bvspcc.com

Another Point for Casting Conversion

In Metal Casting Design & Purchasing, we share many stories and examples of casting conversions. These are engineered components originally produced with another manufacturing method that are redesigned for the metalcasting process. Typically, the cases involved a multiple part weldment or fabrication re-engineered as a single-piece casting.

The casting process offers many benefits to the designer that centers around the freedom of shape, making it a good choice for intriate parts. The designer can manipulate a component to meet multiple functions, place material and strength where needed, and remove material where it is not for lower weight and cost.

Still, metalcasting is not always the first manufacturing method considered for a new part and it might not be until after production and some time has passed that the case for metalcasting starts to surface. Cost reductions might be sought, or better repeatability is needed.
Metalcasters can be pretty good at spotting potential conversions to metalcasting and often work with customers to do a cost benefit analysis, pinpointing which pieces would decrease costs and improve value the most.

Even after considering the benefits to converting to metalcasting, designers and purchasers have another hurdle: tooling cost. Investing up front on the patterns to make the castings for a component already in production? It is not an easy pill to swallow, and traditional tooling can be expensive.
However, metalcasters are making inroads in reducing those costs. Rapid manufacturing has been building steam and includes CNC machining patterns, 3-D printing sand and wax molds, and now, 3-D printing plastic patterns.

This past year I have visited three metalcasting facilities that print their own patterns in-house, and they report it has been game-changing. The article, “Jump-Start Tooling With 3-D Printing” on page 22 explores the opportunity this technology has for metalcasting and the designers who can take advantage of the process with lower tooling and development costs. 

In recent years, 3-D printing equipment and material has become more widespread and less expensive, so the barrier to entry is lowering. Printing patterns is quicker and cheaper than producing them the traditional way, particularly when going through the design and development phases. Often this method is used for very low volumes, such as between one or two pieces, but that is changing. One foundry I visited this summer is using its 3-D printed patterns in its automated green sand machine for up to 500 molds.

As someone who is a customer of foundries, you have the power to encourage your casting sources to further explore 3-D printing their tooling. It can lower your costs and time to market, as well as remove a little bit of the hurdle for redeveloping a part to take advantage of the casting process’ design freedoms.

Click here to see this story as it appears in the November/December 2017 issue of Metal Casting Design & Purchasing


Patent Protection Pointers

Product development is difficult enough, whether it is a new invention from the proverbial drawing board or a modification of an existing product. One of the key issues facing corporations today is how to protect developments for new machines, products, foundry processes, etc. 

Additionally, there are times that the “when” question is just as important as the “how,” because obtaining patent protection includes a number of statutory deadlines.

Patent protection is essentially a grant of a right to exclude others from practicing an invention in exchange for providing a full disclosure of how to practice the invention. In almost all cases, patent protection extends 20 years from the original filing date. In other cases, the inventor or business can use trade secrets in search of longer lasting, perhaps perpetual, protection for the invention.

Two types of patent applications that are most used in the manufacturing world are “non-provisional patent applications” and “provisional patent applications.”  The non-provisional patent application provides a full disclosure of an invention, includes claims that define the invention, and can eventually lead to a patent after claims are found allowable during examination by a patent examiner. 

In contrast, provisional patents do not require claims, are never examined, and are often used to hold a date of application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

The differences here are significant, as the America Invents Act of 2011 changed the U.S. patent system from a “first to invent” system to a “first inventor to file” system.  As such, many businesses and inventors prefer to file a provisional patent application with a brief disclosure in order to more quickly plant a flag in Washington D.C. to obtain an earlier filing date, thereby gaining superior rights to others who later file applications for the same or similar inventions. 

Subsequent filing of non-provisional patent applications within one calendar year claim priority to the provisional patent application to maintain the filing date claim.

While this system change has the good intention of simplifying the previous system of determining who was the first to invent a particular machine component or casting process, patenting decisions are now accelerated along with the research and development decisions and commitments.

This timeline acceleration can bring manufacturing operations into a legal minefield of confidentiality and disclosure rules. Keep in mind that in both the new and old patent systems, there is a twelve-month window after disclosure for the applicant to file the patent application at the USPTO. 

After the 12-month grace period, American patent rights are extinguished. Perhaps more problematic is the fact that most foreign countries require that there be no previous disclosure prior to filing a patent application. As a result, even an errant disclosure on social media or at a trade show by an eager and well-intentioned employee can sink hopes of foreign patent protection.

