Optimizing Powder-to-Liquid Ratios in Lost Foam Casting Coatings: Impacts on Viscosity, Shear Thinning Behavior, Coating Weight, and Surface Morphology

Abstract

This study explores the effects of the powder-to-liquid ratio on the performance characteristics of lost foam casting coatings. The investigation focuses on how variations in this ratio affect key properties, including apparent viscosity, shear thinning behavior, coating weight, and surface morphology. Through a series of controlled experiments, coatings were prepared with different powder-to-liquid ratios and assessed for their physical and application properties. The results indicate that increasing the powder-to-liquid ratio raises the apparent viscosity and modifies shear thinning behavior. Notably, ratios exceeding 2.0 result in a sharp increase in viscosity that impedes coating application. The optimal powder-to-liquid ratio was determined to be between 2.0 and 2.2, where coatings demonstrated enhanced uniformity, improved particle distribution, and superior surface morphology. Coating weight increased up to a ratio of 2.2 but decreased beyond this threshold due to excessive viscosity. Both microscopic and macroscopic analyses confirmed that a ratio of 2.0 to 2.2 strikes the best balance for coating performance. These findings underscore the importance of precise powder-to-liquid ratio control to optimize the quality of lost foam casting coatings, offering valuable insights for refining coating formulations and application techniques in industrial contexts.

1. Introduction

Lost foam casting (LFC) technology, also known as evaporative pattern casting, has gained significant attention in recent years due to its unique advantages in producing complex, near-net-shape metal components [1,2,3,4]. This method is widely utilized in various industrial sectors, including automotive, aerospace, and heavy machinery manufacturing, where precision, surface finish, and cost-effectiveness are critical [5,6]. One of the key advantages of LFC over traditional casting methods, such as investment casting (wax casting), is the elimination of the need for mold parting lines and cores, which simplifies the production process and reduces the overall cost [7,8]. Furthermore, LFC allows for the casting of intricate geometries with high dimensional accuracy, making it particularly suitable for the production of complex parts such as engine blocks, transmission housings, and other critical components [9,10]. Compared to wax casting, LFC offers significant advantages in terms of mold design flexibility and material efficiency [11,12,13]. The LFC process replaces the wax pattern with a foam pattern that is vaporized during casting, eliminating the need for pattern removal and reducing potential defects associated with wax residue. Additionally, LFC enables the casting of larger components with thinner walls, providing substantial material savings and improving the mechanical properties of the final product. These characteristics make LFC a preferred choice in industries where high-performance components are essential.

In the LFC process, the role of the coating is crucial. It is an essential auxiliary material that ensures the production of smooth and high-quality cast surfaces [14,15,16,17]. The composition and performance of the coating must be meticulously tailored to the LFC process. Any mismatch can result in casting defects, such as porosity, sand inclusion, and increased carbon content, ultimately degrading the quality of the castings and increasing scrap rates. Therefore, to produce high-quality cast parts, particularly large or complex ones, extensive research on the formulation and proper application of coatings is indispensable.

The evolution and innovation of LFC technology are closely tied to the advancements in lost foam coatings. Significant progress in the LFC process can only be realized through continuous improvements in coating materials and formulations. Lost foam coatings are typically composed of aggregates, binders, suspending agents, carriers, and various additives [18,19,20,21]. Aggregates are the primary components and have a profound impact on the coating’s strength and permeability. However, they can also introduce casting defects such as porosity and slag inclusion. The selection of appropriate aggregates is based on a comprehensive analysis of the casting’s metal type, size, temperature, and geometry. Common aggregates include silica sand, corundum, talc, quartz, and graphite, which can be used individually or in combination. Binders, which can be inorganic or organic, enhance the coating’s strength and adhesion properties. Suspending agents prevent the coating from clumping, settling, or aggregating, thereby increasing its viscosity, thixotropy, and coating properties. Carriers, typically water-based or alcohol-based, act as dispersing media, and their proper selection can improve the surface quality of castings. Specific performance requirements may necessitate the inclusion of additives such as surfactants, defoamers, and preservatives [22,23,24,25].

