Exploring Advanced Manufacturing Technologies

By Steve Krar and Arthur Gill

Designed to introduce new technologies to students, instructors, manufacturing engineers, supervisors and managers, this ready reference includes many new manufacturing technologies for those who do not have time to undertake the necessary research. Each topic addresses the following points:

• a brief description of the technology and where it is used
• the underlying theory and principles and how the technology works
• where the technology can be used and what conventional process it may replace
• the requirements necessary to make it work and some possible pitfalls 
• advantages and disadvantages
• successful application areas.
• Introduces and provides an overview of 45 of the latest manufacturing technologies.
• Each unit has the potential for saving a manufacturer many thousands of dollars when applied properly. All major developments in manufacturing technology are available in this one volume...no more time-consuming searching of the Web.
• Written by a highly successful team of technical authors whose reputations for accuracy and quality are recognized worldwide.
• Many technologies have been updated to the date of publication.
• Includes these topics: Producing Prosperity, Human Resources, Internet Sourcing: Goods/Services, Justifying AM Technologies, Superabrasive Technology, Direct Metal Deposition, Fineblanking, Product Design & Development, Internet 2D/3D File Transfer, Open Architecture CNC, Immersive/Virtual Reality, Machine Diagnostics Online, CNC Manufacturing & Lasers, Robotics & Rapid Prototyping, E-Manufacturing, STEP NC, Manufacturing in the Future, Nanotechnology, plus 25 other advanced technologies.
• Each section has been reviewed by industrial experts to ensure that it contains the latest information and is technically accurate.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Industrial Press, Inc.
• Release date: Jan 2, 2005
• ISBN: 9780831191573

Book preview

EXPLORING ADVANCED

MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES

EXPLORING ADVANCED

MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES

Stephen F. Krar and Arthur R. Gill

With contributions by:

Jack C. Cahall

Michael J. Flaman

Dr. George C. Ku

Dr. T. Warren Liao

Robert L. Mabrey

Steven Raff

Mario Rapisarda

Douglas Rizzo

Peter Smid

Dirk A. Smits

Dr. Joyce A. Wilkerson

NOTICE TO THE READER

The publisher does not guarantee or warrant any of the products and processes described in this publication or conduct any independent analysis in connection with any product information. The publisher does not assume, and expressly disclaims, any obligation to obtain and include information other than that supplied by the manufacturer or company.

The reader is cautioned to adopt all safety precautions that might be indicated in this publication. By following the instructions or procedures in the book, the reader assumes all risks connected with such instructions.

The publisher makes no endorsements, representations, or warranties of any kind, including but not limited to, the warranties of fitness for particular purposes or merchantability, nor should it be assumed that any such representations are implied. The publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the reader’s use of, or reliance upon this material.

COPYRIGHT

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Krar, Stephen F.

Exploring advanced manufacturing technologies / Steve F. Krar, Arthur R. Gill

p. cm.

ISBN 0-8311-3150-0

1. Manufactures—Technological innovations. I. Gill, Arthur, 1930– II. Title.

TS23.K73 2003

670.42—dc21

2003047834

Industrial Press Inc.

200 Madison Avenue

New York, NY 10016-4078

First Edition

Exploring Advanced Manufacturing Technology

Copyright © 2003. Printed in the United States of America. All rights reserved.

This book or parts thereof may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form without the permissio of the publishers.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover

Title Page

Notes to the Reader

Copyright

Preface

Acknowledgments

About the Authors

SECTION 1. HUMAN RESOURCES

Unit 1. Producing Prosperity (Steve Krar)

Unit 2. Economics of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (Steve Krar)

Unit 3. Managing Human Resources (Jack Cahall)

Unit 4. Internet Sourcing of Products and Services (Steve Krar)

SECTION 2. MATERIAL REMOVAL PROCESSES

Unit 1. High-Speed Machining (Steve Krar)

Unit 2. Single-Point OD Grinding (Steve Krar)

Unit 3. Grinding Simulator (Dirk Smits)

SECTION 3. CUTTING TOOLS AND ACCESSORIES

Unit 1. Superabrasive Technology (Michael Flaman)

Unit 2. Cutting Tool Technology (George Ku)

Unit 3. Modular Tooling (Arthur Gill)

Unit 4. Thriller® Combination Tool (Steve Krar)

Unit 5. QQC Diamond Process (Steve Krar)

SECTION 4. WORKHOLDING DEVICES

Unit 1. Types Of Workholding Devices (Arthur Gill)

SECTION 5. SPECIAL MACHINES

Unit 1. Linear Motors (Steven Raff)

Unit 2. Non-Cartesian Machines (Douglas Rizzo)

SECTION 6. NON-CONVENTIONAL MATERIAL REMOVAL PROCESSES

Unit 1. Lasers (Michael Flaman)

Unit 2. Electrical Discharge Machining (Arthur Gill)

Unit 3. Waterjet and Abrasive Waterjet Cutting (Arthur Gill)

SECTION 7. NON-MATERIAL REMOVAL PROCESSES

Unit 1. Near Net Shape Casting (Arthur Gill)

Unit 2. Rapid Prototyping (Steve Krar)

Unit 3. Direct Metal Deposition (Steve Krar)

Unit 4. Fineblanking (Steve Krar)

Unit 5. Robotics (Steve Krar)

SECTION 8. COMPUTER NUMERICAL CONTROLAND CAD MANUFACTURING

Unit 1. Product Design and Development (Steve Krar)

Unit 2. CAD/CAM (Joyce Wilkerson)

Unit 3. Internet 3D CAD Files (Steve Krar)

Unit 4. Open Architecture CNC (Steve Krar)

Unit 5. Solid/Hybrid CAD Modeling (Robert Mabrey)

Unit 6. Immersive Virtual Reality (Arthur Gill)

Unit 7. NURBS Interpolation (Peter Smid)

SECTION 9. MEASUREMENT, INSPECTION AND QUALITY CONTROL

Unit 1. Artificial Intelligence (Warren Liao)

Unit 2. Coordinate Measuring Systems (Warren Liao)

Unit 3. Laser/Vision Measuring (Arthur Gill)

Unit 4. Total Quality Improvement (Mario Rapisarda)

SECTION 10. MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS

Unit 1. Continuous Improvement (Steve Krar)

Unit 2. Lean Manufacturing (Arthur Gill)

Unit 3. Group Technology and Cellular Manufacturing (Warren Liao)

Unit 4. Flexible Manufacturing Systems (Steve Krar)

Unit 5. Just-In-Time Manufacturing (Steve Krar)

Unit 6. Machine Diagnostics Online (Steve Krar)

Unit 7. e-Manufacturing/Internet Manufacturing (Steve Krar)

Unit 8. STEP NC and Internet Manufacturing (Steve Krar)

Unit 9. Advanced Digital Manufacturing (Steve Krar)

SECTION 11. MISCELLANEOUS

Unit 1. Cryogenic Tempering (Steve Krar)

Unit 2. Manufacturing in the Future (Steve Krar)

Unit 3. Nanotechnology (Steve Krar & Arthur Gill)

INDEX

PREFACE

Competition in manufacturing, no longer defined by national boundaries, is global in scope, with an increasing number of countries competing for a share of the world market. Manufacturers wishing to survive over the long term must strive to become world-class competitors. These firms should be replacing obsolete methods, processes, and systems with a structure based on the latest technology and best human resource utilization.

