General Pros and Cons of Laser, Plasma, and Water Cutting

From our friends at KAAST Germany:

Procedure

Benefits

Disadvantages

Oxy

Only for structural steel

Cutting of all electric conductive materials
Without alternative in cutting of high-alloy steels and Aluminum materials in middle and thicker material
Excellent suitability of thin and middle steel (up to 30 mm) in relation on costs/benefits ratio
Cutting of high-strength steel with low heat-impact
One and more burner operation depending on lot-size and configuration
High cutting speed (compared up to 10 x faster than Autogen)
High Quality of cutting edge in sector of middle and thicker Sheet field with vortex gas-technology with industrial gases
good automation possibilities

Use up to 160mm (180mm) material thickness with dry cutting and 120mm in Underwater-cutting.
Depending the plasma source wider kerfs

High accuracy and cutting speed in thin and middle sheet area
Square and high-quality cutting edge without grid
Very good automation
Extremely low heat impact zone
Very close kerf (0,2 – 0,4mm)
extreme high Cuttings-speed in thin sheet area
Cuttings of very small holes, small webs
Production of complex and filigree component contours
Metallic, non-metallic and Composites
ts (high gas consumption)
Limited Sheet thickness range
Depending the selection of Laser source
Exactly Distance Direction to the Workpiece-surface necessary
Interference of the beam stability at the cutting of construction steel with normally Si- and P-Conant

High investment and operation costs (high gas consumption)
Limited Sheet thickness range
Depending the selection of Laser source
Exactly distance leveling to the workpiece-surface necessary
Interference of the beam stability at the cutting of steel with normaly Si- and P-conant
Reduction of the process stability at cutting mirroring material surface

Cutting of metallic, non-metallic and composites
big material- and thickness range
no metallurgical changes at the intersection
; no heat impact
Small kerfs, very good dimensional stability of the workpieces
Excellent cutting-quality at thin and middle material thickness
Good possibilities of process automation
Depending on lot size use of several cutting heads possible
Bridging of air-chinks
High Investment and production costs (compared to Plasma: Operating costs 1:5 to 1:20 depending on Material and Thickness)
Relative small number of cutting speeds on “hard” Materials
A loud and wet procedure

High investment and production costs (compared to Plasma: Operating costs 1:5 to 1:20 depending on material and thickness)
Relative low cutting speeds on special materials
A noisy and wet cutting technology

This has been republished from and with permission of, www.KAAST-CNC.com. Click here to see the original article, Laser vs Plasma vs Water Cutting.