| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Chinese factory
|
Chinese factory
|
Chinese factory
Ignoramus29244 fired this volley in
: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Comments welcome Obviously, it's because the robots "do what they're told" instead of "doing what they want to do"! G What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. What's fishy about the claim of defect rate, is that any plant turning out 25% defective product could never have remained in business long enough to automate! Lloyd |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:32:58 -0500, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote: Ignoramus29244 fired this volley in : ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Comments welcome Obviously, it's because the robots "do what they're told" instead of "doing what they want to do"! G What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. What's fishy about the claim of defect rate, is that any plant turning out 25% defective product could never have remained in business long enough to automate! Lloyd Actually not true. Government subsidies cover a multitude of sins |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244
wrote: On 2015-08-11, wrote: Information http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/48238331.cms I love this statistic: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Comments welcome First, I can't see India ever allowing an unmanned factory anywhere in their country. They have some of the cheapest labor available anywhere and hundreds of millons of poor to feed. Second, is a company admitting to a 1:4 failure rate. Ghastly. Haven't they heard of "training" and/or "Quality Control"? Third is "down to 5%"? thud -- The beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it. --Thomas Jefferson |
Chinese factory
Larry Jaques fired this volley in
: Third is "down to 5%"? thud Fourth, "INDIA"???? Really, Larry? Lloyd |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:08:33 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:32:58 -0500, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote: Ignoramus29244 fired this volley in : ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Comments welcome Obviously, it's because the robots "do what they're told" instead of "doing what they want to do"! G What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. What's fishy about the claim of defect rate, is that any plant turning out 25% defective product could never have remained in business long enough to automate! Lloyd Actually not true. Government subsidies cover a multitude of sins It isn't "subsidies." There are some processes that produce scrap rates on that order. At one time, single-crystal turbine blades had about a 30% acceptance rate. It's near 100% now, but it was still worthwhile at 30%. Some high-quality investment castings turn out 25% or more scrap. And there are others. Some semiconductors have very high scrap rates. There still are processes that are too expensive, or impossible, to control to the scrap rates generally acceptable in industry today. They tend to be very specialized. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244
wrote: On 2015-08-11, wrote: Information http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/48238331.cms I love this statistic: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Comments welcome i Robotics in some processes reduce scrap rates on that order of magnitude, but I'm suspicious of the whole story. I'd have to see what they're doing to "polish modules" with those robot arms to believe it. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On 8/11/2015 11:44 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
It isn't "subsidies." There are some processes that produce scrap rates on that order. At one time, single-crystal turbine blades had about a 30% acceptance rate. It's near 100% now, but it was still worthwhile at 30%. I worked on some cabinet doors machined from a large aluminum casting. We rejected about half for porosity which we couldn't find until we did a lot of cutting. Some high-quality investment castings turn out 25% or more scrap. And there are others. Some semiconductors have very high scrap rates. There still are processes that are too expensive, or impossible, to control to the scrap rates generally acceptable in industry today. They tend to be very specialized. Another job involved SS bearing housings that had one end cut in one turning center, the second in another. Concentricity from one end to the other had to be +/-.0002". We were rejecting 35% when I discovered a fundamental flaw in the inspection process: before checking concentricity, we would wipe the part with a pink cloth shop rag. One night, I used white paper towels. 5% reject rate. Same the next night, while the day guy still got 35%. I mentioned it to the inspection dept. They pointed out that I was not following procedure. I said we had been out of shop rags, which was true the first night. Shortly thereafter, procedure was changed to require use of white paper towels. Inspection dept took credit, no attaboy. David |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:21:07 -0500, "David R. Birch"