Quality products and customer satisfaction are the keys to successful competition in the world. World-class manufacturers are following specific guidelines to ensure that they will be in business in the future by:

1.Implementing new technological processes as quickly as possible.

2.Improving product quality, processes, and service.

3.Developing benchmarks and manufacturing strategies to reach their goal.

4.Responding quickly and with increased flexibility to market needs.

5.Involving and motivating employees toward a common goal.

Over the past forty years, computer-based technologies have made it possible to improve productivity, reduce manufacturing costs, and produce better quality goods. Manufacturers who have introduced computer-based technology into manufacturing operations were able to increase their productivity and in turn their market share. Unfortunately, companies who resisted the change to computer-based technology experienced reduced markets and many are now out of business.

Exploring Advanced Manufacturing Technologies is designed to introduce new technologies to the student, teacher, manufacturing engineer, supervisor, and management. Many new manufacturing technologies have been included in this resource to serve as a ready reference for those who do not have time for the necessary research. In order to make this an effective resource, each topic addresses the following points:

1.A brief description and where it is used.

2.The principle of, and how the technology works.

3.Where the technology can be used and what conventional process it may replace.

4.The requirements necessary to make it work and some possible pitfalls.

5.Advantages and disadvantages.

6.Successful application areas.

For those wishing to explore any topic to greater depth, please see the Acknowledgment section and the various Web sites mentioned throughout the text.

ACNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to express their sincere thanks and appreciation to our wives, Alice H. Krar and Mary E. Gill, for their assistance and patience during the time we spent compiling and writing this book. They gave up many hours of their time looking after our needs, running errands, and offering encouragement when things did not go as well as we had hoped. Without their valuable assistance and untiring help, this book never have become a reality.

Many thanks to Charlotte Boyd for her valuable assistance with artwork and to the Industrial Press professional team, under the capable leadership of John Carleo, who took the raw manuscript and transferred it into a professional guide on advanced manufacturing technologies: the Art Director and Production Manager Janet Romano, and Robert Weinstein for his editorial skills.

Our sincere thanks go to the following firms that reviewed sections of the manuscript and offered suggestions that were incorporated to make this text as accurate and up to date as possible. A special note of thanks to the following reviewers: Joseph Shenberger, 3D Systems; John Koucky, 300 Below; Glenn Kennedy, Actify Corporation; Vince Taylor, Braintech, Inc,; Tom Smeek, e-Manufacturing Networks, Inc.; Jeff Brum and Mark Hall, Fakespace Inc.; Paul Frauchiger, Feintool Cincinnati, Inc.; Linda Johnson, Framework Technologies; Belinda Jones, Hi-Tech Marketing; Alicia Bowers and Wayne Kotania, GE Fanuc Automation; Jurgen Richter, Junker Machinery, Inc.; David Michalets, MachineMate, Inc.; Robert Preville, ManufacturingQuote, Inc.; Nubuo Suga, Mitutoyo/MTI Corp.; Dwight Morgan, POM, Inc.; Manual Turchan, Turchan Technologies:

Exploring Advanced Manufacturing Technology would not have become a reality without the assistance of the following leading industries and professional organizations who supplied illustrations and technical information:

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

JACK C. CAHALL

Jack Cahall graduated from Xavier University in 1950 with a B.S. in mathematics. He furthered his education at Ohio College of Applied Science and the University of Cincinnati taking courses in Educational Administration, Management, Supervision, Executive Business Administration, Mechanical Design Technology, and Journalism. After his army service ended in 1947, he taught high school Mathematics and Journalism. In 1953 was employed by the Cincinnati Milacron Co. and served in various capacities ranging from Training Department instructor to the Corporate Manager of all Training and Development.

Jack has been very active in local and national organizations such as the American Society of Training and Development, American Society for Engineering Education, and the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce. His contributions to education and training were recognized when he was presented with the first Annual Award in the field of Training and Development by Xavier University.

MICHAEL J. FLAMAN

Michael Flaman spent approximately 15 years in the machine tool industry with experiences as a machine tool operator and diemaking design and building. Normal progression in the trade involved Michael with experiences in automated machinery, CNC operator, CAD/CAM/CNC programming of various machine tools. He also did some teaching on subjects such as Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing, Coordinate Measuring Machines, TQM, Superabrasive Technology, etc.

Mr. Flaman spent about 20 years at Portland Community College as a Machine Tool instructor of machine shop mathematics, print reading, machine shop, and shop lab including basic tool set up and operation of conventional, N.C. and C.N.C. controlled machine tools. He also taught subjects such as Numerical and Computer Numerical Controlled machine programming. C.A.M., Computer Aided Machining, C.I.M., Computer Integrated Manufacturing. T.Q.M., Total Quality Management, and S.P.C., Statistical Process Control. Michael was also a part-time instructor at the Oregon Institute of Technology, Portland State University, School of Engineering and Applied Science.

Michael Flaman’s professional associations include memberships in the Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME), American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE), American Society of Quality Control (ASQC), and the American Society of Materials (ASM). He has served on the executive of many of these organizations.

ARTHUR R. GILL

Arthur R. Gill served an apprenticeship as a tool and die maker. After 10 years in the trade, he entered the Ontario Community College system as a professor and coordinator of precision metal trades and apprenticeship training. During his 30 years at Niagara College in St. Catharines, he has been a member of the Ontario Precision Metal Trades college curriculum committee for apprenticeship training and head of Apprenticeship for Ontario. Art was a member of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers and worked closely with industry to continually improve manufacturing technology.

Art Gill has co-authored the textbooks CNC Technology and Programming, and Computer Numerical Control Programming Basics with Steve Krar. In 1991 he was invited by the People’s Republic of China to assist in developing a Precision Machining and Computer Numerical Control (CNC) training facility at Yueyang University in Hunan Province.

