buletin - aplindoaplindo.web.id/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/buletin-aplindo-52-final.pdf · antar...

BULETIN APLINDO N0.52/2017, Mei – Juli 2017

Asosiasi Industri Pengecoran Logam Indonesia

Gedung Manggala Wanabakti Blok IV Lantai 3 Ruang 303A

Jl. Gatot Subroto, Senayan, Jakarta 10270

Telp. 021.573 3832 ; 571 0486; Fax : 021.572 1328

Email :[email protected] Web Site : www.aplindo.web.id

APLINDO

mailto:[email protected]

BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017

1

DAFTAR ISI

No. Uraian Halaman

1. Pengantar Redaksi 2

2. Harga Gas 3

3. Sosialisasi TDP dan SIUP 7

4. 50th Census of World Casting, Casting Production Stagnan 8

5. Stasiun Peti Kemas Kereta Api Ronggowarsito Semarang siap

beroperasi 13

6. Buhler Die Design Seminar 2017 14

7. Identifying Casting Defects 15

8 Industry 4.0 And What It Means To The Foundry Industrial 20

9 Demand for novel casting process fuelled by drive for improved

performance and focus on total cost

24

10 Inclusions in Permanent Mold Cast Magnesium 25

11 Data Kendaraan Bermotor

1. Data kendaraan bermotor roda 4 di Indonesia & ASEAN 2. Data kendaraan bermotor roda 2 di Indonesia & ASEAN 3. Populasi Kendaraan Bermotor

31

32 33

11 Informasi Umum dan Pameran 1. Website pemerintah yang dapat diakses

2. Website Asosiasi Industri Pengecoran Logam Indonesia 3. Website Himpunan Ahli Pengecoran Logam Indonesia

Pameran dan Seminar

35

35 35

35


2

Pengantar Redaksi

Pada edisi 52/2017 ini, membahas mengenai Rencana Peraturan Menteri Energi dan Sumber

Daya Mineral tentang Harga Jual Gas Bumi Pada Kegiatan Usaha Hilir Minyak dan Gas Bumi.

Perhitungan harga jual gas bumi menggunakan formula sebagai berikut : Harga jual gas

bumi hilir = harga gas bumi + biaya pengelolaan infrastruktur gas bumi + biaya Niaga.

Dalam peraturan tersebut akan mengatur 2 komponen biaya yaitu biaya Niaga dan biaya

pengelolaan infrastruktur gas bumi. Biaya niaga akan diatur sebesar 7% dari harga gas hulu

sedangkan biaya pengelolaan pipa (distribusi dan transmisi) akan diatur dengan menentukan

Internal Rate Return (IRR) atau tingkat pengembalian modal untuk pipa transmisi atau pipa

distribusi dibatasi tidak boleh dari 11% pertahun dengan depresiasi pipa 15 tahun.

Saat ini dunia tengah menghadapi revolusi industri 4.0 (lihat edisi 51/2017), demikian pula

dengan industri pengecoran sebagaimana telah dipresentasikan oleh Mark Lewis di Kongres

Foundry Dunia di Nagoya, Jepang bulan Mei 2016 yang berjudul : Industry 4.0 and what it

means to the Foundry Industry dan dalam edisi ini diinformasikan hasil sensus produksi

pengecoran di dunia ke-50 yang menggambarkan produksi industri pengecoran di dunia

stagnan, serta artikel-artikel untuk menambah pengetahuan dibidang pengecoran logam.

Selanjutnya kami mengharapkan agar buletin ini menjadi media antar anggota maupun

antar industri pengecoran didalam negeri dan diluar negeri. Harapan kami, seluruh anggota

dapat mengisi buletin ini menjadi kenyataan.

Redaksi buletin APLINDO menghimbau anggota APLINDO berpartisipasi dalam mengisi

tulisan/artikel, data maupun informasi lain yang berhubungan dengan industri pengecoran

logam. Naskah tulisan/artikel dapat dikirim ke sekretariat APLINDO, melalui email ataupun

fax, namun hingga saat ini sekretariat belum pernah menerima tulisan/artikel dari anggota.

Redaksi


3

Harga Gas

Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral tengah menyusun Peraturan Menteri ESDM

tentang Harga Jual Gas Bumi Pada Kegiatan Usaha Hilir Minyak dan Gas Bumi. Aturan yang

diharapkan rampung dalam waktu dekat ini, bertujuan menata harga gas bumi di midstream

dan hilir migas agar lebih adil bagi badan usaha yang memiliki infrastruktur dan konsumen.

Perhitungan harga jual gas bumi hilir menggunakan formula sebagai berikut : Harga jual gas

bumi hilir = harga gas bumi + biaya pengelolaan infrastruktur gas bumi + biaya Niaga.

Dalam Peraturan Menteri (Permen) ESDM ini akan membatasi margin keuntungan dari

regasifikasi, penyaluran dan penjualan gas dengan mengatur 2 komponen biaya yaitu biaya

Niaga dan biaya pengelolaan infrastruktur gas bumi.

1. Biaya Niaga,

Biaya Niaga tidak boleh lebih dari 7% dari harga gas hulu. Misalnya harga gas di hulu

US$ 5 per MMBtu, maka di konsumen akhir tidak boleh lebih dari USD 5,35 per MMBtu.

Dalam aturan yang disiapkan ini, penjualan gas berlapis lewat trader alias calo juga

diberantas, dengan cara membatasi margin harga dari hulu sampai pembeli akhir hanya

7%. Boleh saja calo-calo ini tetap beroperasi, tapi keuntungan 7% itu harus mereka

bagi-bagi, misalnya harga gas di hulu US$ 5/MMBtu, di pembeli akhir tak boleh lebih dari

US$ 5,35 per MMBtu, para trader silakan berbagi keuntungan US$ 0,35/MMBtu itu. Kalau

ada 5 trader, berarti 1 trader hanya dapat US$ 0,07 per MMBtu (lihat presentasi Dirjen

Migas).

2. Biaya pengelolaan infrastruktur gas bumi,

Mahalnya biaya distribusi gas bumi sedang mendapat sorotan dari Menteri ESDM

Menteri, Ignatius Jonan karena pelaku usaha di midstream mengambil untung terlalu

banyak, biaya regasifikasi dan distribusi gas mencapai lebih dari US$ 4 per MMBtu,

sehingga Gas yang di hulu harganya US$ 6/MMBtu bengkak sampai di atas US$ 10 – 15

per MMBtu. Tarif distribusi gas bumi saat ini memang tak diatur. Pelaku usaha bebas

menetapkannya secara business to business (B to B) dengan pembeli. Jadi penetapan

tarif yang setinggi mungkin tak melanggar aturan.

