The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (2018) 97:1037–1045

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2020-z

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A comparative study of fabrication

of sand casting mold using additive manufacturing and
conventional process
Nishant Hawaldar 1
& Jing Zhang1

Received: 5 January 2018 / Accepted: 10 March 2018 / Published online: 19 April 2018
# Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
In this study, two processes to fabricate casting mold, conventional sand casting process and additive manufacturing or 3D
printing process, are comparatively investigated. The two processes were compared in terms of their weight saving, surface
finish, design allowance, and fettling work. The results show that there are significant advantages in using additive
manufacturing in the produc- tion of mold. The 3D printed molds provide substantial saving of sand used, design allowances,
and fettling work. The mechanical properties of 3D printed molds are also higher than the conventional ones due to good
bonding strength during 3D printing.

Keywords Additive manufacturing . Mold . Sand casting . 3D printing . Binder jetting

1 Introduction University—Purdue University Indianapolis,

Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

1.1 Conventional sand casting versus

casting using 3D printed molds

1.1.1 Conventional sand casting

Sand casting process is one of the expandable-mold

methods, and is considered the most widely used casting
process due to its economical characteristics. This process
is used to produce approximately 70% of all metal casting
[1]. The conventional sand casting process starts with
pattern making. The patterns are usually made of wood,
metal, plastic, or other materials. The cavity is formed out
of sand by means of pattern and has a replica of the shape
of the part to be cast. Pouring molten metal in the cavity
gives the final metal cast [2].
Considering shrinkage of the metal during solidification
phase, shrinkage allowance is provided to a pattern. Shrinkage
allowance increases the final dimension of the cast. Interior ge-
ometry of the part is determined by means of a core which is
placed inside the mold cavity. A core box is required to make
a core which is usually the replica of core itself [3]. Pattern
making

* Jing Zhang
[email protected]

1
Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Indiana
and mold and core box making come under casting tooling.
Apart from these two tooling features, sand casting includes
making of prints for cores, pouring basin, sprue, runner and
risers, and feed aids [4]. Generalized steps in conventional
sand casting are shown in Fig. 1. In general, sand casting has
a low production rate in order to remove the casting part,
and the sand mold needs to be broken [5].

1.1.2 3D printed molds for casting

As discussed above, many of general steps in traditional

sand casting process, including pattern, mold, core, and
core box, are derived from the part geometry, followed by
modification to incorporate various allowances. These
steps provide new opportunity for adopting additive
manufacturing or 3D print- ing technique into the sand
mold fabrication. Additionally, it is very challenging to
fabricate a metal casting with complex geometries using
the conventional casting process. Therefore, the geometric
freedom offered by AM technology is an impor- tant asset
that can be used in combination with conventional
processes [6]. In contrast to the long history of
conventional sand casting process, additive manufacturing
has emerged on- ly a few decades ago. Many of the
applications for 3D printed molds are providing flexible
tooling for conventionally de- signed castings.
Some pattern-making shops have started adopting this
AM technology as a better method for testing part and
pattern designs. Different shrinkage and draft allowances
along with gating systems can be optimized. Once the
design is finalized,
 10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–