STEVE F. KRAR

Steve F. Krar spent 15 years in the machine tool trade and later graduated from the Ontario College of Education, University of Toronto, with a Type A Specialist’s Certificate in Technical Education. After 20 years of teaching, he devoted full time to researching and co-authoring over 60 books on machine tools and manufacturing technology. The text Technology of Machine Tools, now in its fifth edition, is recognized as one of the leading texts in the world on the subject; it has been translated into four languages. During his years of research, he has studied under, Dr. W. Edwards Deming, and has been associated with GE Superabrasives, and countless other leading machine tool manufacturers. He was invited twice to China to teach and share his knowledge about modern machining and manufacturing technology. Steve Krar, the former Associate Director of the GE Superabrasives Partnership for Manufacturing Productivity, is a life member of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers.

DR. GEORGE C. KU

Dr. George C. Ku is a professor of Technology and Vocational-Technical Education at Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, Connecticut. He has taught Material and Manufacturing technology courses at CCSU for the last 26 years. George Ku holds a B.S. and M.S. degree in Industrial Technology from Southern Illinois University and an Ed.D. in Industrial and Technical Education from Utah State University. Prior to his current assignment, he taught industrial education subjects at LaSalle High School, South Bend, Indiana, and Logan High School, Logan, Utah. He also worked as a mechanic, machinist, and welder in the modern industry. Dr. Ku has been invited to China and Taiwan to teach and share his knowledge about modern manufacturing technology and technical education programs in the United States. He has published a number of articles in professional journals and his publications range from machine tool operations to international programs.

DR. T. WARREN LIAO

Dr. T. Warren Liao received his M.S. and Ph.D. degree in Industrial Engineering from Lehigh University in 1986 and 1990, respectively. He has been with the Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering Department at Louisiana State University since 1990.

Dr. Liao’s primary research is intelligent manufacturing. He has published fifty refereed articles in journals such as Computers & Industrial Engineering, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, Wear, NDT&E, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, and Fuzzy Sets & Systems. He has served as a Guest Editor for three journals including Computer & Industrial Engineering, International Journal of Industrial Engineering, and Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing.

Dr. Liao is a recipient of ASEE-ARL Postdoctoral Fellowship Award.

ROBERT L. MABREY

Robert L. Mabrey is currently serving as an adjunct professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Tennessee Technological University (TTU). He recently retired as a full professor after serving for 25 years at TTU and later at Georgia Institute of Technology (GT). During his tenure at TTU, Robert founded and directed the Computer Aided Engineering Laboratory and while at GT he established and directed the Design and Model Fabrication Laboratories. Mabrey has served as president for the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) South Eastern Section and Secretary of the American Society of Computer Graphics for the State of Tennessee. He was also the recipient of the Frank Oppenheimer National Award from the Engineering Design Graphics Division of ASEE. His text on computer-aided graphics and solid modeling has been well received.

STEVEN RAFF

Starting in the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy, Steven Raff has worked for forty-six years in the electronic engineering segment of the aerospace industry. The Royal Navy provided him with a four-year full time apprenticeship, and a further ten years experience in design, development, and maintenance of avionics and missile systems. After leaving the navy he joined the British Aircraft Corporation as an engineer, where he worked for seven years on developing software and hardware systems for automated test equipment used in the flight controls of the Concorde supersonic transport, and the Rapier missile system. In 1974 he immigrated to Canada where he worked for Canadair on the design, development and test of Unmanned Air Vehicle systems, which are now in service with the German and French armies. His final seven years at Canadair were spent as department head (and designated Transport Canada Design Approval Representative) responsible for ensuring the design of Canadair’s production aircraft included the ability, as required for Airworthiness Certification, to safely survive the effects of lightning strikes and electromagnetic interference. In 1999 he retired from Canadair, but maintained his Transport Canada Design Approval Representative status and runs an engineering consultant business from home.

MARIO RAPISARDA

Mario Rapisarda of Norwalk, Connecticut is a multi-media writer and producer whose credits include developing interactive teaching programs as well as being published in two technical textbooks. His first assignment with Steve Krar, international author of over 60 Machine Tool Technology books, was doing research and some photography for the text Superabrasives: Grinding and Machining. He is the author of PRECISION METAL TECHNOLOGY, published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Mario’s varied teaching experience included the vocational school system of Connecticut, CETA job training programs for the Norwalk Board of Education, and the NTMA (National Tooling and Machining Association). A member of SME (Society of Manufacturing Engineers), his practical experiences are the result of working at different levels of engineering, beginning as an apprentice tool and diemaker. He also developed and produced a series of video and A/V programs on machine shop practices for Photocom Productions.

DOUGLAS RIZZO

Mr. Rizzo’s association with the machine tool trade started at an early age in his father’s machine shop where he learned to operate all types of conventional machine tools. As CNC machine were introduced, Doug was one of the first to have the opportunity of learning about, and running this new technology. He gained valuable experience in programming and operating CNC turning and chucking centers and multi-axes CNC machining centers. His extensive experience with CAD/CAM has been a benefit in his and his father’s shop.

Douglas Rizzo’s love of learning has resulted in a B.S. in Business Management and he is currently working on a B.S. in Biology. His eventual goal is an Engineering degree. He has used his CNC trade knowledge to do in-house training for various industries.

PETER SMID

Peter Smid graduated from high school with a specialty in machine shop training. After graduation, he entered industry, completed an apprenticeship program, and gained valuable experience as a machinist skilled on all types of machine tools. Peter immigrated to Canada in 1968 and spent the next 26 years employed in the machine tool industry as a machinist and a tool and die maker.

In the early 1970s he became involved in Computer Numerical Control (CNC) as a programmer/operator and devoted the next 18 years to becoming proficient in all aspects of computerized manufacturing. In 1989 he became an independent consultant and hundreds of companies used Peter Smid’s CNC and CAD/CAM skills to improve their manufacturing operations. During this time Peter found time to write a comprehensive 500 page CNC Programming Handbook that is rapidly becoming the Bible of CNC Programming.

In 1995, he became a consultant/professor of Advanced Manufacturing focusing on industrial and customized training in CNC, CAD/CAM, and Agile Manufacturing. His many years of teaching, training, lecturing, and designing curriculum gives Peter the opportunity of passing along his vast knowledge on modern manufacturing technology to students of all ages.

DIRK A. SMITS

Dirk Smits became associated with the machine tool industry following his early education. During his association with the trade he became interested in the field of grinding. He continued his education completing a Bachelor of Science degree, with majors in Mathematics and Physics, from Northern Kentucky University in 1990. This was followed in 1993 by a Master of Science degree, with a major in Electro-Optics, from the University of Dayton. Dirk has been employed by Bethel Technologies since 1994 and his specialty is Cylindrical Grinding technology.