Biaya pengelolaan pipa akan dibenahi pemerintah dengan menentukan Internal Rate

Teturn (IRR) atau tingkat pengembalian modal untuk pipa transmisi atau pipa distribusi

dibatasi tidak boleh dari 11% pertahun dan depresiasi pipa 15 tahun, sehingga Biaya

regasifikasi dan toll fee pipa tak bisa ditetapkan sesuka hati.


4

Pada tanggal 2 Agustus 2017, FIPGB telah memberikan masukan mengenai simulasi harga

jual gas bumi sampai ke industry dan menyatakan bahwa selama tidak ada penurunan harga

gas bumi, tidak menyetujui Rancangan Peraturan Menteri ESDM tentang harga jual gas bumi

melalui pipa.


5


6


7

Sosialisasi TDP dan SIUP

Kementerian Perdagangan kembali mensosialisasikan surat izin usaha perdagangan (SIUP)

dan tanda daftar perusahan (TDP), dimana sudah sejak 23 Februari 2017, Kementerian

Perdagangan resmi menghapus kewajiban SIUP dan TDP sebagai pelaksanaan dari

Peraturan Menteri Perdagangan Republik Indonesia nomor 07/M-DAG/PER/2/2017 tentang

perubahan ketiga atas peraturan Menteri Perdagangan nomor 36/M-DAG/PER/9/2007

tentang penerbitan surat izin usaha perdagangan dan Peraturan Menteri Perdagangan

Republik Indonesia nomor 08/M-DAG/PER/2017 tentang perubahan kedua atas peraturan

menteri perdagangan nomor 37/M-DAG/PER/9/2007 tentang penyelenggaraan pendaftaran

perusahaan, namun, kebijakan ini kurang tersosialiasi kepada para pengusaha.

Pada regulasi yang baru ini tidak lagi menyulitkan para calon pengusaha yang akan

mengajukan SIUP dan TDP. Sebab, prosesnya akan lebih mudah tidak seperti sebelum-

sebelumnya yang banyak dikeluhkan publik.

SIUP Saat ini, Sesuai dengan Permendag nomor 07/M-DAG/PER/2/2017 ditetapkan bahwa

SIUP berlaku selama perusahaan perdagangan menjalankan kegiatan usaha, dan

perusahaan perdagangan yang mengajukan permohonan SIUP baru, perubahan atau

penggantian SIUP yang hilang rusak tidak dikenakan retribusi. Namun, jika pemilik atau

pengurus perusahaan perdagangan yang telah memiliki SIUP, melanggar ketentuan yang

ada akan dikenakan sanksi administratif berupa peringatan tertulis dari pejabat penerbit

SIUP. Peringatan tertulis diberikan paling banyak 3 kali berturu-turut dengan tenggang

waktu 2 minggu terhitung sejak tanggal surat peringatan dikeluarkan oleh pejabat penerbit

SIUP.

TDP juga saat ini, tidak diberlakukan perpanjangan, berdasarkan Permendag nomor 08/M-

DAG/PER/2017 ditetapkan bahwa bagi perusahaan yang akan memperbaharui TDP setelah

lima tahun cukup menyampaikan surat pemberitahuan kepada Kantor KPP

Kabupaten/Kota/Kotamadya mengenai berakhirnya masa berlaku TDP dengan melampirkan

fotokopi TDP yang lama.

Selain itu, diberlakukannya penyederhanaan prosedur dan penghapusan kewajiban biaya

administrasi pembaharuan TDP dan SIUP. Sesuai dengan stadar pelayanan yang telah

ditetapkan, maka pembuatan SIUP membutuhkan waktu selama 3 hari kerja dan TDP

selama 5 hari kerja. (*)


8


9


10


11


12


13

Stasiun Peti Kemas Kereta Api Ronggowarsito di Semarang siap beroperasi

Pada awal tahun 2017, PT Kereta Api Daerah Operasi 4 Semarang tengah menyiapkan dua

lokasi sebagai terminal penumpukan barang, yaitu di wilayah Brumbung dan Ronggowarsito

Semarang.

Melalui kerjasama dengan salah satu operator kereta api kontenair dan Cikarang Dry Port

(CDP) akan memanfaatkan Pelabuhan Kering Cikarang dan salah satu operator kereta

kontainer akan memanfaatkan stasiun kereta peti kemas Ronggowarsito siap beroperasi

pada pertengahan Juni 2017 untuk melayani pengguna jasa di wilayah Semarang dan Jawa

Tengah. Stasiun ini akan difungsikan sebagai salah satu titik pemberhentian untuk relasi

Jakarta - Cikarang Dry Port- Semarang –

Surabaya.

Layanan kereta domestik tujuan Semarang

ini semakin melengkapi daftar layanan di

Cikarang Dry Port. Selain untuk tujuan

ekspor dan impor, CDP juga melayani

distribusi domestik dengan kereta peti

kemas tujuan Semarang dan Surabaya.

Layanan multimodal domestik juga

tersedia, menggabungkan layanan

pengiriman barang ke Surabaya dan

layanan pengangkutan laut ke berbagai

tujuan di Indonesia Timur.

Stasiun Ronggowarsito di Semarang ini sebagai salah satu titik pemberhentian akan

memberikan tambahan dalam hubungan pengangkutan barang di pulau Jawa dan

merupakan kesempatan untuk memperluas ke pasar baru di wilayah Semarang dan Jawa

Tengah.


14

Buhler Die Design Seminar 2017

Buhler Die Design Seminar 2017 ini merupakan penyelenggaraan Lokakarya Die Casting ke-4

atas kerjasama APlindo dengan Nuhler Indonesia yang diselenggarakan di Jakarta tanggal

10 Juli 2017 yang diikuti oleh 30 peserta dari beberapa perusahaan pengecoran alumunium

Indonesia. Seminar ini menghadirkan pembicara dari Tenaga Ahli Buhler Swistzerland yang

memiliki pengalaman dalam die designer, Die casting aplicatition technology, Mr. Rudolf

Beck.

