buletin - aplindoaplindo.web.id/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/buletin-aplindo-52-final.pdf · antar...
TRANSCRIPT
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
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
5
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
6
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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. (*)
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
8
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
9
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
10
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
11
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
12
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
24
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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.
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
No. Bulan Penjualan (Unit)
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
33
b. Penjualan sepeda motor 2012-2017 di ASEAN
No. Bulan Penjualan (Unit)
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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
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
BULETIN - APLINDO No.52/2017
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]