This document summarizes a casting simulation comparing two models. Model 2 has better filling performance while Model 1 has a better air pressure and entrapment performance. Both models show risks of shrinkage and porosity, especially at the top of rounded parts. The runner design of Model 2 creates a smoother molten flow pattern compared to Model 1.
15. Summary & Comments
• MODEL 2 has better filling performance, temperature drop occurred in
MODEL 1 at one of the cavity in the middle gate runner (refer to filling
temperature results at 10 s)
• MODEL 2 runner design makes smooter & better flow pattern compare to
MODEL 1. MODEL 1 runner design’s angle create turbulence within runner
and makes the molten flow not balanced (refer to tracer particles flow results
at 10 s)
• From air pressure & air entrapment results, MODEL 1 has better
performance. Some additional overflow is may needed for both models in
particular area.
• There is separated area that disconnecting as cast solidified, this may leads
to shrinkage problems (refer to solidification result 14-17 s)
• There is high risk of shrinkage porosity on highlighted-red on hot spot
results, for both models, they have higher risk at the top of rounded parts.
• MODEL 1 has better porosity results, and possibly needs additional spot
cooling at the top rounded parts.
Porosity & Hot spot and rounded parts