wrote: On 8/11/2015 11:44 AM, Ed Huntress wrote: It isn't "subsidies." There are some processes that produce scrap rates on that order. At one time, single-crystal turbine blades had about a 30% acceptance rate. It's near 100% now, but it was still worthwhile at 30%. I worked on some cabinet doors machined from a large aluminum casting. We rejected about half for porosity which we couldn't find until we did a lot of cutting. Some high-quality investment castings turn out 25% or more scrap. And there are others. Some semiconductors have very high scrap rates. There still are processes that are too expensive, or impossible, to control to the scrap rates generally acceptable in industry today. They tend to be very specialized. Another job involved SS bearing housings that had one end cut in one turning center, the second in another. Concentricity from one end to the other had to be +/-.0002". We were rejecting 35% when I discovered a fundamental flaw in the inspection process: before checking concentricity, we would wipe the part with a pink cloth shop rag. One night, I used white paper towels. 5% reject rate. Same the next night, while the day guy still got 35%. I mentioned it to the inspection dept. They pointed out that I was not following procedure. I said we had been out of shop rags, which was true the first night. Shortly thereafter, procedure was changed to require use of white paper towels. Inspection dept took credit, no attaboy. David Imagine if it had been toilet paper, and it became part of your ISO 9000 documents. d8-) -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On 8/11/2015 3:50 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:21:07 -0500, "David R. Birch" Another job involved SS bearing housings that had one end cut in one turning center, the second in another. Concentricity from one end to the other had to be +/-.0002". We were rejecting 35% when I discovered a fundamental flaw in the inspection process: before checking concentricity, we would wipe the part with a pink cloth shop rag. One night, I used white paper towels. 5% reject rate. Same the next night, while the day guy still got 35%. I mentioned it to the inspection dept. They pointed out that I was not following procedure. I said we had been out of shop rags, which was true the first night. Shortly thereafter, procedure was changed to require use of white paper towels. Inspection dept took credit, no attaboy. David Imagine if it had been toilet paper, and it became part of your ISO 9000 documents. d8-) This was a bit before the ISO fad, it was near the start of the SPC fad. David |
Chinese factory
On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan |
Chinese factory
wrote in message
... On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan ========================= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lights_out_(manufacturing) "FANUC, the Japanese robotics company, has been operating a "lights out" factory for robots since 2001. Robots are building other robots at a rate of about 50 per 24-hour shift and can run unsupervised for as long as 30 days at a time. "Not only is it lights-out," says Fanuc vice president Gary Zywiol, "we turn off the air conditioning and heat too." American inventor Oliver Evans built the world's first fully automated factory: http://www.farmcollector.com/equipme...rist-mill.aspx "In the 1780s, Evans built a completely automatic grist mill in New Castle County, Del. Powered by a water wheel, the mill was the first continuous flow, production line mill in the world. An English book of the day described the mill: "Mr. Oliver Evans, an ingenious American, has invented ... a flour mill upon a curious construction which, without the assistance of manual labor, first conveys the grain ... to the upper floor, where it is cleaned. Thence it descends to the hopper, and after being ground in the usual way, the flour is conveyed to the upper floor, where, by a simple and ingenious contrivance, it is spread, cooled, and gradually made to pass to the boulting hopper." The product wasn't touched by human hands from the time the grain was dumped into the receiving hopper until the finished flour flowed into a bin ready for packing into barrels or bags." The sole operator handled shipping and receiving. -jsw |
Chinese factory
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 09:32:43 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote: wrote in message ... On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan ========================= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lights_out_(manufacturing) "FANUC, the Japanese robotics company, has been operating a "lights out" factory for robots since 2001. Robots are building other robots at a rate of about 50 per 24-hour shift and can run unsupervised for as long as 30 days at a time. "Not only is it lights-out," says Fanuc vice president Gary Zywiol, "we turn off the air conditioning and heat too." Fanuc was running the first modern lights-out factory, building wire EDMs, from around 1991. It worked very well but I don't know how cost-effective it was. One guy monitored the whole thing, walking about with a lighted clipboard. They built it partly as a demonstration of what they could do with their robots and networked CNCs at the time. There is enough lights-out activity going on that my publishing group made a prototype of a new magazine, called _Lights-Out Manufacturing_, four years ago. We decided that there wasn't enough editorial material to sustain a full-scale magazine at that time, but there is activity. -- Ed Huntress American inventor Oliver Evans built the world's first fully automated factory: http://www.farmcollector.com/equipme...rist-mill.aspx "In the 1780s, Evans built a completely automatic grist mill in New Castle County, Del. Powered by a water wheel, the mill was the first continuous flow, production line mill in the world. An English book of the day described the mill: "Mr. Oliver Evans, an ingenious American, has invented ... a flour mill upon a curious construction which, without the assistance of manual labor, first conveys the grain ... to the upper floor, where it is cleaned. Thence it descends to the hopper, and after being ground in the usual way, the flour is conveyed to the upper floor, where, by a simple and ingenious contrivance, it is spread, cooled, and gradually made to pass to the boulting hopper." The product wasn't touched by human hands from the time the grain was dumped into the receiving hopper until the finished flour flowed into a bin ready for packing into barrels or bags." The sole operator handled shipping and receiving. -jsw |
Chinese factory
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244
wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. John John DeArmond http://www.neon-john.com http://www.fluxeon.com Tellico Plains, Occupied TN See website for email address |
Chinese factory
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:33:45 -0400, Neon John wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244 wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. John John DeArmond But John, it isn't clear what kind of process they're talking about -- whether it's some group of processes, or just polishing that cell-phone "module." I'd want to know more before getting critical about it. For reference, when P&W started making their single-crystal jet-turbine blades, the reject rate was 70%. But their performance was so much better than the blades they made previously that it was worth it. There are some needs for parts in production that can barely be met by the best known or best practical processes -- they have low Cp or Cpk, if you're into that stuff. There are other processes where the material is so cheap (plastic phone cases) where a high reject rate isn't much of a hardship, compared to the cost of improving the process. We're so locked into sigma values over 4 these days that we sometimes forget that there are some things that, in practice, we can barely make to spec no matter what we use. But they can be things that we really need. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 11:30:12 AM UTC-4, Ed Huntress wrote:
There are other processes where the material is so cheap (plastic phone cases) where a high reject rate isn't much of a hardship, compared to the cost of improving the process. Ed Huntress Or like using aluminum for pickups............... Rejects and scrap just get recycled. Dan |
Chinese factory
"Neon John" wrote in message
... On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244 wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. John John DeArmond http://www.neon-john.com http://www.fluxeon.com Tellico Plains, Occupied TN See website for email address I used to design burn-in and production test equipment. What kind of failures do you see? -jsw |
Chinese factory
On 2015-08-12, Neon John wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244 wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. Finally someone saw that statement for what it REALLY means! 25% defect rate? ****!!! i |
Chinese factory
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:37:43 -0500, Ignoramus28978
wrote: On 2015-08-12, Neon John wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244 wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. Finally someone saw that statement for what it REALLY means! 25% defect rate? ****!!! I tracked this story back to it's source: People's Daily. It's virtually the same story. I have no confidence that People's Daily got the story right. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:37:43 -0500, Ignoramus28978
wrote: On 2015-08-12, Neon John wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:16:31 -0500, Ignoramus29244 wrote: ``...Since the robots came to the plant the defect rate of products has dropped from over 25 per cent to less than 5 per cent...'' Thus defines the term "chinese junk"!!! We use a US box builder to actually manufacture our products. The after-burn-in defect rate they're held to is 0.1%. They're at least an order of magnitude better. Finally someone saw that statement for what it REALLY means! 25% defect rate? ****!!! i But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On 8/13/2015 10:20 AM, John B. wrote:
If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. I remember a post in alt.machines.cnc, someone relating a story about making boatloads of small brass parts for a customer. By the barrel full. Customer goes to China to get them for some significant amount less. First delivery shows up and roughly half the parts are scrap, out of tolerance. Company complains, China factory says they'll make twice as many, same total price. And yea, the US company set up an inspection line to sort good from bad... Forgive if I got it a bit wrong, this was years ago. Jon |
Chinese factory
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:17:12 +1000, Jon Anderson
wrote: On 8/13/2015 10:20 AM, John B. wrote: If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. I remember a post in alt.machines.cnc, someone relating a story about making boatloads of small brass parts for a customer. By the barrel full. Customer goes to China to get them for some significant amount less. First delivery shows up and roughly half the parts are scrap, out of tolerance. Company complains, China factory says they'll make twice as many, same total price. And yea, the US company set up an inspection line to sort good from bad... Forgive if I got it a bit wrong, this was years ago. Jon I suspect that is true. Cummins Diesel set up a plant in China probably fifteen years ago. They were selling the Chinese made engines in Singapore for the same price as those that were made in the U.S. I happened to know the Manager of Caterpillar Tractors, Singapore pretty well and asked him about the engines and he reckoned that they were up to Cummins standards. I asked him how he could say that, "they are made in China for God's sake", and he told me that they did it the same way that Caterpillar had done it. You put in your managers and your inspectors and you check everything twice, just as Cat had done at their plant in Indonesia. If you go to China and say, "Make me a thousand of these for the cheapest price you can", you will get cheap parts. If you go to China and say, "I want you to make me a thousand and I am going to check every one and I'll only pay for the ones that pass inspection", you get a higher price but the parts will meet your specs. I might say that nobody in Asia ever pays for anything before it is done and checked.... -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B.
wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
Chinese factory
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:02:08 +0700, John B.
wrote: If you go to China and say, "Make me a thousand of these for the cheapest price you can", you will get cheap parts. If you go to China and say, "I want you to make me a thousand and I am going to check every one and I'll only pay for the ones that pass inspection", you get a higher price but the parts will meet your specs. I might say that nobody in Asia ever pays for anything before it is done and checked.... -- cheers, John B. Long ago, a very wise trader once told me that he could go to Japan and negotiate a $100 product down to $75 and they'd make exactly the same product with the same quality and sell it to him for $75. Do that in China and they'll find a way to make a $75 product for you. My subsequent experience confirmed that, but of course paying more in itself is no guarantee. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
Chinese factory
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. Exactly. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp Yes, I read that. But as far as I can tell the article was originally written in Chinese and the "polishing", that several have mentioned, may simply be the translation of a word that can mean several things, one of which is "polish". Think of the common U.S. use of "Cool" or "Tactical" - I recently saw an advert for a pocket knife being a "tactical color", i.e. black, and I can't even imagine how the phrase, "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:04:16 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:02:08 +0700, John B. wrote: If you go to China and say, "Make me a thousand of these for the cheapest price you can", you will get cheap parts. If you go to China and say, "I want you to make me a thousand and I am going to check every one and I'll only pay for the ones that pass inspection", you get a higher price but the parts will meet your specs. I might say that nobody in Asia ever pays for anything before it is done and checked.... -- cheers, John B. Long ago, a very wise trader once told me that he could go to Japan and negotiate a $100 product down to $75 and they'd make exactly the same product with the same quality and sell it to him for $75. Do that in China and they'll find a way to make a $75 product for you. My subsequent experience confirmed that, but of course paying more in itself is no guarantee. --sp The furore a while back about the dolls painted with lead based paint is very likely an example. The Buyer, who is probably not an expert in anything, contracts to "make us some blue dolls" and the Chinese company does exactly they. Than there is all kinds of Hell raised about the lead based paint, but the Chinese company did exactly as ordered. Blue dolls were ordered and blue dolls were supplied. :-) And before someone comes up with the "they should have known" argument I can tell you that when an international oil company writes a contract to build, say a pipeline or an off shore platform, the paint, if any, is spelled out in great deal - the type of paint, the color, complete with a color chart reference, the type and quantity of ingredients in the paint and the number of coats and thickness of each coat, and often a specific reference - "XYZ company Ultra Protection Enamel, or equal", for example. -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 07:47:18 +0700, John B.
wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp Yes, I read that. But as far as I can tell the article was originally written in Chinese and the "polishing", that several have mentioned, may simply be the translation of a word that can mean several things, one of which is "polish". Think of the common U.S. use of "Cool" or "Tactical" - I recently saw an advert for a pocket knife being a "tactical color", i.e. black, and I can't even imagine how the phrase, "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) That's an interesting thought, and a possibility, but as I mentioned, the original article was published in the English edition of the People's Daily -- which prints the government line. Without getting too involved with it, the entire newspaper is dedicated NOT to informative journalism, but to communicate *ideas* the government of China wants people to hear. Details like accuracy and technical understanding are not exactly high priorities. The way it was written, it sounds like something written by a general assignment reporter. I agree with Spehro that there is not enough information here to judge the case. I also suspect that the story is not very accurate. -- Ed Huntress |
Chinese factory
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 23:22:25 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 07:47:18 +0700, John B. wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp Yes, I read that. But as far as I can tell the article was originally written in Chinese and the "polishing", that several have mentioned, may simply be the translation of a word that can mean several things, one of which is "polish". Think of the common U.S. use of "Cool" or "Tactical" - I recently saw an advert for a pocket knife being a "tactical color", i.e. black, and I can't even imagine how the phrase, "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) That's an interesting thought, and a possibility, but as I mentioned, the original article was published in the English edition of the People's Daily -- which prints the government line. Without getting too involved with it, the entire newspaper is dedicated NOT to informative journalism, but to communicate *ideas* the government of China wants people to hear. Well of course. Whoever would want to sponsor a news outlet that didn't print what they wished it to print. Or perhaps to put it in more capitalistic terms, do writers pan the product of their largest advertiser? Details like accuracy and technical understanding are not exactly high priorities. The way it was written, it sounds like something written by a general assignment reporter. That is probably the norm in many (most?) newspapers. The Bangkok Post had, for a time, a sub-editor of the weekly published Computer Section, who was firstly a computer nut and secondly sensible enough to contract outsiders to write technical articles. The Sub-Editor retired and the Computer Section became the Technical Section and now prints copies of reviews of hand phones :-( I agree with Spehro that there is not enough information here to judge the case. I also suspect that the story is not very accurate. -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:20:19 +0700, John B.
wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 23:22:25 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 07:47:18 +0700, John B. wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp Yes, I read that. But as far as I can tell the article was originally written in Chinese and the "polishing", that several have mentioned, may simply be the translation of a word that can mean several things, one of which is "polish". Think of the common U.S. use of "Cool" or "Tactical" - I recently saw an advert for a pocket knife being a "tactical color", i.e. black, and I can't even imagine how the phrase, "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) That's an interesting thought, and a possibility, but as I mentioned, the original article was published in the English edition of the People's Daily -- which prints the government line. Without getting too involved with it, the entire newspaper is dedicated NOT to informative journalism, but to communicate *ideas* the government of China wants people to hear. Well of course. Whoever would want to sponsor a news outlet that didn't print what they wished it to print. Or perhaps to put it in more capitalistic terms, do writers pan the product of their largest advertiser? It depends on the quality of the publication. I've had advertisers pull out on two occassions over things I've written -- one was a $40,000 program, back in the late '70s, when that was real money -- and my publishers have backed me on both occasions. Writers know exactly what the level of journalistic integrity is for the publishers in their field, and I've only worked for the best. In the 1930's, a few employees died on the job at National Steel Co. (Pittsburgh), and American Machinist (my old employer) blasted National Steel for not caring about the lives of their employees. The executives of Nat. Steel demanded a meeting with the Editor and publisher of AM, so they went out there by train, top hats and all. When they walked into the meeting, the AM publisher spoke first: "We've come here for one purpose," he said. "It's to inform you that we con't accept advertising from murderers." With that, they turned around, walked out, and went home to New York. It was 20 years before National Steel was allowed to advertise in AM again. AM was that powerful, and a big part of it was their reputation for integrity, accuracy, and fearlessness. In the case of People's Daily, it's only nominally a journalistic enterprise. It's really Communist Party PR. Writing the wrong thing for them probably could get you "disappeared." g Details like accuracy and technical understanding are not exactly high priorities. The way it was written, it sounds like something written by a general assignment reporter. That is probably the norm in many (most?) newspapers. The Bangkok Post had, for a time, a sub-editor of the weekly published Computer Section, who was firstly a computer nut and secondly sensible enough to contract outsiders to write technical articles. The Sub-Editor retired and the Computer Section became the Technical Section and now prints copies of reviews of hand phones :-( Good beat reporters are hard to come by. d8-) -- Ed Huntress I agree with Spehro that there is not enough information here to judge the case. I also suspect that the story is not very accurate. |
Chinese factory
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:06:50 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan Ayup..."lights out machining" is quite common and gaining popularity. |
Chinese factory
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:17:12 +1000, Jon Anderson