Fig. 1 Generalized steps in Pattern making

conventional sand casting process

Sand preparation
Mold making

Heat treatment
Assembling components

Furnace

Metal preparation Pouring into mold Cooling & Breaking

Cleaning
& Inspection
Finishin
g

a durable pattern could be manufactured using conventional

1.2 Materials for traditional sand casting
casting means [7]. and 3D printed casting molds
Pattern making requires skilled labor but 3D printing
has simplified pattern making which was hitherto a skilled
The traditional sand casting process used for this study was
job and depended on artisans [8]. Nowadays, different
no-bake, also known as 2-part sand casting. The grain size
additive manufacturing processes like binder jetting (BJ),
of the sand used for no-bake sand casting process is around
laminated object manufacturing (LOM), fused deposition
200– 220 μm with AFS (American Foundry Society)
modeling (FDM), and selective laser sintering (SLS) can
fineness num- ber 60–65. In this process, chemical binders
produce com- ponents strong enough to replace the
are used to bond the molding sand. The chemical binder
conventional wooden patterns [9]. Recently, SLS and BJ
and catalyst are added to sand and this mixture is blended
processes have been used to directly manufacture silica
in a mixer. Cope and drag are individually filled with this
sand molds and cores by selec- tively jetting binder into a
molding sand which forms a compacted, strong, and dense
powder bed of conventional found- ry sand. In some cases,
mold. Furan resin (Hüttenes- Albertus GmbH) was used as
the same BJ process is used to fabricate master pattern
a binder with sulfonic acid (Hüttenes-Albertus GmbH) as
which generally requires in mass production [10]. 3D
acid catalyst. The exothermic polycondensation caused by
printers are available which can print a sand mold directly
addition of an acid catalyst to a furan resin causes
from CAD files in a matter of hours. As a result, sand mold
hardening of the binder [12]. The curing mechanism is
and cores can be produced without the need of patterns
shown in Fig. 3.
(i.e., patternless molds). The surface finish and mechanical
The mold material used for 3D printed molds is the
properties achieved using printed sand molds are consistent
proprie- tary furan direct binding (FDB) sand developed by
with conventional sand castings [11].
Voxeljet, GmbH for a range of its printers as a mold material
The generalized steps of sand casting using 3D printed for making molds and cores for casting applications. The FDB
molds are shown in Fig. 2. Comparing the step chart in sand consists of silica sand (GS14, Voxeljet GmbH) with a
Fig. 1, the steps of pattern making and mold making can be
grain size 140 μm. The cold hardening furan resin is used as
replaced by 3D CAD data and 3D printing of molds and
a binder for binding the silica sand. The binder content was
core.
between 0.9–2.0 wt% [13].

Fig. 2 Generalized steps in 3D data

casting process using 3D printed
molds
3D
printing
of mold

Heat treatment
Assemblin
g
components

Cooling & Breaking Cleaning & Finishing

Metal
Pouring
preparation Inspection
into
mold
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10

Fig. 3 The furan acid-catalyzed no-bake curing mechanism [12]

The objective of the paper is to provide a comparative Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram of binder jetting
study of mold fabrication between traditional sand casting process used in the printer. Traditional inkjet print head is
process and new developed 3D printing process. This used to form one cross-sectional layer of the part, after a
paper is arranged as follows. In Section 2, the process of layer of sand is printed. Then, the powder bed lowers, and
3D printed mold and core will be presented due to its fresh sand is spread over the bed using a roller. In this
uniqueness, follow- ed by assembly of the mold manner, the process repeats until desired height is
components. In Section 3 results and discussion, the achieved. After the mold is printed, the excess sand is
weight, surface finish, design allowance, and fettling work removed using compressed air or vacuum.
of the two processes will be compared. Finally, the In this study, the parts of mold are cope and drag which
conclusion is given in Section 4. are printed individually along with the inside core. The
printed parts are shown in Fig. 6. The cope and drag are the
top and bottom parts of the mold assembly. In some cases,
the mold assembly is done in three parts; the middle part is
2 Experimental process for sand called cheek. The gating system is designed along with the
printing mold parts in Creo, as shown in Fig. 6c. The gating system
includes runners and risers along with down sprue. Core
2.1 3D printing of mold components prints are also provid- ed which forms a seat in the mold on
which the sand core rests during pouring of the mold. The
In this study, a binder jetting 3D printer (VX500, Voxeljet, molds also have prints on four corners to ease assembly.
Germany) was used to 3D print the mold and core of a pump
bowl. The multi-jet print head enables to achieve resolution 2.2 Assemble of 3D printed mold and core
of 600 dpi with a 80-μm layer thickness. Effective and
continu- ous operation through rugged design can be The assembly of mold is somewhat same as conventional
achieved using VX500 for high-quality components. The sand casting process. Figure 7 shows the assembly steps
unprinted sand par- ticle is recyclable which can be recycled for mold and core. First, the bottom part, i.e., drag, is kept
for next projects [14]. The 3D CAD model files (Fig. 4) are on ground and core is slowly mounted on it. Core prints
generated in Creo2.0. provided helps in self alignment with the drag. After this,
The Creo file is then converted into .stl format. Then .stl the center part of mold, i.e., cheek, is mounted on core.
file is given as input to the 3D printer. The furan direct Through bars are pro- vided for better alignment and
binding sand mentioned in Section 1.2 is spread over the support the mold assembly. At
bed and print-head sprays binder through jets. Layer by
layer printing of each component is carried out into the
printer.

