Yes. Both series are automation-ready over EtherCAT and Profinet, so the head can be mounted on a robot or gantry and driven from a cell controller rather than held by an operator.
Operator-facing controls include eight selectable scan patterns, a maximum scan width of 300 mm, and a touchscreen HMI with dynamic alarm display. Dual red-light preview shows the scan area before the laser fires, which matters as much in a fixed cell as in the hand: it is how you confirm the part is positioned correctly without a test pass.
The most common uses are weld preparation, paint and rust stripping, mold cleaning, heritage restoration, and mining and MRO equipment refurbishment.
Supported substrates include steel, stainless, aluminum, bronze and titanium. Pulsed systems extend to cast iron, stone, concrete and wood, which is what makes restoration and masonry work practical rather than only metal cleaning.
If you have a surface that is currently blasted, stripped with chemicals, or cleaned by hand, it is worth testing on a sample before assuming which category it falls into.
Yes. Vantix laser cleaning systems reach up to SP-10 near-white metal blast standard.
That is the surface preparation level most industrial coating specifications call for, which means laser cleaning can satisfy the specification itself rather than serving only as a touch-up method between blast operations.
The difference in practice is containment. Reaching the same standard without grit means no blast enclosure, no media recovery and no contaminated abrasive to dispose of, which is often what decides whether prep can be done in-house at all.
Laser cleaning works by selective absorption. Contaminants such as rust, paint, coatings and oxide absorb the laser energy and vaporize, while the underlying metal reflects far more of it and is left intact.
Because nothing touches the surface, there is no abrasive media, no chemical stripper, and no contaminated grit or chemical runoff to dispose of afterward. What comes off is captured as particulate rather than mixed into spent blast media, which is usually the larger disposal problem.
The practical consequence is that cleaning can happen in places blasting cannot: indoors, near assembled equipment, and on parts that cannot be moved to a booth.
Two series. Continuous-wave systems come in 2 and 3 kW for high-throughput industrial refurbishment. Pulsed systems come in 200 W, 300 W, 500 W, 1000 W and 2000 W for precision work, mold cleaning and heritage restoration.
Continuous is chosen for area covered per hour. Pulsed is chosen for control over how much energy reaches a delicate substrate, which is what makes it usable on surfaces a continuous beam would mark.
Pulsed units at 200 to 300 W are air-cooled; 500 W and above are water-cooled.
Stainless steel, carbon steel and galvanized steel, plus aluminum. Copper and brass are supported at 3 kW.
The low heat input also makes the process practical in places conventional welding struggles: near heat-sensitive components, on thin-to-thick joints, and on finished or coated assemblies where distortion would be visible.
Operators reach working proficiency in days. TIG takes months.
That difference is the main reason shops buy the technology. It separates welding capacity from the supply of certified welders, so you can add output without competing for a labour pool that is not growing.
Results are also more consistent between operators, because much less of the outcome depends on hand technique. That tends to matter most on repeat production work, where variation between welders shows up as variation in the finished product.
Handheld laser welding runs about 4 times faster than MIG or TIG on comparable joints.
The speed comes from a concentrated energy source and much lower heat input. The lower heat input is arguably the bigger effect: less distortion on thin sheet means less post-weld straightening, and cleaner welds mean less grinding and polishing.
On thin stainless the finishing time saved is often larger than the welding time saved, which is why a straight arc-time comparison usually understates the difference.
