gciriani
Materials
- May 5, 2004
- 52
I am evaluating the possibility of utilizing investment casting when more cost effective. My parts are AISI 316L for luxury accessories (watchbands) and are typically machined from profiles. Typical dimensions are 20x8x4 mm, with tolerances +/- 0.05 mm, and mirror-polish finish. I know this is beyond the capabilities of Investment Casting, but still think there is some merit for complex parts for which tolerances can be relaxed a bit, and where some final machining can be done on the crucial details. We make at present some parts that take 2-3 minutes each to be manufactured by our CNC machine.
Some parts that are less tolerance demanding we already produce by stamping. Few times in the past we have utilized MIM, but this process has an intrinsic porosity that makes it difficult to reach our mirror-polish finish. Investment casting should prove a much better candidate for mirror-polish finish, and from a chart found at it would seem less expensive than MIM. Our production orders consist of about 20,000 to 100,000 parts.
In a previous occasion we have requested quotes for investment casting, with traditional pour. However, it would seem that counter-gravity, suction pour in air or vacuum, CLA or CLV, should have definite advantages. Does any one have additional indications on cost benefits of casting, and ball-park figures for percentage savings with CLA and CLV as compared to traditional casting?
I realize that this is a complex question, and I will post it both in the “Metal and Metallurgy engineering Forum” and “Steel Uses & Processes engineering Forum”.
Some parts that are less tolerance demanding we already produce by stamping. Few times in the past we have utilized MIM, but this process has an intrinsic porosity that makes it difficult to reach our mirror-polish finish. Investment casting should prove a much better candidate for mirror-polish finish, and from a chart found at it would seem less expensive than MIM. Our production orders consist of about 20,000 to 100,000 parts.
In a previous occasion we have requested quotes for investment casting, with traditional pour. However, it would seem that counter-gravity, suction pour in air or vacuum, CLA or CLV, should have definite advantages. Does any one have additional indications on cost benefits of casting, and ball-park figures for percentage savings with CLA and CLV as compared to traditional casting?
I realize that this is a complex question, and I will post it both in the “Metal and Metallurgy engineering Forum” and “Steel Uses & Processes engineering Forum”.