International Journal of Metalcasting

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 89–97 | Cite as

Effect of Preconditioning and Inoculation on Graphite Nodule Count and Their Size Distribution in Spheroidal Graphite (SG) Cast Iron: A Study to Minimise Rejection of Castings Due to Shrinkage Porosity

  • Mohd. Nadeem BhatEmail author
  • D. M. Afzal Khan
  • K. K. Singh


This paper attempts to investigate the effect of preconditioning and inoculation on nodule count and their size distribution to eliminate shrinkage porosity in spheroidal graphite (SG) iron castings. Studies were conducted on various heats of SG iron prepared for differential case casting with and without the addition of 0.1% Al, Zr, Ca–FeSi alloy as preconditioner and Ca–Ce–FeSi alloy was used as an inoculant. It was found that the combined effect of preconditioning and inoculation significantly improves nodule count and nodule size distribution which subsequently reduces the number of castings containing shrinkage porosity. The shrinkage quantity (Q) was found to reduce from 10 to 2.4%. Graphite nodule count and their size distribution were found to be important factors for controlling shrinkage porosity, and it was observed that preconditioning substantially improves the percentage of small size (5–15 µm diameter) graphite nodules. Higher nodule count reduces chances of shrinkage but simply having higher graphite nodule count of similar size does not help in minimising or elimination of shrinkage, it is necessary to have nodules of different sizes in a significant proportion.


shrinkage porosity preconditioning nodule count nodule size inoculation 



Authors gratefully acknowledge OCL Iron and Steel Ltd. (Amtek India) located in Bhiwadi, Rajasthan, India, for permitting to conduct the experiments and providing the materials required for this study.


  1. 1.
    E. Foglio et al., Int. J. Metalcast. 11(1), 33 (2017). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nicolás Tenaglia et al., Int. J. Cast Met. Res. (2016). Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Chisamera, I. Riposan, S. Stan, P. Toboc, T. Skaland, D. White, Shrinkage evaluation in ductile iron as influenced by mould media and inoculant type. Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 24(1), 28–36 (2013). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    S.S. Sholapurwalla, Capturing the complexities of ductile iron solidification through simulation. Am. Foundry Soc. Trans. 116, 25–30 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    K.K. Singh, S.K. Sethy, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 26(3), 168–175 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Regordosa, N. Llorca-Isern, Int. J. Metalcast. (2016). Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. Hartung, D. White, K. Copi et al., Int. Metalcast. 8, 7 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    I. Riposan, M. Chisamera, V. Uta et al., Int Metalcast. 8, 65 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. Fraś, H. López, Int. Metalcast. 4, 35 (2010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    S.S. Ojo, I. Riposan, Mater. Sci. Technol. 28, 5 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Popescu, R. Zavadil, M. Sahoo, Int. Metalcast. 3, 53 (2009). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    I. Riposan, M. Chisamera, S. Stan, P. Toboc, C. Ecob, D. White, Al,Zr–FeSi preconditioning of grey cast irons. Mat. Sci. Technol. 24(5), 579–584 (2008). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. White, Avoiding Shrinkage defects and maximizing yield in ductile iron (2012), Paper 12-081.pdf, AFS ProceedingsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Skaland, Ductile iron shrinkage control through graphite nucleation and growth. Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 16(1–3), 11–16 (2003). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Alonso, D.M. Stefanescu et al., Int. J. Metalcast. (2016). Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Lekakh, V. Richards, K. Peaslee, Int. Metalcast. 3, 25 (2009). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Kanno et al., Int. J. Metalcast. (2016). Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Alonso, D.M. Stefanescu et al., Int. J. Cast Met. Res. (2016). Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.N. Lekakh, B. Hrebec, Int. Metalcast. 10, 389 (2016). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Sasaki, K. Ono, Application of ultrasonic testing techniques to the quality evaluation of cast iron rolls. Am. Foundry Soc. Trans. 76, 169–173 (1968)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xiaogang Diao et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 23(6 & 7), 1853–1860 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Foundry Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Metallurgical and Materials EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologySrinagarIndia
  2. 2.Department of Foundry TechnologyNational Institute of Foundry and Forge TechnologyRanchiIndia

Personalised recommendations