1:10  10 5 ðCSi Þ2 þ 8:23
RR

 10 6 T þ 5:47  10 6 ðCSi Þ2  10 9 T2 1:89  10 6 CSi T


8 2 4
þ 1:85  10 T 1:05  10 CSi T
CO

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

TPaT ¼ 2:16  1010 þ 5:07  1020 ðCSi Þ2 3:94  1020 CSi þ 5:23  1019 þ 3:08  1015 CSi 2:82  1015 =2:32  1012
UN

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

2
TPA1 ¼ 4:05  10 þ 6:72  10 ðCSi Þ 7:3  10 CSi þ 7:5  10 þ 5:46  10 CSi þ 1:16  10 =2:4  1013 ;
11 21 20 19 16 16

901
a=g 4 where CSi is the Si content in austenite at different 912
CC ¼ 9:53  10 þ 1:02  10 2 CSi þ 1:55 interfaces expressed in weight percentage and T is the 913
 10 6 T þ 9:59  10 4 ðCSi Þ2 þ 1 temperature of the alloy in Celsius degrees. 914
10
 10 T2 1:76  10 5 CSi T
903

14—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
936
915 APPENDIX B: SURFACE OF SPHEROIDS IN The value of DRgj is obtained from the differential Eqs. [6], 937
934
916 CONTACT WITH FERRITE AND AUSTENITE [7], [9], or [10], depending on the temperature of the alloy and 938
935
on the characteristics of the transformations. 939
917 For the jth spheroid, the surfaces of graphite spheroids
With the values of radius of graphite spheroids, the 940
918 in contact with ferrite and austenite are given as fraction:
graphite volume fraction is obtained from 941
ðRai Þ2
Pnf
k
Aa=gj ¼ i¼1 4 X  3
NV
 2
4 Rgj ; ½B1Š fg ¼ p gj Rgj ;
3 j¼1
Ac=gj ¼ 1 Aa=gj
where k is the number of events of nucleation of graphite 943
920 where nf is the number of ferrite grains nucleated on spheroids and NV gj the number of graphite spheroids per 944

F
921 each graphite spheroid (see Table B-IV) and Rai is the unit volume associated with the j event of nucleation. 945
922 radius of ferrite grains nucleated on the spheroid. Aa=gj As the austenite fraction is transformed into graphite, 946

O
923 could be computed with higher precision by means of a ferrite, and/or pearlite, its value should be computed again as 947
924 surface integral and assuming that each ferrite grain is  
925 located on the spheroid; however, the differences with fc ¼ 1 fg fa fP ;

O
926 the results of Eq. [B1] are negligible.
where fa and fP are the volume fractions of ferrite and 949
Author Proof

pearlite, respectively. 950

PR
927 APPENDIX C: VOLUME FRACTION Details of the microstructure models from which fa 951
928 OF GRAPHITE AND AUSTENITE and fP are calculated are given by Carazo.[12] 952

929 With the radius increment of graphite spheroid in a


930 time integration interval Dt, t þ Dt, the radius of a
931 graphite spheroid corresponding to nucleation event j at APPENDIX D: CARBON QUANTITY IN 953

D
932 time t þ Dt (tþDt Rgj ) is AUSTENITE 954
The value of CcC per unit volume of RVE is computed as 955

TE
tþDt
Rgj ¼ t Rgj þ DRgj :
where CXC , qX ; and t UX are carbon concentrations in 956

Table B-IV. Thermo-physical Properties and Material Parameters of Cast Iron


EC
Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) Specific Heat (J/kg)

Temperature [K (°C)] Conductivity Temperature [K (°C)] CP


553 (280) 54.1 293 (20) 500 9 103
693 (420) 38.1 873 (600) 750 103
RR

9
833 (560) 47.1 1073 (800) 750 9 103
973 (700) 43.6 1418 (1145) 820 9 103
1113 (840) 38.1 1428 (1155) 840 9 103
1253 (980) 32.5 1673 (1400) 840 9 103
1393 (1120) 28.8
CO

1673 (1400) 45
Mass density (kg/m3) 7300
Solidification phase-change model[11]
Eutectic latent heat (J/kg) 2  105
Carbon diffusion coefficient in liquid and austenite (m2/s) DlC ¼ 5  1010 and DcC [10]
Graphite nucleation coefficients bM ¼ 1  1013 (grains/m3 Ks) cM ¼ 280 ðÞ (K)
UN