With these pitfalls, it is important to remember that protection of your inventions is not all that difficult to put into place.  Here is one example of how an operation can provide better protection for its inventions:

First, have every applicable employee in the company sign an appropriate confidentiality agreement, a non-compete agreement, and an assignment of “inventor’s rights” to the company so there will be no questions in the future as to invention ownership and confidentiality.

Second, if vendors are involved in the development project, it is best to have an agreement between the two parties to define both confidentiality and non-disclosure.  The agreement should also make the vendors specifically acknowledge and agree that every part of their contribution to the project is assigned to you (the manufacturer or the casting supplier), along with any present and future patent rights.  These agreements should include not only the products and inventions being developed, but also any follow-on products and inventions that might be future offspring of the project.

Third, any “field testing” programs are designed and implemented with trusted customers who also agree in writing to confidentiality. Results of the field testing must be used to judge the product in question.

Finally, if there is not a way to develop and test a product without a public disclosure, you have exactly 12 months from the disclosure date; therefore, make sure your patent lawyers are involved as early in the project as possible.  This will help ensure that when the product gains commercial viability, a solid patent application is already in the works.  

Click here to see this story as it appears in the November/December 2017 issue of Metal Casting Design & Purchasing


Paradigm Shift Ahead for AFS Online Library

The American Foundry Society’s Online Library is an amazing repository of past research. In this treasure chest are more than a century of research and development made by metalcasters for the metalcasting industry, with some research articles dating back to 1896. The library contains publications such as: AFS Transactions, International Journal of Metalcasting, Modern Casting, MetalCasting Design & Purchasing, AFS conference proceedings, industry-wide trade journals and various technical publications. The collection is also being constantly curated and updated by our staff librarian. Our library currently boasts more than 14,000 digitalized articles, making it the largest specialized metalcasting library in the world.

The online library was first launched in 2008, allowing visitors to search and purchase individual articles for download. It persisted in its original form for many years. However, technology does not stand still, and the foundations the online library is built upon are outdated. To give you some context, the original Apple iPhone was first released just six months prior to the online library being launched. In 2008, mobile was not a factor, unlike now where mobile is a primary consideration when building a web presence.

AFS is in its third year of information technology renovations. We have modernized our membership database and staff work stations, launched the social forum CastingConnection, and rebuilt the corporate network infrastructure. It is now time we re-envision the AFS Online Library.  The AFS Library is moving from its current home to a dedicated library management platform. This is a Software as a Service (SaaS) platform, meaning AFS pays a modest fee for its very own instance of the library platform. This platform is continually updated and improved by our partner as technologies evolve.

AFS IT Project Manager Katie Matticks led an exhaustive search of dozens of library system platforms.  The platform we have selected for our re-envisioned library is the Liberty System by Softlink. Softlink specializes in knowledge, content, and library management systems, as well as request management systems for special, education, government and corporate information libraries. Some of its clients include the World Wildlife Federation, American Academy of Family Physicians and The Appraisal Institute. Its Liberty platform enables vital information to be discovered and delivered anywhere, anytime, through modern digital devices. Liberty combines advanced functionality with ease of use.

Some of the new features and functionality you will see when the new library is launched are:
Responsive design: The new library system is being designed to dynamically scale and change its user interface depending on the size of your device’s screen. This will give the you a great experience whether you are on a desktop or mobile device.

Faceted search: Faceted search is a way to add specific, relevant options to your results pages, so that when you search for an article, it can see the classification of the articles you’ve ended up with. This is very similar to your experience when shopping on Amazon. This can help you expand what you’re looking for to include other related topics.

Library navigation: For the first time ever, the AFS Library will have a true navigation setup. We are building this navigation on an in-house metalcasting industry taxonomy.

Predictive text searching: Predictive text searching will display possible search terms in real-time as you type, just like Google.

Catalog of physical resources: The online library will also include a catalog of our physical collection of industry-wide trade journals and technical publications, which is currently located at AFS Headquarters in Schaumburg, Illinois.

That is not all! The AFS online library has been hampered by a complex pricing model that has limited its usefulness to members and required many technological work-arounds to implement. These work-arounds degraded the user experience. The most exciting news about the vision for the library is that it will now be a true member benefit. That means that American Foundry Society’s vast online archives will be accessible to AFS members, both individual and corporate. This is a significate value add to membership. If you are an AFS member or work for an AFS Corporate Member look for the library to appear as an option on your community hub profile after logging into AFS.

Look for the new and improved AFS Library coming to your membership later this winter.  


