Views: 0 Author: Site Editor Publish Time: 2025-09-12 Origin: Site
Traditiona die casting and squeeze die casting are two distinct processes. Although both involve molds and pressure, their principles, purposes, and product characteristics are fundamentally different.
Traditional die casting: High-pressure and high-speed filling of the cavity, emphasizing efficiency and complex shapes, but it is prone to porosity inside.
Squeeze die casting: Low-speed stable filling and solidification under high pressure, emphasizing high quality and density, and heat-treatable.
I. Comparison of Core Principles and Purposes
Features | Die Casting | Squeeze Casting |
Core Principles | Molten metal is injected into the mold cavity at an extremely high speed (30-80 m/s) under high pressure (usually several hundred Bar). | The molten metal is filled smoothly into the cavity at a relatively low injection speed, and then an extremely high static pressure (500-1500 bar or higher) is applied to the molten metal to solidify it under pressure. |
Main Purposes | Form complex thin-walled parts with high efficiency and high precision, and pursue production efficiency. | Obtain extremely dense metallographic structure, eliminate internal defects, and produce high-performance, heat-treatable castings. |
Metal Filling Method | Turbulent filling. High-speed molten metal rushes into the mold cavity like waves, easily enrolling air and oxide scale. | Laminar flow filling. Low-speed and smooth advancement, similar to an extruction, avoids turbulence and air entrapment. |
II. Comparison of Process Characteristics, Advantages and Limitations
Features | Die Casting | Squeeze Casting |
Advantages | 1. Extremely high production efficiency and short cycle. 2. It can produce parts with extremely complex shapes and extremely thin wall thicknesses (minimum 0.5mm). | 1.The density of the casting is close to that of the forging, and there are no internal pores or shrinkage cavities. 2. It has excellent mechanical properties and can be further strengthened through heat treatment (T6). |
Limitations | 1.There are pores inside, and it is usually not weldable or heat-treated (the expansion of pores during heat treatment will cause surface bubbling). 2. The mold cost is high and it is only suitable for mass production. 3. It is sensitive to the wall thickness of parts, and shrinkage porosity is prone to occur in thick and large areas. | 1. The production efficiency is relatively low and the cycle is longer than that of traditional die-casting. 2. Not good at manufacturing very complex and ultra-thin-walled parts. 3. The rigidity and strength requirements for equipment and molds are extremely high (they need to withstand huge pressure), and the investment is even greater. |
III. Comparison of Part Performance and Microstructure
Features | Die Casting | Squeeze Casting |
Internal Quality | Due to high-speed turbulent filling, there are entrained-air pores inside, and the structure is not dense. | It solidifies under extremely high static pressure, without pores or shrinkage porosity, and has an extremely dense structure. |
Mechanical Property | The strength is acceptable, but the elongation and fatigue strength are relatively low due to the presence of pores. | The strength, elongation, toughness and fatigue strength are all much higher than those of traditional die-castings, and their performance can be comparable to that of forgings. |
Heat Treatability | Solution treatment (T6) is not allowed; only low-temperature aging (T5) is permitted. | It can undergo complete T6 heat treatment, which greatly enhances its mechanical properties. |
Weldability | Poor quality. During welding, internal pores will overflow, resulting in poor weld quality. | Excellent because its structure is dense and free of pores. |
IV. Comparison of Application Fields
Die Casting | Squeeze Casting |
Automobile: non-load-bearing or sub-load-bearing structural components such as transmission housing, cylinder head, oil pan, bracket, wheel hub (part), etc. | Automobiles: Safety components and structural parts, such as steering knuckles, control arms, suspension brackets, battery pack trays, motor housings, brake calipers, etc. |
3C electronics: Mobile phone frames, notebook shells, heat sinks, etc. (parts with high surface requirements and insensitive to internal air holes). | Aerospace: Non-critical load-bearing structural components with extremely high requirements for performance and reliability. |
Daily hardware: door locks, handles, toy models, etc. | Military industry: Components with high-performance requirements. |
High-performance sports equipment: bicycle frames, motorcycle wheels, etc. |
V. Conclusion
The choice between traditional die casting and extrusion die casting is fundamentally based on the performance requirements of the parts and cost considerations.
If the parts need to withstand high loads, high fatigue or require welding and heat treatment, then even if the cost is higher and the production cycle is slower, extrusion die casting must be chosen.
If the parts are mainly used for structural packaging, appearance parts or secondary load-bearing structures and are not sensitive to internal pores, then traditional die casting is undoubtedly the most efficient and cost-effective choice.
With the increasing demands for lightweight and safety in new energy vehicles, extrusion die casting is becoming increasingly important.
