Why plasma?
Comparison of plasma, oxyfuel and laser |
Thick |
Laser
Laser provides excellent cut quality and productivity
on material less than 6 mm. Laser technology
has high capital equipment, running and maintenance
costs, therefore a high level of business volume
is required to pay back the cost of the equipment.
Plasma
Plasma provides an optimal mix of cut quality,
productivity and operating cost for mild steel,
stainless and aluminum across a wide range of
thicknesses at a competitive capital equipment
price. |
38 mm
(1 1/2") |
|
Material
thickness |
| |
|
| |
Low volume |
|
Business volume |
|
High volume |
Plasma provides the optimal mix of
cut quality, productivity and operating cost
|
Plasma advantages
vs. oxyfuel
Better cut quality
Greater material flexibilty
Significantly higher productivity
Signifcantly lower cost per length of cut
Plasma advantages
vs. laser
Significantly higher productivity
Increases flexibility to cut a wide range of material
thicknesses and types
Significantly lower capital, operating and maintenance
costs
|
| |
Oxyfuel |
Plasma |
Laser |
 |
Oxyfuel
Oxyfuel is limited to mild steel and is not
effective on
stainless steel or aluminum.
Cut quality |
Good angularity Large
heat-affected zone Dross
levels require rework Not effective on stainless steel or aluminum |
Excellent angularity
Small heat-affected zone
Virtually dross-free
Good to excellent fine-feature
cutting. |
Excellent angularity
Small heat-affected zone
Virtually dross-free
Good to excellent fine-feature cutting with narrowest kerf |
 |
| Productivity |
Slow cutting speeds
Pre-heat time increases pierce
times |
Very fast cutting speeds for all
thicknesses
Very fast pierce times
Quick-disconnect torches maximize
productivity |
Very fast on thin material (less
than 6 mm-1/4") and slower on thicker material
Long pierce times on thick material |
 |
| Operating cost |
Poor productivity
and required rework drive cost per part higher
than plasma. |
Long consumable life, good productivity and excellent cut quality drive the cost per part lower than other technologies. |
High costs per part due to power requirements, gas consumption, high maintenance costs and relatively
low cut speeds on thick material. |
 |
| Maintenance |
Simple maintenance
requirements can often be performed by in-house maintenance
groups. |
Moderate maintenance requirements: many components are servicable by in-house maintenance groups. |
Complex maintenance tasks require specialized technicians. |
|
|