When applied to the model, lost foam coatings fulfill several critical roles in the casting process, including support, heat transfer, mass transfer, control of metal fluidity, and enhancement of surface quality [26,27]. Their primary functions include increasing the model’s strength and rigidity to minimize deformation, protecting the molten metal from infiltrating the molding sand, ensuring high permeability for the escape of decomposition products, and providing good peelability. Consequently, lost foam coatings prevent mold collapse, model deformation, and defects such as porosity or surface carbon increase, underscoring their indispensable role in the LFC production process.

The performance of a coating is influenced not only by its formulation but also by its preparation process. Even with an identical formulation, variations in preparation methods can yield different performance outcomes. During the preparation of coatings, it is critical to ensure that thickeners, binders, and solvents are fully dispersed and strongly adsorbed onto the refractory powder. This ensures the complete integration of the coating components, which is essential for achieving good thixotropy and coatability [28,29,30]. Good thixotropy refers to the coating’s ability to exhibit a significant reduction in viscosity during application, allowing for smooth brushing and uniform coverage, while quickly regaining its original viscosity after application to prevent sagging or running. In the LFC process, the coating undergoes several stages, including preparation, stirring, application, and drying. The initial stages of preparation and stirring are vital for most LFC coatings. If process parameters are not optimized, it can directly affect the subsequent performance and the surface quality of the cast products. Factors such as the ratio of powder to carrier liquid, stirring time, and stirring speed all significantly influence the coating’s performance. The powder-to-liquid ratio is a critical parameter; improper proportions or stirring parameters can result in poor suspension, coatability, and uneven application, leading to defects such as sand adhesion and deformation during metal pouring. These issues ultimately affect the surface smoothness and overall quality of the cast products.

This study focuses on commercial lost foam coatings, examining the impact of different powder-to-liquid ratios on coating performance, including viscosity, coatability, and surface morphology. By analyzing these effects, the study aims to provide critical data to optimize the use of the LFC process, thereby contributing to the production of high-quality cast parts. Additionally, this research underscores the importance of a thorough understanding of the coating preparation process among practitioners. A precise control of the powder-to-liquid ratio not only enhances the coating’s performance but also ensures consistency and reliability in the final cast products. This study emphasizes the necessity for meticulous preparation and monitoring of coating parameters to achieve optimal results, promoting the efficiency and effectiveness of the LFC process in industrial settings.

2. Experimental Materials and Methods

In this study, water-based lost foam casting powders from Henan Tianyuan Precision Mould Co., Ltd. (Xinxiang, China) were employed, with water serving as the primary solvent. The coating formulation comprised several essential components: refractory powders, binders, suspending agents, carriers, surfactants, and defoamers. Specifically, the refractory powders included zircon sand and bauxite. Sodium bentonite and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) were selected as suspending agents to ensure the stability and homogeneity of the suspension. The binders used were silica sol and phenolic resin, which were chosen for their binding strength and compatibility with the refractory materials. Alkylphenol polyoxyethylene ether was used as the surfactant to enhance the dispersion of powders, while n-butanol served as the defoamer to reduce bubble formation and improve coating consistency.

Five distinct powder-to-liquid ratios were systematically studied: 1.5, 1.8, 2.0, 2.2, and 2.5. Each ratio was tested with three different stirring durations to evaluate its impact on coating properties. The powders were precisely weighed using an electronic balance with an accuracy of 0.1 g. For each experimental condition, a total mass of 750 g was maintained. Initially, the powders were manually stirred for three minutes to ensure the dissolution of any dry particles. This was followed by high-speed dispersion using a frequency-conversion disperser, with varying stirring times, to achieve optimal mixing. After stirring, the mixture was discharged for subsequent analysis. A controlled variable approach was utilized to investigate the effects of different powder-to-liquid ratios on the coating properties, while keeping stirring rates, stirring durations, and total weights constant. Additionally, the influence of varying stirring times on the properties of the coatings was examined under fixed stirring rates and powder-to-liquid ratios.