Tracking Growth in Business and Houseplants

There is a leafy houseplant in our office here at Metal Casting Design & Purchasing.  It was adopted by Mark McGowan, one of our coworkers, a couple of years ago. Since then, it has flourished and grown, with one long, viney arm stretching across his cubicle office and now snaking its way to the neighboring space. 

We’ve begun to measure that vine’s progress, like a parent marking their children’s height on the wall.

On Aug. 23, it had grown 28 inches since July 5. In a few months, it will reach my office. I cannot wait.

The funny thing is, none of us really paid much attention to the plant, besides maybe Mark, until he stuck a post-it note on the wall, marking the date. Now, we can visually tell how far that vine has come. We can state for fact: this plant has grown X inches since X date.

I recently visited a metalcasting facility that takes measurement and data analysis seriously. As the president told me, “Anything that is measured improves.”

The company has applied this mantra across its whole business, from workforce development to scheduling, and the results have been positive. This analytical approach helps make business decisions, as well as track a decision’s impact and give the chance for course correction or redirection. Any business seeking improvement can benefit from this attention to measurement.

Sometimes there is fear in measuring, because what if that first data point is not what you want it to be? Anyone who has avoided stepping on a scale might understand. But measuring ultimately can be rewarding, especially as goals are approached, met and then exceeded.

Measuring something, like a part’s scrap rate, delivery record or pick-and-place time, doesn’t just indicate the current data point. It shows what is possible, what more can happen.

As for our pet office plant, I don’t think we’ll be developing any Excel spreadsheets tracking its progress. We don’t have any specific goals for its growth. But we are invested in it just the same. If it starts to brown or stops growing, we’ll notice and discuss what we should do to keep it healthy. I’m rooting for it to make it to my desk.  

Click here to see this story as it appears in the September/October 2017 issue of Metal Casting Design & Purchasing.


Trade Secret Protection

The American Bar Association estimates the market value of S&P 500 companies can include as much as 75% of intangible assets. This is quite an increase over a 1975 estimate indicating less than 20% of these companies’ collective market value consisted of intangible assets. A good portion of these intangible assets is intellectual property which includes patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. As you might be aware, there is now federal jurisdiction for trade secret theft. The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) was signed into law on May 11, 2016, after unanimously passing in the Senate and ratification in the House by a vote of 410-2. The DTSA became immediately effective for all trade secret misappropriation taking place after the bill’s signing date.

While many of us might not think of trade secrets (such as the formula for Coca-Cola) as being commonplace, the National Science Foundation estimates that corporations actually employ trade secret protection perhaps two times as often when compared to patents. As such, trade secrets certainly constitute a significant amount of value of intangible assets for American corporations. Trade secrets can include a formula, practice, process, design, instrument, pattern, commercial method, or compilation of information.  To fit the federal definition of a trade secret, the information must include information, reasonable measures taken to protect the information, and information which derives independent economic value from not being publicly known as defined under 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3) (A), (B) (1996).

A paper co-authored by create.org and PricewaterhouseCoopers estimates that trade secret theft ranges from 1-3% of the Gross Domestic Product of the U.S. and other advanced industrial economies. As such, the federal government chose to create a federal cause of action for trade secret misappropriation in the DTSA. This legislation includes a three-year statute of limitations, and it authorizes remedies similar to those found in current state laws. The DTSA also creates a seizure procedure for use in extraordinary circumstances where the offender “would destroy, move, hide, or otherwise make such matter inaccessible to the court, if the applicant were to proceed on notice to such person.”  While the seizure may be carried out immediately, the new law provides that the court shall set a hearing not less than seven days after the issuance of the order. Finally, the law protects whistleblowers from retaliatory accusations of trade secret misappropriation, so long as the whistleblowers disclose the trade secret information to government or court officials in confidence.

The DTSA does not preempt existing state law, which will preserve options for metalcasters in regard to whether to file federal or state claims and court selection. It also notably omits any requirement that a trade secret plaintiff describe its trade secrets with particularity, which helps to protect the sensitive trade secret information after prosecution of the offender. The criminal provisions of the DTSA increase the penalties for a criminal violation from $5,000,000 to the greater of $5,000,000 or three times the value of the stolen trade secrets to the organization, including the costs of reproducing the trade secrets.

As a result of the legislation, your business may wish to consider four responses to the DTSA after consulting your business attorney:
First, you may wish to update your employment and confidentiality agreements to disclose the whistleblower immunity provisions in the DTSA. If you do so, your company may be eligible to recover double damages or attorney fees in trade secret litigation.

