USE OF SUPPLIER QUALITY INDEX FOR ASSESSING PROVIDERS QUALITY IN

ALUMINIUM CASTINGS

Eray Erzi 1 , 2
, 1
, Derya Dispinar 1*

1
Istanbul University, Faculty of Engineering, 34320 Avcilar-Istanbul, Turkey
1
Ataturk University, Faculty of Engineering, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey
*Corresponding address: e-mail: deryad@istanbul.edu.tr

Key words: 356, casting quality, bifilm, index

1. Introduction mould was used to measure the fluidity of the alloys.

Finally, tensile test bars were produced from the
In many of the casting operations, whether an ERP mould given in Figure 1 where the design belongs to
(Enterprise Resource Planning) is installed or not, John Campbell. In all the experiments, die moulds
there is a good control of process parameters. The were used which were heated to 150oC.
melting temperature is measured, degassing
operation is always repeated at the same parameters,
runner and sprue design is made and pouring is
carried out in the same controlled manner. Although
each and every parameter is orderly taken into
consideration, yet, rejected part percent can vary
from time to time. Operations are checked over and
over. One of the most important disregarded
parameter in such operations is the measure of the
provider’s ingot quality. Typically, the chemical
analysis of the charge is checked and the density
index of the melt is measured. Dispinar [1-2] had
shown that density index is misleading. Instead, a
numerical indication of melt quality was quantified
with bifilm index. In this work, a new quality index
was proposed and the assessment of supplier’s
quality was quantified with the following equation:
Fig. 1. Tensile test bar
(1)
3. Results
Where SQI is Supplier Quality Index, UTS is
Ultimate Tensile Strength, YS is Yield Stress, e is
The bifilm index measurement had shown that
elongation at fracture (x100) and BI is Bifilm Index.
Provider B had the best melt quality and Provider D
had the worst as seen in Figure 2.
Mechanical properties and fluidity need to be high,
therefore these values are in positive side. On the
other hand, bifilm index is subtracted from the
equation, because higher the bifilm index, lower the
melt quality; such that bifilm index of zero would
indicate a perfectly clean melt.

2. Experimental Study

In this study, A356 alloy was provided from four

different suppliers. For commercial reasons, the
providers were coded as A, B, C and D.

10 kg of ingots were melted in a resistance furnace

in SiC crucible at 745oC. For melt quality Fig. 2. Melt cleanliness comparison of different
assessment, reduced pressure test samples were providers
collected which were solidified under 100 mbar
vacuum. The bifilm index was measured from the
cross section of the samples [3]. Standard spiral

569
 The spiral fluidity test results revealed that Provider
D was the lowest with 70 mm and Provider B had the
highest of 160 mm.
Fig. 3. Fluidity of different providers
After inclusion of mechanical properties in the
Supplier Quality Index (Eq.1), Figure 4 was
obtained. It can be seem that Provider B had the
highest index whereas Provider D had the lowest
value.
Fig. 4. SQI of different providers
In order to compare the SQI with rejection rates,
Figure 5 was plotted.
Fig. 5. Fluidity of different providers
It can be seen in Figure 5 that there was a strong correlation
between the SQI and the rejection rates.
4. Conclusions
Supplier quality assessment plays a significant
role in determining the quality of the cast parts.
570
A simple index was proposed in this work which
consisted of tensile values, fluidity and bifilm
index.
There was good correlation between the SQI and
rejection rates of cast parts.
Acknowledgment
Authors would like to thank Maxion Wheels, Manisa
(Turkey) for their support.
References
[1] Dispinar, D., & Campbell, J. (2004). Critical
assessment of reduced pressure test. Part 1: Porosity
phenomena. International Journal of Cast Metals
Research, 17(5), 280-286.
[2] Dispinar, D., & Campbell, J. (2004). Critical
assessment of reduced pressure test. Part 2:
Quantification. International Journal of Cast Metals
Research, 17(5), 287-294.
[3] Dispinar, D., & Campbell, J. (2014). Reduced Pressure
Test (RPT) for Bifilm Assessment. In Shape Casting: 5th
International Symposium 2014 (pp. 243-251). Springer,
Cham.