Probably not intended as a design statement for the White House Cabinet “If you can just get your mind together
Then come on across to me “
So begins “Are You Experienced?” by Jimi Hendrix. (Note to daughters: “Yes, I listened to Jimi. On an album. What’s an album? Never mind.”)
“Are you experienced?” is the current question on the mind of the people who watch Washington. People like Michael Cembalest, Nick Schulz, and Kyle Wingfield. And like a shop quality engineer trying to solve an intractable problem, these people collected data, analyzed it, compared it to prior data available, and made a graphic so that the data would talkdata can sing to us.
(My first statistics professor told us “when you put your data in rows and columns, your data will sing to you.” Honest.)
Here’s the data regarding the private sector experience of the president’s cabinet, compared to prior president’s cabinets. "Data in rows and columns almost sings to you"
Here is Kyle Wingfield’s analysis: “the current Cabinet largely lacks a practical understanding of the country and companies which it now regulates — understanding that might come in handy now that our government is more enmeshed than ever with banks and auto makers, and is pushing for radically different rules for energy and health-care producers and consumers…And I think it means more than just that. If the members of the Cabinet have gotten more than 90 percent of their experience from a sector that makes up less than 20 percent of the work force, they represent a relatively small pool of people.”
And from where I sit, they sure don’t seem to understand manufacturing. About how we have to meet a payroll, collect receivables, have access to working capital.
The typography of that album cover reminds me that things certainly have changed since I was in college.
The percentage of cabinet appointees with private sector experience reminds me that there has been a change in Washington too.
And not on the side of ‘experience.’
So what were the last two lines of the first stanza of “Are you Experienced?” “We’ll hold hands and then we’ll watch the sunrise
From the bottom of the sea .” End of Flashback…
PMPA’s Index of Sales of Precision Machined Productsrose to 85, the highest value for the year.This is an increase of 30.8% in the Sales index compared to the 2009 low of 65 in May for the 96 companies reporting this month.Our industry sales continue to recover. Five consecutive months of growth in sales. And high for the year. Reason for optimism: October marks the fifth month in a row of increasing sales in the precision machining industry. The three month moving average crossed the 12 month moving average. For our industry, this data shows that recovery is underway. Thirty-four percent (34%) of participating shops reported double digit sales increases in October. Sales Outlook: The percentage of respondents who felt that sales would decline over the next three months was almost equal to the percentage that thought sales would be up, (25% vs. 26%) with 48% expecting sales to remain about the same. The outlook for sales in the short term has stabilized.
Our report for October 2009 confirms that the sales of the precision machining industry are recovering. The percentage of respondents showing positive sales growth, the three month moving average for sales crossing the 12 month moving average for sales, five consecutive months of improved sales, and the rise of the sales index by 30.8% over the year’s low in May are strong and positive indicators of sales recovery. How can we help you?
While Austenitic Grain Size is a result of chemistry (composition), the changes that it evokes in our process are a result of material structure and properties, not just the chemical ‘ingredients.’
Steel that is fully deoxidized and grain refined is more sound, less susceptible to cracking and distorting, and more easily controlled in heat treat. Well worth it in final performance compared to the machinist’s increased tooling costs. Here are 5 Ways Austenitic Fine Grained steels can affect your shop:
Poorer Machinability than Coarse Grained Steels. (The hard oxides and nitrides resulting from deoxidation and grain refinement abrade the edge of tools and coatings- this is one reason that you go through more tooling on Fine Grained Steels.)
Poorer Plastic Forming than Coarse Grained Steels.
Less Distortion in Heat Treating than Coarse Grained Steels
Higher Ductility at the same hardness than Coarse Grained Steels
Shallower Hardenability than Coarse Grained Steels.
This is a look at Austenitic Fine Grain Steel.
Fine Austenitic Grain Size is a result of DELIBERATELY ADDDING grain refining elements to a heat of steel. Because these grain refining elements have been added, the steel has a “Fine Austenitic Grain Size.”
In order to make steels with this Austenitic Fine Grained Structure, the steel is first deoxidized , (usually with Silicon) and then Aluminum, or Vanadium or Niobium are added. Aluminum, Vanadium, and Niobium are called grain refiners.
After the Silicon has scavenged most of the Oxygen out of the molten steel, the grain refiner is added. (In this post I’ll stick with Aluminum as the example.) The added Aluminum reacts with Nitrogen in the molten steel to form Aluminum Nitride particles. These tiny particles precipitate along the boundaries of the Austenite as well as with in the Austenite grains. This restricts the growth of the grains.
Because the deoxidation and grain refinement create hard abrasive oxide and nitride particles, they machine and process differently than coarse grained steels.
Fine Austenitic Grain Size appears on the material test report as an ASTM value of 5 or greater. Values of 5, 6, 7, 8, or “5 and finer” indicate that the material is Austenitic Fine Grained. Typically 7 or 8 was reported for the Aluminum Fine Grain steels that I certified.
