PSI - Issue 79

Kazem Reza Kashyzadeh et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 79 (2026) 65–72

69

 Case 2: Pouring the melt from the arm section.  Case 3: Pouring the melt from the bottom of the hub as shown in Figure 2 (i.e., the model must be placed upside down and rotated into the mold).

Fig. 2. A schematic of the implementation of scenario No.2 (i.e., the location of the molten pool on the bottom of the hub).

2.4. Evaluation Criteria Von Mises stress, maximum thermal stress, was used to evaluate the risk of hot tearing and plastic deformation. In addition, defect analysis was performed to predict the volume and location of air entrapment and porosity due to shrinkage. 3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Thermal Stress and Structural Integrity The von Mises stress contour and the temperature distribution contour are illustrated in Figures 3 and 4 for all three scenarios, respectively. Analysis 2 recorded a critically high stress of 9869.91 MPa, which far exceeds the typical yield strength of cast iron GJS-700-2. This indicates a high probability of hot tearing or cracking during solidification and cooling, rendering this configuration unsuitable for production [17]. In contrast, Analysis 1 and Analysis 3 showed substantially lower and more feasible stress levels of 1324.96 MPa and 1497.4 MPa, respectively. While Analysis 3 shows a slightly higher stress than Analysis 1, both values are within a realistic range for the casting process, suggesting that the component can solidify without catastrophic failure due to residual stress.

(a) Max: 1324.96 MPa

(b) Max: 9869.91 MPa

(c) Max: 1497.4 MPa

Fig. 3. Von Mises stress as thermal stress in various casting scenarios including: (a) scenarios No. 1, (b) scenarios No. 2, and (c) scenarios No. 3