Second, reevaluate your company’s tolerance for bringing trade secrets claims. Many companies have been deterred from making claims in the past because of the uncertainties and delays in state courts. Federal courts, however, have smaller case loads, allowing them to more directly and efficiently manage such litigation.

Third, take inventory of your company’s trade secrets and evaluate the protections in place to maintain the confidentiality of those secrets. Preventative measures are far more effective and less costly at keeping your secrets safe than trying to “re-secure” a trade secret after it is disclosed.

Fourth, develop response plans for suspected misappropriation and for receiving a seizure order. Trade secret litigation tends to move relatively quickly. Having a plan for what to do in the event your secrets are stolen will prevent unnecessary delays that can compromise your rights.   

Click here to see this story as it appears in the September/October 2017 issue of Metal Casting Design & Purchasing.


Everybody Writes

October 1, 2017--Do we need another book on writing? Yes, because as Ann Handley explains, everybody writes. Handley is the Chief Content Officer at MarketingProfs, and her book, “Everybody Writes, Your Guide to Creating Ridiculously Good Content,” offers many ways everyone to improve their writing. We’re looking at you, fellow marketers. And ourselves. 

Why did Handley write this book? Because we live on Planet Publisher and everybody writes stuff. If you tweet, blog, post on LinkedIn or Facebook, or send emails on any subject, you write and publish. Since publishing is a privilege, you owe it to your readers—whoever they are—to think of them first.

In the foreword, Nancy Duarte (Owner, Duarte Design), says “If Strunk and White’s ‘The Elements of Style’ and Stephen King’s ‘On Writing’ had a baby, this would be it.”

“Everybody Writes” is such an entertaining child; however, along with the fun, it’s deadly serious about better content creation. (Ms. Handley, please note I used a semicolon while joining independent clauses with “however.”)

We owe it to our audience to write better. As writers, we must be relentless audience advocates. Reading can, and should, be part of a great user experience. Compelling writing serves your audience.

The book has 74 short, quickly digestible chapters, making it easy to read in short bursts. If brevity is the soul of wit, this is a witty book, indeed.

“Everybody Writes” abounds in aphorisms. Saying it “abounds in quotables” would violate one of Handley’s criterion to avoid turning one part of speech into another. “Quotable” is an adjective, not a noun.

For instance, Handley says:
 “… I might not believe in writer’s block, but I do believe in writer’s evasion.” (If you’re a writer, you know exactly what she means.)
 “… at some point, you do have to rush your own art. Otherwise, your art sits on its butt on the couch eating chips and salsa.” In other words, “Deadlines are the WD-40 of Writing.”
 “… no business truly sells to another business; we all sell to people.”

There are two kinds of people, “those who think they can write, and those who think they can’t. (And too often, both are wrong!)”

There is so much more excellent guidance in “Everybody Writes” than I can tell you here. Just applying Handley’s rules for avoiding clichés like the plague, or omitting useless words from the start of your sentences, are enough to make you a better writer, immediately. 

The works on writing that I regularly consult are the 1982 edition of Jack Capon’s “The Word,” an Associated Press Guide to Good News Writing, George Orwell’s essay, “Politics and the English Language,” and “The Elements of Style.” Now, “Everybody Writes” will take its place on my shelf next to those so I can refer to it regularly, as well. 


Designing From Example

A few months ago, a group from work gathered for one of those evening paint classes I’m sure you are familiar with. An instructor takes the group through the process of painting an image, going step by step through the brushstrokes and paint mixing. Although the color choices, spacing, and shaping were unique, in the end, we all had paintings of an owl on a branch in the moonlight.

Contrast that with another recent art project, this time with my kids. They were given several tubs of Play-Doh with pictures of colorful sculpture examples displayed on the packaging—a butterfly, a clown, a flower. After studying the pictures, they came up with their own creations. The butterfly turned into a purple and red lady bug and the clown turned into a snowman with a pointy hat.

Both these adventures in art remind me of the design and engineering process for manufacturing a part.

Step-by-step instructions, rules of thumb, design guidelines, and protocols help you achieve the function of your parts. Examples and case studies show what has already been achieved, so you can make the connection to how it may be applied to your own project.

