A systematic approach to selecting your next hot runnerA systematic approach to selecting your next hot runner
The K show approaches, fiscal years are closing, and budgets are being prepared; as a result of all of these—plus recovery from the recession—capital investment is on many minds. We have asked experts from some of the industry's leading suppliers to offer their tips on how processors should consider as they buy new or upgrade current equipment. Thanks to Michael Phillips, director of marketing and sales support at Mold-Masters Ltd., for this article.
August 20, 2010
Have your own tips or suggestions? Willing to share them? Contact us at [email protected].
As with any major capital purchase the end in mind must be the attainment of a business objective or a series of juxtaposed business objectives. Accordingly, here are our recommendations for processors and moldmakers as they consider purchasing their next hot runner.
First, know and identify clearly the desired outcome. While this is stated to us in a variety of different ways, the typical buyer we encounter is looking as a result to maximize injection molding performance, reduce total ownership costs and to minimize associated business risks.
Consequently exploring ways and means to achieve the above should lead a decision maker towards a structured approach to answering the following within the context of maximizing performance, reducing ownership costs while mitigating business risk. This can be achieved by reviewing the following as the investigation unrolls.
What are the needs?
What are the available options?
What decision criteria should we use?
Which option will best meet our criteria?
Needs are assessed by working backwards from the ultimate business objective. For example, if the requirement is for the output to be a high quality multi-colored component where yield rates have to be sustainable over a long period of uptime, reliability and initial design are critical. The buyer therefore needs to find a solution that will on production startup provide the required quality level and offer an optimized color change capability while meeting a minimum objective for uptime and reliability.
With this in mind a buyer approaching a pool of potential suppliers should couch their inquiry around the following areas of interest and would then warehouse important decision information by asking questions along the lines of, "In what ways would the solution you are proposing allow us to maximize our injection molding performance related to the production of this component . . . . .?"
Having gone through the effort to quantify your project's needs and business objective, the answers to this question will lead you to further questioning to determine the most qualified solution for your requirement.
For example, and keeping in mind the above example, a buyer could tag on to this question the following endings:
. . . . . as it pertains to achieving the required quality objective?
. . . . . as it pertains to optimizing color change-over?
. . . . . as is pertains to uptime and reliability?
The buyer is now well positioned to "peel the onion back" to explore a supplier's replies in much greater detail while ensuring to focus the discussion around the objective of maximizing injection molding performance as it pertains to the component involved. We strongly recommend that you ask follow-up questions which allow for an exploration of both the design element and underpinning science involved.
Once you and the seller understand clearly what the key needs are, attention must turn for the buyer towards developing a deep understanding of the science behind the design decisions involved. For example, a majority of hot runner suppliers provide a clamped-on nozzle heater solution. This design, we argue, tends to be less efficient, more costly to operate, and struggles to meet the reliability/uptime capability of an embedded brazed heater solution. Discussions that answer these and other technical issues are the sort a buyer needs to be having.
As the buyer, it is your responsibility to "own" the discussion around injection molding performance optimization. Ensure time is built in to the review process to explore this in as much depth as possible.
A next question to ask would be, "In what ways would the solution you are proposing allow us to reduce total ownership costs . . . . .?" As the buyer you will have less confidence and capability to assess the answers to this question if you have not already considered the possible ownership costs. As you review the following endings to the above generic question, a list will emerge that you can use as a basis for this:
. . . . . as it pertains to achieving a minimum sustainable level of yield?
. . . . . as it pertains to achieving a minimum level of sustainable reliability and uptime?
. . . . . as it pertains to minimizing costs related to quality imperfections?
. . . . . as it pertains to minimizing costs related to maintenance?
. . . . . as it pertains to optimizing color changes?
. . . . . as it pertains to reducing energy and waste-related costs?
Once again the buyer has positioned the conversation to focus the seller's replies directly on a key business objective, while providing the opportunity for the seller to present the logic of his product's science and design to underpin his answers. If a buyer is prepared to make the commitment to use this questioning approach, then they must also be prepared to discuss and share certain metrics involved. This could be as simple as, "We have set a target to reduce energy consumption by 10% and waste by 8%, so would be curious to learn how the design you are proposing might help us achieve this objective."
Here again, it is the buyers responsibility to "own" the subject knowledge inputs related to total ownership costs - and for the potential suppliers then to explore this in depth.
Another question to use as you continue your hot runner search is, "In what ways would the solution you are proposing allow us to minimize associated business risk . . . . .?" By asking this question, you move the conversation away from a pure science and design perspective, and move it towards a review of certain key buyer "rights" such as:
• Does this supplier have the "right" people to service us pre-sale?
• Does this supplier have the "right" people to service us post-sale?
• Does this supplier have the "right" infrastructure to support their people supporting us?
• Does this supplier have the "right" strategy to support us as we grow and evolve our business?
This last of our three key questions allows the buyer to remain focused on the principle that the end result of any capital expenditure must be the attainment of a business objective or series of juxtaposed business objectives. So building on the above question, the following can be added to its end:
. . . . . as it pertains to the pre-sale process involved?
. . . . . as it pertains to the post-sale process involved?
. . . . . as it pertains structurally to your organization?
. . . . . as it pertains to your ability to handle our future needs?
We are very confident that if a buyer uses this simple but effective process to "interview" potential hot runner suppliers, he will be very satisfied with the outcome and the results of his efforts. We have all learned as consumers that long after the sweetness of low price has been forgotten, the bitterness of poor quality lives on. Following the above process ensures that the price paid is directly related to the value that should be received. Good Luck!
About the Author
You May Also Like