Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Figure 1 Geometrical representation of casting modulus. Note the DNV long tern testing procedure as follows:
Refer DNV-RP-B401 - 12.2.1 Quote: Specimens for testing shall be cut from full scale anodes using the same type of raw
materials, smelting, and casting practices as for normal production. The net mass of the anode shall be minimum 30% of the
maximum anode net mass of anodes for which the documentation shall apply. Guidance Note: The performance of an anode
material may be affected by solidification and cooling such that specimens cut from smaller anodes, or separately cast
specimens, may not be fully representative for larger anodes. End Quote.
The representation in figure 1 is split up into three groups, for which I feel are relevant for microstructure comparison. Also
note that the shapes presented assume a minimal solid insert (core) the like of 50 x 10 Flat, or 24 Round. For the heavier
module anodes pipe inserts are very common to ensure that (even at 50% consumption) the anode has a very good surface
area. This tube insert adds surface area available for cooling and lowers the modulus, which in turn shortens the
solidification time. This paper is reporting worst case scenario as sometimes heavy blocks are used with flat or round bar.
Upon examination of the data above the reader should see some relationship between modulus and solidification time.
This is basically a proportional comparison where I have used the Modulus2 x 1.2 to arrive at a solidification time.
The data above has been calculated, and coagulated with the experience of a galvanic anode manufacturing team.
Note the Platform & Block anodes take 10 times the solidification time of the 15kg hull anode. Also note the very short
times of the small diameter round bar and ask oneself if the sampling methods for electrochemical testing are relevant?
There might be concerns about the complete homogeneity of a galvanic anode which takes 16 minutes to solidify.
Note we have a 420kg Platform Anode, which takes 16 minutes to solidify. (2500 x 250 x 250). Above that we have 142kg
pier which satisfies the 30% weight rule for DNV long term testing; however with a modulus of 2.1cm it will complete
solidification in 5 minutes, perhaps not representative at all.
Below the 420 kg platform we have a 145kg block which also satisfies the 30% weight rule, and it does represent (or
exceed) the same modulus.
Please observe the cm3 cm2 = cm function.
3. MODULUS VS MICROSTRUCTURE
A summary of the three groups from Figure 1.
Group 1 Products with a Modulus less than 1.0 cm instant to very fast Solidification.
This group would include almost all pressure die-cast components, Bar Stock (Cast) up to 25mm Dia, and most flat block
anodes with a thickness up to 25mm thick.
Group 2 Products with a Modulus > 1.0cm < 2.5cm A slight to moderate delay in Solidification.
The larger array of hand cast anodes your general purpose hull anodes, larger diameter shafts and rods (cast > 25mm
but less than 60mm Dia), most tank anodes would fall into this category.
Group 3 The larger heavy duty platform anodes Modulus between 2.5 and 4.5 cm.
The physical metallurgy involved, suggest larger modulus Platform Anodes and Heavy Duty Blocks are a real concern.
The following section of the paper will give a detailed description of the solidification process for each of the above three
groups. Included are some sketches of what I would predict the microstructures to be.
Group 1 Products with a Modulus less than 1.0 cm instant to very fast Solidification
Metallurgical Prediction These would have an even (equiaxed) grain size distributed throughout the section of the
component. There would be very little, if none at all, loss of homogeneity in the microstructure with no signs of a second
phase due to fast solidification.
I have noticed this term second phase used in corrosion technical papers on these alloys.
I will use it generally (as other authors do) as it is hard to define if the second phase is either:
A: Indium behaving as partly insoluble. The only element in these alloys which can be unstable in OES analysis is Indium,
which indicates limitations in solubility exist. Also, many corrosion papers refer to forming second phase Indium which
falls in line with my thoughts. The papers, unfortunately, do not suggest Indium levels with a given casting modulus. Indium
is the only element in the composition table for these Zn, In, Si alloys which has a different crystal structure. Indium being
body centered tetragonal where as Al, Zn, Si, Fe, and many others are face centered cubic interesting, and hopefully
relevant. In my opinion, as I cant find any text to prove this, Indium might sit in the atomic lattice as an interstitial (in
between spaces) where as the other elements Zn, Fe, Si etc would be substitutional.
