Truth Be Told
It is time for the industry to dispel RP
exaggerations before they impact the future of advanced applications
like rapid manufacturing.
It is time for the industry to dispel RP
exaggerations before they impact the future of advanced applications
like rapid manufacturing.
Overnight Prototypes, claimed an RP advertisement in 1991. The headline
grabbed attention, but it also created unreasonable expectations. At
that time, a rapid prototype was typically delivered in three to seven
days; the promise to deliver "overnight" only served to elevate
expectations, create disgruntlement and fuel opposition.
Regrettably, 13 years of exaggerated claims about speed, quality, cost
and labor have become self-defeating to the acceptance of RP
technology. Over the years, the industry has looked outward to find
something to blame for impediments to its growth, but in truth the RP
industry has created its own barriers. It is time to tell the truth
before exaggerated claims further impact the future of RM.The Early Years
The bold claims of the early 1990s fueled disappointment and riled a
powerful foe. In addition to the claim of being able to produce a
prototype overnight, the industry forecasted billion-dollar economic
growth and the demise of NC/CNC machining. By making these bold claims,
the RP industry evoked negative reaction from machine tool vendors, CAM
vendors and-more importantly-the entire community of toolmakers and
machinists.
Instead of positioning RP as a complementary tool, it was positioned as
a replacement to conventional techniques, which threatened the
livelihood of manufacturing professionals. Understandably, those with
vested interests fought back. Seeking ammunition to shoot down the new
technology, the machine tool industry easily determined that the
declaration of overnight prototypes was untrue.
Armed with proof of false allegations, the machining community,
exposing the truth about speed, created doubt about all other claims,
regardless of whether they were true. Considering the risk and expense
of the new technology, most chose to avoid adopting RP.
Taking on the machine tool industry also forced the hand of the RP
vendors. Because the industry set its sights on the replacement of
machining, RP was forced to compete with machine tool vendors in areas
such as accuracy, surface finish and material costs.The Current Situation
Although RP today actually can deliver overnight prototypes, other
claims continue to be overstated. Perhaps the most notable, and most
common, is the claim of consistent accuracy. Over the years, ± 0.005
inch. (0.127 mm) has become a de facto standard for accuracy. Yet,
systems cannot deliver this quality for every part and every feature on
each prototype. (Although technologies exist that can consistently
deliver this accuracy, these are limited to small parts or are
constrained by excessively long build times.) As in earlier claims of
overnight RP, overstatements about accuracy are easily disproved,
giving justification to those who oppose RP technology.
The problem is that many of the claims have become accepted as
standards that are used to evaluate the technology. When competing for
the sale of an RP system, vendors found it easier to adopt the
exaggeration rather than educate the buyer. Service bureaus also found
that, to be competitive, they had to promise the same level of quality
as claimed by vendors. So, ± 0.005 inch became the benchmark to measure
technology, and it came to be seen as the "truth."
This "truth," however, is easy to disprove. Those who buy and use RP
are in technical disciplines that deal in facts. As soon as truth is
shown to be fiction, the choices become: (1) expect some claims to be
fiction and deal with the consequences; or (2) investigate and research
each of the claims that have to potential to affect success.
Omissions, half-truths and exaggerations extend into all aspects of RP
technology-quality of surface finish, repeatability and material
properties. There are omissions on material cost, acquisition expense
and operating expense. Time is subject to half-truths on build speed,
total leadtime and the amount of labor required to make a rapid
prototype a showpiece.
Considering today's tight budgets and lean workforces, organizations
have become more conservative. Doubting a product's claims is a serious
barrier to adopting a new technology. Common human traits of resistance
to change and risk aversion are fed by the inherent desire for job
security. Even after 17 years, RP is viewed as a risky new technology.
Considering the current situations, many decision-makers seek to
justify status quo and reject change.The Work Environment
Next, consider the work environment in relation to exaggerations
concerning RP. Even for those who are interested in adopting RP, the
fear of surprises and the effort required to validate claims may cause
them to avoid the technology. For those who are opposed to RP, the
prevalence of exaggerations offers ample justification to avoid
adopting it. Many times, there is too much work, effort and risk to
implement this new technology when so many unknowns exist.
For those who succeed in justifying RP, imagine spearheading the
initiative and promising deliverables and corporate gains only to find
that the truth was fiction, that the desired results are not possible
or are achievable only by expending significantly more labor, cost,
time or secondary processes than planned. Imagine standing before
management who authorized your purchase request and informing them that
more is needed or less is possible. Imagine the alternative-making the
technology work in any manner possible.
Exaggerated claims have created obstacles to the growth of RP. Yet, as
thousands of companies worldwide have shown, the technology is a
powerful tool in design and manufacturing; it can return a positive ROI
in a few months (see Use RP As a Complement to Machining sidebar). RP's
process is unique, and from that stems the ability to do things that
were thought to be impossible and even unimaginable.The Promise of RM
RM is an emerging technology that holds tremendous promise. One
half-truth that is accepted as fact but later found to be fiction
causes serious damage, because that truth can be used as the rationale
to maintain the status quo on the manufacturing floor. Moreover, a
company's revenue stream and future can be put in jeopardy.
RP needs no embellishment; the technology delivers real benefits.
However, prospective users require accurate information and expect the
facts. With the truth, the RP industry can flourish.
For more information contact Todd Grimm of T.A. Grimm & Associates, Inc. (Edgewood, KY) at (859) 331-5340.
