Castanal 2

Casting Analysis - 2
Solidification and cooling

Surface tension
Gas solubility and porosity
ver. 1
ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 1

Prof. J.S. Colton © GIT 2011
Overview
• Processes
• Analysis
– Melting
– Pouring
– Solidification and cooling
– Surface tension
– Gas solubility and porosity
• Defects
• Design rules
• Economics

Temperature vs. Time
Temperature
pouring
melting solidification
removal
initial
time

Heat Transfer Mechanisms
• Conduction
• Convection
– to a limited extent via h
• Radiation
– eb = sT4

1D Conduction Heat Transfer
T T
y 2
 2
t x
x
T = temperature
t = time
2l  = thermal diffusivity

Thermal Diffusivity ()

k

conductivity
  c density  specific heat 
2
  length
time

Characteristic Time Constant (t)
y
2
l
t~
x

2l
l = characteristic dimension

Solidification
Temperature
pouring
removal
initial
time

Solidification time – Insulating mold
• Assumptions
– no thermal resistance at mold-metal
interface
– no temperature gradients in metal
– mold is semi-infinite medium with uniform
and invariant properties with temperature
gradients
– liquid metal conducts better than mold
material
• also compare thermal diffusivities, 

Insulating mold
T
Air Mold Solid Liquid
Tmelting
T0
x=0

Insulating mold
• To solve this we will equate heat flux into the

mold with that required to solidify the casting
q q
   
 A moldx 0  A casting

Insulating mold
Conduction heat transfer equations
q T
  k mold Fourier’s law
A x
 2T 1 T 1D heat conduction

x 2  mold t
kmold
 mold  Thermal diffusivity
 mold cmold

Insulating mold
Solution to 1D heat conduction eqn
 
T x, t   Tmelting  To  Tmelting   erf 
x 
2  t 
 mold 
2  
 
x
x3 x5 x7
erf  x  
2
 0
exp  2
u du   x     
  3  1! 5  2! 7  3! 
differentiating to obtain the temperature gradient
T Tmelting  T0   x2 
 exp  
x  mold t  4 mold t 
 
Insulating mold
heat flux at the mold-metal interface
q T
    kmold
 A mold x0 x x 0
substitution yields
q
  
kmold  mold cmold
t

Tmelting  T0 
 A mold x0
effusivity(e)  kc
Insulating mold
if the metal is cast at its melting temperature, then
the heat entering the mold is the latent heat of fusion
dQ dV dS
 castingDH f  castingDH f A
dt dt dt
• DHf = latent heat of fusion
• V = volume of solidified metal
• A = area of mold-metal interface
• S = thickness of solidified metal (x)

Insulating mold
• Corresponding heat flux
q dS
    castingDH f
 A casting dt

Insulating mold
• heat flux away from mold-metal interface = heat flux

to mold-metal interface due to solidification
q q
   
• so
k mold  mold cmold

Tmelting  T0   castingDH f dS
t dt
• Integrating from S = 0 and t = 0 to S = S and t = t

Insulating mold
2  Tmelting  T0 
 k
S  mold cmold t
  castingDH f  mold

and S = V/A
- characteristic heat transfer length

Solidification time
   DH 
2  2
  c f

1   V
t  k  c  A 
 4  Tm  T0  m m m

• Subscripts
– c = casting
– m = mold
• DHf = latent heat of solidification
• Tm = metal melting temperature
• T0 = initial mold temperature
Inclusion of Superheating
• Increase latent heat of solidification DHf

by cpDT
– First approximation
   c DH f  c p DT   1
2
 V 
2
t      
 4  Tm  T0  km  mcm  A 

Solidification time – Ex. 5-1
• You are sand casting a magnesium part with

dimensions of 10 cm by 10 cm by 2.5 cm.
The environment temperature is 25oC.
• Determine the time for the part to solidify if
the metal is poured at its melting point.
the metal is poured at 50oC above its melting
point, so as to alleviate the potential problem
of short shots.

