{"id":5547,"date":"2026-06-24T17:50:38","date_gmt":"2026-06-24T09:50:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/?p=5547"},"modified":"2026-06-24T17:50:38","modified_gmt":"2026-06-24T09:50:38","slug":"multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet\/","title":{"rendered":"Multi-Wire Saw vs Inner Diameter Saw: A Cost Comparison for NdFeB"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>For NdFeB magnet producers, the decision between an inner diameter (ID) saw and a multi-wire saw is no longer a debate about which cuts cleaner \u2014 both can produce acceptable slices on modern equipment. The decision is about <strong>economics at scale<\/strong>. Multi-wire saws cut dozens of slices simultaneously; ID saws cut one at a time. On any production volume above a few hundred slices per day, that throughput gap translates into a five-figure cost difference per year that compounds annually.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This article walks through how each technology works, where each one performs best, and the five-year cost-of-ownership math that explains why so many NdFeB producers have migrated from ID to multi-wire over the past decade. For the underlying equipment platform, see our <a href=\"\/ja\/magnet-slicing-machine\/\">magnet slicing machine<\/a> overview.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"576\" src=\"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-1024x576.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-5548\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-300x169.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-768x432.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-18x10.jpg 18w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison-600x338.jpg 600w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/multi-wire-saw-vs-inner-diameter-saw-magnet-comparison.jpg 1600w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How an Inner Diameter (ID) Saw Works<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>An ID saw uses a thin, ring-shaped steel blade with diamond grit bonded to the <strong>inner edge<\/strong> of the ring. The blade is mounted on a rotating spindle and tensioned outward by mounting flanges, which keeps the cutting edge stable despite the thin blade body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The workpiece is fed against the inner cutting edge. The blade rotates at high speed, the diamond grit removes material, and a single slice is produced. After each cut, the blade retracts, the workpiece indexes forward by one slice thickness plus kerf, and the next cut begins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Key characteristics:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>One slice per cycle<\/strong> \u2014 sequential cutting only<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Blade thickness<\/strong> typically 0.2\u20130.4 mm<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>\u30ab\u30fc\u30d5\u5e45<\/strong> typically 0.3\u20130.5 mm<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Cut time per slice<\/strong> typically 30\u201390 seconds depending on workpiece diameter<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Blade life<\/strong> typically 2,000\u20134,000 cuts before re-tipping or replacement<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>ID saws dominated NdFeB slicing through the 1990s and early 2000s because they produced consistent surface quality and the equipment was simple to operate. The limitation was always throughput.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How a Multi-Wire Saw Works<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>A multi-wire saw uses a single long diamond-coated wire that loops back and forth between two or more grooved guide wheels, forming a parallel array of cutting strands above the workpiece. The wire moves at high speed across the entire array, and the workpiece is fed upward into the wire field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Every wire in the array cuts simultaneously. A workpiece that would produce 80 slices on an ID saw produces 80 slices in a single feed cycle on a multi-wire saw \u2014 not 80 cycles, <strong>one cycle<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Key characteristics:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Tens to hundreds of slices per cycle<\/strong> \u2014 fully parallel cutting<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>\u30ef\u30a4\u30e4\u30fc\u5f84<\/strong> typically 0.10\u20130.20 mm for thin slicing, 0.35\u20130.5 mm for thicker NdFeB cuts<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>\u30ab\u30fc\u30d5\u5e45<\/strong> typically 0.13\u20130.55 mm (much narrower than ID saws)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Cycle time<\/strong> typically 4\u201312 hours per workpiece (but producing dozens of slices)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Wire consumption<\/strong> roughly 1\u20132 km per cycle, replaced continuously<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The first generation of multi-wire saws (slurry-based, late 1990s) had issues with surface quality. Modern fixed-abrasive diamond wire systems eliminated those issues, which is why the technology became the production standard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Throughput Comparison<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>For a typical NdFeB block producing 80 slices at 2 mm thickness:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>\u30e1\u30c8\u30ea\u30c3\u30af<\/th><th>ID\u30bd\u30fc<\/th><th>\u30de\u30eb\u30c1\u30ef\u30a4\u30e4\u30fc\u30bd\u30fc<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Cuts per cycle<\/td><td>1<\/td><td>80<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Time per cut<\/td><td>60 sec<\/td><td>\u2014<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Time per cycle<\/td><td>\u2014<\/td><td>6 hours<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Total time per block<\/td><td>80 min<\/td><td>6 hours<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><strong>Daily output<\/strong> (single shift)<\/td><td>~6 blocks (480 slices)<\/td><td>~1.3 blocks (104 slices)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>That table looks like ID wins on daily output, but the math reverses immediately when you stack machines or compare cost per slice. <strong>Multi-wire&#8217;s parallel cutting means the 6-hour cycle produces the same 80 slices an ID saw produces in 80 minutes \u2014 but a single multi-wire machine runs unattended overnight and produces 200+ slices per machine per day with one shift of supervision.