Request A Callback

Enter your details below and one of our Customer Support Team members will be in touch as soon as is possible.

Please check your inbox for an automated response after submitting this form.
Improving Productivity

Improving productivity in heavy stock removal application

with the optimum tool choice.

Improving Productivity in heavy stock removal application with the optimum tool choice

A major global heavy industry manufacturer with high volume routine heavy stock removal processes wanted to address the efficiency of their entire process. Frequent and significant processes, with inconsistent repeatability of performance included; 

  • Rough grinding of joints of two weld sections 
  • Grinding corners of welded joints 
  • Removing weld undercuts 
  • Cutting out incompatible joints 
  • Grinding the face and ridge 
  • Preparation of the weld 
  • Cutting out details incorrectly mounted in hard to reach places 

ATA undertook an audit of the customers entire process, from tool and consumable selection to human behaviour, and identified the following issues which were impacting the increasing monthly consumables costs for the manufacturer:

  • Lack of training, especially of new employees in processes 
  • Incorrect bur selection for a given operation 
  • Short life of previously used cutters due to their inferior quality 

Following the evaluation, representative test solutions were proposed by ATA, and tests were conducted using two alternative/specific bur geometries, in both laboratory and production environments. The tests compared Steel Cut and Cut 5 for the customer’s application, each with their unique characteristics which lent themselves to the customer’s process needs.

Steel Cut on the customer's specific application

  • Very aggressive at the beginning of the work 
  • Engaged the work-piece and removed stock consistently 
  • The cutting edge became dull during use 
  • There were no signs of tool damage, but overheating was visible on the shank 


Cut 5 results on the application 

  • Geometry engaged with the work-piece and removed stock consistently 
  • The bur did not dig into the work-piece 
  • One full cut was completed with the bur, and continued into a second cut 
  • The cutter remained sharp for the full duration of the test, and only at the end of the second cut-off did the cutting edge begin to lose its sharpness 


After conducting tests with a selection of sizes, shapes and geometries, and comparing laboratory results with production environment results, the customer was able to make a more informed decision, which resulted in much higher productivity and indirect cost savings. 

Ultimately, for the customer's particular application, Cut 5, with its negative cut geometry and more aggressive stock removal, coupled with operator training, proved to be the optimum solution. The customer was extremely grateful to ATA’s expert engineering assessments and recommendations which steered this decision. 


    For additional information, please fill in the required fields below.

    Fields marked with * are required.
    Please check your inbox for an automated response after submitting this form.
    • Improved Productivity
    • For Heavy Industry
    • Expert Engineering Assessments