Rail
Member
In order to powdercoat parta and brass casings, what kind of $ investment are we talking about?
Powdercoating investment
- Thread starter Rail
- Start date
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
- Status
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
its_virgil
Member
I have the system from Harbor Freight. It is $99.99 and is on sale for $59.99 quite often. In fact I just looked and it is on sale for $69.99 now. Check it out at:
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=42802
I use a toaster oven I bought at Good will for $5. I get powders from http:www.columbiacoatings.com Others use the system from Caswell Platings at: http://www.caswellplating.com/powder/powder_coat.htm ,
but their system looks a lot like the Harbor Freight equipment. The learning curve is not steep. There are a couple of articles in the different penturners forums. I can email you one if you will email me, since I can't attach a file to your address via the IAP email link to your address.
Good luck and lots of us here powder coat and will be glad to help you with your question.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=42802
I use a toaster oven I bought at Good will for $5. I get powders from http:www.columbiacoatings.com Others use the system from Caswell Platings at: http://www.caswellplating.com/powder/powder_coat.htm ,
but their system looks a lot like the Harbor Freight equipment. The learning curve is not steep. There are a couple of articles in the different penturners forums. I can email you one if you will email me, since I can't attach a file to your address via the IAP email link to your address.
Good luck and lots of us here powder coat and will be glad to help you with your question.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
Randy_
Member
Always wondered how that saying came about?? Maybe out math instructor can give us some insight? Don: Isn't it true that steepness of a graphed curve can be changed simply by changing which axis represents a particular variable??
its_virgil
Member
Yes, that's true. Interchange the variables and the steepness (slope) changes to the original steepenss' reciprocal. But, I don't have any idea how the saying about a learning curve's steepness came about. Stranger things happen if the learning curve does not have a constant steepness. But, hey, I'm retiring...this is too much like class.[
] I wish my students were eager to learn and would ask some thought provaking questions.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
] I wish my students were eager to learn and would ask some thought provaking questions.Do a good turn daily!
Don
Randy_
Member
Hey Don: If you are of a mind and have a few free minutes.....I'd like to hear your thoughts on the students of today vs. the students you saw when you first started. Probably needs to be a new thread in the casual forum. My thanks in advance.
Both of my parents were educators so I have a special respect for those who choose to teach!!
dfurlano
Member
I bought the sears unit that someone returned for $99.00. You do not need a compressor it has a built in fan. So far it has worked great.
wdcav1952
Activities Manager Emeritus
Reed,
I can't answer your question, but Don or Fangar certainly can. I was reviewing this thread and Googled to see what the answer to Randy's question about the derivation of the term learning curve. This link will give some insight.
http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/learn.html
I can't answer your question, but Don or Fangar certainly can. I was reviewing this thread and Googled to see what the answer to Randy's question about the derivation of the term learning curve. This link will give some insight.
http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/learn.html
YoYoSpin
Member
Randy,
As a manufacturing engineer at Texas Instruments, using learning curve theory was an every-day part of the job. How it works: if for example you're on a 70% curve, the theory says that every time your cumulative production doubles, the costs should go down my 30%.
As a manufacturing engineer at Texas Instruments, using learning curve theory was an every-day part of the job. How it works: if for example you're on a 70% curve, the theory says that every time your cumulative production doubles, the costs should go down my 30%.
Let me see if I understand:
If the first pen costs me 100 (dollars, hours, whatever) and I'm on a 70% curve, than the next one would cost me 70. The next 2 pens would cost me 49 each?
How is the % curve determined? I would think it's a different determination for a corporation vs an individual, and it would vary from individual to individual. Isaac Asimov's Foundation series leaps to mind.
If the first pen costs me 100 (dollars, hours, whatever) and I'm on a 70% curve, than the next one would cost me 70. The next 2 pens would cost me 49 each?
How is the % curve determined? I would think it's a different determination for a corporation vs an individual, and it would vary from individual to individual. Isaac Asimov's Foundation series leaps to mind.
YoYoSpin
Member
Scott,
Yes, if unit #1 = $100, on a 70% curve, #2 would be $70, #4 would be $49 and #8 would be $34.30.
Usually, the slope of the curve is established as a goal and then actuals are measured over time to determine performance against the goal.
Yes, if unit #1 = $100, on a 70% curve, #2 would be $70, #4 would be $49 and #8 would be $34.30.
Usually, the slope of the curve is established as a goal and then actuals are measured over time to determine performance against the goal.
