12
MACHINING VS. CASTING EGR 403 GROUP 7 BRIAN JACOBS MICHAEL MAYER NOAH WINSOR MATTHEW YESETA

Cast vs Machine

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

casting technique explained in contrast with machining the components

Citation preview

Page 1: Cast vs Machine

MACHINING VS. CASTING

EGR 403GROUP 7BRIAN JACOBSMICHAEL MAYERNOAH WINSORMATTHEW YESETA

Page 2: Cast vs Machine

PROPOSAL

PERFORM COST ANALYSIS ON 2 DIFFERENT PROCESSES

MACHINING Vs. CASTING

DETERMINE WHICH PROCESS IS ECONOMICALLY BENIFICIAL BASED ON NET PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS

Page 3: Cast vs Machine

REQUEST FOR QUOTE

4 FIN IMPELLER – PERSONAL WATERCRAFT APPLICATION

6061-T6 ALUMINUM ALLOY 3500 PIECES PER YEAR MARR IS 12.5% INFLATION IS 3.5%

Page 4: Cast vs Machine

MANUFACTURING PROCESS

5-AXIS HIGH SPEED CNC MACHINING

Page 5: Cast vs Machine

MANUFACTURING PROCESS

MOLTEN ALUMINUM DIE CASTING “SQUEEZE CASTING”

Page 6: Cast vs Machine

CASTING Vs. MACHININGOPERATION COST

$200,000

$150,000

$100,000

$50,000

$0

$50,000

$100,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

CO

ST

MACHINING

CASTING

EQUIPMENT MATERIALS ENERGY MAINTANANCE LABOR

RECYCLING

SALVAGE

Page 7: Cast vs Machine

CASTING Vs. MACHININGOVERALL PROGRESS 10 YEARS

$0.00

$100,000.00

$200,000.00

$300,000.00

$400,000.00

$500,000.00

$600,000.00

$700,000.00

$800,000.00

$900,000.00

$1,000,000.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

YEARS

BE

NE

FIT

S-C

OS

T

total cost-benefit10yearscastingtotal cost-benefit10yearsmachining

Page 8: Cast vs Machine

SENSITIVIY ANALYSISFOR BOTH OPTIONS, CHANGE IN

TOTAL INCOME HAD THE MOST EFFECT– 20% CHANGE IN INCOME RESULTED

IN 30% CHANGE IN PRESENT VALUE (HIGH/LOW)

– FOR CASTING, ELECTRICITY WAS SIGNIFICANT AS WELL (LARGER AMOUNT = HIGHER SIGNIFICANCE)

SALVAGE LEAST SIGNIGFICANT

Page 9: Cast vs Machine

SENSITIVITY ANALYSISMatching PW (casting energy decreases)

$2.00

$2.50

$3.00

$3.50

$4.00

$4.50

(Mill

ion

s)

Cost of Energy for Casting

PW

MachiningPW

CastingPW

Page 10: Cast vs Machine

CONCLUSION WE CHOSE THE MACHINING

PROCESS – EQUIPMENT COST AND MAINTENANCE

WERE HIGHER BUT COST OF RUNNING OPERATION MUCH LOWER

– HIGH REMOVAL AMOUNT OF MATERIAL MADE UP WITH RECYCLING RETURN

– LONGTERM USEFUL LIFE– LABOR COST HIGH BUT LABOR MORE

SKILLED AND VERSATILE– HIGHLY ADAPTABLE PROCESS

Page 11: Cast vs Machine

RESOURCES

HASS AUTOMATION, INC.

E-BAY

CALIFORNIA EDISON

IMS METALS

Page 12: Cast vs Machine

HELPFUL WEBSITES

http://www.treasury.gov/– THIS IS A GOOD SITE FOR

INFORMATION ABOUT THE OVERALL ASPECTS OF THE ECONOMY

www.cfo.com– THIS IS A GOOD SITE FOR

INFORMATION ABOUT RUNNING A BUSINESS