Material Specific heat Density Thermal
(kJ/kg-oC) (kg/m3) conductivity
(W/m-K)
Sand (solid) 1.16 1500 0.6
Magnesium 1.07
(solid) 1700 156
Melting point Latent heat of Specific heat

(oC) solidification (kJ/kg-K)
(kJ/kg)
Magnesium 650 384 1.38
(liquid)

• N.B. solidification is a phase change
that occurs at the melting point
• Insulating mold:
– kmold = 0.6 << kcasting = 156 W/m-K
– mold = 3.4 x 10-7 << casting = 6.6 x 10-5 m2/s
• Solidification time:
   DH 
2  2
  c f

1   V
t  k  c  A 
 4  Tm  T0  m m m

• DHf = 384 kJ/kg

• c = 1700 kg/m3
• Tm = 650oC
• To = 25oC
• km = 0.6 x 10-3 kW/m-K
• m = 1500 kg/m3
• cm = 1.16 kJ/kg-K

• V = 0.1 x 0.1 X 0.025 = 2.5 x 10-4 m3

• A = 2 x (0.1 x 0.1) + 4 X (0.1 x 0.025) =
0.03 m2
• (V/A) = 8.33 x 10-3 m
• (V/A)2 = 6.94 x 10-5 m2

• So
   1700 384 2 
t   3
1
 6.94  105

 4  650  25  0.6  10  1500 1.16 
• t = 57 s

• Now, we have to take into account
cooling the liquid from (650 + 50)oC to
650oC
• So, the latent heat of solidification (DHf)
will be increased by cpDT
   c DH f  c p DT  2 1  V 
2
t      
 4  Tm  T0  km  mcm  A 
• For liquid magnesium

– cp = 1.38 kJ/kg-K
– DT = 50oC
• So
DHf = Hf + cpDT
= 384 + 1.38 x 50 = 453 kJ/kg

   c DH f  c p DT  2 1  V 
2
t      
 4  Tm  T0  km  mcm  A 
   1700 4532 
t   3
1
 6.94  105

 4  650  25  0.6  10  1500 1.16
t = 79 s (a bit slower)

• In both cases, we need to be careful

that the part does not freeze before
filling the mold (short shot).
• To be conservative, complete the pour
in 79 – 57 = 22 s
– superheating-allowed time

Dimensions of a semi-infinite mold
• How big does a mold need to be to be
considered semi-infinite?
• We need T(L,t) = To
– where L = mold thickness
T
Tmelting Air Mold Solid Liquid
T0
x
L
x=0
Semi-infinite mold
 
T x, t   Tmelting  To  Tmelting   erf 
x 
2  t 
 mold 
• Governing equation
• Reaches equilibrium when bracketed
term in erf() = 2 1.005
1
0.995
• Hence 0.99
 x  0.985
 2
0.98
2  t 
0.975
0.97
 mold 
0.965
0.96
1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6

Semi-infinite mold
• Using the example before

• Tsand = 20 C
• Tsolidification = 650 C
• sand = 3.3 x 10-7 m2/s
• Time = 57 s, 79 s

Semi-infinite mold
• So for t = 57 s
7
L  2  2  3.4 10 m / s  57s  18mm
2
• T = 79 s, L = 21 mm
• So, the mold needs to be at least that
thick for the semi-infinite mold assumption
to hold

Conducting mold
• We can perform a similar analysis for

when the mold conducts as well as the
metal being cast and the interface
resistance dominates.
• Die casting is an example.

