Production Efficiency Upgrade of Automotive Component Manufacturer After Replacing Mechanical Punch Press

Case Background

This case targets a tier‑2 automotive metal‑stamping manufacturer located in South China. The plant mainly produces automotive chassis reinforcing brackets and shell structural parts, processing materials including 1.5‑3.0 mm HSLA high‑strength steel and aluminium‑magnesium alloy sheets. Before reconstruction, the workshop deployed three sets of traditional 160‑ton flywheel‑driven mechanical punch presses for progressive‑die stamping. The main pain points included unstable dimensional consistency of high‑strength‑steel parts, high scrap ratio, frequent die wear and high comprehensive energy consumption. In Q1‑2025, the enterprise replaced two old mechanical punch presses with two sets of 160‑ton direct‑drive servo punch presses, retaining one original mechanical press for simple low‑requirement parts for comparison testing. Continuous production data was tracked for 12 consecutive months after commissioning.

Original mechanical punch presses adopted fixed sine‑wave motion curve. When stamping high‑strength steel, instantaneous impact force caused die chipping, part spring‑back deviation and burr over‑tolerance. Operators could only compensate by repeatedly adjusting die clearance, which brought unstable quality and frequent shutdown for die maintenance.

After switching to servo punch presses, engineers programmed customized ram curve: fast approaching before contact sheet material, low‑speed stable pressing at bottom dead centre with controllable holding time, rapid returning stroke. This mode reduces impact vibration of die sets, optimizes material forming status and suppresses spring‑back defect. Meanwhile, real‑time position feedback ensures stable punching accuracy for long‑time continuous running.

Conclusion

From this real‑world manufacturing case, servo‑driven punch presses bring obvious comprehensive benefits for manufacturers processing high‑strength metal sheet with high‑quality requirements. However, equipment upgrade is not simply “one‑for‑one replacement"; reasonable collocation of old‑and‑new equipment, die adaptation and personnel training are critical factors to realize expected economic benefits.