After mixing the coatings according to the designated powder-to-liquid ratios, stirring times, and speeds, the mixtures were allowed to stand for three minutes. The viscosity and shear stress of the coatings were then measured using a digital rotational viscometer, which is manufactured by Shanghai Fangriu Instrument Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China). To evaluate the surface morphology, glass slides were immersed in the coating beaker for ten seconds. The slides were then removed, allowed to drip naturally for three seconds, and subsequently air-dried. A schematic diagram of the sample preparation process for coating morphology observation is shown in Figure 1. After the coatings were completely dried, the samples were examined using a stereomicroscope which made by SUNNY GROUP Co., Ltd. (Yuyao, China).

For determining the coating weight, a clean stainless-steel sheet was used. The initial weight (W1) of the sheet was recorded before immersion in the lost foam coating, ensuring complete coverage of the sheet. After a ten-second immersion, the sheet was lifted and allowed to hang, permitting excess coating to drip off under the force of gravity. Following a two-minute interval, the sheet was weighed again (W2) using an electronic balance. The coating weight was calculated as the difference between W2 and W1, represented in grams, as depicted in Figure 2.

This methodology guarantees a comprehensive and precise preparation and analysis of the coating materials, demonstrating a high level of scientific rigor and attention to detail that meets the stringent standards of premier scientific publications.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effect of Powder-to-Liquid Ratio on the Apparent Viscosity of the Coating

The coatings under investigation exhibit non-Newtonian fluid characteristics, which result in viscosity variations dependent on the measurement conditions. To elucidate the impact of the powder-to-liquid ratio on coating viscosity, the apparent viscosities were meticulously measured using a rotational viscometer at rotor speeds of 6 rpm, 12 rpm, 30 rpm, and 60 rpm. The shear rates corresponding to the different rotor speeds are 1.25 s⁻¹, 2.5 s⁻¹, 6.27 s⁻¹, and 12.54 s⁻¹. This multispeed approach provides a comprehensive evaluation of the coating’s plastic viscosity, offering an accurate representation of its performance characteristics. The influence of the powder-to-liquid ratio on the viscosity of coatings under various stirring times is depicted in Figure 3.

As shown in Figure 3, the stirring rate plays a more critical role in determining the shear-thinning behavior of the coating. Higher stirring rates lead to greater structural disruption within the coating, thereby enhancing the shear-thinning effect. While extended stirring times also contribute to this effect, their influence is less pronounced compared to that of the stirring rate. As observed, the viscosity of the coating increases with the powder-to-liquid ratio. Specifically, a significant increase in viscosity of approximately 45% is noted when the powder-to-liquid ratio rises from 1.5 to 2.5. This substantial change underscores the impact of the powder-to-liquid ratio on the coating’s application performance, where the increase in viscosity directly influences the handling and usability of the coating. This increment is attributed to the increased solid content, which augments the internal friction and resistance to flow. However, extended stirring times introduce shear-thinning effects, leading to a gradual reduction in viscosity. Specifically, when the powder-to-liquid ratio exceeds 2.0, a pronounced rise in viscosity is observed. This elevated viscosity can result in application challenges, including uneven coating and impaired usability, as excessive thickness can hinder uniform film formation.

In accordance with the non-Newtonian nature of the mixed powder-liquid system, viscosity exhibits a dependence on the shear rate, which varies with rotor speed. To analyze this shear-rate dependence, viscosity versus rotor rate curves were plotted as shown in Figure 4. As illustrated, the viscosity decreases with increasing rotor speed, reflecting the shear-thinning behavior of the coating. To further understand the powder-to-liquid ratio dependence, the near zero-shear-rate viscosity, obtained by extrapolating the viscosity data at a shear rate 1.25 s⁻¹, was considered. This near-zero-shear-rate viscosity provides a more accurate characterization of the intrinsic viscosity, independent of rotor speed variations. As shown in Figure 4, the near-zero-shear-rate viscosity of the coating increases with the rise in powder-to-liquid ratio, which is consistent with the expected behavior of viscosity increasing as the concentration of the coating increases.