Fangar
Member
Take a look at the tutorial I created:
http://www.thepenshop.net/powder.pdf
Fangar
its_virgil
Member
Reed,
The items that are powdeer coated are placed on a rack or jig and the entire rack/jig is placed in the oven very carefully...if you stumble the powder comes off...I know that for sure.
Here is a link to a tutorial done by a friend. Enjoy.
http://tinyurl.com/h3ow9
Do a good turn daily!
Don
The items that are powdeer coated are placed on a rack or jig and the entire rack/jig is placed in the oven very carefully...if you stumble the powder comes off...I know that for sure.
Here is a link to a tutorial done by a friend. Enjoy.
http://tinyurl.com/h3ow9
Do a good turn daily!
Don
Quick question. I'm looking at using PC mainly for tubes for acrylics at this point.
Do you find that you need to drill larger holes in the blank to accomodate the thickness of the powder coat?
One of the tutorials shows some pains being taking to avoid the end of the tube from resting on the rack. The other seems to just drop the tube on the rack, the end of the tube resting on the rack. Is there a problem with the tubes sticking to the rack or a problem with the coating chipping when you pull the tube off the rack?
Thanks
Do you find that you need to drill larger holes in the blank to accomodate the thickness of the powder coat?
One of the tutorials shows some pains being taking to avoid the end of the tube from resting on the rack. The other seems to just drop the tube on the rack, the end of the tube resting on the rack. Is there a problem with the tubes sticking to the rack or a problem with the coating chipping when you pull the tube off the rack?
Thanks
Jerryconn
Member
James, Don,
Do you guys PC your pen kit parts as well?
Thanks
Do you guys PC your pen kit parts as well?
Thanks
its_virgil
Member
Jerry,
I have but don't any more, except to do colored pen parts. I was clear PCing cheaper gold parts, but decided it was more ecconomical and time saving for me to purchase titanium gold kits. When I want to do colored kit parts, I purchase the cheap gold plating, buff off the gold and PC the parts in colors. Tape on the places where no PC is wanted. The painted parts, i.e. black stripe clips, tend to crinkle when baked in the oven. I have done a few aluminum pens and powdered coated the aluminum. Mostly now I only PC the cartridge parts I use to make the cartridge pens.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
I have but don't any more, except to do colored pen parts. I was clear PCing cheaper gold parts, but decided it was more ecconomical and time saving for me to purchase titanium gold kits. When I want to do colored kit parts, I purchase the cheap gold plating, buff off the gold and PC the parts in colors. Tape on the places where no PC is wanted. The painted parts, i.e. black stripe clips, tend to crinkle when baked in the oven. I have done a few aluminum pens and powdered coated the aluminum. Mostly now I only PC the cartridge parts I use to make the cartridge pens.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
its_virgil
Member
I have not PCed any tubes, but Jay Pickens has and I don't remember him mentioning the need to drill larger holes. The thickness of the powder can be controlled somewhat.
Things tend to stick to the jig, but breaks away quite readily. Fangar's tutorial showed some parts resting on some aluminum foil around the screw or whatever the parts are resting on. I think this may be to insure conductivity as well as holding the parts off the jig base. There are many ways to make the jigs...they must be metal that will conduct electricity and the parts that are PCed must conduct.
I have been carrying a PCed rifle casing in my pocket for over a year with my change and other stuff. It is now in the trash at the Denver airport...they didn't want me carrying it on the plane. Anyway, it showed no signs of wear or dulling. That stuff is harder than woodpecker lips.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
Things tend to stick to the jig, but breaks away quite readily. Fangar's tutorial showed some parts resting on some aluminum foil around the screw or whatever the parts are resting on. I think this may be to insure conductivity as well as holding the parts off the jig base. There are many ways to make the jigs...they must be metal that will conduct electricity and the parts that are PCed must conduct.
I have been carrying a PCed rifle casing in my pocket for over a year with my change and other stuff. It is now in the trash at the Denver airport...they didn't want me carrying it on the plane. Anyway, it showed no signs of wear or dulling. That stuff is harder than woodpecker lips.
Do a good turn daily!
Don
alamocdc
Member
An absolute travesty! I can take it apart and show that it has absolutley NO way of firing (no powder, primer or even a decent slug) and they still have the mind set of idjits (to qoute Frank). I mean, I'm glad they are trying to make the skies more safe, but for crying out loud... that don't even make good nonsense! Okay, I'm done now. Please excuse the interuption!
