Supplier requesting switch over to new machine - watch outs?

[prdave00]

Our current supplier of a plastic molded thermoplastic polycarbonate urethane part is asking if we'd consider "upgrading" from a Arburg model 270S400-100 U press to a Arburg 270C-400-90. Differences provided by our supplier are listed below. We do not want to completely re-validate the process nor introduce changes that would impact our part performance (e.g., increase risk of degradation, etc.). I'm OK with the increased pressure and tonnage capacity. Also OK with "improved" controller. However, wasn't sure about intensification ratio. Based on quick research it sounds like the injection and hold pressures can be changed to account for change in ratio. Sound right? Should I ask more questions? Comments/advise appreciated.

Press Tonnage increasing from 40 to 44 tons
Maximum injection pressure hyd/electric increasing from 2000 to 2262 psi
Maximum hold pressure hydraulic increasing from 2000 to 2262 psi
Controller changing from Dialogica to Selogica
Intensification ratio changing from 18.1:1 to 16:1

 

[cowski]

Should I ask more questions?

Be sure to ask how much this will impact your part cost. If they are touting it as an "upgrade", it sounds like it is going to cost you something...

 

[Pud]

Worked on Arburgs for over 15 years. Take the USB stick/CF card/write down parameters out of old machine, insert in new and call up program, All settings are converted if the 'new' machine has the ability. If not, red flashing warnings on the parameter in question. Often or not, it's just pressures or number of heating zones available.
Btw - figures quoted on pressures are meaningless. They are maximum pressures which are usually never anywhere reached.
As Cowski alluded to - the Selogica system is now about <15 yrs old, so your supplier will be using a much more efficient machine. (i.e variable delivery hydraulic pump(s)). Tonnage (aka Max clamp load) can be adjusted on-screen to whatever is needed. (IIRC, any where from 15min to max of 44 tonnes in this case).
Intensification ratio which I assume is the compression ratio of the screw, will be fine. Lower the better with PC. Less shear is good.





Politicians like to panic, they need activity. It is their substitute for achievement.

 

[tygerdawg]

It all depends.

If the part you supply has persnickety functional requirements and you do not engage in a rigorous Management Of Change procedure, then you could be setting yourself up for a train wreck.

Example for context:
My company jumped at the chance to produce a complex little part that was produced by another company who wanted to exit the business. A manufacturing process was developed in good faith to produce the part to the design drawings. And it did: parts statistically met the design drawings to strong six sigma requirements.
It turned out that the end customer had no idea how this particular part actually worked and performed with the final assembly. Parts supplied by the original manufacturer used a manufacturing equipment/process that gave sharper geometrical edges to part features than the equipment/process used by our team. Both suppliers produced parts within the design drawing's specifications. But parts produced by us did not function nearly as well. The rounded corners on the features produced by our equipment/process did not provide sufficient sealing. It was a VERY subtle failure mode. I had no involvement, but the scenario sure taught me some lessons that were hard-learned by other less fortunate people.

TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering

http://www.bluetechnik.com