ADVANCEMENTS IN COLD BOX BINDERS FOR ALUMINUM CASTINGS

V. Varghese, Joe Muniza, ASK Chemicals India, Pune

The original cold box binders developed in the 1960s were designed with the key attributes of
increased cure speed and productivity over the traditional heat cured systems.
These improved
attributes were seen as game changing to our industry and were quickly adopted. Then, over the next
three decades, these binder systems were further optimized based on the needs identified by foundries;
Metal type

Casting Design

Sand-To-Metal Ratios

Operating Permits

Sand Type

Foundry Location

Casting Defects

Equipment

These were just a few the items that were considered when a particular chemistry was being developed
and improved upon.
As we moved forward with more complex casting designs, more stringent environmental
constraints, and greater interaction between the once remote foundriesand the public the need for more
highly engineered binders has arisen. During this time there was also a shifttoward improved fuel
economy and lower engine emissions. The automotive segment, as a lead adaptor in this movement,
has been a key driver for lighter weight castings/metals and a reduced environmental footprint in the
manufacturing facility.
Another change that has occurred over time is that the foundry industry has evolved from an
apprenticeship based industry to a highly automated and robotic driven culture. These drivers have
prompted a need for highly engineered binders for aluminum and, to a lesser degree, other lighter weight
metals.
Aluminum castings global tonnage was reported as 13.2 million tons in 2011 in the American
th
Foundry Society 46 Census of World Casting Production (1).This same report indicated India produced
less than 900,000 tons of nonferrous castings (dataincluded aluminum and other nonferrous) which would
represent less than 6.8% of the total global aluminum casting productionvs. 10.1% of all metal castings.
rd
This relatively low percent production of aluminum castings in India, the 3 highest tonnage production
country in the world, should indicate a region set for growth in the coming years. As such, it will be critical
to be prepared with the knowledge of how to produce the highly engineered, complex castings that

dominate

the

aluminum

metal

segment

today.

Data compiled from the American Foundry Society 46th Census of World Casting Production report - 2011

This paper will attempt review some recent developments in organic Cold Box binder technology
that are designed to assist foundries in the production of highly complex metal parts at the lowest cost to
use. This is also coupled with compliance to the ever increasing environmental regulations as required
by local governments and the customer base.
Aluminum castings present a challenge not only to the foundry but also to the consumable
suppliers on a number of fronts:

Core blowing can be difficult due the complexity of the core

Casting design is pushing the limits of current binder technology
Lower melting temperatures of aluminum means a smaller amount of the binder is
decomposed (pyrolysis) during the casting process and also makes core removal (shakeout) problematic
More binder will remain in the core package after casting which leads to problems with
excessive binder residue during sand reclamation Some casting processes can provide
excellent overall quality but can also add significant complexity
Aluminum core and mold packages are becoming thinner and thinner but still must
maintain the strength to survive the casting process.
High purity, low contaminate sand is becoming less available in many regions.
As in all cases, the environmental requirements in the foundry becoming more stringent

In most cases, theissues presented above drive foundries to attempt to lower the overall binder
percentage of a core or mold package. However, contrary to this new goal, the use of robotics during the
core manipulation phase demands that core or mold package be stronger to withstand the pressure
associated with these robots.

It is clear that the requirements are becoming more difficult and the demands on the foundry are
increasing. The question now becomes how can foundries continue down this path yet maintain the profit
that must be achieved to allow for reinvestment into the facility? The answer is not a simple one,
however one strategy can be to utilize a highly engineered cold box binder along with other
complimentary products supported by highly trained technical people. This combination of options should
provide the foundry with an array of means to improve the efficiency of the facility. The solutions will not
likely be any one of these but a combination that over time will provide a successful partnership.
BINDERS:
There are several organic aluminum Cold Box binder chemistries that can be utilized by a
foundry. These chemistries can be segmented as;

Phenolic Urethane Amine Cured Cold Box Binders

Epoxy Acrylic Free Radical Cured Cold Box Binders
Ester Cured Phenolic Cold Box Binders
CO2 Cured Cold Box Binders
Hybrid Phenolic Epoxy Cold Box Binders (ISOMAX)

The first two chemistries comprise about 85% of all the cold box consumption globally and will be
the only two systems discussed here.

PHENOLIC URETHANE AMINE CURED COLD BOX BINDERS

These binders are a 3-part system comprised of a phenolic resole part I, an isocyanate part II,
cured with an amine gaseous catalyst. The part I and part II are mixed on the sand or other aggregate,
blown into the appropriate form and then cured with the gaseous catalyst.
Advancement for aluminum castings has been extensive in this binder segment. The new age
binders should be formulated taking into account the needs of the aluminum caster. As can be seen
below in figure (1.) thisfirst generation of new binders for aluminum castings can provide excellent
strengths to accommodate the robotic handling at a lower overall binder percentage.

Figure (1.) Transverse strength comparison

As can be seen from the data these new binders:

Are upwards of 20% stronger

Are more resistant to moisture in the sand and humidity from the atmosphere
Improve useable life of the mixed sand (Bench Life)
Improve resistance to water based coating

These improvements allow the foundry operator to either reduce core breakage due to handling
issues or systematically work to lower the binder percentage, taking advantage of casting defect
reduction and lower cost to use.
The second generation binders can now show even larger improvements. As stated earlier this
improvement comes from a combination of how the Phenolic Resole Part I is cooked, the specific choice
and ratio of key raw materials and by optimizing the use of high end additives to impart particular binder
attributes. See Figure (2.)