Fig. 4: 3D CAD model of (a)

casting bowl, (b) cross-sectional
view of the bowl, and (c)
gatting system
10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–

(a) (b) (c)

 10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–

Fig. 5 Schematic diagram of

the binder jetting (BJ) process

last, the top most part, i.e., cope, is mounted on cheek The mold is allowed to cool after pouring of molten
which has pouring well on top of it. metal. Mold is broken using a hammer, and the final cast is
removed and send to fettling shop for removing runner and
2.3 Metal preparation and pouring risers.

Pump bowl is a part of vertical turbine pump which act as

a diffuser with vanes cast integrally. The impeller is 3 Results and discussion
coupled with the bowl through pump shaft bearings. The
pump bowl specifications are shown in Table 1. The 3.1 Weight of the components
molten cast iron (FG260) is prepared into a furnace and at
1400 °C is poured in the pouring well using preheated To compare the weight saving, a weighing scale was used
ladle. to measure the weights of components. The weight
reduction is

Fig. 6: 3D printed mold

components: a Drag, b cope,
c core, and d cheek
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10
Fig. 7 Assembly of 3D printed
mold components: a Core is
mounted on drag, b through
bars are placed in holes, c cheek
is placed over drag, and d cope
is mounted over cheek

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

achieved for all parts i.e. cope, cheek (middle part), drag,
and core. As shown in Table 2, the amount of sand used in
con- ventional sand casting process for making mold was
301 kg and in 3D printing process, it was 99 kg which is
also less, compared to conventional sand casting. The
amount of sand saved was 202 kg which results in 67.11%
saving. The core in case of conventional sand casting
requires three parts to make and then need to assemble it to
form the final core. The core for the pump bowl has 8
vanes, and each vane need to be made separately using
special core boxes. Then single vanes are glued to main
core and dome core. At last, the prints are glued for better
seating of core into cavity.
Making this core by conventional method requires
around
7.7 kg of sand, but on the other hand, the 3D printed core
which was made in single piece required 4.4 kg. The sand

Table 1 Pump bowl specifications

Casting weight 21.70 kg (CAD input)

Casting material grade: Cast iron (FG260)
No of vanes 8 nos
Vane thickness 4 mm
Overall size (diameter × height) 247 mm × 220 mm
Wall thickness 7 mm
 10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–
percentage saved by going with 3D printing process
saved 57.14% of sand.
Conventionally made pump bowl weighs 32 kg and the
pump bowl made using 3D printed mold and core
weighs
23.4 kg. The designed weight of the pump bowl is 21.70
kg which is calculated using total volume of metal poured
into cavity. The final weight of casted pump bowl using
3D printed mold and core is close to the calculated design
weight. So, using 3D printed mold and cores for
fabricating pump bowl is also effective in terms of final
cast weight of pump bowl, as it saves 8.6 kg of metal
which results in 26.88% of metal saving.

