When evaluating a part for die production, the most restrictive aspect to be considered is
the cost of the tooling. To build a metal stamping die is a costly process, involving many
people, many machines, and several technologies. For that reason, the demand for tooling
must first be economically justified.
The quantitative demands per given time span should be evaluated first, because a scenario
of 50,000 washers to be delivered each month requires a different treatment from
50,000 washers to be delivered each week.
A correct evaluation of the problem must be performed on the basis of:
• Availability of the appropriate press
• The equipment’s running speed
• The length of production shifts
• Scheduling for the needed time interval
For a small run with few repetitions, a single line of tooling may be chosen. However, if
the quantities are large and the time constraint exists, a multiple-part-producing tool must
be built. Such a die, generating at least two or more complete parts with each stroke of a
press, will speed up production admirably. But increasing the size of the tool necessitates
the use of a larger and more powerful press and may even require a nonstandard width of a
strip, which will certainly cost more and will have longer lead times.
With parts other than simple washers, the shut height of the press versus the height of
the part is another production-influencing factor.
The width of the opening in the press plus the width of the proposed die must definitely be
in congruence.
The possibility of reorders should be considered at this point, as they may result in an
extended production run, greater material demands, and longer occupancy of the press.
Such longer runs are usually beneficial from the economical standpoint, as they save on
die-mounting procedures and press adjustments, while also decreasing the demand for
quality control personnel involvement.
On the other hand, a problem of storage of these extra parts may arise along with the existence
of temporarily unrewarded financial investments into the purchase of material, workforce
compensation, taxes, utilities, and overhead. These all need to be taken into account since
they will only increase the final cost of the product, long before it can be sold to a customer.
To properly evaluate the situation, all applicable expenditures should be added up as follows:
1. Cost of the storage space (prorated rent or property taxes, cost of the building and
improvements)
2. Cost of all packaging and repackaging material, storage containers, protective barriers,
and insulation
3. Cost of stacking and restacking of parts, sorting them out, and discarding rusty or damaged
pieces
4. Spoilage of possible storage-sensitive material and the scrap rate
5. Cost of raw material and other production-related necessities
6. Overhead, such as electricity, cost of heating or cooling, water, and fuel applicable to
the storage of parts
7. Cost of labor, including possible overtime
8. Cost of paperwork involved with storage and subsequent handling of products
9. Interest rate at which the monies allocated to the above activities could have generated
when invested otherwise
The combined expenses 1 through 9, when added up, should be equal to or less than the
combined:
1. Cost of the removal of a die from the press
2. Cost of the installation of a die in the press (for the subsequent run)
3. Cost of the machine’s downtime during the die removal and installation
4. Cost of the press operator’s standby, if applicable
5. Cost of the press adjustments and trial runs
6. Cost of the first piece inspection and the cost of further adjustments and approvals, if
applicable
7. Cost of the extra material and supplies, which must be purchased ahead of the time
even if not immediately utilized
8. Overhead, such as cost of electricity, heating, cooling, water, and fuel
9. Cost of all subsequent billing and paperwork
10. Combined interest the finances allocated to the above causes would
have generated when invested otherwise
The length of each run and its influence on the need for sharpening and maintenance of tooling
must be evaluated for the entire production run. Should a maintenance-related interruption
be necessary, a possible split of the previously planned combined run should be considered.
A definite advantage of the die production is its unrivaled consistency in the products’
quality and dimensional stability. In absence of design and construction mistakes, the die,
once built, needs minimal amount of alterations, aside from regular sharpening.
Some dies, true, are more sensitive than others, which is mostly attributable to excessive
demands on close tolerance ranges of parts and on the variation in material thickness.
With some bending and drawing operations, the consistency in hardness of stock can be
essential as well. But a regular die, well designed and well built, can deliver a great load of
products before its punches begin to wear and a need for repair or sharpening arises.