Mr. Smits has coauthored a number of papers on Centerless and Roll grinding along with producing numerous software programs on various aspects of grinding for the Cincinnati Milacron Co. and ICMI (International Commission on Mathematical Instruction)

Dr. JOYCE A. WILKERSON

Joyce Wilkerson began her pursuit of technological expertise by completing half a Tool and Die Apprenticeship and a Moldmaking Apprenticeship in her home state of Tennessee. Her Machine Tool experience led to employment by several companies in Indianapolis. She completed an AAS degree in Machine Tool Technology at Ivy Tech State College and a B.S. degree at Martin University. Using her machine tool skills and knowledge of the industry, Joyce owned and operated a Mold Shop. While completing the degree at Martin University, Joyce joined the adjunct faculty at Ivy Tech where she assumed full-time faculty and Program Chair responsibilities for the Machine Tool and CAD/Cam Programs. In this capacity she developed the Computer Numerical Control and CAD/CAM elements of the program and designed new course outlines that became the model for all courses offered in the Technology Division of Ivy Tech.

Dr. Wilkerson earned her Masters Degree from Indiana State University and later accepted a faculty position in Industrial Technology and Basic Engineering at Tennessee Technological University. While at Tennessee Technological University she earned a Doctorate in Education at Tennessee State University. Her knowledge and skill in CAD/CAM evolved into the first Internet CAD/CAM course. Dr. Wilkerson’s contributions to educational materials in machine tool practice and reference extend from laboratory manuals and textbook revisions to authoring multimedia tutorials of CAD/CAM.

Dr. Wilkerson is currently Technical Education Officer for Gadsden State Community College at Gadsden, Alabama.

SECTION 1

HUMAN RESOURCES

High technology has arrived on the floor of America’s factories and the growing use of these technologies has led to operational excellence, higher productivity, and higher profits. High technology alone cannot provide all these benefits without a skilled workforce that is continually updated and trained to get the full benefits that each new technology can provide. Therefore, training and managing of the workforce should be the greatest focus of any firm wishing to compete and survive in manufacturing.

Executives cannot do their best work or be successful in business without the cooperation and help of others. Conventional manufacturing is being rapidly replaced by new, fast-response, customer-focused techniques that maximize the manufacturer’s return on all resources: capital, materials, equipment, facilities, time, and especially human resources. Without a skilled workforce, we cannot remain the world’s economic leader.

UNIT 1-1

PRODUCING PRODUCTIVITY

Manufacturing Technology’s Unmeasured Role in Economic Expansion

(Reprinted by Permission of AMT – The Association of Manufacturing Technology – Sept. 2000)

Traditional economic measures of productivity alone do not reveal the full extent of economic benefits contributed by machine tools and related advanced manufacturing techniques. The unmeasured contributions averaged nearly $200 billion per year during the past five years a total of nearly $1 trillion. This represents savings in just two product examples as well as labor productivity improvements in the eight industries that are the most intensive users of machine tools. The measure of economic benefits would be even larger if other products and industries were included in the analysis.

The basis for this conclusion is the Sept. 2000 study by Joel Popkin and Company, Washington, D.C. based economic consultants. It reveals the substantial benefits generated by advanced manufacturing technologies and their positive effect on productivity, an outcome reflecting the blending of new, high productivity machine tool technology with the benefits of information technology based manufacturing processes.

Traditional measures of productivity alone do not reveal the full extent of manufacturing’s true contributions to the growing U.S. economy masking the full potential for continued strong economic growth without inflation. Manufacturing technology, through its application in various types of capital equipment, played a major role in the country’s remarkable economic growth of the 1990s, this analysis of official economic data shows.

Why has manufacturing’s contribution to the nation’s prosperity largely gone unrecognized? Economists believe the main reason that its role has not been fully credited is because of the diverse mix of technological advances in manufacturing and the difficulty of quantifying their total economic benefits.

Yet these contributions to economic growth rival those of computers and information technology. Estimates by Federal Reserve Board economists attribute no more than one half of the recent upswing in productivity to computers and information technology. Thus other forms of improvement deserve a large part of the credit for the upswing in productivity that has given the nation a decade of uninterrupted growth.

Beneficiaries of these understated advances have included nearly everyone:

▪Manufacturers, who make higher quality products faster and at lower cost.

▪Consumers, who pay less for higher quality goods that perform better and last longer.

▪Workers in the manufacturing sector, who acquire new skills and earn higher real wages.

▪The economy, because the U.S. is competitive and inflation stays in check.

PRODUCTIVITY MAKES THE DIFFERENCE

Productivity in durable goods manufacturing is one of the economy’s main drivers. From 1959 to 1996, economy wide multifactor productivity (MFP) the most fundamental measure of productivity that considers factors beyond capital and labor grew at an annual average rate of 0.8 percent for the nonfarm economy, while manufacturing MFP grew considerably faster, at 1.1 percent. Chart 1.2* shows that the durable goods sector accounted for virtually all of the MFP growth in manufacturing during the period from 1971 to 1996, as nondurable MFP was flat during that time. During the 1980s and 1990s, durable goods manufacturing achieved exceptional MFP gains, averaging 4.2 percent annually between 1992 and 1996.

Labor productivity shows a relationship similar to that above. The private, nonfarm economy experienced a distinct slowdown in labor productivity in 1973, and proceeded at that slow pace through most of the l990s. Labor productivity in manufacturing, while also growing at a constant pace until the mid 1990s, accelerated sharply beginning in 1993. Chart 1.4 traces gains in manufacturing output per labor hour to durable goods industries, especially during the 1990s.

*Chart and table numbering conforms to designations used in the main study.

These gains in manufacturing productivity have resulted in enormous benefits.

▪Rapid gains in labor productivity in the durable goods sector generated an additional $618 billion of output (in 1996 dollars) over the 1992–98 period.

▪These same producers also saved $25.3 billion in carrying costs between 1992 and 1997 thanks to a decline in inventory requirements per dollar of sales, attributable to advanced manufacturing processes. This in turn freed up billions of dollars in capital for additional investment.

▪Eight key industries auto parts, aircraft engines and parts, engines and turbines, metal foundries, fabricated structural metal, other industrial machinery, construction and mining equipment, and farm and garden machinery saved a combined total of $24.3 billion in payroll costs in 1997 and $80 billion over the six year period 1992–1997.

▪Consumers realized an actual decline of just over $100 billion in the cost of durable goods from 1996 to 1999.

▪Consumers also saved billions from product quality improvements such as cars with higher fuel efficiency ($50 billion in 1999), reduced maintenance needs ($21 billion in 1998), and savings from lower electricity bills for energy efficient refrigerators and air conditioners ($19.6 billion in 1997).

MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES

America is back as a manufacturing powerhouse.

Manufacturing today is complex, competitive, and quality conscious. Consumer demand for mass customization has replaced the earlier one size fits all notion of mass production. Manufacturers are now driven by a faster, better, cheaper mantra.

To deliver what customers want, manufacturers have reinvented themselves, finding new ways of doing things and reevaluating every aspect of production to improve productivity. To respond to this demand, machine tool makers have instituted changes to enhance productivity and competitiveness in a variety of industries including automobiles, refrigeration, heating and air conditioning, aerospace, construction and mining equipment, and farm and garden machinery (See Table 2.1).

Machine tools have also become increasingly tied to information technologies to form a combined system of manufacturing that produces goods more quickly and with greater accuracy than before. Among the most important advances has been the change from manual control of the machine tool’s movements to numeric control and computer numerical control. This has fostered new uses for machine tools. Five axis machine tools are now widely used, not only in the defense industry but also in civilian applications. The ability to produce complex geometric patterns more quickly and accurately, without using templates, has increased the number of items for which the use of machine tools is practical.

During the last two decades, a revolution in manufacturing technology generally and advances in machine tools specifically enabled manufacturers to reinvent themselves and to restore the competitive power of the United States as a world class producer of durable goods.

There has also been a marked increase in the use of computing power and automation in machine tools, such as the ability to read computer aided design math models into the machine to determine its movements. The aircraft industry provides a good example of how advances in machine tool technology have improved the manufacturing process. In one dramatic example, an aerospace company [McDonnell Douglas] changed the manufacturing process for landing gear bulk heads of the C 17 aircraft to take advantage of high speed machining. Under the new process, bulkheads are made with two parts, rather than 72, and require only 35 fasteners to hold them together, rather than 1,720 under the previous method. Furthermore, machining was completed 15 times faster.

BENEFITS OF QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS TO CONSUMERS

Advances in machine tool technologies have made it possible to improve quality dramatically and build better, longer lasting products at lower prices. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) documents these improvements. Between 1982 and 1999, the overall CPI increased by 73 percent, or at an annual average rate of 3.3 percent. Over the same period, the price index for durable goods increased by only 35 percent, or an annual average of only 1.8 percent. More striking still, the price of durable goods actually declined between 1996 and 1999, saving consumers approximately $101.3 billion.

Table 2.1: Improvements in Machine Tool Technology Since the 1970s

Increased accuracy due to

▪Thermal effect compensation

▪Geometric compensation through CNC

▪Real-time compensation for tool wear

▪Dynamic compensation for die-height (for effects of thermal and speed vaiations)

Improved operations due to more capable CNC:

▪Download of instructions rather than tape

▪Remote diagnostics

▪Visual representation of cycle progress at the machine

▪More accurate contouring

▪Programming at CNC machine

▪Automatic die changes

Improvements in components of machines

▪Switch from hydraulic drives to electric drives

▪Linear Drives

▪Higher spindle speeds

▪Variable spindle speed used in conjunction with electric drives

▪Faster die changes and automatice bolster/die changers

Improved tool materials provide longer tool life and allow more demanding machining:

▪Coated carbides

▪Cubic Boron Nitride (CBN) Grinding wheels

▪Ceramic tools

Increased capabilities of machining centers:

▪Greater tool storage

▪Ability to handle more pallets

▪Live tool stations on turning centers

Multiple operations performed with a single machine set-up

Combining processes in one machine: mill, turn, grind

High-speed presses

Wire electro-discharge machining

Waterjet machining

Laser machining

Flexible manufacturing systems (an arrangement of machines interconnected with a transport system and both being controlled by a computer system)

Programmable logic controllers

Stereolithography ( a rapid prototyping process whereby a 3-D object is created using cross-sectional data from a computer-aided design file and printing it with a solid-object printer)

Improving handling of parts:

▪Robotics and handling of parts of rotation

▪Automatic loading and unloading of parts from presses

Automobiles illustrate this trend. Consumers spend more on cars and light trucks than any other durable good. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, vehicle quality between 1967 and 1998 increased at an annual average rate of 2.2 percent. This means that a car built in 1998 has twice the quality as one built in 1967 in terms of per formance, reliability, durability, and warranty. Today, owners of new cars produced by U.S. companies experience fewer than 30 problems per 100 cars during the first year of ownership, compared with 104 per 100 cars in 1980.

Higher quality means fewer repairs and longer useful life (Table 4.2). Car maintenance costs dropped 28 percent between 1985 and 1998, translating into a sav ings of $21 billion in 1998 alone. As a result of higher quality, the median age of cars in operation today is over eight years, compared with 6.5 years in 1990 and less than five years in 1980. Yet the average mileage traveled by cars increased from 9,500 miles a year in 1985 to over 11,000 miles today (Chart 4.3).

Advances in manufacturing technology and machine tools have also delivered savings to consumers through major improvements in the fuel efficiency of cars and light trucks during the last 15 years. Today’s passenger vehicles are more powerful and more economical than those of 25 years ago, and they are saving consumers tens of billions of dollars annually in fuel costs alone.

The story of the automobile industry is no fluke. Similar quality improvements and dollar savings are seen in other durable consumer goods. For example, new, more precise and flexible machine tools have enabled the manufacture of the scroll compressor, making it possible to increase the energy efficiency rating of air conditioners and heat pumps nearly 40 percent since 1981; the energy rating of refrigerators jumped 100 percent during the same period. These improvements saved consumers nearly $20 billion in electricity costs during 1997 alone (Chart 4.11).

MACROECONOMIC BENEFITS

In addition to the many machine tool advances that have enabled manufacturers in various industries to produce better products faster and cheaper, improvements in manufacturing technology have also delivered important gains to the economy as a whole in at least four major areas.

First, and of greatest significance, the dramatic turnaround in manufacturing helped fuel America’s economic expansion during the 1990s. After accounting for inflation, the average annual rate of growth of real GDP in durable goods industries between 1992 and 1997 was a remarkable 7.6 percent, more than twice the rate for the overall private economy. During the decade from 1987 to 1997, durable manufacturing grew at a 4.0 percent average annual rate, still significantly higher than the private economy as a whole. And according to the Congressional Research Service, increases in manufacturing output have more than twice the downstream impact on the economy as output increases in other sectors of the private economy such as services.

Second, advances in manufacturing technology have improved the quality and prosperity of the workforce by making it necessary for employers to provide workers with more training. Training is often needed because although today’s machine tools are simpler to operate, the tasks they perform are more complex. Workers who improve their skills through training qualify for higher wages and improve their living standards while enhancing manufacturing productivity.