3.2 Casting surface finish bonding

strength

The fabricated pump bowls using the two processes are

shown in Fig. 8, and the side views are given in Fig. 9.
According to ISO standard, the approximate values of
surface roughness are from N1 to N12 and tolerance on
dimensions typically obtained with different manufacturing
processes as available in Ref [5]. The desired surface
roughness for this pump bowl is N9 con- sidering hydraulic
efficiency and application where the vertical turbines pump
will be installed. Phase II SRG 4000 surface roughness
tester was used to measure the surface roughness of the
pump bowl. Sand particle size and distribution plays a vital
role in good surface finish. The better surface finish is
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10

Table 2 Weight comparison for conventional sand casting mold and 3D printed mold

Mold
Mold component Sand used in conventional Sand used in 3D printing (kg) Sand saving (kg) Weight saving percentage (%)
sand casting (kg)
Cope 80 34 46 57.5
Cheek 113 40 73 64.6
Drag 108 25 83 76.85
Total 301 99 202 67.11
Core
Core component Sand used in conventional Sand used in 3D printing (kg) Sand saving (kg) Weight saving percentage (%) (kg)
sand casting (kg)
Main core 2.8 3.3 4.4 57.14
Print core 0.2
Dome core 4.7
Total 7.7 3.3 4.4 57.14
Cast pump bowl
Usage of metal Casting weight (kg) Casting weight (kg) Metal saving (kg) Weight saving percentage (%) (kg)
32 23.4 8.6 26.88

produced due to fine grain size of sand but on the other In terms of mechanical strength, in conventional sand
hand, it reduces the permeability of the sand molds to gases cast- ing, we need to mix the sand and chemical binders in
[15]. Previous tests showed that molds produced using a mixer and then they are filled into the wooden mold box
binder jetting process produces much more amount of gases manually. The chemical reaction will bind the sand
during casting process [16]. The surface roughness for the particles at room temperature. The bonding strength will be
pump bowl casted using 3D printed mold and core is better different at different height of mold box. In contrast, in
compared to conven- tionally casted pump bowl. As the sand case of 3D printing tech- nology, binders are sprayed on
used for both the pro- cesses is the same, still we get better every layer. This will result in good bonding strength
surface finish for 3D printed pump bowl compared to between sand particles. The bonding nature helps in
conventional sand casting. The average roughness of 3D increasing mechanical strength of particles and along with
printed pump bowl surface is ~ 200 μm, in the same order the strength, it also overcomes some problems in
particle size. In comparison, the roughness of conventional conventional sand casting like porosity and leads to better
one is ~ 500 μm. surface finish as shown in Fig. 9.
As shown in Figs. 8a and 9a, for the 3D printed mold,
there are four bumps on four side which are the called core 3.3 Design allowance
print for self alignment. When the core are assembled over
the drag, self alignment of the core prints is required. They Allowances are usually made in the core, mold, and pattern
are removed after by post machining process. in order to compensate the dimensional changes that will
happen

Fig. 8 Side view of the

fabricated pump bowl using (a)
3D printed mold, and (b)
conventional sand casting mold
10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–
(a) (b)
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10
Fig. 9 Top view of the
fabricated pump bowl using (a)
3D printed mold, and (b)
conventional sand casting mold

during any step of the sand casting process [17]. The or rinsing away, or in some cases by means of gas cutters,
various types of allowances can be summarized by the saws, and
shrinkage al- lowances, the draft allowances, the shakeout
allowances, the finishing or machining allowances, and the
distortion allow- ances. When metal cools down at room
temperature, metal contraction is caused. To compensate
the metal contraction, usually, the pattern is made
oversized, which increases the size of cavity made by
pattern. As metal contraction occurs in every direction, the
oversize allowance should be apply in each direction and
depends on shape and size of the casting. As mentioned in
Section 3.2, the surface roughness achieved for sand
casting was ~ 500 μm, and due to some surface im-
purities, there are some surface variations. So, in order to
achieve better surface, finish machining is required to be
done, which can be compensated by providing machining
allow- ances. The taper angle is provided on the pattern
which is also called as draft angle, to reduce the damage to
the edges while removing the pattern. This pattern
allowance is known as draft allowance. As taper angle
made by the pattern creates extra space, the required metal
to pour also increases, which indi- rectly increases total
weight of part cast.
As pattern making is eliminated in casting using 3D
printed molds, the draft allowance will get eliminate. In
case of 3D printing of sand, as the machine prints accord-
ing to the CAD data provided, the possibility of getting
good dimensional accuracy is more. So, we can reduce
the machining and finishing allowances. The only allow-
ance which will contribute in total weight is shrinkage
allowance. As pattern allowances are eliminated and ma-
chining allowances are reduced, it will definitely lead to
total weight reduction of the final part.