Penyelenggaraan seminar ini terbilang sukses dan pelanggan yang bergabung pada

lokakarya ini sangat aktif dan tertarik, dengan subjek materi sebagai berikut :

- DC alloys – melting and melt treatment

- New tool design : step by step

- New ways of die cooling

- Gate calculation

- 3=platen dies

- Mechine calculation.

Ketua APLINDO bersama dengan tranner dan peserta Buhler Die Design Seminar pada tanggal 10 Juli 2017

di Hotel Mercure Kemayoran Jakarta


15

Identifying Casting Defects

A faulty casting has arrived at your facility‘s door. You‘re not exactly sure what‘s wrong with

it, but from what you‘ve heard, you‘re pretty sure it‘s ―porosity.‖

You tell the quality control manager you‘ve got porosity. She wants to know more.

What you have on your hands is a cavity-type defect. While many kinds of these defects

exist, most designers of castings know them only as porosity. If you could just give the

quality control manager a more specific defect name, she‘d know its root cause and

therefore how to fix it.

Below are descriptions of defect types and their correct terminology.

1. Upon machining, small, narrow cavities appear on your casting faces.

2. Several castings in your shipment are showing thin bits of metal at the parting

line.

Defect: Flash—Projections at the parting line occur when clearance between the top

and bottom of the metalcasting mold halves is great enough to allow metal to enter and

solidify. The metalcaster must take more care in pattern, mold and coremaking to

eliminate flash or remove it in the cleaning room after pouring.

3. One of your iron castings fractures and reveals smooth, slightly curved facets

on the fracture face.

Defect: Conchoidal or ―Rock Candy‖ Fracture—This defect is characterized by separation

along the grain boundaries of primary crystallization. The resulting configuration is often

Dispersed Shrinkage

Defect:

Dispersed Shrinkage—Characteristic of cast

iron, these cavities are most often

perpendicular to the casting surface, with

depths as great as 0.8 in. (2 cm). The

casting defect is most commonly caused in

iron components by low carbon content or

high nitrogen content in the melt.


16

compared to the appearance of rock candy. The defect is caused in steel castings by

elevated aluminum and nitrogen levels.

4. Your casting has smooth-walled, rounded cavities of various sizes clumped

together in one area.

Blowholes/Pinholes

Defect:

Blowholes/Pinholes—The interior walls of

blowholes and pinholes can be shiny, more

or less oxidized or, in the case of cast iron,

covered with a thin layer of graphite. The

defects can appear in any region of a

casting. They are caused when gas is

trapped in the metal during solidification.

5. Your iron casting has folded, shiny films in its walls.

Lustrous Carbon

Defect: Lustrous Carbon—These folded or

wrinkled films are distinctly outlined and found

within the walls of iron castings, causing a linear

discontinuity in the structure. Generally, they are

seen only upon fracturing a casting. The defects

form when materials from mold or core additives

and binders volatize, decompose and become

entrained in the melt.

6. Upon x-ray, you observe a cavity in the middle of your casting.

Axial Shrinkage

Defect: Axial Shrinkage—All metal shrinks as it

solidifies. Axial (or centerline) shrinkage, most

often plate-like in shape, occurs when the metal at

the center of the casting takes longer to freeze

than the metal surrounding it. The defect is partly

a function of the section thickness designed into

the casting, but it also can be influenced by the

metalcaster‘s pouring temperature, alloy purity,

riser use and pouring speed.


17

7. A protrusion of metal is sticking out of a 90-degree corner of one of your

castings.

Defect: Fillet Vein—These types of metallic projections can divide an interior casting

angle in half. This defect can occur when too much binder in the sand causes a crevice

to form in a mold or core during mold preparation or casting. The metalcaster will reduce

or modify its binder usage to alleviate the defect.

8. All your casting dimensions are incorrect in the same proportion.

Defect: Improper Shrinkage Allowance—All casting alloys shrink as they solidify, but

each does so at a different rate. This defect can occur when the patternmaker uses a

shrink rule (constant) that differs from the actual shrinkage of the alloy used. The

pattern will have to be remade to account for this defect.

9. Your casting is essentially complete except for more or less rounded edges

and corners.

Defect: Misrun—This defect can occur with the use of any casting alloy, but in the case

of iron, the surface is generally shiny and easily cleaned. The problem can come about

due to a lack of alloy fluidity, slow mold filling, inadequate venting of the mold and (in

permanent molding) low temperatures.

10. Your casting has a partial separation in one of its walls.

Defect: Cold Shut—Cold shuts vary in depth and can extend either partially or all the

way through a casting section. This defect may be accompanied by rounded casting

edges (also common to misruns, detailed in question 9). Cold shuts generally occur on

wide casting surfaces in thin, difficult-to-fill sections, or where two streams of metal

converge in the mold during filling.

11. Your casting has been stored for some time, and when you pull it out for

assembly, you notice it has bent out of specification.

Defect: Warped Casting—Distortion due to warpage can occur over time in a casting

that partially or completely liberates residual stresses. Common practice in iron casting is

normalizing heat treatment to remove residual stress. In aluminum casting, a

straightening between quench and aging might be required.

12. Your iron casting has branched grooves of various lengths with smooth

bottoms and edges.

Defect: Buckle—Occurring in all ferrous alloys and sometimes in copper-base castings,

the defect is caused by the expansion of silica sand. The defect distinguishes itself from

a scab (see question 18) in that it does not allow penetration of the metal into the

adjacent cavity below.


18

13. Very small grooves (less than 0.5 in.) on the surface of your casting are

almost covered by a folded edge.

Defect: Rat Tail—This shallow defect occurs in ferrous and nonferrous green sand

castings. Rat tails most often extend from the area where the metalcaster gates the

casting. Rat tails may be accompanied by other projection-like defects. Metalcasters can

alleviate this defect by altering their sand mixture.

14. Your iron casting has spherical particles coated with oxide inside it. The

particles are the same chemical composition as the base metal.

Defect: Cold Shot (Shot Metal)—Not to be confused with a cold shut, this defect occurs

when small droplets of metal fall into a metalcasting mold, solidify and fail to remelt

when the remaining metal is introduced to the mold. The defect is caused primarily by

faulty pouring practices, but it also can be influenced by misplaced runners and risers.