Furthermore, Figure 5 illustrates the shear stress associated with different powder-to-liquid ratios.

The shear stress measurements, presented in Figure 5, demonstrate a direct correlation between powder-to-liquid ratio and shear stress. Higher powder-to-liquid ratios result in increased shear stress, reflecting enhanced structural integrity within the coating. Although the shear stress increases consistently with the powder-to-liquid ratio, the rate of increase diminishes at higher rotor speeds. This behavior suggests that while the coating’s resistance to flow increases, the effect of the shear rate becomes less pronounced at elevated speeds. High shear stress values indicate robust solid-like properties, whereas lower values signify more liquid-like characteristics. The observed shear stress behavior underscores the significant role of suspending agents, which promote the formation of a network structure within the coating. This network increases the flow resistance, necessitating higher shear stress to achieve flow. The effective dispersion and stability of these structural elements are crucial for optimizing the coating’s performance and application characteristics.

It is important to clarify that, although viscosity decreases with increasing rotor speed (as shown by lower viscosity measurements at 60 rpm compared to 6 rpm), shear stress behavior is influenced by both the rate of shear and the structural properties of the coating. At higher rotor speeds, while viscosity decreases, the shear stress measured reflects the coating’s ability to resist deformation under higher shear rates. Thus, the increased shear stress at 60 rpm compared to 6 rpm can be attributed to the higher shear forces applied, which intensify the internal resistance of the coating. This resistance is due to the more pronounced structural network within the coating, which becomes evident under increased shear conditions, despite lower viscosity readings at higher speeds.

3.2. Effect of Powder-to-Liquid Ratio on the Shear Thinning Behavior of the Coating

In practical applications, the dilution of coatings is often necessary to achieve optimal brushing performance and surface quality. Shear-thinning behavior, a crucial parameter in evaluating the usability of coatings, reflects how viscosity changes under varying shear rates. The shear-thinning ratio, defined as the ratio of viscosities at low and high shear rates, reflects not only the extent of viscosity reduction but also the speed at which viscosity changes under varying shear conditions. This information is crucial for assessing the coating’s performance and usability under different application scenarios. The effect of the powder-to-liquid ratio on the shear-thinning behavior of the coating is illustrated in Figure 6.

This figure illustrates the shear-thinning behavior of coatings prepared with varying powder-to-liquid ratios. Shear thinning, in this context, refers to the non-Newtonian behavior of the coatings, where viscosity decreases as the shear rate increases. The graph compares the apparent viscosity of the coatings at a low shear rate (6 rpm) versus a high shear rate (60 rpm). The shear-thinning ratio, defined as the ratio of viscosity at 6 rpm to that at 60 rpm, reflects the extent to which the coating’s viscosity decreases under increased shear conditions. A higher shear-thinning ratio indicates a more pronounced reduction in viscosity with an increased shear rate, which is crucial for understanding how the coating will perform under dynamic application conditions.

Notably, for stirring times of 10 min and 80 min, the shear-thinning ratio initially increases with the powder-to-liquid ratio, reaching a peak at approximately a ratio of 2.0, and then decreases at higher ratios. This behavior can be attributed to the interplay between viscosity and structural changes within the coating. The observed decrease in shear thinning ratio at higher powder-to-liquid ratios (greater than 2.0) can be explained by the changes in the coating’s internal structure. At higher powder-to-liquid ratios, the coating’s viscosity increases due to greater particle interactions and agglomeration, which can disrupt the formation of a stable shear-thinning network. As the powder content continues to rise, these disruptions become more pronounced, leading to a less effective reduction in viscosity under higher shear rates. Moreover, while Figure 5 demonstrates that viscosity at 6 rpm is consistently higher than at 60 rpm across all ratios. The decrease in shear thinning at higher ratios reflects a diminishing ability of the coating to maintain a pronounced decrease in viscosity under shear, due to the increasingly disrupted network structure and higher overall viscosity.

