ANONYMIZED PROJECT CASE
A Japanese equipment customer moved a die-cast housing through a first-batch leakage investigation, an approved change to an A356 material and process route, renewed sampling and quarterly repeat production.
PART & APPLICATION
The housing is used in construction and industrial equipment where machined interfaces, assembly fit and leakage-sensitive service conditions must be controlled. The customer also required a finished condition compatible with automated unpacking and assembly.
PROJECT REQUIREMENT
The program required approximately 40,000 housings per year in four quarterly batches of about 10,000 pieces. The customer required drawing-based dimensional conformity, stable machined interfaces and a production route capable of supporting automated handling and assembly.
Leakage prevention and internal casting integrity were functional acceptance concerns. The exact service pressure, controlled dimensions and acceptance limits remain private.
MANUFACTURING CHALLENGE
First samples did not reveal the later production issue. During assembly of the first small batch, the customer reported leakage after five machines had been assembled. The supplied evidence indicated internal porosity that became visible only after coating and machining, showing that appearance checks alone were not sufficient for the affected area.
The root-cause review considered alloy selection together with metal flow, solidification, local geometry, process control and the limitations of the original inspection route. Public copy does not attribute the issue to copper content alone and does not present any alloy as inherently free from porosity.
MANUFACTURING ROUTE
The primary process and supporting operations are shown as one connected route.
The corrective route combined a customer-approved change from GAlSi9Cu3 to A356 with renewed sampling and review of the casting and finishing sequence. Process and inspection attention was directed to local fill and solidification behavior, machined interfaces and the leakage-sensitive area.
Material substitution was one part of the corrective action, not a stand-alone guarantee. The revised route also required controlled production, dimensional verification and project-specific internal-integrity evaluation before batch release.
Part function, controlled dimensions and acceptance needs.
High-pressure aluminum die casting for repeat component production, supported by tooling review, trimming, CNC machining, finishing and project-specific…
Bores, faces and assembly interfaces were machined and inspected to the controlled drawing requirements.
The finished housing received the project coating system after casting and machining controls were completed.
Evidence checked against the agreed project scope.
TOOLING & SAMPLE APPROVAL
After the customer reported leakage, the team reviewed the failed areas, agreed a revised A356 material and process route and produced new samples for internal-defect and surface evaluation.
The workbook records that the follow-up samples met the project checks and that the optimized route proceeded to batch production. The controlled test method and report are not published.
QUALITY & VERIFICATION
The revised control route combined material confirmation, production-process control, visual inspection, dimensional checks of the machined and assembly interfaces and project-specific internal-integrity evaluation.
Leakage and internal-quality acceptance remain drawing- and application-specific. This case does not promise universal zero porosity or pressure tightness.
Customer evidence and affected components were reviewed after leakage appeared during assembled-equipment operation.
Outcome: The original route was not released for continued supply without corrective action.
New A356 samples were evaluated for internal indications and surface condition under the revised route.
Outcome: The workbook records acceptance of the follow-up samples; the detailed report remains private.
Machined bores, mounting interfaces and identified assembly characteristics were checked against the released project requirements.
Outcome: The optimized route proceeded to planned quarterly production.
PROJECT RESULT
The workbook records that the revised samples passed the project checks and that production continued under the optimized route. The customer placed repeat orders for quarterly delivery.
The publishable result is recovery from a documented first-batch problem into controlled repeat production. No absolute defect rate, pressure rating or financial saving is stated because the supporting records are not approved for publication.
CONNECTED CAPABILITIES
RELATED PROJECT RECORDS
ENGINEERING REVIEW
Share the drawing or sample, material, quantity, application and acceptance requirements. Our team will review the feasible route before quotation.