Metalcasters can stop the defect from occurring by improving pouring conditions and

protecting the mold openings against metal splashing.

15. Small, gray-green, superficial cavities in the form of droplets or shallow spots

appear on your iron castings.

Defect: Slag Inclusions—A reaction between the mold and ferrous metals can cause the

formation of a low-melting slag, which can adhere to the casting surface. When the

inclusions are dislodged during shot-blasting, a rounded cavity is left behind. The defect

is especially common in steels with high chromium contents. The metalcaster will reduce

pouring temperatures and cool the castings in a reducing atmosphere to correct the

problem.

16. Irregular projections crop up on one side of a vertical casting surface near the

parting line.

Defect: Ramoff/Ramaway—This defect is characterized by a thickening of the casting in

the vicinity of the parting line or an increase in dimension of a surface parallel to the

parting line. It is caused by improper mold creation (ramming), which has in turn caused

the sand to separate from certain vertical walls of the pattern.

17. Plate-like metallic projections with rough surfaces jut up parallel to the

casting surface.

Defect: Kish Graphite Inclusions—This ferrous casting defect appears as coarse (not

smooth) porosity, filled with graphite. It generally becomes visible upon casting

machining. The defect is caused by an excessive carbon equivalent in the melt, slow

cooling or great differences in section thickness. A redesign on the part of the casting

end-user may be in order to address this defect.


19

18. Your iron casting shows local accumulations of coarse graphite. The graphite

has moved into the shrinkage cavities.

Expansion Scab

Defect:

Expansion Scab—Another defect caused by

the expansion of molding or core sand,

expansion scabs can occur in ferrous or

copper-based castings. The thin metallic

projections with sharp edges are generally

parallel to the surface of the casting and

have very rough surfaces. They are usually

attached to the casting at only a few points

and are otherwise loose.

19. Waves of fold markings without discontinuities appear on your casting.

Seams or Scars

Defect: Seams or Scars—This defect, which

generally occurs on horizontal or convex

surfaces of thin castings, distinguishes itself

from a rat tail in that the two edges of each

individual groove are at the same level. The

defect may appear in conjunction with kish

graphite (detailed in question 18). Sand is not

the cause of this defect. Rather, it is

metallurgical.

20. Lines of extra metal that look like veins appear on your casting surface.

Defect: Veining—This defect occurs when cracks appear on a sand mold due to sand

contraction, which is caused by heat. The metalcaster must regulate its sand composition

and heating to keep veining from occurring.


20

Industry 4.0 and what it means to the FOUNDRY INDUSTRY

This article is based on a paper given by Mark Lewis

at the World Foundry Congress in Nagoya, Japan in May 2016.

Mark Lewis of Omega Foundry Machinery Ltd gives an insight into the impact the fourth

industrial revolution will have for the cast metals industry.

The first thing to understand about Industry 4.0 is it is not one technology but a

combination of modern technologies combined to create a ‗SMART factory‘. The 4.0 stands

for the fourth industrial revolution which at first sounds extreme but when you start to look

at the possibilities it is easy to see how these technologies can become real game-changers.

Industry 4.0 is the brainchild of the German government, and the train of thought is to

create smarter, more efficient manufacturing through the use of SMART factories in the not

too distant future. This will be achieved by various technologies communicating in a way

that allows autonomous running of the facility and processes.

The big question is how can we utilise these new technologies within the foundry industry

and what are the benefits?

INTRODUCTION

In our everyday lives we are becoming increasingly reliant on technology, with smarter cars

keeping us safe through to smart phones keeping us connected. If you consider the things

we take for granted in our daily lives like streaming music or films, saving documents to the

cloud, or remotely connecting to the office, these are all using state-of-the-art technology

with one important link - the Internet. The high speed internet of today is allowing a lot

more data to be transferred remotely and giving us much more control over various aspects

of our lives, and this is where industry will start to see massive leaps forward in the

workplace.

Businesses are starting to utilise this connectivity in many ways, from automatic material

ordering through to cloud-based software control. The premise behind Industry 4.0 is to

take this one step further by connecting not just one machine but also the whole factory so

it communicates as one entity.

To achieve this there is one more key element needed - the Industrial Internet of Things -

and this boils down to creating smart devices/machines that communicate with each other

and the outside world.


21

FOUNDRY APPLICATIONS

Let us take these technologies and look at how they can be utilised in a foundry. The

example we shall consider is one using silica sand monitored by a smart system. When the

sand drops below the re-order level the SMART factory automatically places an order on the

sand supplier for the required quantity of sand. So far this is simple, but it is reactive not

proactive. Taking it to the next level, if that same system was tied into the production

control system within the foundry and used data from material consumptions it could predict

the sand, chemical, and consumable requirements for the coming week or month and could

therefore have orders placed with suppliers for when they are needed. Of course whilst all

this is happening the relevant person within the organisation is kept informed via

notifications and can easily see what is happening via any device with a web browser and

internet connection from anywhere in the world.

This is a very simple example of what could easily be achieved and if the rest of the foundry

was automated and connected we start to get an understanding of how far reaching

Industry 4.0 can truly be.

TODAY’S FOUNDRY

We may be some years away from a truly automated foundry but the technology is already

available to achieve a lot of the benefits we will see in the future.

As an example, machinery in a foundry can already be monitored remotely via cloud-based

control systems giving complete access to the data on the machine and if needed remote

control of certain elements is possible. Also using technologies like RFID (radio frequency

identification) we are able to automate control of various machines. For example, on sand

mixers it is possible to deliver the exact sand recipe and quantity along with fully automatic

filling sequence - this level of control can reduce waste and improve overall casting quality.

As this process is automated it becomes easier to record production information and material

usage because it is automatically collated and stored.

Add the ability to then access this data remotely on a PC, table or phone from anywhere in

the world and we can see the future foundry is not so far away.

BENEFITS AND FUTURE ADVANTAGES

With less time spent doing the mundane work and by removing the guesswork from the

equation it is easy to see the efficiency gains that are possible. In Germany industry is

talking about average productivity gains of 5-8 per cent with some sectors seeing up to 20


22

per cent and the potential of Industry 4.0 adding over $14 trillion to the global economy in

the next 15 years.

Foundries of the future will need to be reactive to the changing market place and by

investing in Industry 4.0 they will have a competitive edge. Those adopting the concept will

be more efficient and improve productivity but at the same time will be able to be more

reactive to customer needs because these systems will give huge flexibility allowing more

affordable short production runs.

