The right system starts with the component, not the machine

Anyone purchasing a waterjet cutting system should first define the recurring components and process requirements. The material, maximum material thickness, component dimensions, batch sizes, desired cut quality, and planned annual utilization determine the optimal machine configuration. Only then should decisions be made regarding the work surface, cutting head, pump system, automation, and software.

1. Which materials should be processed on a regular basis?

The greatest strength of waterjet cutting is the wide range of materials it can process. Metals, plastics, composites, stone, glass, and other materials can be cut without using traditional thermal cutting processes. However, when making an investment decision, it is crucial to determine which materials will account for the largest share of future capacity utilization. A company that primarily cuts 2D contours from sheet metal has different requirements than a user dealing with chamfers, weld preparation, or three-dimensional geometries.

2. 2D, cutting angle error compensation, or 5-axis?

For simple contours, a 2D cutting head is sufficient in many applications. If the requirements for a vertical cut edge increase, automatic cut angle error compensation may be beneficial. If chamfers, weld preparation, or complex spatial cuts are required, a 5-axis solution should be considered. For this purpose, STM offers 2D cutting heads, the TAC 12° for automatic angle error compensation, as well as 3D cutting heads with 5-axis kinematics and swivel ranges of up to 68°.

Requirement	2D	TAC	5-axis
Simple Contours	very good	very good	possible
High requirements for vertical cut edges	depending on the material and quality	very good	very good
Chamfering / Weld Preparation	not possible	limited	very good
Complex 3D geometry	no	no	yes

3. What kind of work surface makes sense?

The work surface should be based on actual raw material sizes and not solely on the largest conceivable custom part. Machines that are too large consume space and capital, while machines that are too small result in unnecessary re-spanning or logistical expenses. Loading considerations are also relevant: Will heavy panels be loaded using a crane? Does the machine need to be accessible from multiple sides? Are there any restrictions on hall height or material flow?

4. One or more cutting heads?

For recurring parts and suitable geometries, parallel machining can significantly increase productivity. However, the key factor is not the number of possible heads, but whether your specific range of parts regularly allows for parallel machining. A multi-head system should therefore be evaluated based on actual orders and cycle times.

5. Correctly Size the Pump Capacity and Cutting Pressure

Higher pressure is not automatically the most cost-effective solution. Factors affecting the design include nozzle size, flow rate, material, material thickness, required cut quality, desired speed, energy consumption, and wear. A well-thought-out configuration therefore considers the entire system and the cost per component, not just a maximum pressure value.

6. Software Is Part of Productivity

The machine is only cost-effective if job planning, programming, and cost estimation are also efficient. Relevant functions include CAD import, nesting, automatic cutting parameters, cost and time estimation, and the programming of 5-axis operations. STM SmartCut supports common drawing and 3D formats and can calculate the cutting time and costs for a job.

7. Scalability reduces investment risk

It makes sense, especially for medium-sized manufacturing companies, not to purchase every potential future option right from the start. A modular system makes it possible to initially configure the machine for the current range of parts and then expand it as requirements change. STM follows this principle with a modular system that spans multiple machine series.

8. Verify Cost-Effectiveness Using Real Components

The most reliable investment analysis is based on actual data. To this end, cutting time, abrasive consumption, energy and wear-and-tear costs, as well as setup and non-productive times, should be calculated for typical jobs. Only on this basis can one evaluate how in-house production compares to contract manufacturing or alternative cutting methods.