Kalıp imalatı & Yeni Ürün Devreye Alma Süreci
It was a big question mark for me as a top mold maker when I faced with the insufficient performance of the tool making process even when I was sure about the high engineering level of design at the begining and during the manufacturing before I start the root cause investigation about this concern.
Yes,it was the obvious lack of the team work culture, institutional approach to interdependent chain actions and standards and documantation. Briefly weak tracking method at the first study.
But I had to notice that tool making process needs expertise, intuition, technical forecast, technical experience, polymer know-how, Lean approach, innovation, bravery same as it needs the rules and standards.
In the other hand DFMEA & PFMEA were blinking me always, they were noticed me that “don’t forget us because you have to standardize all achieved experiences in each stage and/or projects. Honestly FMEA was the start point for me to think about the shaping of an integrated tool making tracking sheet.
This sheet should provide an auditing property but should never limit the possibilities in design and manufacturing issues. Let me open it a bit more. Polymer industry and plastic part development demands are in a huge rising trend as we know all. A very hard challenge to realize the continuous development in cosmetic and mechanical properties. This means part and tool developer engineers should always try to develop “solutions” by pulling-up all limits to answer client and market rising demands. Eventually making a roof that covers innovation beside standards to enhance the performance, reduce the lead time and cost needs innovative is not possible without an expert view.
Actually this is the modern approach to the engineering in industry 4.0 in my opinion. I named it “Putting together contrasting properties”.
I started to collecting criteria’s in part development, tool design, trial, tunings and approval stages as much as possible. Later I exchanged the criteria’s to the point shot questions for the next step. And finally design a comprehensive algorithm between them. The final result was around 500 questions that were all related to each other to support the sustainability of tracking from the start of part design till the end of approval. It was very important because process is fairly eager to break the chain.
Every question answers by “OK”, “Not OK” & “Not required”, so it can be quite easy to check and list the lack and stop the process (if need) in every stage. Some of questions are clear to answer, but many of them needs “expert’s opinion” to let the appearance of all possible innovation and solution offers.
And the finally at the end I decided to evaluate the team, actions and tool maker with parametric criteria’s.
To be honest I could optimize and enhance the algorithm, criteria’s and sub-documents during the last 17 years when I run the system in real projects.
This tracking process is now available in my data base in TR & EN languages and ready for use for every company or institute that wants to enhance its new product activation process, training the employees and/or feel any lacks in this issue. Just send me a request letter to firstname.lastname@example.org address if you are not still “perfect” in new project activation process and let me offer my solutions.