A third heretofore unappreciated benefit of the improvements in manufacturing technology has been to reduce the peaks and valleys of the U.S. business cycle by reducing inventory fluctuations. Better machine tools have helped to shorten process times and aided Just In Time inventory management procedures. In the past, inventory fluctuations have often triggered economic recessions.

Finally, manufacturing improvements have again made the U.S. a powerhouse in the global marketplace. After bottoming out in the early 1980s, the quantity of manufactured goods exported from the U.S. grew at nearly 12 percent annually between 1986 and 1992, while those of leading global competitors lagged. German exports of manufactured goods grew at only 4 percent, for example, and Japan’s grew at just 3.5 percent. Over the 10 year period from 1986 to 1996, U.S. exports of manufactured products grew at an average annual rate of 10 percent, while those from Germany and Japan averaged a mere 4 percent and 2.5 percent, respectively.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The dividends to the U.S. economy created by advances in manufacturing technology are not captured by productivity measures alone. There are other important ways in which the restructuring of the nation’s manufacturing capabilities have generated significant economic benefits for producers of durable goods, the consumers who buy their products, and the U.S. economy as a whole.

Thus, policies that promote and support continued capital investment, the development of advanced manufacturing technologies, and the continuing advancement of education and skill training for the American worker should be a priority at all levels of government.

Specific public policy initiatives have been developed and are to be published separately. Among the highlights are:

▪Keeping interest rates stable so as not to discourage continued investment.

▪Stimulating more investment by allowing investments in productive equipment to be written off at the time the expenditure is made.

▪Supporting research & development by extending the R&D tax credit on a permanent basis and increasing the budget for the National Science Foundation and other technology oriented programs.

▪Improving the trade environment by adopting a territorial and border adjustable tax system, increasing resources for trade promotion agencies including the Export/Import Bank, eliminating unilateral U.S. export controls, vigorously enforcing U.S. Fair Trade laws, strengthening dispute resolution within the World Trade Organization, and working to open foreign markets to U.S. products.

▪Assuring that exchange rates reflect international as well as domestic economic conditions to provide fair trading relationships.

▪Adopting fair and balanced legal and regulatory reforms.

These policies will, AMT believes, help extend prosperity in the United States in a manner that will provide the maximum opportunity for manufacturing and other industries to participate in the expansion.

The study was sponsored by AMT The Association For Manufacturing Technology, the trade association for American producers of machine tools and manufacturing technology equipment. For additional copies contact AMT at 703 893 2900. E mail: [e-mail].

Fig. 1-1-1

The Law of Production

What Everyone Should Know About Economics

The following sets of facts, developed by The American Economic Foundation, are called the Ten Pillars of Economic Wisdom. These basic laws of economics might be called a blueprint for man’s economic life. These simple truths should clear up the hostility that has been generated between economic groups by people who want to benefit by that hostility.

These ten rules show how simply the economic truth can be told:

1.NOTHING IN OUR MATERIAL WORLD can come from nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free. Everything in our economic life has a source, a destination, and a cost that must be paid.

2.GOVERNMENT IS NEVER A SOURCE OF GOODS. Everything produced is produced by the people, and everything that government gives to the people, it must first take from the people.

3.THE ONLY VALUABLE MONEY that government has to spend is that money taxed or borrowed out of the people’s earnings. When government decides to spend more than it has thus received, that extra unearned money is created out of thin air, through the banks, and, when spent, takes on value only by reducing the value of all money, savings, and insurance.

4.IN OUR MODERN EXCHANGE ECONOMY, all payroll and employment come from customers, and the only worthwhile job security is customer security; if there are no customers, there can be no payroll and no jobs.

5.CUSTOMER SECURITY can be achieved by workers only when they cooperate with management in doing the things that win and hold customers. Job security, therefore, is a partnership problem that can be solved only in a spirit of understanding and cooperation.

6.BECAUSE WAGES ARE THE PRINCIPAL COST of everything, widespread wage increases, without corresponding increases in production, simply increase the cost of everybody’s living.

7.THE GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER means, in its material sense, the greatest goods for the greatest number that, in turn, means the greatest productivity per worker.

8.ALL PRODUCTIVITY IS BASED on three factors: 1) natural resources, whose form, place, and condition are changed by the expenditure of 2) human energy (both muscular and mental), with the aid of 3) tools.

9.TOOLS ARE THE ONLY ONE of these three factors that people can increase without limit. Tools come into being in a free society only when there is a reward for the temporary self-denial that people must practice in order to channel part of their earnings away from purchases that produce immediate comfort and pleasure, and into new tools of production. Proper payment for the use of tools is essential to their creation.

10.THE PRODUCTIVITY OF THE TOOLS - that is, the efficiency of the human energy applied in connection with their use - has always been highest in a competitive society in which the economic decisions are made by millions of progress-seeking individuals, rather than in a state-planned society in which those decisions are made by a handful of all-powerful people, regardless of how well-meaning, unselfish, sincere, and intelligent those people may be.

For more information on PRODUCING PROSPERITY see the Website: www.mfgtech.org.

UNIT 1-2

ECONOMICS OF ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY

The global competition in manufacturing industries has focused on producing quality parts quickly and accurately. This attention to the quality of products, along with the increased productivity necessary to compete globally, has led more and more manufacturers to introduce advanced manufacturing technologies. This appears to be the strategy of companies striving to become world-class competitors; generally it involves the use of the latest machine tools, cutting tools, and manufacturing processes which are expensive and sometimes difficult to justify using the traditional accounting practices.

The major opposition to introducing advanced manufacturing technologies seems to be the fact that many companies are still using traditional cost accounting and justification methods of the past. These methods are too short-term and too bottom-line oriented and do not consider the effects and benefits that advanced technologies can have on the entire company’s competitive position in world trade. What is required is the extension of traditional cost accounting to include a softer relationship that goes beyond purely financial measures. It must consider the sometimes intangible effects that advanced technologies can have on the customer which in turn can affect the entire company. Recent surveys reveal that 92% of those responding believe that the biggest barriers to using new manufacturing technologies are related to management and not to technical problems. Four factors seem to confirm the reasons for their unwillingness to invest:

1.The misconceptions of the past and the present economic conditions.

▪There is an overemphasis on direct labor costs which in the past amounted to as much as 50% of the total product cost.

▪In the 1990s, the approximate division of manufacturing costs is was follows: direct labor – 10%, material – 55%, overhead – 20%, and indirect labor – 15%, Fig. 1-2-1.

2.The bias against capital equipment investment because of the critical errors in the way the theory is applied.