Graphite initial radius (m) R0g ¼ 5:0  10 7


Austenite nucleation coefficient (grains s/m3 K) Ac ¼ 1  107
Gibbs–Thompson coefficient (Km) CGT ¼ 2  10 7
Graphite and austenite densities (kg/m3) qg ¼ 2023 and qc ¼ 7000
Solid-state phase-change model[12]
10 [52]
Initial thickness of the boundary layer ahead d ¼ 5  10
of the front of transformation (m)
Ferrite latent heat (J/kg) 6  104
Initial numbers of ferrite grains (grains) na ¼ 9
Initial radius of ferrite grains (m) R0a ¼ 1  10 8
Pearlite latent heat (J/kg) 9  104
Pearlite nucleation coefficient (grains s/m3 K) lP ¼ 1  1010
Carbon diffusion coefficient in austenite (m2/s) DcC [10] and DBC [53]
and austenite/pearlite interface
Enthalpy change during austenite–pearlite transformation (J/kg) DHPV [53]
Interfacial free energy in ferrite at interface with cementite (J/m2) ra=h [54]

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—15

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
t
CcC qc 1 t t t
UP þ Cg qg t Ug tþDt Ug þ CaC qa t Ua tþDt
Ua þ CPC qP t UP tþDt
       
Ug Ua UP
tþDt
CcC ¼   ; ½D1Š
qc 1 tþDt Ug tþDt Ua tþDt UP

temperature of alloy is the same as the maximum value 967


Table E-V. Thermo-physical Properties of Sand recorded in the experiments: 1478 K (1205 °C). The 968
initial temperature for the cylindrical cup is the envi- 969
Temperature [K (°C)] Thermal Conductivity (W/mK)
ronmental temperature at the moment of conducting the 970

F
373 (100) 0.54 experiments: 293 K (20 °C). 971
573 (300) 0.57 The values of specimen–mold conductance coefficient, 972

O
773 (500) 0.65 specimen–environment and mold–environment convec- 973
973 (700) 0.79 tion heat transfer coefficients, and specimen thermocou- 974
1173 (900) 1.00

O
ple conductance coefficient are shown in Tables E-VI, 975
1373 (1100) 1.26
E-VII, and E-VIII, respectively. 976
Author Proof

1573 (1300) 1.59


1673 (1400) 1.59

PR
Mass density (kg/m3) 1550
Specific heat (J/kg) 1 9 106 REFERENCES 977
1. ASTM A247-10: ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 978
2010. doi:10.1520/A0247-10. 979
Table E-VI. Specimen–Mold Conductance Coefficient 2. D. M. Stefanescu and C. S. Kanetkar: in Computer Simulation of 980
981

D
Microstructural Evolution, D. J. Srolovitz, eds., TMS, Warrendale,
Temperature [K (°C)] Conductance Coefficient (W/m2 K) PA, 1985, pp. 171–88. 982
3. BC Liu, HD Zhao, WY Liu, and DT Wang: Int. J. Cast Met. Res., 983
293 (20) 60 TE 1999, vol. 11 (5), pp. 471–76. 984
773 (500) 70 4. S Chang, D Shangguan, and DM Stefanescu: AFS Trans., 1991, 985
1123 (850) 90 vol. 99, pp. 531–41. 986
1443 (1170) 100 5. S Chang, D Shangguan, and DM Stefanescu: Metall. Trans. A, 987
1673 (1400) 100 1992, vol. 23A, pp. 1333–46. 988
6. A. Almansour, K. Matsugi, T. Hatayama, and O. Yanagisawa: 989
EC

Mater. Trans., JIM, 1996, vol. 37(4), pp. 612–19. 990


7. D. Venugopalan: in The Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron. Pro- 991
Table E-VII. Specimen–Environment and Mold–Environment ceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Physical 992
Convection Heat Transfer Coefficients Metallurgy of Cast Iron, G. Ohira, T. Kusakawa, E. Niyama, eds., 993
Materials Research Society, Tokyo, Japan, 1989, pp. 271–78. 994
Temperature [K (°C)] Heat Transfer Coefficient (W/m2 K) 8. D Venugopalan: Metall. Trans. A, 1990, vol. 21A, pp. 913–18. 995
RR

