I appreciate your favorable feedback, Dan.
But I hear there seems to be some shortcomings in Keltool process.
It is said that the shortcomings of the process is as follows.
1. Building size is limited ----- smaller size preferred.
2. Material shrinkage is not homogeneous over all the features.
3. Manual labor should be intervened.
4. License fee is too expensive.
Yes..you can say Keltool process is not, almighty and, the best solution
for every appliction.
I however think, unless the above shortcomings is overcame,
it can not be welcomed as a general solution for rapid tooling.
Then I wanna ask you how to overcome those shortcomings in the industry?
Any feedback you can give me would be always appreciated.
> From DanF@aol.com Tue Jan 5 18:01:20 1999
> Return-Path: <DanF@aol.com>
> Received: from mail.lge.co.kr (mail.lge.co.kr [18.104.22.168]) by pyungtaik.lge.co.kr (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA19431 for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:01:19 +0900 (KST)
> From: DanF@aol.com
> Received: from relay.lg.co.kr (relay.lg.co.kr [22.214.171.124]) by mail.lge.co.kr (8.8.4_hhk9703/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA13436 for <email@example.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:53:36 +0900 (KST)
> Received: from imo11.mx.aol.com (imo11.mx.aol.com [126.96.36.199])
> by relay.lg.co.kr (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA12660
> for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 17:53:11 +0900 (KST)
> Received: from DanF@aol.com
> by imo11.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id 4FQAa04329
> for <email@example.com>; Tue, 5 Jan 1999 03:58:03 -0500 (EST)
> Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 03:58:03 EST
> To: email@example.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Subject: Here's my feedback on your RT statement (RP-ML)
> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 214
> Here is my response to your posting:
> Dear ALL :
> >I think there might be some alternatives for all the rapid tooling
> >methods that have already reached their critical point.
> >When it comes to accuracy(the 1st priority of production mold),
> >all the rapid tooling methods developed so far could't go over
> >the conventional CNC tooling.
> Accuracy is misleading - how do you make something accurate? 3D Keltool is as
> accurate as any CNC machined or EDM'd part. How's that? Simple...by
> machining it or EDMing it to finished dimensions. You see, the key is that
> 3D Keltool can create complex geometries and feature-rich parts faster than
> even high-speed CNC machining and, while the accuracy may not be the same, 3D
> Keltool inserts can be machined and EDM'd to final accuracies required
> (without having to machine them from solid blocks). Keep in mind that 3D
> Keltool is PRODUCTION TOOLING IN A PROTOTYPE TIMEFRAME.
> 3D Keltool is a tool in the moldmaker's toolbox. It is not the best solution
> for every application. But, it is the best solution for some applications and
> it has been proven time and time again. 3D Keltool has hundreds of customers
> that have made thousands of molds that have produced millions of parts. 3D
> Keltool works and it works best in the hands of qualified moldmakers who WANT
> to make it work for them (it's a tool and, like any tool, when used for the
> right job, is best).
> >For turnaround time too, high speed machining technologies have
> >much more possibilty than rapid tooling methods.
> Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. 3D Keltool produces production steel inserts of
> complex geometries that are feature-rich in 8 calendar days. High-speed CNC
> machining cannot always do better than that (depends on part
> geometry/design/features and tool design - 3D Keltool can be used only for
> complex inserts in a conventional/CNC'd mold).
> >For Invetment Cost, high speed machining technologies can give
> >us much more possibilty than rapid tooling methods.
> "Possibility?" 3D Keltool can provide the above strategic benefits and, can
> provide capacity that cannot be beaten for the money. While you can buy high-
> speed CNC machines, a 3D Keltool license and capabilities will give a company
> a whole other way of producing production steel inserts while not requiring
> one more mold maker. In fact, 3D Keltool licensees have seen their moldmaker
> productivity increase by a factor of 2X or more. High speed CNC machining
> won't come close to that. 3D Keltool license will move a company's bottleneck
> from producing inserts (machining/EDMing) to producing/assembling molds!
> >So I think there is no alternative of rapid tooling tech. except CNC
> >HIGH SPEED MACHINING for the time being.
> I understand your thinking. There are many people who are unfamiliar with 3D
> Keltool and what it can do for their business. In the hands of qualified
> moldmakers, 3D Keltool is a powerful and strategic investment that can pay for
> itself in as few as 12 months (based on an actual ROI performed for a client
> using their numbers).
> I welcome your feedback.
> Best regards,
> >Is there anyone who has some opinions on this ?
> >Any opinion you can give me would be greatly appreciated...
> > Best Regards.
> >Precision Technology Center,LG-PRC / LG Electronics Inc.
> >19-1,Cheongho-Ri,Jinwuy-Myon,Pyungtaek(451-713), R.O.Korea
Precision Technology Center,LG-PRC / LG Electronics Inc.
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:50:43 EEST