▪A common mistake is only considering the cost of the piece of the technological equipment and not its effect on the entire manufacturing operation.

3.The failure to deal with or understand any of the important factors relating to the company’s business philosophy.

▪Many projects can be justified on direct productivity savings, reduced warranty costs, reductions in scrap, and rework costs, Fig. 1-2-2.

4.Setting high hurdle rates for evaluating new technology, believing this will result in high-return profits, rather than introducing new product and process technology to improve product accuracy and manufacturing productivity.

▪Delaying investments for advanced manufacturing technologies can result in a competitor gaining a market advantage that may be difficult or impossible to reverse.

Fig. 1-2-1 The changing manufacturing costs between the 1920s and the 1990s shows a major reduction in labor costs. (Courtesy Cincinnati Milacron, Inc.)

BASIC JUSTIFICATION APPROACHES

There are three basic approaches on how to justify the replacement of machines, tools, and processes, Fig 1-2-3. Industrial equipment justification is generally a management decision that is critical to the quality and price of the finished product. It often determines whether a company’s product will survive in the marketplace or how long a company will remain in business.

1.The defensive approach is where no capital equipment, major tools, or manufacturing processes are purchased until something wears out and cannot be repaired.

At that time, the equipment is replaced with comparable equipment with no thought given to any changes in the manufacturing method.

▪This approach is relatively easy, however it is generally leads to a loss of the company’s position in the marketplace.

Fig. 1-2-2 Factors that can determine the justification of an advanced manufacturing technology. (Courtesy Kelmar Associates)

Fig. 1-2-3 Types of justification approaches. (Courtesy Kelmar Associates)

2.The cost saving approach is basically a conservative approach that offers some degree of overall progress.

▪A piece of equipment is replaced with a similar kind that offers some manufacturing improvements.

▪There is no concentrated effort to see whether the entire operation, tools, or process should be changed.

▪The investment is made as long as the ROI (return on investment) looks favorable.

3.The aggressive approach takes a critical look at the present equipment and manufacturing processes to see if they are really the best ones that will keep them competitive in the marketplace.

▪It may mean a complete change in concept or methodology that offers the best possibilities for real changes in a manufacturing process.

▪This approach is the most difficult to justify by a dollar-and-cents formula, however, it may be the only way to generate new revenue and increase the competitive position of the company.

COSTING METHODS

There are two different types of costing methods: traditional and advanced manufacturing technology, Fig. 1-2-4.

Traditional Costing

Traditional costs are those that have always been recognized as permanent or essential to the process.

▪The purchase prices of the machine, process, and tooling

▪The cost of expendable tools and equipment

▪Labor and overhead costs per part

▪The setup and tool-change time

▪The number of parts produced in a cycle

▪The life of the machine, process, or tooling

Fig. 1-2-4 The two types of costing methods commonly used to justify expenditures. (Courtesy Kelmar Associates)

Advanced Manufacturing Technology Costing

Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT) costs are those that become important as a result of the effect they have on the entire company.

▪The reduced cost of storing and delivering tools to the workstation because of their extended life

▪Fewer tools required in inventory to meet the production schedule that reduces JIT (Just in Time) and inventory costs

▪Because of the quality of the machines and tools, there is less maintenance and therefore lower labor costs

▪Less scrap and rework resulting from the reliability of the machines and tools

▪The accuracy and repeatability of the machines increasing the productivity and the product quality

▪Greater customer satisfaction with the product quality that results in increased sales

JUSTIFYING THE INVESTMENT

The following look at justification is based on a realistic assessment of the impact that advanced manufacturing technology has on the manufacturing operation, the organization, and the corporate strategies.

Investment management should be seen as more than a budgeting process for capital outlays on new machines and manufacturing processes. The common thread that binds all successful automation implementation is careful planning that considers the long-range benefits and the risks involved. New technological investments that involve greater productivity potential must be evaluated on their projected competitive advantage and related benefits such as:

▪improved and/or more consistent product quality

▪greater flexibility

▪shorter throughput and lead time

▪reduced inventory

▪less floor space required – A new technology machine or process generally out-produces two or more machines.

▪Reduced indirect manufacturing costs that could include:

•material handling equipment and personnel material handling equipment and personnel

•the number of machines required

•scrap, rework, and warranty claims

•maintenance and disposable tooling costs

•QC (quality control) personnel

•light, heat, taxes, and insurance

An effective business plan, Fig. 1-2-5 should be a three-tiered approach based upon:

▪A global or strategic plan that considers the requirements for competing in the world marketplace

▪The business plan that develops strategies to compete around the world

▪A detailed manufacturing plan that identifies activities in support of the business and strategic plans to become a low-cost, high-quality producer.

•This plan must deal with components such as product cost, product quality and reliability, delivery lead times, and frequency of new products.

Fig. 1-2-5 An effective business plan includes three factors. (Courtesy Kelmar Associates)

By examining the non-technical concepts of a manufacturing plan, such as GT (Group Technology) or JIT (Just-In-Time) manufacturing, can become more productive with very little capital investment. These two factors provide the greatest savings, representing a large down payment on new technology, yielding benefits such as:

▪90% reduction in inventory

▪90% decrease in lead time

▪75% reduction in setup time

▪50% more efficient use of floor space

A well-planned manufacturing installation can dramatically improve product quality, reduce scrap and rework, and increase the company’s flexibility to respond to the changes in production requirements and the marketplace. The goal of new technology should never be to eliminate labor but to increase the flow of product through a plant, improve the product quality, and be able to quickly respond to customer’s needs.

COMMON JUSTIFICATION PITFALLS

Technology has dramatically changed manufacturing cost behavior patterns. The direct labor and inventory costs are decreasing, while depreciation, engineering, and data processing costs are increasing. Traditional financial systems focus on labor and inventory, and do not consider the benefits of flexibility, product quality, and customer service.

Major Pitfalls

▪Using traditional cost accounting/performance measuring systems that rely on labor, and price per part

▪Setting high ROI (Return On Investment) hurdle rates and applying the same rate to new and strategic product lines

▪Little or no consideration of alternative methods of improving productivity and product quality

▪Resistance to identify the benefits of advanced technology properly

▪Failure to consider the effects that not introducing new technology may have on the company

▪Failure to understand that traditional ROI/DCF (discounted cash flow) justification methods do not consider the effect that advanced technology can have on the future of the company

The biggest problem is that the relationship between improved cost and improved market share is not fully understood or even considered.

A JUSTIFICATION STRATEGY

It must first be understood that traditional methods do not completely assess the impact of introducing advanced technology, be it machine tools, manufacturing processes, or tooling on the entire company. Justifying the benefits, tangible or intangible, of advanced technology is not impossible if the company has a well-defined plan. The following points should be considered:

▪What is the value of consistent and superior product quality?