PITFALLS AND CYBERSECURITY

Obviously there are disadvantages to any system and Industry 4.0 doesn‘t come without its

issues. Firstly the systems are very dependent on connectivity and the Internet, if the

factory were to lose its internet connection it would have no means of communicating with

the outside world. Secondly, the risk of cybercrime and hacking become even more of a

threat when the whole plant is connected to the Internet.

However, these issues are easily overcome with clear planning and preparation. The plant

must be able to continue operating if connectively is lost and the systems also need to have

robust security and protection. When undertaking the task of installing a SMART foundry it is

important to understand all the limitations and minimise their impact.

Another point worth considering is the supply chain around the foundry - there is no point

creating an automated process if the current supply chain is not on board or capable of

working with Industry 4.0. There is nothing stopping foundries implementing Industry 4.0 in

small sections of the business as this gives a clear and steady path to implementation, but

again planning is the key element and choosing the correct partners to work with will be

paramount.

WHAT’S NEXT?

It will be many years before SMART foundries become commonplace but that does not mean

that it isn‘t important to understand now what the benefits are and what can be done to

prepare for the future. It is possible to retrofit SMART technology to old plant so we don‘t

have to wait for new factories and equipment to take advantage of the Industrial Internet of

Things. As devices and equipment in our factories get smarter, we must also get smarter on

how we use the connectivity made available to us.

The possibilities are endless and by simply integrating smarter open technologies now it will

make foundries easier to upgrade in the future to the Industry 4.0 ethos.

FINAL GOAL


23

The final goal is a foundry where customer orders are placed via a centralised control system

and by using integrated MRP/ERP systems the foundry manages its supply chain and

production needs automatically. Machines communicate with each other and the supply

chain placing orders for raw materials and planning production needs to meet lead times.

The equipment then works together in the most efficient manner to achieve the customer‘s

requirements.

This doesn‘t mean the end of human involvement but it does necessitate a different skill set,

so it is important to have a workforce able to understand and cope with this advance in

technology.

As technology has changed our everyday lives away from work it is now time to see how it

can improve our working environments too. We all need to get a better understanding of

what can and can‘t be done with Industry 4.0 so we can make the transition as smooth as

possible.

Contact : Mark Lewis,

Omega Foundry Machinery Ltd,

Tel: +44 (0) 1733 232231,

email: [email protected] web: www.ofml.net


24


25

Inclusions in Permanent Mold Cast Magnesium

Magnesium alloys have been gaining consideration as possible alternatives to aluminum

alloys to reduce vehicle weight in aerospace and automotive applications. Magnesium alloys

are about 35% lighter than aluminum alloys. However, only 0.3% of the total automotive

vehicular weight in North America is composed of magnesium alloys, while 8.3% is

composed of aluminum alloys. In terms of total weight, each passenger car contains only

11.02 lbs. (5 kg) of magnesium, yet 264.5-308.6 lbs. (120–140 kg) of aluminum.

The widespread use of magnesium alloys for aerospace and automotive applications is

hindered by their high reactivity, which increases the probability of inclusion formation


26

during casting processes. Inclusions in magnesium alloys compromise corrosion resistance,

increase porosity, produce unfavorable surface finishes, and reduce mechanical properties,

in particular ultimate tensile strength and elongation. Two major types of inclusions in

magnesium alloys occur: intermetallic and non-intermetallic. Intermetallic inclusions are

almost always iron-rich phases, while non–intermetallic inclusions include sulfides, fluorides,

sulfates, chlorides, nitrides, and oxides, with oxides being the most dominant.

Avoiding inclusions in magnesium alloys is difficult due to the many sources from which they

arise. Inclusions can arise from reactions with air where magnesium reacts with oxygen to

form MgO, reactions with fluxes entrapping flux components (e.g., MgCl2, CaCl2) and flux

reactions with oxygen to form MgO. Even with the use of protective atmospheres such as

sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), reaction products of MgO and MgF2 can become entrapped in the

melt. In addition, melt turbulence during melting, handling, and pouring can be a source of

inclusions in magnesium castings.

A wide variety of inclusion assessment techniques are available for magnesium and its

alloys. These techniques vary from simple observational methods, such as metallographic

and fracture bar examinations, to highly sophisticated online methods, such as liquid metal

cleanliness analyzers. Since no industry standard for examining inclusions in magnesium

alloys exists, the techniques employed are foundry-dependent, which complicates

comparisons between facilities.

This article aimed to characterize and examine the effects in ZE41A and AZ91D magnesium

alloys and their influence on microstructure and mechanical properties. By better

understanding and documenting metal handling, the resulting scrap reduction, casting

quality enhancement, and associated cost reductions will improve foundry competitiveness.

This research is part of an ongoing effort to increase the use of magnesium alloys to a

significant level in the aerospace and automotive industries and to reduce vehicle weight,

fuel consumption, and emission of harmful gases.

The general procedure was the same for both alloys and involved the production of

permanent mold tensile castings and fracture bar castings from multiple foundries and

characterizing them according to their mechanical properties, grain sizes, microstructures,

and inclusion contents. The microstructures, inclusions, and grain sizes were characterized

using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical microscopy. The mechanical

properties were assessed using uniaxial tensile testing.

For both ZE41A and AZ91D alloy castings, the average yield strength, ultimate tensile

strength, and elongation decreased between the start and end of the production run. The

results from examination of grain size, microstructure and inclusion analysis indicate that the


27

loss in properties was predominately caused by the accumulation of oxides. For example, the

AZ91D castings demonstrated a ~5-10% decrease in UTS and a ~20-30% decrease in

elongation, with a smaller change in yield from start to end of production.

For both alloys, an increase in grain size was observed between the start and end of the

production run, but the reduction in mechanical properties was mainly attributed to particle-

type Mg–Al–O inclusions in the AZ91D alloy and film-type Mg–O inclusions in the ZE41A alloy

on the fracture surfaces of the tensile samples and fracture bars. The AZ91D castings had

very few inclusions, but they were much larger than those in the ZE41A castings. This

research recognized extensive variability of the inclusion levels in the industry and is a

precursor to developing industry standards for melt cleanliness in magnesium alloys. This

will be a major step in enabling improved quality and enhanced use of magnesium alloys in

aerospace and automotive industries.

