Process Overview | Creates a wax pattern, coats it in ceramic, melts out the wax, and pours molten metal into the cavity. | Uses a foam pattern embedded in sand. When metal is poured, the foam vaporizes, leaving the casting. |
Applicable Standards | ASTM A356, ASTM E931, ISO 8062-3, and DIN EN 12890 for process quality and tolerances. | ASTM A995, ISO 8502, ISO 8062-3, and VDG P690 for process quality, tolerances, and materials. |
Tolerances | ±0.1 mm to ±0.5 mm depending on the part size and complexity. Typical tolerance grades: CT4 to CT6 (ISO 8062-3). | ±0.3 mm to ±1.0 mm based on part dimensions. Tolerance grades: CT8 to CT12 (ISO 8062-3). |
Surface Finish | 1.6-3.2 µm Ra (fine surface finish with minimal post-processing). | 6.3-12.5 µm Ra (requires secondary operations for fine finish). |
Material Grades | – Ferrous: Stainless steel (e.g., 304, 316), carbon steel (e.g., AISI 1018, AISI 1045). – Non-Ferrous: Aluminum alloys (e.g., A356), brass, bronze. | – Ferrous: Gray iron (EN-GJL-250), ductile iron (EN-GJS-400-15, EN-GJS-500-7). – Non-Ferrous: Aluminum alloys (e.g., AlSi12), magnesium alloys. |
Size & Dimension Limits | Small to medium-sized parts with dimensions typically ranging from a few millimeters to 1 meter. Maximum weight: up to 500 kg. | Suitable for medium to large castings. Maximum part size can reach 2 meters or more. Maximum weight: up to 5000 kg. |
Wall Thickness | Capable of producing parts with wall thickness as low as 0.5 mm. | Minimum wall thickness: 2-3 mm due to process constraints. |
Dimensional Accuracy | High accuracy, typically within ±0.1% of part dimensions. | Moderate accuracy, typically within ±0.3% of part dimensions. |
Mechanical Properties | – High tensile strength and good impact resistance, depending on alloy choice. – Can produce parts with complex stress patterns due to uniform grain structure. | – Suitable for parts with lower tensile strength and ductility. – Mechanical properties are more dependent on mold conditions and sand compaction. |
Complexity & Geometry | Capable of producing highly complex geometries with thin walls, undercuts, and intricate details. | Good for moderate complexity; limited capability for intricate designs due to mold constraints. |
Tooling Costs | High initial tooling cost for wax and ceramic molds; more economical for high-volume production. | Lower initial tooling cost for foam patterns and sand molds; more suitable for small to medium production volumes. |
Production Volume Suitability | Ideal for medium to high-volume production runs. Economical for large batches. | Suitable for small to medium production runs. Preferred for prototype and medium series production. |
Lead Time | Longer lead time due to mold preparation and multi-step process. Typically 4-8 weeks depending on part complexity. | Shorter lead time due to simplified tooling and fewer steps. Typically 2-4 weeks. |
Typical Applications | Aerospace turbine blades, medical implants, automotive turbocharger wheels, and complex machinery components. | Automotive engine blocks, pump housings, gear cases, and large, less complex structural parts. |
Post-Processing Requirements | Minimal post-processing required. Parts are usually ready for use or only require minor machining. | Requires secondary operations like grinding, machining, and heat treatment for surface finish and dimensional accuracy. |
Environmental Considerations | Ceramic molds and wax patterns have higher waste and energy consumption, but the process offers higher precision. | Sand molds are recyclable, and the process generates less waste, making it more environmentally friendly. |
Overall Cost | Higher overall cost due to complex molds and tooling. Cost-effective for high precision and complex parts. | Lower overall cost due to simplified patterns and mold production. More economical for larger parts and low to medium complexity. |