9. M Wessen and IL Svensson: Metall. Trans. A, 1996, vol. 27A, 996


293 (20) 50 pp. 2209–20. 997
1673 (1400) 80 10. J Lacaze and V Gerval: ISIJ Int., 1998, vol. 38 (7), pp. 714–22. 998
11. P. M. Dardati: Ph.D. Thesis, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Fı́sicas 999
y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2005. 1000
12. F. D. Carazo: Ph.D. Thesis, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Fı́sicas 1001
CO

Table E-VIII. Specimen–Thermocouple Conductance y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2012. 1002
Coefficient 13. D Celentano, E Oñate, and S Oller: Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng., 1994, 1003
vol. 37, pp. 3441–65. 1004
Interface Heat Transfer Coefficient (W/m2 K) 14. R Hill: J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 1965, vol. 13 (4), pp. 213–22. 1005
15. FD Carazo, PM Dardati, DJ Celentano, and LA Godoy: Metall. 1006
Part-thermocouple 40 Trans. B, 2012, vol. 43B (6), pp. 1579–95, DOI:10.1007/s11663- 1007
UN

012-9710-y. 1008
16. B Lux: AFS Cast Met. Res. J., 1972, vol. 8 (1), pp. 25–38. 1009
17. B Lux: AFS Cast Met. Res. J., 1972, vol. 8 (2), pp. 49–65. 1010
957 weight percentage, density, and carbon quantity in a 18. D. M. Stefanescu and D. K. Bandyopadhyay: in The Physical 1011
Metallurgy of Cast Iron. Proceedings of the Fourth International 1012
958 micro-constituent X, respectively. X may be austenite, Symposium on the Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron, G. Ohira, T. 1013
959 graphite, ferrite, or pearlite. The derivation of Eq. [D1] Kusakawa, E. Niyama, eds., Materials Research Society, Tokyo, 1014
960 may be seen in Carazo.[12] Japan, 1989, pp. 15–26. 1015
19. J. A. Sikora, G. L. Rivera, and H. Biloni: in F. Weinberg Int. 1016
Symp. on Solidification Processing, J. E. Lait and I. V. Sama- 1017
rasekera, eds., Pergmon Press, Inc., New York, NY, 1990, pp. 1018
961 APPENDIX E: THERMO-PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 280-88. 1019
962 AND MATERIAL PARAMETERS USED IN THE 20. DK Banerjee and DM Stefanescu: AFS Trans., 1991, vol. 99, 1020
pp. 747–59. 1021
963 NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS 21. Z. Jiyang: Acta Metall. Sin., 1989, vol (4), pp. 261–65. 1022
22. DM Stefanescu: J. Mater. Sc. Eng. A, 2005, vols. 413–414, 1023
964 Tables B-IV and E-V show the values of coefficients pp. 322–33. 1024
965 and thermo-physical properties of the alloy and sand 23. R. W. Cahn and P. Haasen (eds.): Physical Metallurgy, vol. 1, 4th 1025
966 used in the numerical simulation. The initial ed., Elsevier, Amsterdan, The Netherlands, 1996, p. 767. 1026

16—xxx METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK
1027 24. W Kurz and DJ Fisher: Fundamentals of Solidification, 1st ed., 36. E. Frás, W. Kapturkiewicz, and A. Burbelko: Adv. Mater. Res. 1059
1028 Trans. Tech. Public, Switzerland, 1984, p. 98. (Durnten-Zurich, Switz.), 1997, vol. 4–5, pp. 499–504. 1060
1029 25. G Lesoult, M Castro, and J Lacaze: Acta Mater., 1998, vol. 46 (3), 37. J Liu and R Elliot: J. Cryst. Growth, 1998, vol. 191, pp. 261–67. 1061
1030 pp. 983–95. 38. J Lacaze, M Castro, and G Lesoult: Acta Mater., 1998, vol. 46 (3), 1062
1031 26. K. C. Su, I. Ohnaka, I. Yamanuchi, and T. Fukusaco: in The Physical pp. 997–1010. 1063
1032 Metallurgy of Cast Iron, H. Fredriksson and M. Hillert, eds., Proc. 39. I Ohnaka: Int. J. Cast Met. Res., 1999, vol. 11 (5), pp. 267–72. 1064
1033 Materials Research Society, Nort Holland, 1985, pp. 181–189. 40. MI OnsoØien, O Grong, O Gundersen, and T Skaland: Metall. 1065
1034 27. E. Fras: in The Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron, H. Fredriksson Trans. A, 1999, vol. 30A, pp. 1053–68. 1066
1035 and M. Hillert, eds., Proc. Materials Research Society, Nort 41. J. Čech and L. Zemčı́k: Solidif. Metals Alloys, 2000, vol. 2(44), pp 1067
1036 Holland, 1985, pp. 191–99. 39–44. 1068
1037 28. H. Fredriksson and I. L. Svensson: in The Physical Metallurgy of 42. H Zhao and B Liu: ISIJ Int., 2001, vol. 41 (9), pp. 986–91. 1069
1038 Cast Iron, H. Fredriksson and M. Hillert, eds., Proc. Materials 43. H Zhao and B Liu: Int. J. Cast Met. Res., 2003, vol. 16 (13), 1070
1039 Research Society, Nort Holland, 1985, pp. 273–84. pp. 281–86. 1071
1040 29. M. Castro, P. Alexandre, J. Lacaze, and G. Lesoult: in The 44. PM Dardati, LA Godoy, and DJ Celentano: J. Appl. Mech., 2006, 1072

