Rooster's Revenge

My blessing and sometimes curse is the ability to look at a two-dimensional part print and visualize the stamping process and the three-dimensional mechanics of each tool.

In the manual design days, the vision of the tool design would go from my brain to my hands and end up on paper with pencil and speedraft.

For me, CAD interrupts this seamless transition because I have to “tell” the software what to do to match my die design vision.

Ever since I started experimenting with solid modeling in 1989, I dreamed of a technology that could create the design directly from the vision in my head.

There is an excellent post at Wired that speaks of such a technology. The story talks about scientists using a functional magnetic resonance imaging machine – a real-time brain scanner – to “see” what a person is thinking visually.

How cool would it be to use this fMRI technology to create die designs? It would be like an engineering mind reader.

When it comes to software for the die guy, most software companies have good intentions, but get it wrong.

The software could be solid modeling, estimating, formability analysis, or even online ecommerce.

My top five for what matters is:

1. Ease of use.
2. Accurate results.
3. Live and local technical support.
4. Reliable performance.
5. Useful and necessary features.

My top five for what does NOT matter is:

1. Detailed explanations of how the code works that only a PhD would understand.
2. Focus on aspects that are not relevant, like transverse shear stress calculations.
3. Fancy and expensive marketing materials that drive up the cost of software.
4. Industry awards like “business of the month”. Who cares?
5. Pot shots at competitor software products.

Software companies need to make an effort to understand what matters to the die guy. And deliver.

It is the little things that make a difference. I am generally critical about how to manage people. Most get it wrong.

Day in and day out, people crave leadership. People crave appreciation for their efforts. Even respect without appreciation leaves one feeling empty. Generally speaking, people in a position of leadership need to do more to inspire people.

Take my father for example. He is the best of the best tool and die makers in the business. He has a respected reputation that extends well past his co-workers and immediate supervisor.

My dad started his career in the mid-1960′s in the nuclear energy industry. Very difficult, close tolerance work with exotic materials. He worked for several other industries, including agriculture, before choosing to finish his career in automotive.

In 1984, he fulfilled his lifelong dream of working for General Motors at the prestigious Technical Center in Warren, Michigan.

My father has seen it all. Done it all. After roughly 40 years in the business, he has nothing left to prove. Yet, he works his magic day in and day out.

There was an extra spring in his step yesterday. When I asked how his day was, he had a big smile and a sparkle in his eyes. He finished a job for an engineer. I am thinking a five-axis CNC machine had to dance for this job.

Not the case. This time.

The engineer, who had nothing to gain politically or monetarily (the two incentives to survive in a big company like GM), sent an email up the chain of command expressing his appreciation and accomodation for my dad’s efforts. For a job he could do with his eyes closed.

The engineer had nothing to gain, but gained everything. The email, that little thing, meant alot to my father. Hell, it even made me proud. An ounce of gratitude goes a long way. Believe me.

Speaking of gratitude. I got into this business because of my father. Not because it was the family business. Not because tool and die is in our blood. And certainly not because he had the right connections to get a young kid like me started in a skilled trade. No. I got started in this business because my father inspired me.

When I was four or five years old, my father would do his drafting homework for his apprenticeship classes on the kitchen table. He had a small drafting board propped up on a cigar box. He had his T-square, triangles, and pencils all there.

My mother would try to keep us kids quiet and out of the kitchen while he did his homework after working hard all day. That is what moms are for.

I was always curious as to what he was doing, so I would sneak away, quietly open the kitchen doors, and just stand there. Watching. Quietly and in awe.

I would just watch him draw. Perfect linework. I was fascinated that a mechanical device could come to life from a blank sheet of paper. He made it look easy. And I would just watch.

And it was for only a few precious minutes before mom would discover the door open and get me out of there. But those few minutes was all I needed to know what I was going to do when I grew up.

Like the email from the engineer, it was the little things like this that made all the difference.

My pal Eric Kam has an excellent post about estimating dies.

He is correct in that most shops do not know their actual costs to build a one-off stamping die.

Eric is also correct that the estimate of costs by these shops has a high degree of variation.

I think the intellectual argument he suggests is valid, but the culture of the die business will get hung up on the actual results. The problem is the die business estimates by essentially trial and error guesswork.

Two estimators five steps away from each other in the same shop cannot agree on the estimate, yet these die shops like to argue the validity of the cost from software.

My approach would be much simpler.

I would challenge the estimating department to a challenge. I would call it the “Faster than You” challenge.

Here is how it works:

Let’s say the die shop has five estimators. Give everyone in the estimating department the same product / press / process data to quote to their way.

Show up with five users of the estimating software. Give them the same product / press / process data.

Have everyone start estimating at the same time and clock the results. Without even being there, I know what the result will be:

• Each of the die shop estimators will finish at different times with the slowest taking 50 – 100% longer than the fastest.
• Each of the die shop estimators will arrive at a different cost. The difference between the high and low estimates will be at least 30%.
• Each of the software guys will finish at roughly the same time with the slowest taking 5 – 10% longer than the fastest.
• Each of the software guys will arrive at exactly the same cost. There is no variation in cost given the same product / press / process input.

My argument is two-fold:

1. The die shop’s own estimators cannot agree on the cost using what amounts to trial and error guesswork as quoting method;
2. Since the die shop lacks a structured process, the estimating times are as unpredictable and random as the cost estimate.

The focus should be on eliminating variation in cost and process time. Solve that problem and the software sales will follow.