THE APPLICATION ANALYSIS

Critical dimensions, desired finish quality and current cycle times form the base line in which the Waterjet Application Analysis will initially be evaluated against.

Critical Specifications Example: 

• Cut rows of 1/8” square holes (at the top) spaced 0.313” apart on center. Use the 0.313” on center spacing from row to row.
• Cut rows of 1/8” X 1” slots with the slots spaced 0.313” on center with the 1” length parallel.
• Maintain squareness through cut
• Cut Feature Tolerance

CUT FEATURE TOLERANCE

In addition to meeting the Critical Specifications detailed in step one, a review of additional production system objectives is performed.

Production Objectives Example

• Reduce cycle time from current method
• Eliminate secondary grind operation
• Improve material yields
• Reduce change over time

The material being cut impacts all of the programming parameters including water pressure, feed rates, taper control, abrasive usage, etc.  Enough material needs to be supplied in order to perform the required number of tests to develop optimum cut parameters.

Material Type Example

• Mild Steel (A36, 1008 or 1018), Max thickness .625”
• Aluminum 1/8” thick
• Gray Powder Coated Ferrous Material, 12” X 4” X .035” thick
• Copper Alloy C18000
• Metallic Gasket Material
• 1.170” Laminate Glass

Multiple test cuts are performed across a range of operating parameters in order to optimize the cutting results and dial in the programming parameters.  Each test cut is fully evaluated against the defined critical specifications and production objectives to confirm achievement.

Waterjet Cut Parameters Example

• Pump Pressure (piercing and cuts)
• Orifice/Nozzle Combination
• Abrasive Type and Flow Rate
• Feed Rates: Lead in, Straight Cuts, Bends

ABRASIVE CUT PARAMETERS

A Final Engineering Analysis Report is presented and reviewed with you to include details on each test cut performed and the results relative to the stated Production Objective.

Test Report Content Example

Test Report Content

• Review of all Test Cut Parts
• Optimized Cut Parameters
• IGEMS Program Inputs
• Cut Time/Cycle Time
• Accuracy of Dimensions
• Finish Qualities

Sample Observations

Dimensionally all critical specifications defined were met.  Observed finish quality is better than required. The slugs were easily removed with a light tap of a ballpeen hammer eliminating the need to use tabs and removal tools. The top bevel is consistent; the bottom bevel varies based on depth of cut but within specifications.

The Waterjet Test Cut Results Review will provide a template to evaluate waterjet cutting as the preferred processing solution for your unique products.

So, should we get started?