F
1041 Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron. Proceedings of the Fourth vol. 73 (6), pp. 977–83. 1073
1042 International Symposium on the Physical Metallurgy of Cast Iron, 45. RW Heine: AFS Trans., 1986, vol. 94, pp. 391–402. 1074

O
1043 G. Ohira, T. Kusakawa, E. Niyama, eds., Materials Research 46. A Hultgren: Trans. ASM., 1947, vol. 39, pp. 915–89. 1075
1044 Society, Tokyo, Japan, 1989, pp. 433–40. 47. A. Fick: Ann. Phys. (Berlin, Ger.), 1855, vol. 170(1), pp. 59–86. 1076
1045 30. E Frás, W Kapturkiewicz, and HF Lopez: AFS Trans., 1992, 48. PG Shewmon: Diffusion in Solids, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, NY, 1077
1046 vol. 100, pp. 583–91. 1989, p. 28. 1078

O
1047 31. Y. Zhang, S. V. Subramanian, and G. R. Purdy: in The Physical 49. M Abramoff, P Magalhaes, and S Ram: Biophotonics Int., 2004, 1079
1048 Metallurgy of Cast Iron, G. Lesoult and J. Lacaze, eds., Trans. vol. 11 (7), pp. 36–42. 1080
Author Proof

1049 Tech. Public, Switzerland, 1994, pp. 461–68. 50. CA Schneider, WS Rasband, and KW Eliceiri: Nat. Methods, 1081

PR
1050 32. A. Almansour, K. Matsugi, T. Hatayama, and O. Yanagisawa: 2012, vol. 9 (7), pp. 671–75, DOI:10.1038/nmeth.2089. 1082
1051 Mater. Trans., JIM, 1995, vol. 36(12), pp. 1487–95. 51. EE Underwood: Quantitative Stereology, 1st ed., Addison-Wesley, 1083
1052 33. L. Wenzhen and L. Baicheng: in Proceedings of the Technical Reading, MA, 1970, p. 119. 1084
1053 Forum, 62nd World Foundry Congress, American Foundrymen’s 52. DM Stefanescu: Science and Engineering of Casting Solidification, 1085
1054 Soc., Inc., Philadelphia, USA, 1996, pp. 2–10. 2nd ed., Springer, New York, 2009, p. 21. 1086
1055 34. R Aagaard, J Hattel, W Schafer, IL Svensson, and PN Hansen: 53. A. S. Pandit: Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Materials Science and 1087
1056 AFS Trans., 1996, vol. 104, pp. 659–67. Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 2011. 1088

D
1057 35. C. Charbon and M. Rappaz: Adv. Mater. Res. (Durnten-Zurich, 54. JJ Kramer, GM Pound, and RF Mehl: Acta Metall., 1958, vol. 6 1089
1058 Switz.), 1997, vol. 4–5, pp. 453–60. (12), pp. 763–71. 1090
1091

TE
EC
RR
CO
UN

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A xxx—17

Journal : MMTA Dispatch : 5-3-2016 Pages : 17


PIPS No. : 3430 h LE h TYPESET
MS Code : h CP h DISK

You might also like