Guide

The deep drawn metal stamping process holds a clear advantage over other types of metal forming in several key ways. Cost is low, quality is high, and the process is known to be efficient and accurate. But what about the screw machine process? The capabilities seem similar, and in some cases the final products look about the same.

Volume

The deep drawn stamping process handles large volume projects with ease. High line speeds, low downtime, minimal operator interaction, and the ability of most parts to be created in a continuous operation combines to make deep draw one of the fastest high volume processes available. By comparison the screw machine process is typically a single part operation, which means fewer parts per minute and higher operator interaction.

Cost

Let’s not forget the cost factor. Typically, the cost of the finished part is based on factors such as material used and the amount of machining time required. The same process features that allow the deep draw process to generate higher volumes than other methods also mean greatly reduced costs. Less machine time per part, low labor involvement, and high line speeds make deep drawn stamping one of the lowest cost per part processes available.

Quality

By design, the deep drawn process maintains a very high repeatability between parts and from batch to batch. This means high quality, less scrap, and satisfied customers every time. Other processes just don’t measure up.

On the surface many manufacturing process may appear similar while in reality each is very unique in strengths and weaknesses. It always pays to dig in, get your hands dirty, and research. In most cases, those little differences mean higher costs!

{{cta(‘4b79246d-f740-4103-abfd-e9479dfe2f66’)}}

When someone talks about the deep drawn process and the products that are created by it, the topic seldom turns to helping humanity. In fact, most of the time when someone thinks or talks about any manufacturing process they have very distinct pre-conceived notions. They might consider parts that are used in the automotive industry, or industrial products. Certainly all of these things are in fact created by manufacturing processes such as deep drawn metal stamping, so the notion is not completely incorrect.

Fact is however, that the products created by the deep drawn process have always played an important role in making the world a better place. Nowhere is this more evident than in the medical industry. Some of the most common medical instruments that help save lives every day are created using the deep drawn metal stamping process.

Items such as insulin delivery devices that help make a diabetes patient more comfortable and independent, precision crafted catheters, components of nebulizer and aerosol treatment equipment that help people breathe better, are all produced using the deep drawn process.

The deep drawn process is uniquely suited for medical equipment due to the fact that deep drawn products are seamless. This is critical in a sterile environment as it prevents bacteria from collecting in the narrow seams. Other processes that require joining two or more sections to create a part leave behind seams that can later corrode, causing issues of contamination as well as durability.

Deep drawn products are also typically stronger than similar products created through other processes. The unique cold working attribute of deep drawn parts make them durable and precise, even over time. This feature makes deep draw the chosen process for industries all over the world, creating products that you use and see every day.

Truth is, no matter where you look, there is a good possibility that deep drawn products have played an important role. Whether it is the insulin delivery device that allows people everywhere to self-administer life-saving drugs, or the nebulizer that helps a child to breathe better, deep drawn parts play a critical role in our world.

{{cta(‘4b79246d-f740-4103-abfd-e9479dfe2f66’)}}

Keep it simple.

These are buzz words for any good engineer or inventor to follow. Legends surrounding the creation of the space pen seem to indicate that early in the space program, American scientists didn’t quite grasp the concept.

The most commonly accepted legend of the space pen tells us that during the race to send humans into space it was determined that astronauts needed a writing tool that would operate in zero gravity, write at any angle, survive extreme temperatures, and work on any surface. The ability for the astronauts to make notations, take notes, make reference marks and so on was critical to a mission’s success.

The legend goes on to tell us how American scientists spent “millions” of taxpayer dollars in research in order to develop such a pen. If this isn’t bad enough, the myth also tells us that our competitors in the space-race, Russia, solved the problem by simply handing out pencils.

It certainly seems from this myth that our scientists were a bit off the mark, not to mention big spenders. It’s a fun myth, but let’s set the record straight.

In the beginning of the space program, the US also sent pencils with the astronauts. After the disastrous fire of Apollo 1 in 1967 the space program adopted strict policies regarding flammable items in the space craft. In a high oxygen environment, even the smallest amount of fuel such as the wood in a pencil can be a disaster. Not to mention the hazard of chipped leads and frayed wood particles floating around the zero gravity compartment. NASA realized that they needed a very specialized writing tool and worked towards a solution. But the solution they found did not have a million dollar price tag.

The answer was created by a small company led by a man named Paul C Fisher. Fisher realized that the astronauts needed a very specific solution, and spent just under one million US dollars of his own money to develop a unique space pen that would meet the demands of the space program. After several years, he succeeded, and the first AG-7 Space Pen was developed. After rigorous testing, NASA accepted the pen as standard space program equipment.

The pen worked perfectly in any environment. Not a dollar of taxpayer money was spent. Total cost to the US Government? $2.95 each.

{{cta(‘0d38e70e-d077-445f-9651-6213c3b482b6’)}}