3.4 Fettling work

Fettling work includes removal of runners, risers, and

feeder head after the breaking out of mold by knocking off
 10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–
abrasive wheels. Fettling also involves dressing for the
remov- al of excess metal and residual adhering sand.
Some residuals of feeder heads and in-gates like flash,
pads, and stumps are also dressed during fettling. The
fettling operation is carried out with taking care of shape,
surface finish, and dimensions of final cast with conform
to design requirements [2].
For the casted pump bowl, the hydraulic shape of vane
tip achieved in conventional sand casting process was
having extra metal on its vane tip because of the
allowances given to it by considering casting design and
metal characteristics. This extra metal was removed by
fettling operation carried out by grinders which creates
uneven surfaces causing loss of hydraulic accuracy. But,
in case of sand printing process, we can keep close
tolerances and less machining allowances. The fettling
work required in sand printing is only removal of runner,
risers, and feeders. As we can achieve dimensional
accuracy in sand printing, the last stage in fettling work,
i.e., removal of excess metal, is reduced. The vane tip of
pump bowl which we get in sand printing process is as
per hydraulic design and requires less grinding which
results in improved hydraulic accuracy.

3.5 Comparison of two casting processes

There are several major limitations in conventional sand

cast- ing process. Pattern, cores, and mold making,
therefore, are the life blood of the foundry business.
Conventional sand casting starts with developing pattern
for the part, as every new casting requires new pattern to
make, so without pattern, we cannot move further. Final
design of the part is totally dependent on pattern design,
so, any dimensional inaccuracy will affect final
dimensions. On the other hand, casting using additive
manufacturing does not require any pattern. A mold with
inbuilt gating system also eliminates manual gating which
requires skilled labor in conventional sand casting. In
conventional sand casting process, it is not possible to get
casting as per the design data, i.e., the dimensions are
always
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10

Table 3 Comparison summary of

two processes Process requirements Conventional sand casting process 3D printing
process
3D CAD data No Yes
Pattern/core box required Yes No
Gating system—CAD data No Yes
Results depend on Pattern equipment 3D CAD data
Mold and core making Manual Automation
Core sand material No-bake Furan sand
Mold sand material No-bake Furan sand
Repeatability Depends on pattern condition Consistent
Core-making time (min) 120 Not required
Mold-making time (min) 120 30
Specific molding box Yes No
Core and mold finish Less Fine
Core and mold painting Yes Yes
Skill manpower Yes Not required
Dependency on manpower Yes No
Pattern-making time (month) 3 Not required
Equipment, process and materials costs Low High
Core weight (kg) 7.7 3.3
Mold weight (kg) 301 99
Casting weight (design: 22.5 kg) 34 23
Fettling time (min) 60 15

greater in some proportion. But, on the other hand, the additive manufacturing technology in the production of
casted pump bowl using 3D printed molds was as per mold and core for pump bowl. These advantages include
design data. Table 3 shows the comparison summary of substantial cost and
casted pump bowl using conventional sand casting and
sand printing process. Comparison is done considering
process requirements, time, cost, and weight for both the
processes. This comparison sum- mary shows that the
pump bowl casted using 3D printed molds is better over
conventional sand casted pump bowl.
It is noted that the cost and lead-time benefits of 3D
printed sand casting mold are affected by the production
volume. 3D printed sand casting molds should be more
effective if only one or a small quantity of molds is
needed. However, if a relatively larger quantity of molds
are made, the traditional tooling based method may be
more favorable.
Additionally, it is important to be aware of the costs of
3D printer and operation. Currently, the cost of the 3D
printer is about $250,000. The hourly rate in running the
3D printer and material supplies also need to be
considered.

