Comparative Advantages, Disadvantages and Applications for Various Casting Methods

Sand Casting

Advantages

Disadvantages  

Recommended Application

Least Expensive in small quantities (less than 100)

Ferrous and non - ferrous metals may be cast

Possible to cast very large parts.

• Least expensive tooling

Dimensional accuracy inferior to other processes, requires larger tolerances

Castings usually exceed calculated weight

Surface finish of ferrous castings usually exceeds 125 RMS

Use when strength/weight ratio permits

Tolerances, surface finish and low machining cost does not warrant a more expensive process

Permanent and Semi-permanent Mold Casting

Less expensive than Investment or Die Castings

Dimensional Tolerances closer than Sand Castings

Castings are dense and pressure tight

Only non-ferrous metals may be cast by this process

Less competitive with Sand Cast process when three or more sand cores are required

Higher tooling cost than Sand Cast

Use when process recommended for parts subjected to hydrostatic pressure

Ideal for parts having low profile, no cores and quantities in excess of 300

Plaster Cast

Smooth "As Cast" finish (25 RMS)

Closer dimensional tolerance than Sand Cast

• Intricate shapes and fine details including thinner "As Cast" walls are possible

• Large parts cost less to cast than by Investment process

More costly than Sand or Permanent Mold-Casting

Limited number of sources

Requires minimum of 1 deg. draft

Use when parts require smooth "As Cast" surface finish and closer tolerances than possible with Sand or Permanent Mold Processes

Investment Cast

Close dimensional tolerance

Complex shape, fine detail, intricate core sections and thin walls are possible

Ferrous and non-ferrous metals may be cast

As-Cast" finish (64 - 125 RMS)

Costs are higher than Sand, Permanent Mold or Plaster process Castings

Use when Complexity precludes use of Sand or Permanent Mold Castings

The process cost is justified through savings in machining or brazing

Weight savings justifies increased cost

Die Casting

Good dimensional tolerances are possible

Excellent part-part dimensional consistency

Parts require a minimal post machining

Economical only in very large quantities due to high tool cost

Not recommended for hydrostatic pressure applications

For Castings where penetrant (die) or radiographic inspection are not required.

Difficult to guarantee minimum mechanical properties

Use when quantity of parts justifies the high tooling cost

Parts are not structural and are subjected to hydrostatic pressure