CS-04: Investment Casting for Agro Farm Machinery — Amsol Industries

Investment casting cost optimisation visual

35%

Below Target Cost

4140

Grade Optimised

✓

All Specs Met

Case Studies›Agriculture›CS-04

AgricultureInvestment Casting35% Below Target Cost

Investment Casting for Agro Farm Machinery — 35% Below Target Cost

A customer in the agro farm machinery industry needed investment-cast components with high dimensional accuracy, corrosion resistance, and mechanical strength. Their existing suppliers could not meet the target price. Amsol's DFM review found exactly where the cost was hiding — and eliminated it.

Key Outcome

Engineering-led DFM and process optimisation delivered investment castings 35% below the customer's expected cost — with every specification met on first article.

Industry: Agriculture & Machinery

Process: Investment (Lost Wax) Casting

The Situation

Genuine Investment Casting Requirement — But the Cost Was Unachievable With Existing Suppliers

Unlike CS-03 (where shell mould was the better process), these components genuinely required investment casting. The geometry was complex, the tolerances were tight, and the surface finish and corrosion resistance requirements were real. The challenge was not process selection — it was cost.

The customer's target price was aggressive. Their existing supplier quotes came in significantly over target. They came to Amsol asking one question: can you meet this price without compromising the specification?

The Problem

Investment casting at target price — every supplier said it was impossible.

✕Existing suppliers quoting 35% over the customer's budget — programme stalled

✕Original drawings carried excess machining stock — adding material and cycle time cost

✕Gating system not optimised — poor metal yield increasing material cost per casting

✕Heat treatment specified at individual part level — inefficient furnace utilisation

✕Material grade over-specified for the actual operating environment

Amsol's Engineering Approach

Target price is not a negotiating position. It is an engineering problem.

✓Material selection: 4140 alloy steel and specific SS grades matched to actual operating environment

✓DFM on machining allowances: reduced to minimum required — lower material cost and shorter cycle

✓Gating redesign: improved metal yield — more metal in the casting, less in the scrap bin

✓Heat treatment batch standardisation: single cycle per batch versus individual treatment

✓First article validation: all dimensional, surface finish, and mechanical properties confirmed

The Engineering Decisions

Six Engineering Decisions That Made the Target Price Possible

The cost reduction was not a discount. It was the result of six specific engineering decisions, each of which removed unnecessary cost without removing any required specification.

Material Right-Sizing

4140 alloy steel and specific SS grades matched to the actual load, corrosion, and temperature environment. Not overspecified, not underspecified — exactly what the application required.

Machining Allowance DFM

Original drawings carried excess stock. Amsol reduced allowances to the minimum required for each finish cut — less material poured, less machining time per part.

Gating System Redesign

New gating and riser design increased metal yield — more molten metal ends up in the component instead of the gating system. Direct reduction in material cost per casting.

Heat Treatment Standardisation

Batch heat treatment instead of individual part cycles — same furnace load, significantly lower energy and handling cost per component.

Wax Tooling Optimisation

Tooling designed for maximum pattern yield per shot — reducing tooling cycle time and wax material consumption per component.

First Article Validation

Prototypes validated for dimensional accuracy, surface finish, and mechanical properties on first article — zero rework, zero repeat tooling cost, programme launched on time.

Target price is not a negotiating position. It is an engineering problem. Amsol's answer to 'can you meet this price?' is always the same: let us review the drawing first, then tell you where the cost is and where it does not need to be.

Amsol Engineering Team · Process Optimisation Review

The Results

What the Engineering Review Delivered

Six engineering decisions, one outcome: investment castings that met every specification, delivered on schedule, at 35% below the customer's expected cost.

35%

Below Target Cost

Customer's expected cost versus Amsol's optimised process — without compromising any specification

✓ FA

First Article Passed

All dimensional, surface finish, and mechanical property requirements met on first article — zero rework

4140

Grade Optimised

Material right-sized to the actual operating environment — not overspecified for the application

Long-term

Supply Established

Series production programme established — consistent quality across all batches delivered to date

Similar Challenge?

Investment Casting Component Over Budget?

If your investment casting quotes are coming in over your target price — Amsol's engineers can review the drawing and identify where the cost is hiding. DFM feedback, material review, and indicative optimised pricing within 24 hours. No commitment required.

Share Your Drawing →← Back to All Case Studies

Next Case Study

CS-05 · Aerospace · Lens Mounting System — Israel. ±0.005mm.

Read CS-05 →