Conducting mold
T
Air Mold Solid Liquid
Tmelting
T0
x=0

Conducting mold
• To solve this we will equate heat flux into the

mold with that required to solidify the casting
q q
   

Conducting mold
• Assumptions
– Mold-casting interface resistance
dominates
hinterface lcasting kcasting
Bi #  1 or hinterface 
kcasting S

Conducting mold
• You should also check to see if the

mold is not insulating
– kmold ~ kcasting
– mold ~ casting
• If Biot and insulating mold tests are not
conclusive, mold may be relatively insulating
and it must also meet this condition
km mcm
h 2
interface 
t
Conducting mold
Heat flux across the mold-metal interface into the
mold (Fourier’s law)
q
   hTM  T0 
 A  x 0
Heat flux due to solidification of casting
q dS
   castingDH f
 A casting dt

Conducting mold
• heat flux away from mold-metal interface =
heat flux to mold-metal interface due to
solidification
q q
   
hTM  T0   casting DH f
dS
dt
• Integrating from S=0 and t=0 to S=S and t=t

Conducting mold
TM  T0
S h t
 castingDH f
also S = V/A

Conducting mold
casting DH f V
t
hTM  T0  A

Inclusion of Superheating
• Increase latent heat of solidification DHf
by cpDT
– First approximation
 casting DH f  c p DT  V
t
h TM  T0  A

• You are die casting a magnesium part with
dimensions of 10 cm by 10 cm by 2.5 cm.
The initial iron mold is at 25oC. The overall
heat transfer coefficient is 200 W/m2-K
the metal is poured at its melting point.
the metal is poured at 50oC above its melting
point, so as to alleviate the potential problem
of short shots.

(kJ/kg-K) (kg/m3) conductivity
(W/m-K)
Iron (solid) 0.7 7900 73
Magnesium 1.07
(solid) 1700 156
Melting point Latent heat of Specific heat

(oC) solidification (kJ/kg-K)
(kJ/kg)
Magnesium 650 384 1.38
(liquid)

• DHf = 384 kJ/kg

• c = 1700 kg/m3
• Tm = 650oC
• To = 25oC
• km = 73 W/m-K
• m = 7900 kg/m3
• cm = 0.7 kJ/kg-K

• V = 0.1 x 0.1 X 0.025 = 2.5 x 10-4 m3

• A = 2 x (0.1 x 0.1) + 4 X (0.1 x 0.025) =
0.03 m2
• (V/A) = 8.33 x 10-3 m

Solidification – Ex. 6-5
• Conducting mold? kcasting
hinterface 
S
156 kcasting
hinterface  200  3
 18,727  Yes!
8.33  10 S
• Insulating mold?
– kmold = 73 ~ 156 W/m-K = kcasting

– mold = 1.32 x 10-5 ~ 6.6 x 10-5 m2/s = casting
– Not insulating

• Solidification time
casting DH f V
t
• So hTM  T0  A
1700  384 3
t  8 .33  10
200  10 3  650  25
• t = 43.5 s

• Now, we have to take into account

cooling the liquid from (650 + 50)oC to
650oC
• So, the latent heat of solidification (DHf)
will be increased by cpDT

• For liquid magnesium

– cp = 1.38 kJ/kg-K
– DT = 50oC
• So
DHf = Hf + cpDT
= 384 + 1.38 x 50 = 453 kJ/kg

• So
1700  453 3
t  8 .33  10
200  10 3  650  25
t = 51.3 s (a bit slower)

• In both cases, we need to be careful

that the part does not freeze before
filling the mold (short shot).
• To be conservative, complete pour in
51.3 – 43.5 = 7.8 s
– superheating-allowed time

Relatively insulating molds
• If the  test and the Biot number test

are not conclusive:
km mcm
h 2
interface 
t
• Where does it come from?

Fourier’s law
q
 hequivalent  DT
A
1 1 t t
  
hequivalent hinterface ecasting emold

Effect of effusivity
• Consider casting aluminum in steel and

sand molds.
• Do the properties of the mold matter?