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Real-world production comparison, 200 slices\/day target:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Approach<\/th><th>Equipment needed<\/th><th>Operator labor<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>ID saw scaling<\/td><td>3+ ID saws running parallel<\/td><td>3+ operators or constant supervision<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Multi-wire scaling<\/td><td>1 multi-wire saw<\/td><td>1 operator part-time<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>This is the line that drives most migration decisions: <strong>labor cost per slice on multi-wire is roughly 1\/5 of ID saw labor cost per slice<\/strong> at production volumes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Kerf Loss Comparison<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Kerf loss is the material removed by the cutting tool and lost as swarf. On a $80\/kg NdFeB material, kerf loss is direct margin loss:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>\u30e1\u30c8\u30ea\u30c3\u30af<\/th><th>ID\u30bd\u30fc<\/th><th>Multi-Wire Saw (diamond wire)<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Typical kerf width<\/td><td>0.3\u20130.5 mm<\/td><td>0.13\u20130.35 mm<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Slices per kg (2 mm slice + kerf)<\/td><td>~217<\/td><td>~250<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Material yield<\/td><td>~85%<\/td><td>~93%<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Kerf loss as % of input material<\/td><td>~15%<\/td><td>~7%<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>On a 1,000 kg\/month NdFeB production line at $80\/kg material:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>ID saw kerf loss: 150 kg\/month wasted = $12,000\/month<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Multi-wire kerf loss: 70 kg\/month wasted = $5,600\/month<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Multi-wire saves ~$6,400\/month in material alone<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>This is on top of the labor savings. For detailed analysis of kerf loss optimization on diamond wire systems, see our <a href=\"\/ja\/ndfeb-cutting-kerf-loss-reduction\/\">NdFeB\u5207\u65ad\u30b1\u30eb\u30d5\u30ed\u30b9\u4f4e\u6e1b<\/a> deep dive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Quality Comparison<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Surface quality is where ID saws historically held an edge. Modern multi-wire diamond wire systems have closed that gap:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Quality Metric<\/th><th>ID\u30bd\u30fc<\/th><th>Multi-Wire (modern diamond wire)<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Surface roughness Ra<\/td><td>0.3\u20130.5 \u00b5m<\/td><td>0.4\u20130.7 \u00b5m<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Total thickness variation (TTV)<\/td><td>5\u201310 \u00b5m<\/td><td>8\u201315 \u00b5m<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>\u30a8\u30c3\u30b8\u30c1\u30c3\u30d4\u30f3\u30b0<\/td><td>\u6700\u5c0f\u9650<\/td><td>Minimal with proper tension<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Bow \/ warp<\/td><td>\u4f4e\u3044<\/td><td>\u4f4e\u3044<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Subsurface damage<\/td><td>10\u201320 \u00b5m<\/td><td>15\u201325 \u00b5m<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>ID saws produce slightly better Ra and TTV. For most NdFeB applications \u2014 magnets that will be ground and coated downstream \u2014 the multi-wire surface quality is more than adequate and the slight Ra disadvantage is removed in the next process step anyway. <strong>Quality differences only matter if the cut surface is the final surface, which is rarely the case in NdFeB production.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For applications requiring the absolute best surface from the cutter, ID saws remain valid. For everything else, the multi-wire quality is fine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"800\" height=\"800\" src=\"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-5480\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2.png 800w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-300x300.png 300w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-150x150.png 150w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-768x768.png 768w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-12x12.png 12w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-600x600.png 600w, https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/image-2-100x100.png 100w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Cost of Ownership (5-Year)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Here is where the decision actually gets made. Production scenario: 200 slices\/day target, NdFeB N48 magnet blocks, single-shift operation, 250 production days\/year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>5-Year Cost Component<\/th><th>3\u00d7 ID Saws<\/th><th>1\u00d7 Multi-Wire Saw<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Initial equipment<\/td><td>\u4f4e\u3044<\/td><td>\u9ad8\u3044<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Floor space<\/td><td>3\u00d7 footprint<\/td><td>1\u00d7 footprint<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Operator labor (5 years)<\/td><td>3 operators \u00d7 5 years<\/td><td>~0.5 operator \u00d7 5 years<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Wire\/blade consumables<\/td><td>Frequent blade replacement<\/td><td>Continuous wire feed (higher unit cost, lower per-slice cost)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Coolant\/abrasive<\/td><td>3\u00d7 consumption<\/td><td>1\u00d7 consumption<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Material yield loss<\/td><td>~15% kerf<\/td><td>~7% kerf<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>\u30e1\u30f3\u30c6\u30ca\u30f3\u30b9<\/td><td>3\u00d7 scheduled maintenance windows<\/td><td>1\u00d7 scheduled maintenance window<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Downtime per blade change<\/td><td>Frequent (every 2,000-4,000 cuts)<\/td><td>Less frequent<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><strong>Total 5-year cost ranking<\/strong><\/td><td>\u9ad8\u3044<\/td><td><strong>Lower (by 30-50% for high-volume production)<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The break-even production volume \u2014 where multi-wire saw total cost crosses below ID saw total cost \u2014 sits around <strong>80-120 slices per day<\/strong>. Below that, ID saws can be competitive. Above that, multi-wire wins on every line of the cost sheet except initial purchase price.