Microstructure

A representative micrograph from Foundry A of the grain structures of the ZE41A castings

produced toward the start and end of a production run is shown in Figure 1. The samples

were extracted from tensile mold castings. At the start of pouring, the average grain size of

the castings from Foundry A was 22 ± 1 µm and increased to 38 ± 7 by the end of the

production run. For Foundry C, at the start of pouring, the average grain size of castings was

27 ± 2 µm and increased to 32 ± 3 µm by the end of the production run. The grain

structures in Figure 1 were very spherical in shape, especially near the start of the

production runs. With the minor grain coarsening toward the end of the production run, the

grain structure begins to deviate from its spherical shape.

Such a coarsening and deviation from spherical grain structure during holding were expected

due to zirconium losses, which may occur from reactions with iron crucibles or settling of

zirconium particles over time. However, this coarsening is not expected to be significant in

reducing mechanical properties.

The grain structures of the AZ91D castings from Foundry B produced using the tensile mold

are shown in Figure 2 with Foundries A, B, and D all having similar looking microstructures

with just a variation in grain sizes. At the start of pouring, the average grain sizes of the

castings from Foundries A, B, and D were 77 ± 4, 49 ± 8, and 63 ± 9 µm, respectively. At

the end of pouring, the average grain size for Foundries A, B, and D increased to 112 ± 12,

58 ± 15, and 78 ± 20 µm, respectively. The variation in grain sizes is attributed in part to

the range of pouring temperatures used at each foundry.

This coarsening of the grain structure can be attributed to the transformation of grain-

refining Mn–Al particles to less potent Mn–Al–Fe compositions during holding, as observed in


28

high-purity Mg–Al alloys. The increase in grain size over the course of the production run is

more significant for the AZ91D alloys than for the ZE41A castings. In addition, the AZ91D

castings from all foundries had grain structures that contained both small spherical grains

and larger irregular grains. Both these phenomena are likely due to the relatively weaker

and less abundant Mn–Al refining particles in AZ91D as compared to often excess zirconium

added to ZE41A.

Fractography

Inclusions are known to act as stress risers, and their presence on a fracture surface can

indicate their role in fracture initiation. Figure 3a shows an inclusion that likely initiated

failure in a sample collected at the start of the experimental trials. Analysis of the inclusion

using EDX indicated it was rich in magnesium, zinc, and oxygen. The inclusion is likely a Mg–

O-based inclusion with zinc contributions from the alloy matrix. The lack of any iron in the

analysis eliminates the possibility of the inclusion being an iron-based intermetallic. The

inclusion in Figure 3a also has a fold or crack defect at its interface with the magnesium

matrix. Similar results were observed with the samples from Foundry C, as shown in Figure

3b where a Mg–O-based inclusion (indicated by the arrow) was observed with poor

interfaces with the magnesium matrix. The Mg–O inclusions appeared mainly as films sitting

atop the fracture surfaces. These Mg–O films accumulate during the production run,

becoming entrapped in the molten metal during sampling, pouring, and holding. This defect

indicates that the observed Mg–O inclusion was weakly bonded to the magnesium matrix,

making it a likely source of failure during tensile loading.

The corresponding SEM image of the fracture surface depicts dimple-like features and

confirms the absence of inclusions on the surface. These dimples usually indicate good

casting ductility. Samples from Foundry B were similar to those from Foundry A with no

inclusions evident on the fracture surface, and their microstructure does not contain any

noticeable cleavage planes. Samples from Foundry D from the start of the experimental

trials were also free of inclusions.

Inclusion Assessment

Some of the fracture bars from Foundries A and B were virtually inclusion free, while the

maximum inclusion areas were under 2%. If tensile samples were prepared, Foundry B likely

would produce castings with mechanical properties very similar to those of Foundry A. On

the other hand, the castings from Foundry C contained the highest median inclusion area

and had a maximum inclusion area of about 9%. This can be attributed to the fact that

Foundry C was the only foundry to use 100% remelted metal and had the highest pouring

temperature, exacerbating oxidation. It appears that a melt cleaning measure using filtration


29

or argon bubbling is necessary to enable use of 100% recycled metal. All of the foundries

produced some castings that appeared completely inclusion free.

For Foundries A and B, the median inclusion areas were 2–4 times higher for AZ91D than

their ZE41A counterparts. Also, for Foundries A and B, the maximum areas of the inclusions

in the AZ91D castings were 10 and 25%, whereas in the ZE41A castings they were only 1

and 1.5%. The inclusion assessment for Foundries A and B reveals that the AZ91D alloy

tends toward a lesser quantity of inclusions, albeit of much larger sizes, than ZE41A alloy.

A similar inclusion assessment for the fracture surfaces of tensile samples was also

conducted. They show similar trends, with Foundry C having the largest inclusions for ZE41A

and Foundry B for AZ91D. Foundry B did not provide any ZE41A tensile samples. It is

interesting to note that the inclusion areas observed in the tensile samples are much lower

than those of the fracture bars. Therefore, the tensile sample fracture surfaces also can be

used as a representative means to determine the relative amounts of inclusions in samples

but likely underestimates their maximum size. The particle-type Mg–Al–O inclusions in the

AZ91D alloy also resulted in a higher measured inclusion area because they tend to be

equiaxed in shape and cover a larger surface area than the film-shaped Mg–O inclusions in

the ZE41A alloy.

Mechanical Properties

Whereas the ZE41A alloy is much more susceptible to the accumulation of many film-type

oxide inclusions throughout the production run, the AZ91D alloy tends to collect a few large

particle-type inclusions. This difference in the accumulation of inclusions between the two

alloys is likely a contribution of many factors, including oxidation tendencies of each alloy,

melt density and viscosity which would influence how inclusions would agglomerate

throughout the melts and alloy addition sources.

The film-type inclusions in the ZE41A were more distributed in the samples, while the

particle-type inclusions in the AZ91D appeared as agglomerates with a large surface area. It

is not possible to relate the decrease in the mechanical properties according to inclusion

type, whether it be film or particle type, because of the difference in alloy system (AZ91D or

ZE41A) where each inclusion type was dominant. The authors reason the large particle-type

Mg–Al–O inclusions are more detrimental because of their faceted nature, larger surface

area, and appearance as agglomerates on fracture surfaces. Possible future avenues for

research would be to induce inclusions of various sizes and shapes into magnesium alloy

melts and measure changes in microstructure and mechanical properties.