Figure (2.) Strength comparison standard vs. 1st Generation vs. 2nd Generation

Improved core strengthis only the first part of the story. The second part deals with the fact that
after pouring and cooling,the cores must be effectively removed from the casting. These new engineered
binders can also be targeted to improved shake-out characteristics. Certainly the lower binder level helps
in this matter, but based on the how the binder is manufactured and the choice of raw materials, the final
shake out effectiveness can be modified.Henry, Showman and Wandtke noted in the AFSsVariables
Affecting Aluminum Casting Shakeout of Cold Box Cores, that shakeout" characteristics of resin-bonded
cores in aluminum castings were related to the mechanical strength of the core. (2) It follows that
lowering the binder level will assist in shakeout. However, as can be seen in Figure 3.this laboratory test
and confirmed by customer feedback, the new generations aluminum binders show better performance in
both speed and the amount of binder breakdown.
Traditional Binder

nd

2 Generation Binder

Figure (3.) Shake out and Gas Evolution Curves

The third part is consistent with most foundries desire to reduce emissions. The new generation
aluminum binders can achieve this, in some cases allowing as much as a 30% reduction. This can allow
foundries to increase production without exceeding facility permits and positively impacting employees,
neighbors and the environment. Granted, the overall reduction achieved will be relative compared to the
current product used but testsconducted by European government environmental bodies have
conclusively proven that these new binders have lower emission rates. The improvements can be seen
on several fronts. See Figure (4.) As measured by Flame Ion Detector Gas Chromatograph (FID),
Hoodstack measurements of Benzene, Toluene, and Xylene (BTX) and through Odor Panel Testing
(Smell).
Emission Reduction with New Binders

Results in Foundry Comparisons

Figure (4.) Emission comparison in the lab and at customer site

As with all products it is critical to test under individual foundry conditions and sand types.
However, all data and customer feedback indicate the new generation cold box binders offer the foundry
an improved product that when combined with equipment optimization can produce more castings faster,
which lowers the overall cost to produce.
EPOXY ACRYILIC FREE RADICAL CURED COLD BOX BINDERS
Another system that is making strides in the production of aluminum castings is the Epoxy Acrylic
Free Radical Cured systems. These systems present some very unique characteristics that cannot be
obtained by any other chemistry.
The first is unlimited bench life of the mixed sand. In traditional phenolic urethane or estercuredcold box binder systems, once the binder is mixed with the sand the chemical reaction begins to
occur. Over time the mix will reach a point where it will no longer produce quality cores or molds due to
strength degradation and sand flowability reductions. This limited use time is termed bench life. In the

Epoxy Acrylic Free Radical Cured Systems the bench life is unlimited. As such the reaction will not begin
until the catalyst is introduced into the binder sand mixture. See Figure (5.)

Figure (5.) Bench Life of Epoxy Acrylic system vs. Phenolic Urethane system

The second is cure speed. Based on real life examples shown in Figure (6.), an optimized Epoxy
Acrylic System will run faster cycles times vs. an optimized Phenolic Urethane system.The two systems
were run in a side-by-side comparison at a customer site. The data reflected what can be achieved but it
should be noted these results were obtained in an optimized setting and will be dependent on the core
type and facility capabilities.

Figure (6.) Cure speed comparison between Epoxy Acrylic system and Phenolic Urethane system

The third benefit that can be realized is lower overall emissions. This is due to the raw materials
used in the production of these binders along with systems that can contain no solvents (a leading
constituent of emissions). The specific emissions in ppm are shown in Figure (7.)

Figure (7.) Gas evolution comparison between Epoxy Acrylic system and Phenolic Urethane system

Empirical data suggests that the lower emissions can also lead to lower condensate, lower tar
formation, and provide a reduction in gas porosity which is especially important for foundries utilizing
Semi-Permanent Mold or Gravity Die Casting processes. The gas evolution cures and the pictures of
condensate build up on tooling are shown in Figure (8.)
Gas Evolution Testing

SPM Tooling Condensate

Any reduction in tar, condensate, and/or gas all provide a benefit to the foundry although some of
the benefit may be difficult to quantify. It should be noted that the cost benefits of Epoxy Acrylic system
lend themselves to be one of lowest cost to produce system for this segment.
HYBRID PHENOLIC EPOXY COLD BOX BINDERS
Even higher attributes can be built in with extremely modified systems such as the Hybrid
Phenolic Epoxy cold Box Binders (HPECB). This unique patented binder system was developed to
optimize shake out in aluminum castings while maintaining enough hot strength to allow for dimensionally
stable castings. As can be seen in figure 8 below HPECB not only shows substantial improvement in
shake as compared to PUCB even at 20% higher binder addition rates but also shows a signification
improvement in hot distortion.

Figure (8.) Shake out comparison between HPECB and PUCB

Hot distortion as tested by BCIRA

The key themes discussed in this paper are centered on the facts that aluminum castings are a
fast growing segment in the foundry market but present some distinct challenges to the metal caster. The
designs are difficult, metal wall thicknesses are shrinking, customer requirements are getting tougher and
the government regulatory bodies are tightening the parameters that a foundry must abide by.
Even with all these challenges the foundry operator does have options. The recent advancements
in both phenolic urethane binders and epoxy acrylic binders allow for choices that can focus on the key
attributes important to each foundry. Depending on the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of the facility a
binder system can be chosen to help return the largest financial benefit. The focus needs to be on
lowering the cost to produce a casting through a combination of lower binder level, reductions in scrap
cores, minimizing casting scrap, and a reduction in casting rework. A binder is only a piece of the puzzle
and should be looked at as part of the process not an end unto itself.