▪What is the cost of scrap, rework, and large inventories?

▪What is the cost of missed delivery dates, lost contracts, and shrinking market share?

▪What is the value of greater flexibility and the ability to respond to market changes quickly?

▪What is the cost of not being able to hold existing markets or open new markets due to lack of competitive equipment or the capacity of the company?

▪What is the value of increased productivity and reduced lead-time?

▪What is the cost of product and prototype development, engineering changes, work-in-process, inventory, and inefficient use of equipment and facilities?

Only by identifying the real cost drivers can the benefits of advanced manufacturing technology be valued and justified.

JUSTIFYING NEW PROCESSES

New manufacturing processes usually involve adding of new equipment or tools; the key benefits are not always easy to identify. Rapid prototyping - a process that can involve the use of laser, photochemistry, optical scanning, and computer technology - is used to make a three-dimensional prototype (model) from a CAD file one layer at a time, Fig. 1-2-6.

Rapid Prototyping allows product designers and manufacturing engineers to see and hold a physical model of a new product in as little as a day after the prototyping begins. Any technology that can radically improve the ability of a company to compete more effectively is worth the effort it takes to prepare a solid proposal for its acquisition. Most of the guidelines shown in Fig. 1-2-7, even though they are directed to Rapid Prototyping, should apply when attempting to justify any advanced manufacturing technology.

1.The Executive Summary

▪A one-half- to one-page long document that describes the present manufacturing operation and why it is necessary for the company to consider the benefits of the new technology.

Fig. 1-2-6 Rapid Prototyping is used to create prototype models for new products. (Courtesy 3D Systems)

▪Identify the productivity-increase factor by the total expected savings over a five-year period divided by the cost and the support services.

2.The Wish List

▪Include the equipment that is necessary to install the new process. State the effect this addition would have on the company’s productivity and competitive position in the marketplace.

▪In a separate proposal, list the cost and effects of upgrades to existing equipment or processes.

3.Alternatives

A well-written proposal should detail the alternatives to buying a new process and if possible its disadvantages:

▪Upgrading existing equipment may not meet the increases foreseen in demand or product quality.

▪Using outside suppliers to provide the technology required.

•What did this service cost from outside suppliers over the past few years?

•Was the service always available when required and were delivery dates met?

•Would it be less expensive and more convenient to have the equipment in house?

4.Case Histories

In any request for a large capital outlay, it is important to have answers to the following:

▪What is the technology and what does it do? A videotape from the vendor of the technology could be useful in informing those not familiar with the technology.

▪How many competitors are using this advanced technology; document their published results? This information may be available from equipment manufacturers or suppliers.

Fig. 1-2-7 The factors that a justification plan should include to ensure success. (Courtesy Kelmar Associates)

When introducing advanced technology, keep in mind not only its immediate effect on a particular area of the manufacturing operation, but the potential ripple effect that improve efficiency of both upstream and downstream applications.

▪What is the technology’s effect on productivity, production flexibility, responsiveness to market changes, product quality and reliability, human resources, inventory levels, and customer satisfaction?

CASE HISTORIES:

TOOLS AND ACCESSORIES

Major improvements in productivity and product quality can be affected through the use of advanced technology in tools and accessories, manufacturing processes, and machine tools and manufacturing systems. The following examples of each category show the experiences of firms that implemented them.

Superabrasive Cutting Tools

The cost model shown in Table 1-2-1 is a comprehensive method of analyzing critical cost variables associated with a particular machining application. To illustrate how this model can be applied, annual production data from an automotive engine plant has been entered into the applicable sections of the machining cost model. This model reflects the machining costs of a gray cast iron cylinder boring application comparing silicon nitride (SiN) inserts with polycrystalline cubic boron nitride (PCBN) inserts. The use of PCBN tools in gray cast iron machining is limited to certain grades, depending upon the microstructure of the cast iron.

Total Machining Cost Evaluation

Application: Gray Cast Iron Cylinder Boring

An engine cylinder block is being semi-finished and finish bored dry using a single-point tool boring head. After the semi-finishing pass is completed, a single tool is extended from the boring head by an actuator; the finishing pass is completed as the head is extracted from the cylinder bore. A total of twelve inserts are required to complete this operation on the gray cast iron V-6 engine.

▪Insert - SNG-432 (15° X .004 in. chamfer)

▪Speed - 2600 SFM

▪Feed - .014 in./rev.

Table 1-2-1 Machining cost model. (Courtesy GE Superabrasives)

▪DOC - .015 in. semifinish

▪DOC - .005 in. finish

The average bore cylindricity (roundness) obtained with the SiN tooling was .0006 in. When the change was made to PCBN inserts, average bore cylindricity was reduced to .0004 in. Since PCBN inserts conduct heat away from the workpiece, less heat shrinkage occurred in the bores, resulting in an improvement in cylinder honing.

Tool Cost (Cost of tooling only), Fig. 1-2-8. This is the cost often used as the major criterion for determining the economic justification for tool selection. Regrinding is also important, because it can bring the tool cost/part down significantly in some applications. The nature of this cylinder boring application did not allow the regrinding of inserts. As seen from the model, the price per part is essentially the same despite the significantly higher initial price of the PCBN tool.

Fig. 1-2-8 Tool cost factors - Machining. (Courtesy GE Superabrasives)

On-Line Labor Cost (Cost of operator to run machine), Fig. 1-2-9. This cost in some cases will also include setup because it is done by the same person. On a per part basis, the cost model shows a reduction in cost when PCBN is used due to the increase in productivity on this cylinder boring application.

Fig. 1-2-9 On-Line labor cost factors - Machining. (Courtesy GE Superabrasives)

Tool Change Cost (Labor cost required to change tools), Fig. 1-2-10. This may be the same as on-line labor cost depending on who is authorized to change tools. In the cylinder boring application, PCBN requires a reduced number of tool changes, one every 12.5 shifts, compared to two per shift with SiN. Thus the tool change cost is significantly reduced.

Fig. 1-2-10 Tool change cost factors – Machining. (Courtesy GE Superabrasives)

Scrap Cost (Cost of scrapped parts), Fig. 1-2-11. PCBN produces a tighter part tolerance, resulting in a reduced scrap rate that is portrayed as a 61% scrap cost reduction shown in the model.

Fig. 1-2-11 Scrap cost factors – Machining. (Courtesy GE Superabrasives)

Setup Cost, Fig. 1-2-12, – This is the cost for labor to index tooling or prepare cutter for use, before it is actually delivered to the line. Since PCBN requires fewer tool changes, setup cost can be reduced with respect