Which casting processing route actually fits my part and budget?

When a drawing lands in my inbox, I start with the job the part must do and the headaches it has to survive. On the floor people know us as Jinggang, and that name matters only because it reflects how we work day to day. We treat Casting Processing as a set of practical choices. I look at envelope, wall changes, and datum schemes, then match the route between automatic line green sand, shell mold sand, and resin sand so the process fits the geometry instead of forcing the geometry to fit the process. That range lets me cover everything from 0.5 kg brackets to 10,000 kg housings in gray iron, ductile iron, ADI, carbon and alloy steels, and wear-resistant grades. Before any pattern is cut I run simulation to tame hot spots and feeding, during trials I sample melt and sand so the window stays tight, and after shakeout I verify with NDT and a 3D scan so the CAD and the casting agree. Only then do we talk cost and lead time, because the right route is the one that builds your part right once and then builds it right again and again.

Why do I even need different casting routes for one project?

Because one size never fits all. I keep three production paths ready and choose based on geometry, weight, and material behavior

• Automatic line green sand for repeatable medium volumes with tight takt time
• Shell mold sand for crisp edges and thinner sections in small to medium sizes
• Resin sand for large or heavy castings and complex cores

Across these paths I can cover parts from roughly 0.5 kg up to 10,000 kg and pour a wide material window including gray cast iron, ductile iron, ADI, carbon steel, alloy steel, and wear-resistant grades.

Which process lines up with my size weight and geometry targets?

What materials behave best in real foundry conditions?

How do I keep porosity shrink and warpage from wrecking yield?

• I run gating and riser design through casting simulation before patterns are cut and iterate until hot spots are under control
• I track sand properties and melt chemistry with in-process sampling and thermal analysis to stick to the window, not just the spec
• I validate after shakeout with NDT and 3D scanning so feedback loops close fast

What tolerances and surface finishes make sense without overpaying?

• For most sand castings I hold to the ISO 8062 range shown above and trim machining stock to the minimum that your drawing allows
• Where surfaces are cosmetic or sealing, I either choose shell mold or plan targeted machining passes so you do not buy a process you do not need

How do simulation sampling and NDT fit into one clean workflow?

1. Process design verified by casting simulation with reports shared for sign-off
2. Pilot pours with in-process sampling on chemistry, sand, and thermal behavior
3. Full inspection with NDT and 3D scanning against the model and critical GD&T
4. Corrective actions locked in before production release

When do I move from automatic line to shell mold to resin sand?

• I stay with the automatic line when repeatability and volume drive cost per piece
• I pick shell mold when the part needs finer edges or reduced machining
• I go resin sand when the part is physically large or the core package is complex

What information helps me quote fast and accurately?

• 3D model with critical GD&T and clearly marked datum schemes
• Annual and release quantities so I can match tooling to volume
• Material spec and any heat treatment or NDT class
• Target machining allowances and sealing or cosmetic surfaces
• If you have legacy issues like porosity zones tell me so I can attack them first

What does my end to end plan look like with Jinggang?

• Scope and simulation with a clear risk map and draft DFM
• Pilot pours with sampling and documented tweaks
• Release with NDT plan and 3D scan reports attached to the lot
• Ongoing SPC on key dimensions and periodic sand audits

Where do my real customer pain points get solved?

What quick design nudges save me the most money?

How do I move forward today?

If you want a grounded plan rather than guesswork, send the model and requirements and I will walk you through a route that balances performance and cost. You can contact us with drawings, annual volume, and target delivery so I can quote quickly with a clear quality plan. If you prefer a quick call first, say so and I will outline options and trade-offs in plain language. Either way, reach out and let us help you turn concept into reliable cast parts.