Comments on: Guide Decisions

By: stephens

stephens — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:53:27 +0000

Thanks for reading … I am working up a post on things that I feel should change to save billions of dollars on dies.

To answer your question, I feel the materials are generally wrong for today’s stampings. The AHSS and other materials on the market today were not invented when the die standards for conventional D2, S7 and the like were specified.

The processes are about the same, however.

By: WC Murray

WC Murray — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:45:43 +0000

I find your posts to interesting especially as they relate to how the purpose of die standards are to guide the decision making process. It left me wondering are there any “requirements” into which these standards must fall or have the materials and processes advanced so much that it is time for these to even be revamped ?

By: Eric Kam

Eric Kam — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:53:09 +0000

not to mention the guys who made their balloon payments using the Suggestion Plan max award. It never ceased to amaze me that as soon as the die was bought off, the cost savings ideas would come pouring in. Even better when they came from the same people who were troubleshooting the die to begin with would after official SOP have a very well engineered and thought up suggestion.

By: Die Guy » Blog Archive » Broken Rules

Die Guy » Blog Archive » Broken Rules — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:26:21 +0000

[...] mentioned in my previous post about how our die standards completely changed the way automotive dies were designed and built. [...]

By: stephens

stephens — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:52:58 +0000

Right on right on!

I will blog soon on the political struggle we had between the tool bill vs. production maintenance.

Since we were representing the tool bill and building “cheaper” dies, I actually got death threats from production plant managers.

By: Eric Kam

Eric Kam — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:46:22 +0000

Too Right!

Paint by numbers is after all a Detroit Invention (Palmer Paints 1950’s) so it is only fitting that the Former “big three” cling to the idea of one size fits all.

Facts that die standards and their zealous advocates often forget:
1) parts we make today may not have existed back then (Body sides were assemblies not stampings)
2) materials we use today were not common then
3) what they considered niche production back then is the full three year run (50-100K)

Additionally, we must always consider that whenever any standard is written it will tend to benefit the interests of the group that wrote the standards. If the Die Engineering group writes the standards it will usually favor up front engineering and initial build, if production wrote the standards it will favor production needs and/or maintainability, if accountants write them they will favor nobody.