4 Conclusions

In this study, the two mold casting processes, conventional

sand casting process and sand casting using 3D printed
molds and core, are systematically compared. The results
of this study indicate significant advantages in employing
 10 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037–
lead-time savings with minimal material wastage. The
major conclusions are summarized below.

1. 3D printing process is more effective than

conventional sand casting process, in terms of weight
saving of sand, along with metal used, design
allowances, and fettling work, when a small quantity
of molds is required. The traditional tooling based
method may be more favorable when a relatively
larger quantity of molds are made. Additionally,
current costs of the 3D printer and operation are
higher than the conventional approach.
2. The 3D printed mold’s surface quality achieved in
this study is better than the conventional one, along
with im- proved dimensional accuracy. This is due to
3D printed sand molds and core having close
tolerance, which elim- inates the pattern-making
operation in the conventional sand casting.

Funding information JZ acknowledges the financial support

provided by Walmart Foundation (project title: Optimal Plastic
Injection Molding Tooling Design and Production through
Advanced Additive Manufacturing); Jin Sung Precision Metal
Co., Ltd., Republic of Korea (project title: Development of ceramic
core for fabricating 450 mm im- peller with flow thickness of 4 mm
based on 3D printing technology, and its commercialization
technology); and the Korea Institute of Energy Technology
Evaluation and Planning (KETEP), with the financial re- source
from the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE),
Republic of Korea (No. 20172020108530).
 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2018) 97:1037– 10

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to

9. Song JL et al (2007) Rapid prototyping manufacturing of silica
juris- dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
sand patterns based on selective laser sintering. J Mater Process
Technol 187–188:614–618
10. M.M. Akarte and B. Ravi (2010) RP/RT route selection for
casting pattern development All IndiaManufacturing Technology,
References Design and Research Conference: p. 8
11. Dean Snelling, et al. 2013 The effects of 3d printed molds
1. Banchhor R, Ganguly S (2014) Optimization in green sand on metal castings. Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium: p.
casting process for efficient, economical and quality casting. Int 827–845
J Adv Engg Tech/Vol V/Issue I/Jan-March 25:29 12. Holtzer M, Górny M, Dańko R (2015) Microstructure and
2. Beeley P (2001) Foundry Technology (Second Edition). 2 ed. proper- ties of ductile iron and compacted graphite iron
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, p 719 castings. 1 ed. In: SpringerBriefs in Materials. Springer
3. Campbell J (2003) Castings. 2. ed. Butterworth Heinemann, International Publishing XII, New York, p 158
Burlington 352p 13. Material data sheet for furan-direct-binding (FDB) sand molds.
4. Wang W, Stoll HW, Conley JG (2010) Rapid tooling guidelines 2016; Available from: http://www.voxeljet.com/materials/sand/
for sand casting. 1 ed. In: Mechanical Engineering Series. 14. Ederer, I. and R. Hochsmann, Rapid-prototyping method and
Springer US, New York XIV, 164 appa- ratus, U.S. Patent, Editor. 2005, VoXeljet Technology
5. Kalpakjian S, Schmid S (2008) Manufacturing processes for GmbH, Augsburg (DE): USA. p. 17
engi- neering materials. 5th ed. Pearson education, London 15. Nwaogu UC, Tiedje NS (2011) Foundry coating technology: a
1040pp re- view. Mater Sci Appl 2(08):1143–1160
6. Meisel, N.A., C.B. Williams, and A. Druschitz. Lightweight 16. Snelling, D. (2013) Mitigating gas defects in castings pro-
metal cellular structures via indirect 3D printing and casting duced from 3D printed molds. In 117th Metalcasting
In Proceedings of the International Solid Freeform Congress. Afsinc
Fabrication Symposium, pp. 162-176. 2012 17. Peters F et al (2008) Effect of mould expansion on pattern
7. Frank, M.C., et al. A hybrid rapid pattern manufacturing system allowances in sand casting of steel. Int J Cast Metal Res
for sand castings 20(5):275–287
8. Chua CK, Chou SM, Wong TS (1998) A study of the state-of-
the- art rapid prototyping technologies. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 14(2): 146–152