High-molecular-weight copolymers, compared to low-molecular-weight substances, form extensive linear chains in aqueous dispersions. These chains can entangle due to their rotational and reputational motions, creating numerous entanglement points that contribute to a higher apparent viscosity at low shear rates (6 rpm). This entangled network structure provides substantial resistance to flow, resulting in elevated viscosity. At higher shear rates (60 rpm), this network structure is disrupted, leading to reduced flow resistance and lower viscosity. The observed variations in the shear thinning ratio are thus a result of both the powder-to-liquid ratio and the duration of stirring, which influence the extent of network formation and shear-induced breakdown. Effective mixing is also crucial during the preparation process to ensure a uniform distribution of components and to achieve the desired shear-thinning properties. Inadequate mixing can lead to inconsistencies in coating performance, impacting the final application quality.

3.3. Effect of Powder-to-Liquid Ratio on Coating Weight

To systematically evaluate the effect of the powder-to-liquid ratio on the coating weight, coatings were stirred at 1000 rpm for 80 min to ensure thorough mixing and uniformity. This consistent stirring protocol was crucial for maintaining reproducibility across all analyses. Thus, the stirring protocol of 1000 rpm for 80 min was uniformly applied across all stages of coating preparation and analysis, including the surface morphology and coating weight examination. This consistency in preparation ensures that any observed differences in microstructure can be attributed to variations in powder-to-liquid ratios and not to inconsistencies in the mixing process. The coating weight under different powder-to-liquid ratio were tested for three time. The impact of varying powder-to-liquid ratios on the coating weight is detailed in Figure 7.

As depicted in Figure 7, the coating weight initially increases with the powder-to-liquid ratio, reaching a maximum of approximately a ratio of 2.2, after which it begins to decrease. This trend can be attributed to several factors. At lower powder-to-liquid ratios, the coating exhibits lower viscosity due to the reduced powder content. This lower viscosity results in weaker particle cohesion, leading to a thinner application that does not adhere effectively to the test plate, thereby reducing the coating weight. As the powder-to-liquid ratio increases, the viscosity of the coating rises due to the higher concentration of powder. This increase in viscosity enhances the coating’s ability to adhere to the substrate, resulting in a thicker application and an improved coating weight. However, when the powder-to-liquid ratio exceeds 2.2, the viscosity becomes excessively high. This excessive viscosity causes the particles to cohere more tightly, which impedes proper adhesion to the test plate and consequently reduces the coating weight. Furthermore, higher powder-to-liquid ratios introduce variability in coating weight, reflecting reduced uniformity in the coating mixture and potential difficulties in achieving consistent application.

Thus, based on the observed data, a powder-to-liquid ratio exceeding 2.2 is not advisable. For optimal coating performance, a ratio of 2.0 is recommended. This ratio strikes a balance between sufficient viscosity for effective application and minimal variability in coating weight.

The morphological characteristics of coatings with varying powder-to-liquid ratios are illustrated in Figure 8.

At lower ratios (e.g., 1.8), the coating exhibits a low viscosity, resulting in a sparse distribution on the stainless-steel test plate and noticeable downward flow, as shown in Figure 8a. This phenomenon is indicative of insufficient coating thickness and poor adherence. When the ratio is increased to 2.0 and 2.2, the coating achieves a more uniform distribution and smoother surface morphology, as seen in Figure 8b,c. This improvement in morphology reflects enhanced application characteristics and uniformity. Conversely, at excessively high ratios (e.g., 2.5), the coating performance deteriorates, resulting in uneven surface thickness and poor application consistency, as illustrated in Figure 8d. This deterioration aligns with the observed effects of increased viscosity and weight variability, confirming that excessively high powder-to-liquid ratios adversely affect coating performance.

In summary, careful adjustment of the powder-to-liquid ratio is crucial for optimizing the coating application. A ratio of 2.0 is recommended to achieve a desirable balance between viscosity, coating weight, and uniformity, ensuring consistent and effective application of the coating.

3.4. Effect of Powder-to-Liquid Ratio on Coating Surface Morphology

To comprehensively understand how different powder-to-liquid ratios affect coating surface morphology, coatings were prepared and analyzed for their microstructural and macrostructural characteristics. Glass slides were immersed in the coatings, subsequently removed, and allowed to air dry. Figure 9 displays the microstructural variations in the coatings based on different powder-to-liquid ratios.