B: Indium-Zinc or Zinc-Indium compound. Looking at the phase diagram for the Aluminium-Zinc system one would
assume all the Zinc would be in solution in the alpha phase, especially given the rate of cooling these smaller modulus
anodes undergo. I would not rule out that some Zinc may be present in this beta phase as Indium may have a better
affinity for being soluble in Zinc and this insoluble phase is actually a Zinc-Indium compound. SEM or TEN examinations
would have to be done to verify this. We now need to define what level of Indium is required for these anodes if we are
seeing this in the microstructure as the alpha will be anodic to the beta. A reduction of anode properties can occur.
C: Iron and/or Silicon. I would assume that Iron, is in Solution in the Alpha phase (Either as Fe, Al6Fe, Al3Fe, or as an
Al12Fe3Si compound(s) and has not had time to segregate to the grain boundaries) provided the Silicon has been adjusted
to provide this shielding. These elements (Silicon and Iron) would most likely be responsible for nucleation sites if not
visible.
An in-depth understanding of nucleation, dendritic growth, and solidification of this Aluminium-Zinc alloy system is
required to present arguments for or against my logic. Examination of the phase diagram shows us a very small range
between liquidus and solidus. If one were to examine the microstructures keep in mind constituents A & B (above) will look
somewhat splattered like spilt ink, whereas C (above) may have a definite shape, and possibly colour, about them.
Group 2 Products with a Modulus >1.0cm <2.5cm Moderate delay in Solidification.
Metallurgical Prediction These products would see differences in grain size if sectioned carefully. A chill crystal or
equiaxed grain would be distributed on the surface of the die, as solidification there is almost immediate (to a depth 2mm to
5mm deep) as soon as pouring stops. Beyond this skin effect we might observe a larger grain size and possibly some nonhomogeneity, as the dendrite arms could tend to be richer in Aluminium. There might be the chance of the liquid (in the
later stages of solidification) increasing content of Indium and/or Zinc in the pools outside the dendrite bodies. This might
be visible on the light Microscope at 400x-1000x magnification if they become available outside their respective solubility
limits. This may start to occur with the larger modulus anodes, such as the 15kg hull anode. There may be the tendency for
Fe-Si to be visible in the microstructure if they have segregated into the final pools of liquid during solidification.
Authors Note: This may all seem to be standard notation on the subject; however, there are some unique properties that
need to be understood on how these Anode Chemistries differ to our conventional metallurgical understandings.
I will detail these how I understand the process:
Solid Pure Aluminium has 2.5 times the thermal conductivity of the conventional Aluminium Casting Alloys (4xxx and
6xxx Series) due to its single phase microstructure in the solid state. This means we can deliver large amounts of energy
for very little raise in solid temperature. This is unique to pure Aluminium, not so in eutectic containing casting alloys.
Liquid Pure Aluminium is a very poor conductor of heat which is also important to know. By being a poor conductor of
heat the temperature of the liquid can be raised a substantial amount in a short period of time, with a minimum amount of
energy input.
Aluminium Zinc Anodes also have that single phase up to 6% Zinc, which nearly all of our anode specifications involve.
When we have solidified a skin, all the way around the casting, we now have a high thermal conductor between the liquid
and the cast iron die where the energy must be transmitted to for solidification to continue. An insulator of high thermal
conductivity will now inhibit solidification. It literally inhibits the transfer of heat through to the die walls.
Corrosion & Prevention 2012 Paper 48.00 - Page 4
The solid Aluminiums high thermal conductivity further reduces the castings ability to follow these modulus predictions
and the energy being expelled from the dendrite arms undergoing solidification is passed onto the remaining liquid pools
in preference to the already solid material it follows the path of least resistance. The liquid pools increase in temperature!
Whilst those of us metallurgically trained know this phenomenon as latent heat of solidification this property is
logarithmically worse with these Aluminium Anode materials. In simple terms, we all know pure Aluminium takes
extensive amounts of energy to melt; it is that high value of energy which is stored in liquid Aluminium, and released upon
solidification. Controlling the solidification of this material is a difficult objective.
