Site icon Kedel Tool | Your Trusted Carbide Tool Expert

Five Comprehensive Solutions to Eliminate Dusting and Burrs in Electrode Sheet Cutting Processes

Five-Comprehensive-Solutions-to-Eliminate-Dusting-and-Burrs-in-Electrode-Sheet-Cutting-Processes

Five-Comprehensive-Solutions-to-Eliminate-Dusting-and-Burrs-in-Electrode-Sheet-Cutting-Processes

Electrode sheet cutting (especially for lithium-ion battery positive/negative electrodes) is a critical step in new energy battery production. However, dust (such as active material powder and metal debris) and burrs (tiny protrusions on the cutting edge) generated during cutting directly affect battery performance: dust may cause short circuits between positive and negative electrodes, while burrs can pierce separators, leading to safety hazards. Additionally, they increase equipment wear and workshop environmental pressure. Eliminating these issues cannot rely on a single measure; a comprehensive solution must be built around four dimensions: optimized cemented carbide tools, precise cutting parameter control, equipment accuracy assurance, and coordinated dust removal and deburring auxiliary systems. Among these, the selection and maintenance of cemented carbide tools are core (directly determining the initial generation of dust and burrs). This article details specific operational methods for each link, providing actionable solutions to help reduce dust during electrode sheet cutting by over 80% and control burrs within 0.1mm.

Content 隐藏

1. First, Identify the Root Causes: Main Sources of Dust and Burrs in Electrode Sheet Cutting

Before developing solutions, it is essential to clarify the root causes to avoid "blind measures." Dust and burrs in electrode sheet cutting (taking lithium-ion battery electrodes as an example, with substrates mostly aluminum foil/copper foil and coated active materials) mainly stem from the following four factors:

  1. Inappropriate Tool Selection and Condition: Using ordinary cemented carbide tools (e.g., YG6) to cut positive electrode sheets with hard-coated active materials leads to rapid tool wear and metal debris (dust). Alternatively, unpassivated cutting edges cause stress concentration during cutting, resulting in active material detachment (dust) and burrs on the substrate edge.
  2. Unreasonable Cutting Parameter Settings: Excessively high cutting speed (e.g., over 30m/min) causes friction-induced heat between the tool and electrode sheet, leading to active material detachment. Excessively large feed rate (e.g., over 0.2mm/r) over-squeezes the electrode substrate, creating burrs on the edge.
  3. Insufficient Equipment Accuracy: Excessive spindle runout (e.g., over 0.01mm) causes uneven force on the tool during cutting, leading to local overload and burrs. Poor workbench positioning accuracy (e.g., over 0.02mm) shifts the cutting path, resulting in irregular dust and burrs on the edge.
  4. Lack of Effective Auxiliary Systems: No targeted dust removal device is configured to expel generated dust in a timely manner. There is no in-line deburring process after cutting, leaving tiny initial burrs unremoved.

2. Core Solutions: A Systematic Approach Across Four Dimensions

1. Optimization of Cemented Carbide Tools: Minimize Dust and Burrs at the Source

Electrode sheet cutting has high requirements for tool "wear resistance, edge smoothness, and toughness." Priority must be given to selecting suitable cemented carbide tools and maintaining them properly—this is the foundation for reducing dust and burrs.

(1) Tool Material Selection: Prioritize "Wear Resistance + Chipping Resistance" to Match Electrode Sheet Characteristics

Different electrode substrates (aluminum foil/copper foil) and coating hardness require precise tool material matching:

(2) Tool Edge Treatment: Reject "Sharper = Better" and Focus on "Smoothness + Passivation"

Many assume "the sharper the tool edge, the better," but in electrode sheet cutting, overly sharp edges are prone to chipping (especially when cutting hard coatings), which actually generates more burrs and dust. The correct edge treatment methods are:

(3) Tool Maintenance: Regular Wear Checks to Avoid "Cutting with Defects"

When tool flank wear exceeds 0.1mm, the tool must be re-sharpened or replaced promptly (electrode sheet cutting is more sensitive to tool wear—while the wear threshold for general metal cutting is 0.3mm, this must be strictly controlled here):

2. Precise Cutting Parameter Control: Avoid "Overload Cutting" to Reduce Dust and Burrs

Parameters must be adjusted based on electrode sheet thickness (typically 0.1-0.3mm) and substrate material to avoid "excessive friction" or "over-squeezing" caused by improper settings. The following are parameter references for common electrode sheets (using cemented carbide circular knives for cutting):