30

Conclusions

The types of inclusions observed in ZE41A and AZ91D magnesium alloy castings from

multiple foundries were investigated. The following are the major results:

Mechanical properties decreased in both alloys from the start to the end of the production

run for all foundries. This principally depended on the increase in number and size of

entrapped inclusions.

Grain size increased in both alloys from the start to the end of the production run for all

foundries, especially AZ91D. For ZE41A, a loss of grain-refining zirconium with holding time

was the attributing cause, whereas for AZ91D a transformation of grain-refining

manganese–aluminum particles to less potent compositions during holding was the reason

for the increase in grain size.

The fracture surfaces of tensile samples can be used as a representative means to

determine the relative amounts of inclusions in samples but underestimates their potential

maximum size. Fracture bars provide a better representation for the range of inclusion sizes

in castings as compared to tensile samples because of the much larger sample size and

increased number of sampling locations.

The fracture surfaces of the ZE41A alloy contained film-type magnesium–oxygen-based

inclusions, whose poor interface with the matrix was likely the source of fracture. The AZ91D

alloy fracture surfaces contained mostly particle-type magnesium–aluminum–oxygen spinel

inclusions, as well as few smaller iron- based intermetallic inclusions. Whereas ZE41A alloy

was susceptible to many small inclusions, AZ91D alloy was more susceptible to few large

inclusions.

The film-type inclusions for ZE41A would tend not to agglomerate and are reasoned to be

not as harmful as the agglomerated and faceted particle-type inclusions with large surface

area observed in the AZ91D alloy.

This article is a summary of a manuscript published in the International Journal of

Metalcasting, Elsayed, A., Vandersluis, E., Lun Sin, S. et al. Inter Metalcast (2016). For more

information on the manuscript, contact the AFS technical department at 800-537-4237


31

Data Kendaraan Bermotor

1. Data Kendaran Roda 4

a. Penjualan Kendaraan roda 4 (unit) tahun 2012-2017 di Indonesia

No. Bulan Penjualan (Unit)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

1 Januari 96.718 103.609 94.194 85.002 86.324

2 Februari 103.278 111.824 88.740 88.208 95.159

3 Maret 95.996 113.067 99.410 94.092 102.336

4 April 102.257 106.124 81.600 84.770 89.587

5 Mei 99.697 96.872 79.375 88.567 93.775

6 Juni 104.268 110.614 82.172 91.488 66.389

7 Juli 112.178 91.334 55.615 61.891

8 Agustus 77.964 96.652 90.537 96.282

9 September 115.974 102.572 93.038 92.541

10 Oktober 112.039 105.222 88.408 92.106

11 Nopember 111841 91.327 86.937 100.215

12 Desember 97.691 78.802 73.264 86.573

Total 1.229.901 1.208.019 1.013.290 1.061.735 533.570 Sumber :Gaikindo

b. Produksi Kendaraan roda 4 (unit) tahun 2012-2017 di Indonesia

No. Bulan Produksi (Unit)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

1 Januari 97.793 104.728 99.102 91.068 98.683

2 Februari 100.491 112.501 93.113 91.535 106.399

3 Maret 89.073 123.007 108.066 102.507 111.341

4 April 101.805 121.114 97.676 104.412 101.953

5 Mei 99.661 94.353 89.579 105.957 105.814

6 Juni 97.939 117.309 91.807 106.012 73.332

7 Juli 106.519 93.613 59.225 68.357

8 Agustus 77.354 105.259 103.567 105.580

9 September 116.974 119.346 104.702 101.371

10 Oktober 115.533 116.654 95.731 104.130

11 Nopember 110.570 102.423 88.493 107.719

12 Desember 94.499 88.216 67.719 88.741

Total 1.208.211 1.298.523 1.098.780 1.177.389 597.522


32

c. Penjualan Kendaraan roda 4 (unit) tahun 2012-2017 di ASEAN

No. Bulan

Penjualan (Unit)

2013

2014

2015

2016

Jan-Jun 2017

1 Brunai 18.642 18.114 14.406 13.248 6.073

2 Indonesia 1.229.901 1.208.019 1.013.291 1.061.735 533.570

3 Malaysia 655.793 666.465 666.674 580.124 284.461

4 Myanmar - - - - 3.196

5 Philipina 181.738 234.747 288.609 359.572 196.164

6 Singapura 34.111 47.443 78.609 110.455 55.844

7 Thailand 1.330.672 881.832 799.632 768.788 409.980

8 Vietnam 98.649 133.588 209.267 270.820 125.483

Total 3.549.506 3.190.208 3.070.488 3.164.742 1.614.771

sumber :AAF

d. Produksi Kendaraan roda 4 (unit) tahun 2012-2017 di ASEAN

No. Bulan

Produksi (Unit)

2013

2014

2015

2016

Jan-Jun 2017

1 Indonesia 1.208.211 1.298.523 1.098.780 1.177.389 597.522

2 Malaysia 601.407 596.418 614.664 545.253 255.318

3 Myanmar - - - 1.589

4 Philipina 79.169 88.845 98.768 116.868 73.597

5 Thailand 2.457.057 1.880.007 1.913.002 1.944.417 950.966

6 Vietnam 93.630 121.084 171.753 236.161 99.906

Total 4.439.474 3.984.877 3.896.967 4.020.088 1.978.898

sumber :AAF

2. Data Kendaraan Roda 2 / Sepeda Motor

a. Penjualan sepeda motor 2012-2017 Di Indonesia


2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

1 Januari 649.983 580.288 513.816 443.449 473.879 2 Februari 653.357 681.267 570.524 551.930 453.763 3 Maret 657.483 728.820 562.185 583.339 473.896 4 April 660.505 729.279 538.746 501.564 388.045 5 Mei 647.215 734.030 482.691 485.170 531.496 6 Juni 661.282 753.789 588.675 541.428 379.467 7 Juli 704.019 539.171 439.245 326.390 8 Agustus 490.824 599.250 645.997 550.287 9 September 678.139 706.938 632.227 579.454