At a lower powder-to-liquid ratio of 1.8, the coating exhibits insufficient aggregate particles, resulting in sparse and uneven particle distribution (Figure 9a). This low particle density, coupled with the low viscosity of the coating, leads to inadequate suspension and dispersion of aggregates. During the mixing process, centrifugal forces cause the particles to accumulate at the periphery, exacerbating the uneven distribution and negatively impacting the coating’s consistency and performance.

As the powder-to-liquid ratio is increased to 2.0 and 2.2, there is a significant enhancement in both the quantity and uniformity of aggregate particles within the coating (Figure 9b,c). This improvement reflects a more stable and homogeneous structure, enhancing the coating’s application performance. The increased particle density ensures a better suspension of aggregates, leading to improved coating uniformity and functionality.

However, at a higher powder-to-liquid ratio of 2.5, the coating’s viscosity becomes excessively high, resulting in noticeable agglomeration of particles (Figure 9d). This high viscosity leads to poor particle dispersion, causing uneven distribution and increased variability in coating weight. The agglomeration affects the coating’s ability to form a smooth layer, which can result in application difficulties and reduced performance.

Figure 10 illustrates the macrostructural effects of varying powder-to-liquid ratios on coating thickness and surface quality.

At ratios of 2.0 and 2.2, the coatings exhibit a smooth and consistent surface texture, indicative of optimal brushing performance and uniform application (Figure 10b,c). The coatings at these ratios demonstrate superior surface integrity and evenness, reflecting an ideal balance between viscosity and aggregate distribution.

Conversely, at a powder-to-liquid ratio of 2.5, the coating shows significant surface irregularities and inconsistent thickness (Figure 10d). The excessive viscosity results in poor spreading and increased surface defects, which adversely impact the coating’s appearance and functional properties. This finding aligns with previous observations that excessively high powder-to-liquid ratios can lead to compromised coating performance.

The findings from Figure 9 and Figure 10 highlight the critical role of the powder-to-liquid ratio in determining both the microstructural and macrostructural characteristics of the coating. Both excessively low and high powder-to-liquid ratios lead to suboptimal results. Low ratios result in inadequate particle density and poor distribution, while high ratios lead to excessive viscosity and particle agglomeration. These issues underscore the importance of precise formulation in coating preparation to achieve the desired performance and quality. Maintaining a powder-to-liquid ratio between 2.0 and 2.2 is recommended for achieving the best coating performance. This range provides the optimal balance for uniform aggregate distribution, smooth application, and high-quality surface morphology. Deviations from this range may result in decreased coating performance and inconsistencies, highlighting the need for careful control of formulation parameters in coating development.

4. Conclusions

This study examined the impact of powder-to-liquid ratio on the performance of lost foam casting coatings through a comprehensive experimental approach. Our investigations focused on how variations in this ratio influence critical coating properties, including viscosity, shear-thinning behavior, coating weight, and surface morphology. The key findings are as follows:

• The optimal powder-to-liquid ratio for achieving high-quality foam casting coatings is found to be between 2.0 and 2.2. This range ensures effective particle distribution, manageable viscosity, and an improved surface finish.
• The shear thinning behavior of the coatings demonstrates a direct correlation between powder-to-liquid ratio and shear stress, indicating a more robust structural network formation within the coating. At shorter stirring times, the development of this network is less pronounced; however, longer stirring times enhance network formation, thereby improving the coating’s application performance.
• The amount of coating deposited increases with the powder-to-liquid ratio, reaching an optimal maximum of approximately 2.2. Beyond this point, further increases in the ratio lead to a reduction in coating weight due to excessively high viscosity, impairing adhesion and uniformity.
• Microscopic and macroscopic analyses reveal that at lower powder-to-liquid ratios, the coating exhibits poor particle distribution and an uneven surface texture. Ratios at approximately 2.0 and 2.2 provide a more uniform distribution of aggregates and smoother surface morphology.