Fangar
Member
Don has given some great advice. Especially as to the Clear Coat of the Gold parts. It really takes more time than it is worth, unless there is a reason you need to do it. For color, it works well.
As for the tubes... It works well. As for the thickness of the PC, there is not an issue with the hole size. Even if you really cake on the coating, we are talking about minimal thickness increase.
Fangar
As for the tubes... It works well. As for the thickness of the PC, there is not an issue with the hole size. Even if you really cake on the coating, we are talking about minimal thickness increase.
Fangar
Joe Melton
Member
I didn't realize Phil Ostwald wrote a book about the learning curve. He was one of my professors in undergrad school (many years ago).
It is probably more accurate to apply learning curves to time rather than to cost. Of course, it is the same if you are looking at just labor cost. And, as you buy raw materials in larger quantities, because you are making a product in larger quantities, the less they cost per unit, but there is no reason to assume the rate of decrease in cost is the same as the rate of decrease in the time to produce an item.
If the learning curve is 90%, then the time to produce unit two takes 90% of the time to produce unit one, the time to produce unit four takes 90% of the time to produce unit two, the time to produce unit eight takes 90% of the time to produce unit four, etc. It takes less time to make something as learning occurs, and the amount of time change is assumed constant as the number produced doubles.
Obviously, the actual time to produce an item will never reach zero, and use of a learning curve precludes this.
If the 90% were to change to 80%, learning is assumed to be faster, and a curve of quantity produced vs. time would drop quicker. (They would actually not be too far apart once a lot of items have been produced.)
One could say the 80% curve is steeper, because it drops quicker. In general usage, however, when one hears "the learning curve is steep", he generally assumes the speaker is saying that it takes longer to learn how to make the item, and this would imply the 90% curve is steeper than the 80% curve, which is wrong.
Learning curves traditionally have been based on empirical data, and are different for different processes and industries. One could easily send out a team of "time and motion" people, now known as "ergonomics" people, to measure various people making various pens, beginning with their first ever pen. After graphing the data they gathered, a lot of dots, they could do a curve fit to determine the percent learning curve that best fits the dots. Obviously this single curve would not be precise for every individual who makes pens. Some of us learn faster and some of us learn slower. It is meant to be an average. If a manager in an industry were bidding a new job, a product his team had never before made, he might use a learning curve to determine the total labor hours required by his production team, realizing full well that some team members would be more productive than others. Such an estimate, based on industry data, would probably be pretty accurate, and that is why learning curves are used.
Joe
It is probably more accurate to apply learning curves to time rather than to cost. Of course, it is the same if you are looking at just labor cost. And, as you buy raw materials in larger quantities, because you are making a product in larger quantities, the less they cost per unit, but there is no reason to assume the rate of decrease in cost is the same as the rate of decrease in the time to produce an item.
If the learning curve is 90%, then the time to produce unit two takes 90% of the time to produce unit one, the time to produce unit four takes 90% of the time to produce unit two, the time to produce unit eight takes 90% of the time to produce unit four, etc. It takes less time to make something as learning occurs, and the amount of time change is assumed constant as the number produced doubles.
Obviously, the actual time to produce an item will never reach zero, and use of a learning curve precludes this.
If the 90% were to change to 80%, learning is assumed to be faster, and a curve of quantity produced vs. time would drop quicker. (They would actually not be too far apart once a lot of items have been produced.)
One could say the 80% curve is steeper, because it drops quicker. In general usage, however, when one hears "the learning curve is steep", he generally assumes the speaker is saying that it takes longer to learn how to make the item, and this would imply the 90% curve is steeper than the 80% curve, which is wrong.
Learning curves traditionally have been based on empirical data, and are different for different processes and industries. One could easily send out a team of "time and motion" people, now known as "ergonomics" people, to measure various people making various pens, beginning with their first ever pen. After graphing the data they gathered, a lot of dots, they could do a curve fit to determine the percent learning curve that best fits the dots. Obviously this single curve would not be precise for every individual who makes pens. Some of us learn faster and some of us learn slower. It is meant to be an average. If a manager in an industry were bidding a new job, a product his team had never before made, he might use a learning curve to determine the total labor hours required by his production team, realizing full well that some team members would be more productive than others. Such an estimate, based on industry data, would probably be pretty accurate, and that is why learning curves are used.
Joe
- Status