• Assume:
• hinterface for liquid metal = 1500 W/m2K
• hinterface for solid metal = 500 W/m2K
• ealuminum(solid) = 22,000 J/m2Ks0.5
• ealuminum(liquid) = 24,000 J/m2Ks0.5
• esteel = 8,700 J/m2Ks0.5
• esand = 1,020 J/m2Ks0.5

• Determine hequivalent for four cases

• Aluminum in steel:
– 1 s, aluminum liquid
– 9 s, aluminum solid
• Aluminum in sand:
– 1 s, aluminum liquid
– 100s, aluminum solid
• sand molds cool slower

Aluminum / steel mold
• t = 1 s, liquid aluminum
1 1 1 1 1 1
    
hequivalent 1,500 24,000 8,700 1215 hinterface
• t = 9 s, solid aluminum
1 1 3 3 1 1
    
hequivalent 500 22,000 8,700 463 hinterface

Aluminum / sand mold
• t = 1 s, liquid aluminum
1 1 1 1 1
   
hequivalent 1,500 24,000 1,020 592
• t = 100 s, solid aluminum

1 1 10 10 1
   
hequivalent 500 22,000 1,020 330

• So, we can see that effusivity

overwhelms the interface resistance for
a sand (insulating) mold, but has little
effect on a steel (conducting) mold.

km mcm
Relatively insulating mold h 2
interface 
t
• Steel mold, t = 1 s, liquid aluminum
2
– yes 8700
1500 2 
1
• Steel mold, t = 10 s, solid aluminum
2
8700
– yes 500 2 
10
• Sand mold, t = 1 s, liquid aluminum
– no 1500 21020 2
1
• Sand mold, t = 100 s, solid aluminum
– no
2
1020
500 2 
100
Relatively Insulating
• We can see that the steel mold is not

relatively insulating, and meets the
criteria for a conducting mold
• We can see that the sand mold is
relatively insulating, and meets the
criteria for an insulating mold.

Fluidity
• Archaic measure of viscosity and

cooling
• Distance metal flows before freezing

Fluidity

Non-isothermal flow
• Flow rate characteristic time constant:
– t = 1/t ~ V/Lx
• Heat transfer rate characteristic time constant:
– t = 1/t ~ /Lz2
Flow rate V  L2z V  Lz Lz

~  
Heat transferrate   Lx  Lx
• Small numbers give short shots
– thick runners or risers needed
– ratio should be greater than one for filling

Non-isothermal flow
Magnesium
1 cm
10 cm/s
10 cm
Flow rate 10cm / s  0.5cm 0.5cm
~ 2
  0.36
Heat transferrate 0.7cm / s 10cm
So, a short shot may occur, as the flow rate

is smaller than the heat transfer rate.

Chvorinov’s Rule
• Used to estimate solidification time

– for insulating molds
   DH 
2  2
 c 1  
V
t  k(V/A)2 t  f

 4  Tm  T0  k  c  A 
 m m m

– k = constant
• function of cast material, mold material, heat transfer
coefficients
– V = volume
– A = surface area
Comparison of Shapes with Same
Volume
2
Shape Area Volume (V/A) (V/A)
cube 6 1 0.167 0.028
cylinder 5.54 1 0.181 0.033
sphere 4.84 1 0.207 0.043

Risers
• Purpose: to supply metal to part to

make up for shrinkage, preventing voids
• Design issues:
– Risers must freeze after part
– Risers must feed a volume of metal equal
to the part’s shrinkage

Use for riser design – insulating mold
2 2
V  V 
   
 A  riser  A casting
• So that riser freezes after casting

– Otherwise, shrinkage or porosity can result

Riser design – insulating mold
• Insulated risers allow for smaller
dimensions
– Saves metal
• E.g., a riser insulated so it cools n times
slower than the casting (n>1)
2 2
V  V 
n     

Riser design – conducting mold
• Similar to insulating mold
casting DH f V
t
hTM  T0  A
so
V  V 
n     
 A riser  A casting

Riser design – Ex. 7-1
• You are casting housings for an alternator. The
housing is made from magnesium. For heat transfer
purposes, the casting can be considered to have V/A
= 5 mm. The mold is an insulating one.
• The part needs to have risers designed for it. The
risers have additional insulation that doubles their
cooling time and should be cylindrical. The risers will
be 50 mm in height. The tops of the risers are
insulated, so they do not transfer heat to the
environment. The risers are on the runner, so that
you do not need to subtract the riser-part interface
area from the heat transfer area.
• Determine their diameter.

