During the successful AEC webinar, "It’s About the SHAPE: Designing with Aluminum Extrusions," hosted by Design News, there were a number of great questions that we didn’t have time to answer. Some of the questions and answers should prove interesting and useful to a wider audience, so I’ve decided that blogging might be the correct venue to spread the knowledge! I've chosen one particular question here that requires a longer answer than you might expect.
Question: We have found dramatic differences in extruders' willingness to commit to tolerances. Twist is a big deal for us. Are the differences a function of technique, skill level, process, or just the optimism of the extruder?
Answer: Yes, and a bit more. Extruders have varying levels of skill and experience. Sometimes doing the same thing 1,000 times doesn’t yield the same experience as doing 10 different things 100 times each. Even within some large companies, various manufacturing facilities may have a different willingness to take on challenging extrusions depending on their experience, their booking level, etc. In addition, different extrusion lines utilize equipment of varying vintages and capabilities.
The ability to hold tight tolerances (including twist) along the long extruded length is affected by many variables, and there are many variables which need to be controlled to make exceptional extrusions. Luckily, there are many AEC member companies with great equipment, personnel, and experience (see examples at AECGuide.org). Several critical variables come to mind as illustrative examples:
In an ideal world, the centerline of the press frame, the press container, the press stem and dummy block, the tool carrier, and the actual extrusion tooling share a common centerline. In reality, brass press ways or die slide ways wear or are misaligned, dies may be loaded into tool carriers with some debris in them, etc. Excellent extruders use SPC techniques to monitor and drive action on alignment issues, and they keep their tooling and tool carriers clean.
When a die is misaligned to the other press components, the “centerline” of the billet and pressure is off center from the die. Picture squeezing toothpaste out of a tube -- if the hole you are squeezing the toothpaste through is offset, the emerging “extrudate” will bow in one direction or another (a similar phenomenon occurs with twist).
Thermal control and thermal “alignment” of the equipment:
Same as press alignment, but if the die, press container, or other components aren’t evenly heated (or the difference in heat, top to bottom in the container, for example, isn’t taken into account), flow issues can occur, causing bow, twist, or other anomalies.
This refers to both the overall thickness of the stack (from where the billet enters the tooling to where it exits), as well as the stack’s configuration. The extrusion process occurs under tremendous forces and pressures.
The 2,750-ton press that we used (a medium-sized press), generated 5,500,000 lbs of force, enough to lift almost several thousand automobiles.
A typical extrusion press die to make the step extrusions of a stepladder is about two inches thick, producing two steps extrusions from each push (about 120 ft long).
If 5,500,000 lbs were placed onto the die without support, the die would instantly deflect and break.
When the press was purchased in 1983, a typical tool stack was 12 inches thick, but we specified the press with a 16-inch stack. The stack we used for solid dies like steps was a die ring containing the die and backer and a bolster.
The die has an aperture (die bearing) that defines the shape.
The backer is about five inches thick and has an aperture larger than the step profile to provide clearance (the ability of the extrudate not to rub on the backer).
The bolster was about nine inches thick with an even larger aperture. It still form fit in the same basic shape as the step.
By using a thick tool stack with form fit tooling, we minimized die deflections (impossible to eliminate deflection), which gave us very consistent dimensions (and low twist) hole to hole and along the length of the extrusion.
This, coupled with excellent die design, preparation, great press alignment, and temperature control/alignment, yielded great productivity and quality.
The “cost” to achieve this was the up-front equipment, the ongoing excellent technical support and maintenance, including alignment, a long tool stack (more money in steel cost for each profile),the purchase of form fit backers and bolsters, and the overall higher cost of longer extrusion tooling. Other extruders might have foregone these costs, even using a combination of sub-bolsters and bolters, but at cost of tolerances and productivity.
Craig, thanks for following up with all these answers. The webinar gave a ton of information on designing better shapes, sometimes by just implementing a slight change, making the part easier to manufacture and less expensive. It's now available on demand at this link: http://tinyurl.com/mwtfxex
THanks for the informative writeup. Now I know that some extrusion providers can hold much better tolerance than others.Manynyears back we asked for a quote for an extrusion tombe the support for a maglev train track. The extrusion would support the laminations and provide a means of supporting the track. Can you imagine a linear motor running fom Detroit to Miami? On the positive side, the train could cruise at hundreds of mph, and not really use that much power, since each section of track would only be powered for a few feet ahead of and behind the train cars. And the engine on the train would just be a communications console, with the moving portion of the engine being an aluminum plate. I designed the controls, which were triple redundant. No failures were allowed. The extrusion tolerances that we needed were just too tight.
Iterative design — the cycle of prototyping, testing, analyzing, and refining a product — existed long before additive manufacturing, but it has never been as efficient and approachable as it is today with 3D printing.
People usually think of a time constant as the time it takes a first order system to change 63% of the way to the steady state value in response to a step change in the input -- it’s basically a measure of the responsiveness of the system. This is true, but in reality, time constants are often not constant. They can change just like system gains change as the environment or the geometry of the system changes.
At its core, sound is a relatively simple natural phenomenon caused by pressure pulsations or vibrations propagating through various mediums in the world around us. Studies have shown that the complete absence of sound can drive a person insane, causing them to experience hallucinations. Likewise, loud and overwhelming sound can have the same effect. This especially holds true in manufacturing and plant environments where loud noises are the norm.
The tech industry is no stranger to crowdsourcing funding for new projects, and the team at element14 are no strangers to crowdsourcing ideas for new projects through its design competitions. But what about crowdsourcing new components?
It has been common wisdom of late that anything you needed to manufacture could be made more cost-effectively on foreign shores. Following World War II, the label “Made in Japan” was as ubiquitous as is the “Made in China” version today and often had very similar -- not always positive -- connotations. Along the way, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, and other Pacific-rim nations have each had their turn at being the preferred low-cost alternative to manufacturing here in the US.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.