The methods for determining Austenitic Grain Size are detailed in ASTM Standard E112, Standard Test Methods for determining Average Grain Size.
To get the Coarse Austenitic Grain Size Story, see our post here.
Guest Post By Jeff Wiltsie, Vanamatic Company.
Here is a photo of manufacturing in China. Proposed USEPA GHG regulations will actually promote this overseas.
The comment period for USEPA proposed Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Regulations is coming to a close on 28 December 2009. It is important to understand that GHG emissions are a global problem, and without global solutions, all that these “US ONLY” regulations will do is distort and reduce even further the competititveness of US manufacturers compared to countries that are not held to the same standards.
Unilaterally regulating US GHG emissions will actually make world GHG conditions worse, by creating a vicious cycle:
US GHG regulations increase costs for US manufacturers;
Increased manufacturing costs result in US customers shopping for cheaper goods;
Cheaper goods will be produced by manufacturers in countries where GHG regulatory controls are not enacted;
US manufacturing declines as production is moved overseas;
Jobs are lost;
Imports of High GHG produced goods replace US goods in our market;
US deficit in balance of trade grows;
Increase in Global GHG emissions as regulated US manufacturing is replaced with high emitting Non Regulated GHG production overseas.
GHG is a global issue, not just a local issue.US manufacturing jobs are the only thing likely to be reduced under the USEPA’s proposed regulations, and world GHG emissions will continue to rise. What am I missing here? Do you see unilateral rules as being in our favor? Or is the plan to eliminate manufacturing here in the US, to Export our pollution? What do you think? To comment :
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0517 by one of the following methods:
• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517.
• E-mail: vog.ape@tekcod-r-dna-a. Attention Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517.
• Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517.
Tired of innovation? Fed up with other people’s ‘good ideas?’ Here are 6 rules to stifle innovation from one of Americas most readable writers on management, Rosabeth M. Kanter. *
Be suspicious of any new ideas from below.
Make people go through several organizational levels before getting your approval.
Give criticism at every opportunity.
Keep people in the dark about what is going on in the firm.
Manage tightly; control everything to the nth degree.
Have the attitude that top management already knows everything there is to know.
Come to think of it, these sound quite a bit like the PPAP process.
I had the distinct pleasure of working in shops where these were the basis for how management managed.
They were great examples of how I did not want to manage when I got my chance. How many of these ‘rules’ are alive and well in your shop? How many would your employees say? Into innovation? Here's your book. *Rosabeth M. Kanter wrote these in 1991. I found them in The Quest for Competitiveness: Lessons from America’s Productivity and Quality Leaders Y.K.Shetty Editor, Vernon M Buehler Editor. If you can find this book (try Amazon) buy it!
Now is the time for innovation– throughout our organizations, not just the shop floor. Today we’ll provide you with a free “Tool You Can Use” courtesy of Knowledge @ Wharton and Boston Consulting Group. Another piece of the competitiveness puzzle.
“When people think about lean, they often associate it with reducing the workforce. But the cost is not in the line labor, its in the overhead. The most important thing is the seamless integration of everything that goes into the production.” -Adam Farber, Boston Consulting Group.
Lean had its genesis in post-WWII Japan- facing a world with no capital and few raw materials, innovation at Toyota became a necessity- a process known as the Toyota Production System, or Lean.
Today, like Japan after the war, our organizations face a similar crisis: no capital, few orders, difficult to obtain raw materials, and difficult to find skilled people. Innovating throughout our organizations– NOT JUST IN OUR SHOP OPERATIONS, but in sales, engineering, administration, in fact all areas- through the use of Lean tools can help us eliminate waste. Less waste means add more value for customers, improving the sustainability of our companies.
Click here for Rethinking Lean, Beyond The Shop Floor, a free .pdf from Wharton Business School and Boston Consulting Group.
In 1957 MIT economist Robert Solow showed capital and labor only accounted for about half of growth. The remaining half he attributed to innovation. For his work on the importance of innovation, Solow received a Nobel Prize in economics. For your work in innovating throughout your organization, you too may earn a grand prize, a more sharply focused, less wasteful, more sustainable enterprise.
And that more competitive enterprise, is a prize worth having.
Austenitic Grain Size is a material characteristic that is usually reported on test reports and certification documents for the steel materials that we machine in our shops.
Coarse Austenitic Grain Size is a result of NOT ADDING grain refining elements to a heat of steel. Because these Grain refining elements have not been added, the steel has a “Coarse Austenitic Grain Size.” This is Coarse Grain Austenite. You like it for machining.
Typically this practice is applied to free machining grades such as 11XX and 12XX steels. These steels are sold primarily for their ability to be machined at high production rates.
What does Coarse Austenitic Grain Size imply for the parts that you make?