• Here we use
2 2
V  V 
n     
V 
• We are given    5mm
 A casting
V 
• So we need to find  
 A  riser

Ariser  2Rh  2R  50  100R

Vriser  R 2h  R 2  50  50R 2
(top and bottom do not transfer heat)
So
V 
2
V 
2
 50R  2
2 2 R 7.07mm
n      2  5
 A  riser  A casting  100R  D14.14mm

• The number of risers is immaterial to

this calculation. It is necessary to
determine the amount of material that
must be delivered to make up for the
shrinkage, as well as the distance the
material needs to flow in the part.

Cooling below melting point
Temperature
pouring
removal
initial
time

1D, Lumped-capacity HT (1)
Bodies without temperature gradients:
Biot number (Bi)= hl/k << 1
h = heat transfer coefficient
y
T
semi-infinite plate
x
2l Ti

1D, Lumped-capacity HT (2)
• First Law formulation of lumped-

capacity model (pure thermal
system):
Heat transfer =
Increase in Internal Heat Content
Q1 2  U 2  U1

First Law Formulation
dQ  Ah  T  T   dt  VcdT
heat transfer = internal energy change
• t = time
• T = temperature ( = source or sink)
• V = volume
• A = area
• h = heat transfer coefficient
•  = density
• c = specific heat

Heat Transfer Time
Solving for time (t)
Vc  T  T1 
t ln  
Ah  T  T2 
Note: k drops out because of assumption of
negligible temperature gradients.

1D Heat Transfer - Ex. 8-1
• You are interested in cooling a 0.5

in. thick plate of copper from
T=500oC to T=50oC.
• It is cooled such that the overall

heat transfer coefficient (h) is 200
W/m2-K, and the “sink”
temperature is 20oC.

1D Heat Transfer - Ex. 8-2
How long will it take to cool the plate

down?

1-D Heat Transfer - Ex. 8-3
Assume the plate can be modeled
as an infinite plate.
– Note: V/A = l (if l<< plate width and
length), because we are only interested
in half of the plate, by symmetry
• Copper data:
– density () = 8,970 kg/m3
– conductivity (k) = 393 W/m-K
– specific heat (c) = 385 J/kg-K

hl 200 * 0.00635
Biot #  
k 393
 0.00323  1

Vc  T  T1 
t ln  
Ah  T  T2 
0.00635 8,970 385  20  500 

t  ln 
200  20  50 
 304 s  5 mins

Bodies with Temperature Gradients
• Biot number (Bi)= hl/k >> 1

– More difficult, use Heisler charts
y
T  T  2
   2 
t  x 
q Bi-1
x
2l Fo
Surface Tension
• Can be used to determine how well a

material wets and flows into the mold
Poor wetting Good wetting

Surface Tension (g) [mJ/m2]
• Bubbles F
r
DP  = 2  r g
r2
DP = 2g/r F
q
• Capillary
r
2r gcosq  gr2h h
gh = 2g cosq / r
(like a pressure term)

Surface Tension
• Surface may be either:

– wetting, which helps filling
• convex meniscus
– non-wetting, which hinders filling
• concave meniscus

Surface Tension
• We can calculate the pressure needed

to squash a bubble.
• We can calculate how much “extra”
force (pressure) is necessary to fill very
small cavities.

Sievert’s Law
S  k pg
– S = solubility
– k = constant
– pg = partial pressure of gas over melt

Sievert’s Law constants
• Different constants for solid and liquid

metals
• Can’t have more than the solid
concentration in the liquid or bubbles
will form

Sievert’s Law – Ex. 8-1
• Calculate the percentage of hydrogen

gas porosity of a copper casting, if the
partial pressure of hydrogen in contact
with the molten copper is 0.5 atm.
• Determine the maximum hydrogen
partial pressure required to eliminate
gas porosity.

