Page 58
www.us-
tech.com
Partnering March, 2015 Avoid Redesign By Proper Upfront Planning By Ed Nakauchi, Technical Consultant, Orbel Corporation
be heard every day when important questions haven’t been addressed during the development of a preci- sion metal part. Whenever a new project is started, those responsible for delivering the new product into the boardroom are under pressure. They face deliver dates, performance and quality expectations, and the need to meet budgets. With such pressures, a metal
T
component developed as a proof of concept is often not ready for a high- speed stamping press. If the final goals of a design are not addressed early in the design process, a re-
he words “I wish we had thought about that when we started our design effort” can
design may be necessary for that part. How can an engineer responsi- ble for a development project avoid delays and control costs? Light-gauge metal parts can be
formed in many ways, including via die cutting, the use of a turret press, and by means of photochemical milling, but photo-etching will be the focus here. It is a quick and economi- cal metal-forming approach that is ca- pable of tight tolerances specific to light-gauge metals during a prototyp- ing phase of a product development.
Determine Part Function When developing any new part,
whether it is a spring, battery holder, or optical encoder, it is necessary to
determine that part’s functionality, both mechanical and electrical. What material properties are important? For example, what type of corrosion resistance is required? What spring force, durability, solderability, and other material characteristics will be needed for the part to be de- signed? Unfortunately, metals are often specified for new de- signs without first determining if those metals are well suited for the final part design. Some metal
fabrication
processes, such as photo-etching and secondary forming process- es, provide room for making ad- justments when creating a func- tioning metal part. Forming blades, for example, can be ad- justed to yield a required radius for a part. By means of hand adjust- ments across a few parts, it may be possible to achieve a working proto- type part. Photo-etching has the capabili-
early-production stages. Any invest- ment in hard-tooling for a part that may experience revisions at later stages in the product development can be risky. In contrast, photo-etch- ing provides the flexibility of quick revisions to parts without undue
This is a sheet of photo-etched parts before singulation.
ty to process both sides of a metal part. Such features as lines, logos, and pockets, for example, can be etched on one side of a metal part and not on the other side of the part. Such flexibility as provided by photo- etching offers designers the means of meeting difficult metal-forming chal- lenges. If a metal part requires unique features, photo-etching may be the only option in terms of produc- ing that part. Where the cost reduc- tions of progressive stamping are planned for producing the final part, preplanning can provide numerous benefits. Photo-etching during the design stage should be used with care and forethought if high-speed stamping will be the means of pro- ducing the final parts, with an awareness of the differences in the two metal-forming processes. For example, the photo-etching
process requires that a part be held in a large metal sheet as it is being processed. The holding area is known as a tab, and the tab area always leaves an artifact in the metal when parts are removed from a sheet fol- lowing photo-etching. The location of the tabs may be insignificant during prototyping, but become more of an issue and a concern when parts vol- umes increase to the levels of auto- mated production. The issue of the tab mark can be
overcome in several ways. The tab can be located in an area that will not affect the final parts during high- speed automated production. Anoth- er option is to produce the part by means of hard-tooling as soon as the part is considered ready for produc- tion. This is always a preferred ap- proach, but may not be a realistic op- tion during the part design and
costs. Extended lead times are asso- ciated with the hard-tooling of parts, from development to final article ap- proval. When any change is required to a part, it can represent a signifi- cant expense in the changes needed to upgrade the hard-tooling equip- ment. Photo-etching and forming can provide changes without those same expenses, offering a much more eco- nomical solution for forming parts in many cases. The advantages of using a pro-
gressive die in forming metal parts are clear. Tighter tolerances are pos- sible and costs are considerably less than with photo-etching methods. When the need for tight tolerances justifies the investment in hard-tool- ing parts-forming approaches, or the volumes are high enough to account for the capital investments in hard- tooling methods, progressive stamp- ing is the right choice for producing metal parts. But when the volumes are less or the tolerances are less critical, photo-etching methods may be the best approach for producing metal parts, for a life of a project. Expected volumes should al-
ways be considered when planning a new part. By looking ahead to re- quired volumes for a part when pro- totyping the part, it may be possible to eliminate the need for update prints while going through the part approval process twice for the same part, saving both time and money. Also, when considering a proto-
typing partner for a project, the com- pany chosen should offer scalability within its operation. This can ease shifting a prototype part to the best possible manufacturing scenario available when it is time to make that part in high-volume, production-
level quantities. Contact: Orbel Corp.,
2 Danforth Dr., Easton, PA 18045 % 610-829-5000 fax: 610-829- 5050 Web:
www.orbel.com r
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104