Selection Guide for Electromagnetic Iron Removers - Starting from "Compatibility", Avoid 90% of Selection Misunderstandi

When enterprises choose electromagnetic iron removers, they often fall into the misunderstanding of "only looking at the magnetic field strength and ignoring the actual needs", which leads to a mismatch between the equipment and the production line, poor iron removal effect or cost waste. In fact, scientific selection should be carried out around the three core dimensions of "material characteristics, production scenarios, and industry standards" in order to achieve "precise matching". ​
Firstly, it is necessary to clarify the material characteristics: If dealing with monocrystalline silicon dust (with small particle size and high purity requirements), a model with a magnetic field strength of 14,000-45,000 gauss and an iron removal accuracy of ≥99.9% should be selected. If the baking raw materials (such as flour, which is prone to moisture absorption and requires food-grade safety) are to be processed, equipment made of 304 stainless steel with an operating temperature of no more than 40℃ should be given priority. A magnetic field strength of 3,500 to 20,000 gauss can meet the requirements. Secondly, the production scenario determines the form of the equipment: for assembly line production, the "suspended + automatic slag discharge" model should be selected to avoid manual intervention. For intermittent production, the "floor-standing + manual cleaning" model can be selected to reduce costs. Finally, industry standards are the bottom line: The new energy industry needs to meet the ISO 9001 quality traceability requirements, and the equipment needs to have the function of Internet of Things monitoring; The food industry needs to obtain FDA certification, and the contact materials must be food-grade. ​
A certain baking enterprise once mistakenly selected an industrial-grade magnetic separator, resulting in metal debris remaining in the flour, with a product complaint rate of 2.5%. After replacing the JC food-grade model (304 stainless steel + Teflon coating), the iron content dropped to within 0.05mg/kg, and the complaint rate decreased to 0.3%. It is evident that choosing a model based on "compatibility" can avoid misunderstandings and maximize the value of the equipment.