Electrode Sheet Type Cutting Speed (m/min) Feed Rate (mm/r) Cutting Depth (mm) Common Incorrect Parameters & Consequences
Lithium-ion positive electrode (0.2mm) 15-25 0.08-0.12 0.25-0.3 Speed = 30m/min: Frictional heat increases active material detachment by 50%
Lithium-ion negative electrode (0.15mm) 20-30 0.1-0.15 0.2-0.25 Feed rate = 0.2mm/r: Copper foil deformation causes burr rate to exceed 3%
Sodium-ion battery positive electrode (0.25mm) 12-20 0.07-0.1 0.3-0.35 Depth = 0.4mm: Over-cutting causes dust on the substrate edge

Parameter Setting Principles:

3. Equipment Accuracy Assurance: Reduce "Mechanical Errors" to Avoid Additional Issues

Even with proper tools and parameters, insufficient equipment accuracy can still cause dust and burrs. Two key accuracy indicators must be prioritized:

(1) Coaxiality of Spindle and Tool

Spindle runout must be ≤ 0.005mm (measured with a micrometer at the spindle end). Excessive runout (e.g., over 0.01mm) causes the tool to rotate "eccentrically" during cutting, leading to over-cutting (dust) or under-cutting (residual burrs) on local areas of the electrode sheet.

(2) Workbench Positioning Accuracy

The X/Y-axis positioning accuracy of the workbench must be ≤ 0.01mm, and repeatability accuracy ≤ 0.005mm. This prevents cutting path deviation and irregular dust/burrs on the electrode edge.

4. Dust Removal and Deburring Auxiliary Systems:彻底清除残留问题

Even if dust and burrs are minimized at the source, auxiliary systems are still needed for "secondary treatment" to ensure final product quality.

(1) Dust Removal Systems: Combine "Dry + Wet" Methods Based on Scenarios

(2) Deburring Systems: "In-Line + Off-Line" Dual Protection

3. Clarifying Common Misconceptions: Avoid the Trap of "Single Measures"

Many enterprises struggle to solve these issues because they fall into the trap of "prioritizing single measures," leading to poor results. The following three common mistakes require attention:

Misconception 1: "As long as the tool is sharp enough, burrs can be avoided."

Fact: Tool edges for electrode sheet cutting need "moderate sharpness." Overly sharp edges are prone to chipping (especially when cutting hard coatings), generating more burrs. A battery manufacturer used unpassivated cemented carbide tools to cut positive electrodes—edges chipped within 2 hours, with a burr rate of 5%. After switching to passivated tools (edge 0.015mm), edges lasted 8 hours without chipping, and the burr rate dropped to 0.08mm.

Misconception 2: "Dust removal only requires high-suction suction—sealing is unnecessary."

Fact: Suction without sealing causes dust dispersion (only ~60% collected). A factory without a sealed cover still had large amounts of dust floating in the workshop despite a suction speed of 15m/s. After adding a sealed cover, dust collection rate increased to 95% even with the suction speed reduced to 10m/s, while reducing contamination of other equipment.

Misconception 3: "Manual grinding is more accurate for deburring."

Fact: Manual grinding is inefficient (50-100 sheets processed per person per hour) and easily damages electrodes (uneven pressure causes substrate deformation). A factory using manual grinding had an electrode scrap rate of 3%. After switching to in-line brush deburring, efficiency increased to 5,000 sheets per hour, scrap rate dropped to 0.1%, and overall costs decreased by 60%.

4. Implementation Results: Key Indicator References

After implementing the above comprehensive solution, core indicators for electrode sheet cutting (taking lithium-ion battery electrodes as an example) can reach the following levels:

5. Conclusion: Comprehensive Solutions Are Key, Source Control Is Core

Eliminating dust and burrs in electrode sheet cutting cannot rely on "symptom-based" single measures—optimization of cemented carbide tools is the source (reducing initial generation), parameters and equipment accuracy are guarantees (avoiding additional issues), and dust removal/deburring systems are supplements . For professionals in the tungsten carbide industry, tool recommendations should include "material formula + edge treatment + maintenance advice" tailored to specific electrode characteristics (e.g., substrate, coating hardness), rather than just general models.

If your enterprise still struggles with dust and burrs in electrode sheet cutting, or needs customized tool and parameter solutions for specific electrodes (e.g., sodium-ion battery, solid-state battery electrodes), feel free to communicate. We can provide cemented carbide tool sample testing and cutting parameter adjustment guidance to help you implement the solution quickly.

Exit mobile version