Better Machinability– Coarse Grained Steels are more machinable and provide longer tool life than Fine Grained Steels. (The elements added to make the Austenitic Grain size fine create small, finely dispersed hard abrasive particles in the steel)
Better Plastic Forming– than Fine Grained Steels
More Distortion in Heat Treat- than Fine Grained Steels
Lower Ductility at the same hardness- than Fine Grained Steels
Deeper Hardenability– than Fine Grained Steels
Coarse Austenitic Grain Size will show up on the test report as an ASTM value of 1-5. Values of 5 and higher are called Fine Grained Steels, and are the result of additions of Aluminum, Vanadium, or Niobium in North American commercial practice for most Carbon and Alloy steels.
The methods for determining Austenitic Grain Size are detailed in ASTM Standard E112, Standard Test Methods For Determining Average Grain Size.
A nice discussion can also be found HERE.
While we think that chemistry may be the controlling factor for machining performance of the steel in our machines, the contribution of austenitic grain size is also important. As long as you are ordering your free machining steels (11XX and 12XX series) to Coarse Grain Practice, Austenitic Grain Size should not be an issue in your shop.
I went to the U.S. Government’s Bureau of Economic Analysis Site the other day looking for some information on imports and exports of manufactured goods.
However, when I saw the data for General Imports of Crude Oil by Country, what I saw stopped me in my tracks. (in the supplement, Exhibit 3, page 35 of 47 in the .pdf.) We use a lot of oil...
Here are the top 10 foreign suppliers of petroleum to the U.S. Figures cited are in thousands of barrels, and are for the month of August 2009 from Supplement Exhibit 3:
Canada 60,714
Venezuela 36,247
Mexico 32,007
Saudi Arabia 27,675
Nigeria 26,806
Iraq 14,579
Algeria 10,945
Angola 8,761
Brazil 8,388
Colombia 7,741
Venezuela is our number 2 supplier? Nigeria is number 5. Iraq is 6th, and Angola and Colombia make the top ten?
Quick! Can you name any U.S. companies that manufacture solar panels here in North America? A technology that might just help us replace the need for imported petroleum in our daily lives?
Can you name any North American companies that manufacture lithium-ion batteries? What do you make of these facts?
Perhaps distance and perspective give them clarity. It's the value of the dollar...
We follow the ISM Manufacturing Index as an input for our sensemaking as to what is going on in Precision Machining. PMPA’s own Business Trends Report has shown sales in our industry to be recovering. So as we were considering the latest ISM Manufacturing Report, we came across this story from the Financial Post.
The U.S. manufacturing sector grew in October at its fastest pace since April 2006, according to the Institute for Supply Management. The ISM’s manufacturing index climbed to 55.7 from 52.6 in September. This is the third consecutive monthly reading above 50. BElow 50, the index indicates contraction in manufacturing, the line that divides expansion and retrenchment. Also unexpectedly, hiring plans in the beleaguered sector turned positive for the first time in more than a year.
Some economists say they were most encouraged by the signs of hiring in the sector. The employment index surged to 53.1 from 46.2. However PMPA’s survey of members showed that plans to add or recall workers were still nascent, and very dependent on further increases of orders.
Still a way to go until callbacks happen.
According to PMPA’s respondents, “A further 50% increase in sales will result in in the majority of the precision machining industry’s laid off employees being recalled from layoff. A 25% increase is said to be likely to lead to the recall of about 39% of workers on layoff.”
The US, EU and Mexico have just (2 hours ago) jointly made a formal request to the WTO for a dispute-settlement panel to address China’s export restraints on a number of raw materials of interest to our precision machining industry. Bloomberg coverage here.
Raw materials such as
coke ( used in steel),
zinc (used in brass),
bauxite (aluminum ore),
fluorspar (steelmaking slag conditioner),
magnesium,
manganese (steelmaking ingredient),
silicon metal (steelmaking deoxidizer),
silicon carbide (desulfurizer)
These are among the materials listed in the filing. These are important (essential!) ingredients into the steel and metallic raw materials our industry consumes. We remember reading about this as an emerging concern in June in the Globe and Mail. How they load steel in Hubei, China.
The economic issue is that this “resource hoarding” results in artificially lowered cost for these raw materials in China and in effect becomes a subsidy for those manufacturing operations that China deems “strategic.” While at the same time making these materials more difficult (and Expensive) to obtain for non Chinese companies.
“Peace” according to Ambrose Bierce, in The Devil’s Dictionary, “in international affairs is a period of cheating between two periods of fighting.” I think that this is a particularly useful perspective in this situation.
“Diplomacy,” according to my 8th grade History teacher, Mrs. Abernathy, “is war by other means.”
Our industry, the EU, Mexico, and the United States- all of us are certainly looking forward to some diplomatic success.
The panel is expected to be convened Nov. 19th. We all live here together. Why not trade fairly? Steel loading Photo via Globe and Mail originally Shanghai Reuters. Earth photo credit: NASA.