• Concentration of hydrogen in liquid

copper at melting point and one atm
hydrogen = 5.17 cm3/100 g Cu
• Concentration of hydrogen in solid at
melting point and one atm hydrogen =
3.1 cm3/100 g Cu

• First determine Sievert’s Law constant –

k
• From the problem definition
– [H]liquid = 5.17 cm3 / 100 g Cu
– [H]solid = 3.1 cm3 / 100 g Cu
• Copper density = 9 g/cm3

• So
H liquid 5.17 1
k   5.17 cm / 100 g / atm
3 2
pg 1
• and at 0.5 atm
H liquid  5.17 0.5  3.66cm / 100 g 3
• also
H solid  3.1cm 3
/ 100 g
• Then
3.66 – 3.1 = 0.56 [cm3 / 100 g Cu] of
hydrogen will form gas porosity (this
represents the gas which is not soluble)
• the volume of 100 g of Cu
= 100 g / (9 g/cm3)
= 11.11 [cm3/100 g Cu]

• So, the total volume of gas and metal

= 11.11 + 0.56 = 11.67 [cm3/100 g Cu]
• So the gas porosity
= gas volume / (volume of gas + metal)
= 0.56 [cm3/100 g Cu] / 11.67 [cm3/100 g Cu]
= 0.05 = 5%

• There cannot be a higher concentration

of gas in the liquid than [H]solid, or
bubbles will form upon solidification
• So,
3.1cm / 100g  5.17
3
pg
• which gives
pg = 0.36 atm

Data for Solid Materials
Room Temperature
(kJ/kg-oC) (kg/m3) conductivity
(W/m-oC)
Sand 1.16 1500 0.60
Aluminum 0.90 2700 222
Nickel 0.44 8910 92.1
Magnesium 1.03 1740 156
Copper 0.38 8960 394
Iron 0.46 7870 75.4
Steel 0.434 7832 59

Data for Liquid Metals at Tm
Material Melting Density Latent heat Thermal Specific Viscosity
point (oC) (kg/m3) of conductivity heat (C) (m)
solidification (W/m-oC) (kJ/kg-oC) (mPa-s)
(fusion) (Hf)
(kJ/kg)
Aluminum 660 2390 396 94 1.05 4.5
Nickel 1453 7900 297 0.73 4.1
Magnesium 650 1585 384 139 1.38 1.24
Copper 1083 7960 220 49.4 0.52 3.36
Iron 1537 7150 211 0.34 2.2

Summary
• Analysis
– Melting
– Pouring
– Solidification and cooling
– Surface tension
– Gas solubility and porosity


Castanal 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Castanal 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Casting Analysis - 2

Solidification and cooling

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 1

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 2

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 3

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 4

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 5

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 6

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 7

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 8

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 9

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 10

• To solve this we will equate heat flux into the

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 11

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 12

differentiating to obtain the temperature gradient

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 15

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 16

• heat flux away from mold-metal interface = heat flux

k mold  mold cmold

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 17

- characteristic heat transfer length

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 18

• Increase latent heat of solidification DHf

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 20

• You are sand casting a magnesium part with

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 21

Melting point Latent heat of Specific heat

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 22

• DHf = 384 kJ/kg

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 24

• V = 0.1 x 0.1 X 0.025 = 2.5 x 10-4 m3

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 25

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 26

• For liquid magnesium

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 28

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 29

• In both cases, we need to be careful

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 30

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 32

• Using the example before

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 33

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 34

• We can perform a similar analysis for

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 35

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 36

• To solve this we will equate heat flux into the

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 37

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 38

• You should also check to see if the

Heat flux due to solidification of casting

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 40

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 41

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 42

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 43

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 44

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 45

Melting point Latent heat of Specific heat

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 46

• DHf = 384 kJ/kg

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 47

• V = 0.1 x 0.1 X 0.025 = 2.5 x 10-4 m3

ME 6222: Manufacturing Processes and Systems 48