10 Oktober 717.272 675.962 626.725 594.887 11 Nopember 688.527 592.635 565.066 570.923

12 Desember 552.408 556.586 542.487 486.529

Total 7.771.014 7.908.914 6.708.384 6.215.350 2.700.546

sumber : AISI Diolah


33

b. Penjualan sepeda motor 2012-2017 di ASEAN


2013

2014

2015

2016

Jan- Jun 2017

1 Indonesia 7.141.586 7.771.014 7.908.014 6.215.350 2.700.546

2 Malaysia 537.753 546.719 442.749 396.343 214.326

3 Philipina 702.599 752.835 790.245 1.140.338 613.895

4 Singapura 9.923 11.650 8.145 8.336 4.395

5 Thailand 2.130.067 2.004.498 1.701.535 1.738.231 949.550

Total 10.521.928 11.086.716 10.851.615 9.498.598 4.482.712

sumber :AAF

c. Produksi sepeda motor 2012-2017 Di ASEAN

No. Bulan

Produksi (Unit)

2013

2014

2015

2016

Jan-Jun 2017

1 Indonesia 7.926.104 5.698.637 5.698.637 - -

2 Malaysia 439.907 382.218 382.218 395.938 212.896

3 Philipina 755.184 795.840 795.840 1.040.626 608.284

4 Thailand 1.842.708 1.807.325 1.807.325 1.820.358 898.463

Total 10.963.903 8.684.020 8.684.020 3.256.922 1.854.274

sumber :AAF


34

Informasi Umum & Pameran

A. Web site Pemerintah yang dapat diakses :

1. www.setneg.go.id (Sekretariat Negara)

2. www.kemenperin.go.id (Kementerian Perindustrian)

3. www.kemenkeu.go.id (Kementerian Keuangan)

4. www.kemendag.go.id (Kementerian Perdagangan)

5. www.beacukai.go.id (Direktorat Bea & Cukai, Kementerian Keuangan)

6. www.esdm.go.id (Kementerian ESDM)

7. www.bkpm.go.id (Badan Koordinasi Penanaman Modal)

8. www.bps.go.id (Biro Pusat Statistik)

B. Web site Asosiasi Industri Pengecoran Logam Indonesia (APLINDO)

www.aplindo.web.id

C. Web site Himpunan Ahli Pengecoran Logam Indonesia

http://hapli.wordpress.com

D. Pameran dan Seminar

1. Metal + Metallurgy China 2017

13 June - 16 June

Venue: Shanghai, China

15th China International Foundry Expo, the 17th China International Metallurgical

Industry Expo and the 15th China International Industrial Furnaces Exhibition will all be

staged under the banner ''Metal + Metallurgy Chna at Shanghai New International

Expo Center.

www.mm-china.com/en/

2. Rapid Tech 20 June - 22 June

Venue: Exhibition Centre Erfurt, Germany International trade fair and conference for additive manufacturing www.rapidtech.de

3. Foundeq/Metef Show 2017 21 June - 24 June

Venue: Veronafiere Fairground, Verona, Italy

Metef - International aluminium exhibition. Foundeq - International foundry equipment

exhibition.

www.metef.com

http://www.setneg.go.id/

http://www.kemenperin.go.id/

http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/

http://www.kemendag.go.id/

http://www.beacukai.go.id/

http://www.esdm.go.id/

http://www.bkpm.go.id/

http://www.bps.go.id/

http://www.mm-china.com/en/

http://www.rapidtech.de/

http://www.metef.com/


35

4. China Diecasting 2017 19 July - 21 July

Venue: Shanghai New International Expo Centre, China

Diecasting sector exhibition showcasing the Chinese diecasting industry.

www.diecastexpo.cn/en

5. Machine Tool Technology Indonesia 2017 8-11 Agustus 2017 Venue : JIExpo Kemayoran Jakarta Accelerating industry development in Indonesia MTTI is an international event that focuses on advanced technologies in machine tools and metalworking, designed.

t: +(62) 21 7590 6812 / 7590 2647

f: +(62) 21 7590 1572

e: [email protected]

6. 57th International Foundry Forum 13 September - 15 September

Venue: Portoroz, Slovenia

International conference, table-top exhibition and social functions.

email: [email protected]

7. EMO Hannover 2017 18 September - 23 September

Venue: Hannover Exhibition Centre, Germany

International metalworking trade fair will focus on Industry 4.0 in 2017

www.emo-hannover.de

8. 17th ABIFA Foundry Congress and CONAF 2017 26 September - 29 September

Venue: Expo Center Norte, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Brazilian foundry congress with exhibition and conference. Theme - ''Innovations and

trends of the foundry industry in Brazil and the world''.

www.abifa.org.br

9. Deburring Expo 10 October - 12 October

Venue: Exhibition Centre Karlsruhe, Rheinstetten, Germany

Trade fair for debarring technology and precision surfaces

www.deburring-expo.de/en

10. PaintExpo Eurasia 12 October - 14 October

Venue: ifm Istanbul Expo Center, Istanbul, Turkey

Trade fair for industrial coating technology

www.paintexpo.com

http://www.abifa.org.br/

http://www.deburring-expo.de/en

http://www.paintexpo.com/


36

11. parts2clean 24 October - 26 October

Venue: Exhibition Center Stuttgart, Germany

International trade fair for industrial parts and surface cleaning

www.parts2clean.com

12. 14th Asian Foundry Congress 7 November - 11 November

Venue: Songdo Convensia, Incheon, South Korea

Technical presentations, foundry exhibition, works visits and meetings

www.afc14.org

13. WFO International Forum on Moulding Materials and Casting Technologies (MMC) 9 November - 9 November

Venue: Songdo Convensia, Incheon, South Korea

One-day forum with the theme: High Efficiency and Low Cost Moulding Materials

email: [email protected] or [email protected]

web: www.thewfo.com

14. Manufacturing Indonesia Series 2017 6-9 Desember 2017

JIExpoKemayoran Jakarta

15. Indo Metal, Internatuonal metal & steel trade fair for Southeast Asia

17-19 October 2018

JIExpoKemayoran Jakarta

Jointly orgaized by messe dusseldorf asia and pt wahana kemalaniaga makmur

(WAKENI), will present an impressive mix of machinery and product

showcases ranging from foundry technology, to casting products, metalurgy, as

well as thermo process technology

Email : [email protected]

http://www.parts2clean.com/

buletin - aplindoaplindo.web.id/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/buletin-aplindo-52-final.pdf · antar...

Documents