wrote: On 8/13/2015 10:20 AM, John B. wrote: If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. I remember a post in alt.machines.cnc, someone relating a story about making boatloads of small brass parts for a customer. By the barrel full. Customer goes to China to get them for some significant amount less. First delivery shows up and roughly half the parts are scrap, out of tolerance. Company complains, China factory says they'll make twice as many, same total price. And yea, the US company set up an inspection line to sort good from bad... Forgive if I got it a bit wrong, this was years ago. Jon Quite true. Though to be fair..the slopes are getting much...much better at doing high quality work. |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 09:43:08 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:20:19 +0700, John B. wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 23:22:25 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 07:47:18 +0700, John B. wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:00:41 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 07:20:08 +0700, John B. wrote: But, your labour cost is $15/hour, theirs is $15/day :-) If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. It was stated as "polishing". Maybe they just send 25% back for a bit of rework. Not enough information. --sp Yes, I read that. But as far as I can tell the article was originally written in Chinese and the "polishing", that several have mentioned, may simply be the translation of a word that can mean several things, one of which is "polish". Think of the common U.S. use of "Cool" or "Tactical" - I recently saw an advert for a pocket knife being a "tactical color", i.e. black, and I can't even imagine how the phrase, "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) That's an interesting thought, and a possibility, but as I mentioned, the original article was published in the English edition of the People's Daily -- which prints the government line. Without getting too involved with it, the entire newspaper is dedicated NOT to informative journalism, but to communicate *ideas* the government of China wants people to hear. Well of course. Whoever would want to sponsor a news outlet that didn't print what they wished it to print. Or perhaps to put it in more capitalistic terms, do writers pan the product of their largest advertiser? It depends on the quality of the publication. I've had advertisers pull out on two occassions over things I've written -- one was a $40,000 program, back in the late '70s, when that was real money -- and my publishers have backed me on both occasions. Writers know exactly what the level of journalistic integrity is for the publishers in their field, and I've only worked for the best. Exactly. And while Nat. steel might have been a major advertising client I suspect that your Editors had decided that honesty was really the best path to riches. The company I worked for in Indonesia had exactly the same view point. In fact we gloried in telling the truth (and early on we got caught lying and it cost us a bundle to repair the problem) but my, admittedly limited, experience is that this altitude is less than universal. The Hearst and Pulitzer newspapers and the Spanish-American War come to mind here. In the 1930's, a few employees died on the job at National Steel Co. (Pittsburgh), and American Machinist (my old employer) blasted National Steel for not caring about the lives of their employees. The executives of Nat. Steel demanded a meeting with the Editor and publisher of AM, so they went out there by train, top hats and all. When they walked into the meeting, the AM publisher spoke first: "We've come here for one purpose," he said. "It's to inform you that we con't accept advertising from murderers." With that, they turned around, walked out, and went home to New York. It was 20 years before National Steel was allowed to advertise in AM again. AM was that powerful, and a big part of it was their reputation for integrity, accuracy, and fearlessness. In the case of People's Daily, it's only nominally a journalistic enterprise. It's really Communist Party PR. Writing the wrong thing for them probably could get you "disappeared." g I don't believe that being "disappeared" is quite prevalent as it might used to have been but if you were to write an article that the government doesn't like in the Singapore Straits Times you will get fired (The Singapore government owns a considerable portion of the parent holding company). If you wrote an article in a Jakarta newspaper that the government didn't like you might find that your apportionment of news print, might not be delivered. And so on :-) Details like accuracy and technical understanding are not exactly high priorities. The way it was written, it sounds like something written by a general assignment reporter. That is probably the norm in many (most?) newspapers. The Bangkok Post had, for a time, a sub-editor of the weekly published Computer Section, who was firstly a computer nut and secondly sensible enough to contract outsiders to write technical articles. The Sub-Editor retired and the Computer Section became the Technical Section and now prints copies of reviews of hand phones :-( Good beat reporters are hard to come by. d8-) The Pattaya newspaper recently reported that a Chinese tourist was found dead on the beach resulting in much furor. Two days later the police reported that she actually died and was found on the balcony of a condo owned by a female business associate and that she had complained of stomach pains on arrival in Thailand and visited a doctor or clinic and was given "some pills" before setting out for Pattaya and that the police were not discussing a cause of death until after the autopsy. :-) -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:19:53 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:17:12 +1000, Jon Anderson wrote: On 8/13/2015 10:20 AM, John B. wrote: If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. I remember a post in alt.machines.cnc, someone relating a story about making boatloads of small brass parts for a customer. By the barrel full. Customer goes to China to get them for some significant amount less. First delivery shows up and roughly half the parts are scrap, out of tolerance. Company complains, China factory says they'll make twice as many, same total price. And yea, the US company set up an inspection line to sort good from bad... Forgive if I got it a bit wrong, this was years ago. Jon Quite true. Though to be fair..the slopes are getting much...much better at doing high quality work. Back in the early days "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "junk". Now it is a mark of high quality and the same thing is true of Korea, who now are the largest ship builders in the world, and I think that the Chinese are even smarter as they initially started with essentially low tech manufacturing and got the money just rolling in. Now, I suspect, they will start improving the quality of certain items and raising prices. They just devaluated their currency which makes their exports even cheaper and should increase sales greatly while essentially having no effect on their own people. -- cheers, John B. |
Chinese factory
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:19:47 +0700, John B.
wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:19:53 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:17:12 +1000, Jon Anderson wrote: On 8/13/2015 10:20 AM, John B. wrote: If a worker can make 10 pieces a day it cost you $120 to make 10 units. It costs them $15 to make 10 units. they throw 25% away so individual unit cost is $2.00 while your's is $12.00. they sell theirs with 100% mark up for 4 dollars. You go belly up. -- cheers, John B. I remember a post in alt.machines.cnc, someone relating a story about making boatloads of small brass parts for a customer. By the barrel full. Customer goes to China to get them for some significant amount less. First delivery shows up and roughly half the parts are scrap, out of tolerance. Company complains, China factory says they'll make twice as many, same total price. And yea, the US company set up an inspection line to sort good from bad... Forgive if I got it a bit wrong, this was years ago. Jon Quite true. Though to be fair..the slopes are getting much...much better at doing high quality work. Back in the early days "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "junk". Now it is a mark of high quality and the same thing is true of Korea, who now are the largest ship builders in the world, and I think that the Chinese are even smarter as they initially started with essentially low tech manufacturing and got the money just rolling in. Now, I suspect, they will start improving the quality of certain items and raising prices. They just devaluated their currency which makes their exports even cheaper and should increase sales greatly while essentially having no effect on their own people. Good post! Well stated! I should mention that I work on Chinese industrial equipment and most made in the past 10 yrs..is every bit as good as Japanese. |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 07:47:18 +0700, John B.
wrote: "Oh Man, it is Soooo cool" would turn out when translated to Chinese :-) Niu bi! (or in mixed company just niu) (literall translation- 'Cow c*nt'). The second character rarely even appears in print - even in older dictionaries. Slang does not translate literally.. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 09:43:08 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: In the case of People's Daily, it's only nominally a journalistic enterprise. It's really Communist Party PR. Writing the wrong thing for them probably could get you "disappeared." g Unless it's national security related it would probably be similar to what would happen if a Fox News reporter heaped praise on Nancy Peolosi. Abrupt and irrevocable truncation of one's career at that particular establishment. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
Chinese factory
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:17:24 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote: On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:06:50 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan Ayup..."lights out machining" is quite common and gaining popularity. The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment. -- Warren G. Bennis; As cited in: Mark Fisher (1991) The millionaire's book of quotations. --sp -- Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition: http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8 Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48 |
Chinese factory
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:52:57 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
wrote: On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:17:24 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:06:50 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 11:33:01 AM UTC-4, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote: What's missing in all that is that NO plant is TOTALLY automated. There have to be people there (at the very least) to monitor the operation, and handle repairs. We aren't quite yet at the point where the robots will also do their own maintenance. Lloyd Nucor has a couple of fastener plants that come close to being TOTALLY automated. They run three shifts and the graveyard shift runs totally automated. They have automated the monitoring. If something goes wrong , the machine shuts down and it gets fixed on the next shift. Dan Ayup..."lights out machining" is quite common and gaining popularity. The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment. -- Warren G. Bennis; As cited in: Mark Fisher (1991) The millionaire's book of quotations. --sp Oooh! Very good!! Gunner |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter