Scribd
Upload
52 views1 page

Expandable Cavity vs Slides Comparison

The document compares the costs and benefits of using an expandable cavity mold versus a slide mold for a plastic part production project. Key details include an estimated annual production volume of 300,000 parts, an expected mold life of 3 years, and cost savings from using an expandable cavity mold rather than slides in areas like cycle time reduction, increased mold capacity, smaller mold size, and elimination of secondary operations. A savings summary calculates total savings over the life of the mold with an expandable cavity design.

Uploaded by

Victor Villouta Luna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
52 views1 page

Expandable Cavity vs Slides Comparison

The document compares the costs and benefits of using an expandable cavity mold versus a slide mold for a plastic part production project. Key details include an estimated annual production volume of 300,000 parts, an expected mold life of 3 years, and cost savings from using an expandable cavity mold rather than slides in areas like cycle time reduction, increased mold capacity, smaller mold size, and elimination of secondary operations. A savings summary calculates total savings over the life of the mold with an expandable cavity design.

Uploaded by

Victor Villouta Luna
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Comparison: Expandable Cavity vs Slides

Instructions:
1) Fill in all grey boxes (expect those marked optional) for a typical slide mold application.
2) Estimates have been provided but can be replaced with your input.
3) Review Savings Summary at bottom and contact Progressive / Roehr with questions.
* This is NOT a quote. Designs can be submitted to Roehr Tool at [email protected] or call 978-562-4488.
* For animations or more information, please visit http://www.roehrtool.com/Demo/.
Project Overview:
Customer Name:
Project Description:
Date:
Slides vs Ex-Cav
Part/Project Data:

Production Data:

Part OD (in):
Resin Type:
Part Cost Est ($):
Annual Volume:
Expected Life of Mold (yrs):

Run Hours/Day=
Run Days/Year=
Press Rate:
Toolroom Rate:
Productivity Est:

Mold Data:
Cavities:
Slide Cost/Cavity:
Ex-Cav Cost (optional):
# of Columns in Mold Design:

Stops from; trapped parts, slide


maintenance, grease on parts, etc

20
300
$50
$50
90%
# /Year

Downtime/Stop (hr)

$2,500
2

Smaller Press ($ Less):


Secondary Operation Cost (optional):

$5

Cycle Time:
Est Cycle Time of Slide Mold
Actual Ex-Cav Cycle Time (optional):

Quality, Part Rejects:


Part damage, contamination, etc

Savings Summary:
Notes;
Cycle Time Reduction (sec) =
Mold Capacity: ExCav (units)=
Increased Capacity =
Smaller Mold Base (in) =
Mold Cost Variance =
Annual Savings;
Smaller Press Req, Savings =
TOTAL Part Savings =
TOTAL Maintenance Savings=
TOTAL Secondary Ops Savings =
Savings (year 1)
Savings (years 2, 3, etc)
TOTAL Savings over Life of Mold
ROI (yrs)

=
=
=
=

$/hr
$/hr

0.0
#DIV/0!
8
$0

#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
$2,004
$0
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

% Rejects
0.5%

$/hr
% of part cost

You might also like