In this issue of MCDP, we’ve focused on examples. Check out what other designers are doing to achieve their goals for reduced lead time, improved quality, and decreased costs:
•  In the Design Details column on page 20, an aluminum crankcase assembly provided part consolidation, short lead times and part consolidation by combining 3-D printing with low pressure sand casting.
•    In the feature article, “Cast in Place: Integrating Non-Cast Components Into Castings,” on page 28, collaboration between a turbine manufacturer and metal casting supplier resulted in a cast solution that improved part consistency and reduced total cost.
•    The article on page 32, “3-D Technologies Ease Replacement Part Challenges,” is about a project that was specifically launched in order to be a case study for how additive manufacturing and advanced manufacturing practices can increase throughput and reduce cost.
•    Finally, in the Casting Innovation on page 49, “Casting Simulation Helps Part Conversion,”  a marine exhaust housing was successfully converted from another process with the aid of casting process simulation to design a new gating system.

Even though you may not be designing for any of the alloys or end-uses in these case studies, the decision-making process may spark an idea for your own project. Or maybe you have been toying with using additive manufacturing for prototyping but don’t have any experience. Studying case studies and examples opens new possibilities.

Alternatively, when you have completed a successful project, sharing the results with the casting design community may spur the next great design or solution.

Keep creating, and enjoy the case studies in MCDP.

Click here to see this story as it appears in the July/August 2017 issue of MCDP


Know the Updates to Patent Law

From time to time, foundries, foundry suppliers, and casting end-users develop inventions for which they seek patent protection. This could include a new austempered ductile iron composition, a casting made from that composition, a method of making that composition, or a novel molding machine.  While these are a few examples, the limits of the invention are constrained only by what the inventor can dream of.  If you or your company apply for U.S. patents, this column will serve as a brief review of some considerations of U.S. law that have changed in the past few years. The following law changes should be kept in mind prior to and during the patent application process.

As of March 2013, the America Invents Act (AIA) legislated some important changes to the patent law, and patent applicants need to be aware of these changes to more effectively apply for U.S. patents.  Perhaps the most significant change from the AIA is the U.S. moved from a “first to invent” regime to a “first inventor to file” regime.  Simply put, an applicant can no longer gain rights over a later applicant for the same invention by proving that she invented the device first.  Now, the inventor must be first to file, and this encourages inventors to file patent applications early in the process to help ensure that patent rights are maintained over your competitors who may be working on similar inventions.

“Prior art” is a term that refers to patent documents and other disclosures that can be used to defeat a patent application. The prior art available to a patent examiner during the patent examination process in the U.S. is defined by law. One challenge for patent applicants is to identify applicable prior art and thus avoid overlooking potentially fatal prior art. The AIA changed fundamental assumptions defining what will and will not be considered prior art under U.S. law. For example, public disclosures anywhere in the world in any language before your patent application filing date may be considered prior art. In other words, the new definitions remove geographic and language restrictions on prior art and will greatly expand in view of U.S. law what now may be considered prior art. This can add significant hurdles to an applicant because of the large amount of information available to us in many different languages. For example, patent applicants and even patent search experts may have difficulty finding and interpreting patent documents from the Far East that are written in symbolic character languages.

Beneficially for patent applicants, commonly assigned patent applications and subject matter developed under joint research agreements can be used to eliminate some prior art. Under the AIA rules, patents and inventions assigned to a single company can be disregarded as prior art if the invention described in a patent application is assigned to the same company. The same is true for joint research agreements. In one example, if a U.S. patent examiner cites the patent of Company A as prior art against a later Company A patent application, that patent reference can be disregarded under the principle of common assignment.

Here are some suggestions that might improve your or your company’s application process in light of the recent changes in U.S. patent law:
•      Develop company-wide employment agreements, employee handbooks and company policies that require employees to promptly report inventions to the company. The employment agreements and employee handbooks should provide that inventions are automatically assigned to the company.
•      Develop a company strategy to promptly review all employee inventions for commercial value. For those inventions determined to have value, promptly decide how to protect the invention (trade secret, patent or copyright). For inventions that the company decides to protect through patenting, develop a procedure to promptly file a patent application.
•      Develop company forms and policies requiring visitors and other members of the public to sign non-disclosure agreements as a condition for entering company premises where an unprotected invention may be in use.
•      Train employees on the importance of not using any invention in any setting that could be considered public until a patent application is filed for the invention.
•      Train employees of the importance of not marketing or accepting orders for a product incorporating an invention until a patent application is filed for the invention.
•      Train employees about the importance of not disclosing an invention, either in writing or verbally, until a patent application is filed.