Generally, it may be claimed that if the conditions of the die-operating process are kept
the same and if the tool was not dropped off the forklift or similarly mangled, the parts from
the die will emerge consistent with previous runs.
the cost of the tooling. To build a metal stamping die is a costly process, involving many
people, many machines, and several technologies. For that reason, the demand for tooling
must first be economically justified.
The quantitative demands per given time span should be evaluated first, because a scenario
of 50,000 washers to be delivered each month requires a different treatment from
50,000 washers to be delivered each week.
A correct evaluation of the problem must be performed on the basis of:
• Availability of the appropriate press
• The equipment’s running speed
• The length of production shifts
• Scheduling for the needed time interval
For a small run with few repetitions, a single line of tooling may be chosen. However, if
the quantities are large and the time constraint exists, a multiple-part-producing tool must
be built. Such a die, generating at least two or more complete parts with each stroke of a
press, will speed up production admirably. But increasing the size of the tool necessitates
the use of a larger and more powerful press and may even require a nonstandard width of a
strip, which will certainly cost more and will have longer lead times.
With parts other than simple washers, the shut height of the press versus the height of
the part is another production-influencing factor.
The width of the opening in the press plus the width of the proposed die must definitely be
in congruence.
The possibility of reorders should be considered at this point, as they may result in an
extended production run, greater material demands, and longer occupancy of the press.
Such longer runs are usually beneficial from the economical standpoint, as they save on
die-mounting procedures and press adjustments, while also decreasing the demand for
quality control personnel involvement.
On the other hand, a problem of storage of these extra parts may arise along with the existence
of temporarily unrewarded financial investments into the purchase of material, workforce
compensation, taxes, utilities, and overhead. These all need to be taken into account since
they will only increase the final cost of the product, long before it can be sold to a customer.
To properly evaluate the situation, all applicable expenditures should be added up as follows:
1. Cost of the storage space (prorated rent or property taxes, cost of the building and
improvements)
2. Cost of all packaging and repackaging material, storage containers, protective barriers,
and insulation
3. Cost of stacking and restacking of parts, sorting them out, and discarding rusty or damaged
pieces
4. Spoilage of possible storage-sensitive material and the scrap rate
5. Cost of raw material and other production-related necessities
6. Overhead, such as electricity, cost of heating or cooling, water, and fuel applicable to
the storage of parts
7. Cost of labor, including possible overtime
8. Cost of paperwork involved with storage and subsequent handling of products
9. Interest rate at which the monies allocated to the above activities could have generated
when invested otherwise
The combined expenses 1 through 9, when added up, should be equal to or less than the
combined:
1. Cost of the removal of a die from the press
2. Cost of the installation of a die in the press (for the subsequent run)
3. Cost of the machine’s downtime during the die removal and installation
4. Cost of the press operator’s standby, if applicable
5. Cost of the press adjustments and trial runs
6. Cost of the first piece inspection and the cost of further adjustments and approvals, if
applicable
7. Cost of the extra material and supplies, which must be purchased ahead of the time
even if not immediately utilized
8. Overhead, such as cost of electricity, heating, cooling, water, and fuel
9. Cost of all subsequent billing and paperwork
10. Combined interest the finances allocated to the above causes would
have generated when invested otherwise
The length of each run and its influence on the need for sharpening and maintenance of tooling
must be evaluated for the entire production run. Should a maintenance-related interruption
be necessary, a possible split of the previously planned combined run should be considered.
A definite advantage of the die production is its unrivaled consistency in the products’
quality and dimensional stability. In absence of design and construction mistakes, the die,
once built, needs minimal amount of alterations, aside from regular sharpening.
Some dies, true, are more sensitive than others, which is mostly attributable to excessive
demands on close tolerance ranges of parts and on the variation in material thickness.
With some bending and drawing operations, the consistency in hardness of stock can be
essential as well. But a regular die, well designed and well built, can deliver a great load of
products before its punches begin to wear and a need for repair or sharpening arises.
Generally, it may be claimed that if the conditions of the die-operating process are kept
the same and if the tool was not dropped off the forklift or similarly mangled, the parts from
the die will emerge consistent with previous runs.
