Page 46 - MetalForming June 2012

Tooling Technology
shop owner and the finance people to be able to use it, as well as the people in the shop.
“Sescoi developed WorkXPlore 3D (a 3D CAD viewer) and WorkPlan (pro- ject-management and enterprise- resource-planning software suite) to help simplify quoting,” Jaje continues. “Suppose an OEM needs 10,000 parts, and contacts four stampers to bid on that job. Each of those stampers—if they don’t build tooling inhouse— sends out for quotes from die shops. Our customer, the die shop, might get four quote requests for that same part, but each part may be a bit different. Perhaps our customers are journey- man diemakers, and they spend a lot of
Software Cuts Quoting,
time preparing similar quotes over and over. The software lets them automate the process, creating one quote and then using that initial information to create three additional but slightly dif- ferent quotes. Our customer can typi- cally complete those quotes in a quar- ter of the time, and can spend the day making dies instead of creating quote after quote.”
Ease of Use Addressed
As the simplified quoting capabili- ty shows, no longer is the realm of design and simulation software inhab- ited only by advanced-degree engi- neers. Software providers have worked hard to make their products usable
Design and Tryout Time
by more customer employees.
“Right now, our customers want to know if they have to be a rocket scientist to use our software,” says Charles Hay- den III, technical sales manager for Engineering Technology Associates, Inc., Troy, MI, (www.eta.com). ETA provides the Dynaform software suite for die design and forming simulation. “The industry is pushing die designers and builders toward simulation software and they must know how to operate it successfully. So ease of use is a priority, and has been addressed with menus, graphics and improved interfaces. The fact is: If you are a tool-and-die shop and not using simulation software, it is only a matter of time before you will be.”
for Custom Stamper
Dynamic Metals, Inc., Clinton Township, MI, has produced low-volume custom stampings and prototype parts since 2005, all the while employing ETA’s Dynaform for quoting, forming sim- ulation, and tool design and build.
“Before starting Dynamic Metals,” says owner Paul Newman, “I worked for a company that brought in this software, and I saw the ability for it to change the industry. That’s why I went into business for myself.”
The company, with 25 employees, is a Tier One supplier to a who’s who of OEMs, including General Motors, Bobcat and Navistar, and is a Tier Two supplier to Ford and Chrysler. As such, it’s often involved in early die-development and soft-tool production. Equipment on the Dynamic Metals roster includes laser cutters and welders, CNC machines and hydraulic and mechanical stamping presses from 75 to 1000 tons. The compa- ny builds some hard tooling, and produces soft tooling to mimic potential production tooling. Dynamic Metals produces parts from difficult-to-form materials such as advanced high-strength steels and aluminum.
Newman considers his business a pioneer in employing a CAD-driven process to proceed from CAD part to finished parts, while integrating CAD, CNC and actual part production.
“That was a profitable approach,” recalls Newman, “but as other companies caught up with our technology, our margins changed. I felt that Dynaform would give us a new opportunity to lead the pack.”
With the software, Newman says his company has reduced overall operating costs, capital investment and tryout time—from as much as two weeks to one day.
“We can model everything on the computer so that nothing hits the shop floor until it is a good product,” he says. “The soft- ware allows us to produce the same quantity with half of the equipment, and we free-up manpower for other uses. We don’t have to change tools anymore, as everything works right out of the gate. The software, based on our experience, achieves
99 percent accuracy.”
Newman provides examples of benefits brought by Dynaform, including development of an A-pillar rocker-panel extension
made from dual-phase 780 steel.
“Our customer brought us the part file, questioning whether
it was even buildable,” says Newman. Dynamic Metals designed a draw die in CAD and fed it into Dynaform. The result: gross failure.
“We ended up plowing through a series of iterations, with as many as 50 different die designs, before we could produce any- thing even close to working,” he recalls. “Ultimately, we devel- oped a draw, redraw and restrike process to produce a workable part. All the while, the software enabled us to provide feedback to our customer related to project progress.”
Typically, says Newman, development would be a three- to six-month affair, including tool construction and physical tryout. But with Dynaform, Dynamic Metals was able to develop the tooling in three to four weeks, then take the tooling to the press and stamp the part that its customer thought was unbuildable.
Another example of the software’s capabilities becomes evi- dent when examining Dynamic Metals’ production of oilpan tool- ing and parts, which typically requires difficult draws. The firm recently received such a part that a competitor had analyzed using competing software that indicated a successful part. In reality, the draw proved too difficult.
“We ran it through Dynaform, which showed that the part as designed could not be produced,” says Newman. “Using our software, we determined that the part required different draw radii and other changes. By providing the correct feedback, we won the job, and the software proved out the part and the tooling.”
Lastly, Newman explains how the software also assists with scheduling.
“We cannot predict a schedule if the parts don’t work and the jobs can’t run,” he says. “But the fact is, we eliminate scheduling bottlenecks on the floor because we know the tools will work and produce good parts. Of course, because we deal with diffi- cult parts, we may get bottlenecked on the design end, but it is a whole lot less expensive to have designers redesign tools and run them on a computer than to tie up a bunch of machines on the shop floor.”
44 MetalForming/June 2012
www.metalformingmagazine.com