Additionally, it is best practice to not consider “disclosure” in the AIA as replacing a patent application filing; publishing is not a substitute for filing to obtain a strong patent position on the invention. An inventor or engineer who has publicly disclosed an invention should file a patent application promptly or, better yet, before disclosure because a mere public disclosure will never provide an effective filing date. In contrast, an earlier patent application filing date protects against competitors filing patent applications for similar or the same inventions later. Furthermore, disclosure before filing may be fatal with respect to international patent rights.   

Click here to see this story as it appears in the July/August 2017 issue of MCDP

 


Feeling Smart

The premise of “Emotional Intelligence 2.0” by Travis Bradberry and Jean Greaves is that how we manage our feelings in various situations is a better indicator of our professional success than IQ.

Everyone who purchases the book can use a code to take an online test to see how high their emotional intelligence score is. I will admit my score was much lower than my ego thought it would be.

What is emotional intelligence? According to the authors, it is the “communication between your emotional and rational brains.” This link was discovered when researchers set out to find out why people with high IQs outperformed those with average IQs 20% of the time and people with average IQs outperformed those with high IQs 70% of the time. 

Emotional intelligence guides how we react to stress, problem solve, network, work on a team, manage projects, and communicate. The better we do all those things, the better we will be in our jobs.

The book, which is billed as a tool to increase EQ, lists four main skills of someone with a high EQ. This includes self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management. After you take the online test, you are given a score for each of these skills, along with an overall score. The online test will suggest which skill to work on first, based on your scores, and provide some strategies to achieve the goal.

The full book also outlines strategies to improve the four skills of emotional intelligence, but the additional resources gained by taking the online test is valuable. The authors urge readers to focus on one skill to improve at first, so the personalized suggestion for which one to start on first is helpful for someone who wants to start boosting their EQ immediately.

After working on your EQ using the strategies given in the book, the reader is invited to take the online test again to see how they improved. If you scored low at first, there’s hope—Bradberry and Greaves assure us that unlike IQ, EQ can be strengthened and increased with time, patience and practice.

“Research conducted at the business school at the University of Queensland in Australia discovered that people who are low in EQ and job performance can match their colleagues who excel in both—solely by working to improve their EQ,” the authors wrote.

“Emotional Intelligence 2.0” is a quick read. Some of the 66 strategies to improve your EQ seem almost too obvious, but at least they are simple to apply. If you do pick up the book, don’t skip the online test. It is eye opening to see where you actually stand and motivation to start applying your EQ strategies immediately.   

Click here to see this story as it appears in the July 2017 issue of Modern Casting


The Industry Wins

Almost every year, the May/June issue of Metal Casting Design & Purchasing ranks as one of my favorites because we unveil the winners of the annual AFS Casting Competition.

This year’s winner is Aristo-Cast Inc. (Almont, Michigan) for a unique lattice-designed seat frame for aerospace applications. The investment caster used its established best practices to bring to life a new way of looking at part design, and the result is encouraging for future applications.

Competition is close every year, and this was no exception. It’s not surprising because the diversity of the metalcasting industry means designers have many different avenues of achieving their goals in fantastic ways. This year, the best-in-class and honorable mention winners are prime examples of reducing weight (sometimes even by switching from aluminum to iron), simplifying logistics, improving quality, cutting cost, and turning customer’s dreams and wish lists into reality.  

The Casting of the Year winners were on display on the exhibit show floor at Metalcasting Congress in Milwaukee last month. It’s the perfect spot to recognize the achievement—in the middle of the rest of the supply chain showcasing their own best capabilities and products and in tandem with many other top industry awards that are presented, most of which we share on in our post-show coverage starting on page 34.

When achievement and awards are brought up, the misconception can be that the award is the achievement. On the contrary—awards recognize achievement. We should strive for the achievement, not the awards.

So, what has the industry achieved in the last year?
•    Advances in additive manufacturing and rapid manufacturing.
•    Significant plant safety milestones.
•    Advocacy to the next generation of metalcasters and customers.
•    Advocacy to our city, state and national leaders.
•    Alloy developments in magnesium, copper, aluminum, iron and steel.
•    Molding process developments, from wax and lost foam patterns to sand mold filling.
•    Improved simulation and prediction tools.
•    New tools for employee training and education.

This list doesn’t even start to touch everything. What the individuals of the industry accomplish together when they are working toward the same goals is something to be proud of, and these achievements should be recognized. They elevate the entire industry. Congratulations not just to this year’s winners, but also to all the other members of this industry who have collaborated toward a goal and met it this year.

Click here to see this story as it appears in the May/June 2017 issue of MCDP


Displaying 1 to 10 of 146 records

x