This release of energy in the later stages of solidification is what is responsible for a loss of homogeneity, (the same
chemistry in every grain of material), and a loss of uniform grain size, due to the latent heat available delaying the
completion of solidification. We call this recalescence. Dendrites are growing slowly, and too few of them, also pools of
inter-dendritic liquid are getting hotter, not cooler. In respect to Alloying Elements Zinc and Indium the re-heating of the
liquid pools also results in high purity dendrites of the parent metal (Aluminium) and higher concentrations of Zinc and
Indium ending up at the grain boundaries. In some cases the Zinc and Indium may have gone past their solubility limits and
may be seen as a distribution of the Beta Phase.
With respect to Iron and Silicon whilst we may tend to think of these as nucleants in small modulus anodes Im persuaded
to believe these are also prone (in the larger modulus anodes) to floating around in the liquid, not due to density
obviously, but more for their melting point. These intermetallic compounds would have melting points in excess of 1400oC,
much higher that the parent alpha phase at 640-650oC. These compounds are happy to float around in the pools as solid
compounds, until final solidification occurs, hence they are visible at the grain boundaries, sometimes referred to as
second phase Silicon. They are perhaps still in the same form as they were in the ingot throughout the melting, alloying,
and casting operation.
Im hoping at this point to have demonstrated that a small value modulus may not show these differences in the
microstructure and grain size throughout a component. However, when we increase our solidification time from a slight
period of 15-20 seconds, to a period of a minute or more, we have something different. We may no longer have a
homogenous solid solution. This variation in microstructure and grain size must surely have a bearing on the
electrochemical properties of an anode over its intended life.
My concerns especially in regards to DNV testing are that where a larger grain size exists, a larger consumption rate can
exist, as a larger size grain breaks away, when sacrificial. Where differences in micro-chemistry exist, and a beta phase
appears (A, B or C), the alpha phase is anodic to the beta phase, and anode consumption will increase. I believe this can
also reduce potential, as is the case with Iron and Copper in excess levels.
Where intermetallic compounds can combine, and find each other to form a larger particle, this particle causes the parent
alpha grain to be anodic to it, and consumption increases.
The above two statements are explained in more detail in the next section.
Group 3 The larger heavy duty platform anodes Modulus between 2.5 and 4.5 cm.
Metallurgical Prediction - These products would see real differences in grain size and I would predict areas of a second
phase at the grain boundaries. A chill crystal or equiaxed grain would be distributed on the surface of the die, as
solidification there is almost immediate (to a depth 2mm to 5mm deep) as soon as pouring stops. In fact, during casting of
these larger anodes, solidification across the bottom face and up the sides of the die will be occurring as filling is
continuing. Beyond this skin effect we would observe a larger grain size and possibly some non-homogeneity, as the
dendrite arms would tend to be richer in Aluminium. There is a very predictable chance of the liquid (in the later stages of
solidification) increasing content of Indium and/or Zinc in the pools outside the dendrite bodies. This mechanism will cause
these globules to eventually represent the Beta phase, and may be interpreted as having precipitated as a solid solution. It
may be more likely that they have evolved from the liquid pools as either (or both) the Zinc and Indium have reached, and
exceeded their solubility limits. This should be visible on the light Microscope at 400x-1000x magnification. There would
be the tendency for the intermetallics (Fe-Si) to be visible in the microstructure as they have segregated into the final pools
of liquid during solidification.
This mechanism of solidification, and the problems of changes in solubility in the interdendritic liquid during the
solidification, is delayed enough during the casting of these larger anodes for this prediction to take place. Remember the
re-heat principal (recalescence) is running havoc here the energy from the solidifying material is superheating the liquid
pools. Remember what I said earlier about the conductivity of the solid aluminium (alpha), it is inhibiting heat transfer
Corrosion & Prevention 2012 Paper 48.00 - Page 5
outward. Those of us whom have had a good look during casting see the liquid centre (where we add the top up metal) go
from silver, to pink to bright white. This pool could be approaching 900-950oC yet we initially cast the object at 750-780oC.
We now have galvanic grains where the primary (Alpha) phase will be Anodic to the secondary Beta phase. I believe this
phenomenon to be what is referred to by the Corrosion Metallurgists as Intrinsic Corrosion when the product is in service.
In my terms the anode will be consumed faster than a 25mm test piece. I would suggest that a globular beta has originated
from the liquid; where as a more rounded beta is a true precipitation in solid solution.