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For producers operating in or scaling toward the 200+ slices\/day range, the 5-year math is decisive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Migration Path: From ID to Multi-Wire<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>For an existing ID-saw production line considering migration, the path looks like:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Phase 1: Evaluation (4-6 weeks)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Send sample NdFeB blocks to a multi-wire saw manufacturer for trial cuts<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Compare surface quality, TTV, and kerf loss against current ID saw output<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Verify the multi-wire output meets your downstream grinding\/coating process specs<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Phase 2: Pilot Installation (1-3 months)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Install one multi-wire saw in parallel with existing ID saw line<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Run production on multi-wire for 4-8 weeks<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Measure actual throughput, yield, and operator labor against projections<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Phase 3: Scaled Migration (3-6 months)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Add multi-wire capacity as volume justifies<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Retire ID saws as they reach end of useful life (or repurpose for low-volume specialty cuts)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Retrain operators on multi-wire process control<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Most NdFeB producers do not eliminate ID saws entirely. The typical end state is a <strong>mixed line: multi-wire handling main production volume, plus 1-2 ID saws kept for small-batch specialty work or quality-critical applications where the ID saw&#8217;s surface advantage matters<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For the broader production line context \u2014 combining cutting equipment with grinding, polishing, and inspection \u2014 see our <a href=\"\/ja\/magnet-production-line-equipment\/\">\u78c1\u77f3\u751f\u7523\u30e9\u30a4\u30f3\u6a5f\u5668<\/a> overview.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe  id=\"_ytid_79852\"  width=\"640\" height=\"360\"  data-origwidth=\"640\" data-origheight=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/74l1-2d_kck?enablejsapi=1&#038;autoplay=0&#038;cc_load_policy=0&#038;cc_lang_pref=&#038;iv_load_policy=1&#038;loop=0&#038;rel=1&#038;fs=1&#038;playsinline=0&#038;autohide=2&#038;theme=dark&#038;color=red&#038;controls=1&#038;disablekb=0&#038;\" class=\"__youtube_prefs__  epyt-is-override  no-lazyload\" title=\"YouTube \u30d7\u30ec\u30fc\u30e4\u30fc\"  allow=\"fullscreen; accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen data-no-lazy=\"1\" data-skipgform_ajax_framebjll=\"\"><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Customer Migration Cases<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Three patterns from VIMFUN&#8217;s installation base:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Case A: Mid-size NdFeB producer, 5,000 slices\/month<\/strong><br>Migrated from 4\u00d7 ID saws to 1\u00d7 multi-wire over 8 months. Labor cost dropped from 4 operators to 1 part-time. Kerf loss dropped from 16% to 8%. ROI on equipment investment under 14 months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Case B: Wind turbine magnet supplier, 200 mm+ block production<\/strong><br>Migrated from ID saws to dedicated large-block multi-wire (SOM4-750D) for blocks above 150 mm. Kept 2 ID saws for specialty small parts. Production capacity tripled, total labor cost flat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Case C: EV motor magnet manufacturer, high-volume thin-slice production<\/strong><br>Migrated to multi-wire as primary, retired all ID saws. Surface quality differences were absorbed by the downstream grinding step. Cost per finished magnet dropped 18%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The common factor across migrations: <strong>the decision was driven by economics, not by quality dissatisfaction with the ID saws<\/strong>. Existing ID saw owners were generally happy with their equipment; multi-wire just produced the same or better output at substantially lower cost per slice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Free ROI Calculation for Your Production<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>If you are running an ID saw line and considering whether multi-wire makes sense for your volume, send us:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Current monthly slice production<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>NdFeB grade and typical block dimensions<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Number of ID saws currently in service<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Current operator count on the cutting line<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Approximate kerf width on your current cuts<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>We will return a 5-year cost comparison customized to your numbers, including projected break-even point, equipment recommendation, and migration timeline. For applications in wind turbine, EV motor, or industrial magnet production, see our dedicated pages on <a href=\"\/ja\/wind-turbine-magnet-cutting-machine\/\">wind turbine magnet cutting machine<\/a> \u305d\u3057\u3066 <a href=\"\/ja\/ev-motor-magnet-manufacturing-equipment\/\">EV\u30e2\u30fc\u30bf\u30fc\u30de\u30b0\u30cd\u30c3\u30c8\u88fd\u9020\u88c5\u7f6e<\/a> for sector-specific guidance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>External material reference: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.usgs.gov\/centers\/national-minerals-information-center\/rare-earths-statistics-and-information\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener nofollow\">Rare Earth statistics from USGS<\/a> for current Nd\/Dy supply context affecting material cost calculations.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>For NdFeB magnet producers, the decision between an inner diameter (ID) saw and a multi-wire saw is no longer a debate about which cuts cleaner \u2014 both can produce acceptable slices on modern equipment. The decision is about economics at scale. Multi-wire saws cut dozens of slices simultaneously; ID saws cut one at a time. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":5548,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[384],"tags":[1000,1001,1002],"class_list":["post-5547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cutting-technology-methods","tag-id-saw","tag-multi-wire-saw-2","tag-ndfeb-production"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5547"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5547\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5549,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5547\/revisions\/5549"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5548"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.semiconductorcutting.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}