Comparison image of sandblasting vs. grit blasting.
A comparison before and after the application of "sandblasting" and "grit blasting" was conducted on the test piece.
Our company owns a manual blast facility with dimensions of 6m in width, 10m in depth, and 3m in height, which can accommodate the construction of complex fabricated products. This facility can be applied to various purposes, including surface preparation before anti-corrosion treatment, paint stripping of maintenance items, removal of oxidation films after heat treatment, and improving adhesion through increased surface area. We used SS400 products as test pieces and verified the results by changing only the abrasive material while using the same equipment and air pressure. For grit blasting, we used IKK steel grit TGE-100, and for sandblasting, we used NeoBlast G-1. The results were as expected, with both methods effectively removing scale and rust. However, there were clear differences in surface roughness and appearance. Grit blasting resulted in a slightly rougher surface, while sandblasting produced a somewhat dull finish. Our company differentiates between sandblasting and grit blasting, taking into account the size and material of the workpiece, recommended surface roughness, and whether masking is required. By leveraging the characteristics of each method and performing optimal processing, we achieve high-quality finishes. Harada Ironworks Hiroshima Official Link
- Company：原田鉄工
- Price：Other