Im extremely concerned about the internal integrity (non-homogeneity of microstructure and grain size) of these heavy
modulus anodes especially after presenting the solidification structure. What we have here is a magnified problem of
group two - logarithmically.
This is the main discussion - the invalidity of smaller test bars. To fully represent a product they need to be taken, in my
opinion, from a large blank, at various stages of a run. Making a special heat and casting on a cold die does not represent
the product using a true die temperature. This of course becomes a very costly exercise.
Figure 2 Sketches to represent predicted microstructures Groups 1 & 2
Figure 2 Sketches to represent grain size, and second phase presence with varying solidification time.
Corrosion & Prevention 2012 Paper 48.00 - Page 6
Figure 3
Figure 3 Sketches to represent grain size and microstructural constituents in large modulus galvanic anodes. The lower
portion of the sketch detailing the beta components which can increase anode consumption rate and lower potential.
Figure 4
Figure 4 Timeline description of an aerial view of a 2400 x 350 x 350 galvanic Aluminium anode.
Figure 5
Figure 5 Representation of reversal of heat flow top, and recrystallisation in process bottom.
Figure 6
Silicon
< 0.12
Titanium
N/A
Specific
< 0.10
< 0.025
4.75 5.75 %
0.015 0.025 %
< 0.07
Figure 7 Representation of the influence of Titanium on the cooling curve of large Aluminium galvanic anodes.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Hopefully, after reading through this paper, Im hopeful the C.P. engineer is now a little more knowledgeable on the casting
process, and the mechanism involved which arrives at a given microstructure for these galvanic anodes.
I stress strongly, very strongly, the DNV short term test (or any other small sample test) is not representative of the heavy
duty, long term Aluminium galvanic anode. It is a fragile test for a very rugged component. It lacks resolution as it is
conducted with a very small test bar, and relies on mathematical conformance of a very small loss of sample material.
It does however produce the closed circuit potential everyone wants to see, however this also could be using a
microstructure not representative of the product of which it is intended to report on.
The necessity for repetition is not required once the alloy characteristics are defined. Analysis is an instant test.
The best test, if purchasers want to observe a manufacturers process, is OES (Optical Emission Spectroscopy) on a furnace
bath sample immediately prior to casting, and observation of the casting process itself. A pre-tap sample is that which is
representative of the chemistry of the anode(s) about to be cast this is the testing area.
In regards to chemical specifications, for everyones benefit, I would like to see limits refined for large anodes.
Zinc narrow the range to 4.75 5.75 % to ensure adequate capacity. Provided we can prove this is correct.
Indium specifically 0.015 0.025 %, if excess is undesirable then lock it in. Again, we need proof that this is best
practice, and that excess indium can be detrimental to the anodes performance over time.
Silicon define what is required, either a given range or a footnote to detail what is expected in relation to Iron.
There seems to be statement that the lower the Iron the better things perform, however, large quantities of high purity
Aluminium with Iron below 0.06% cant always be obtained at short notice. If we have Iron in excess of 0.06 then we need
an international footnote on what Silicon should be used this should be documented correctly.
Titanium the advantage of the grain refiner Vs the anode properties needs to be distributed, to benefit everyone.
This paper is by no means definitive, except I have tried to define the grey areas in our manufacturing documentation.
I would welcome anyone wanting to assist in finalising these unknown variables. It benefits everyone.
6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My educational mentors without them I would have no presence in physical metallurgy.
I should also mention Robert Wlodawer whom wrote the book Directional Solidification of Steel Castings. It is his
instructions that most foundry engineers base their methods; fortunately I have had the opportunity to use this advice.
7. REFERENCES
Det Norske Veritas (2010) Recommended Practice DNV-RP-B401 Cathodic Protection Design.
8. AUTHOR DETAILS
Russell Northey is the Metallurgist at Cathodic Diecasting Pty Ltd.
Started his trade in 1982 in the founding industry as a Jobbing
Moulder & Coremaker and progressed to obtain an Associate
Diploma in Applied Science Metals Technology in 1990.
Has been involved in Melting & Casting operations of Iron, Steel &
Non-Ferrous alloys, for over 30 years.
Russell has been involved in making Galvanic Anodes since 2000.