Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] "poor-quality" plastic cameras (Relatively LONG)

Subject: Re: [OM] "poor-quality" plastic cameras (Relatively LONG)
From: "Richard Allen" <dickallen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 20:52:06 -0400
Wayne,
Having worked in the Plastics Industry for more than forty years, there are
a number of other things that could prove to be bothersome in considering a
plastic camera.
In this age of tighter and tighter grips on economic issues, I wonder if
pricing pressures on the sub-suppliers of the plastic parts will cause them
to resort to cheating on the quality of the materials and consequently,
manufacture parts of downward spiraling fitness.
These issues apply to the cycle times used to run the molding presses used
in making the parts also. Lessening the cycle times usually will produce
parts that are inferior in print dimensions which in turn, causes problems
in the final assembly as they are not optimum fit any longer.
There are some other problems with running the material too fast, such as
degradation due to excessive heats on the barrel (make the materials melt or
"plasticize" at a faster rate. The parts then, no longer have the
strength/wear characteristics intended in the original design.
Cheating on the material spec. is not necessarily done through using the
wrong material (this does sometimes happen), but by using material which has
gone through what is called the "regrind process". Generally, there is an
allowance for regrind to be mixed in with the "virgin" material.
For quality parts, this allowance is normally restricted to about 10%, but
as the pressures to reduce cost are encountered, those percentages tend to
(mysteriously, I might add), start to climb until there are problems showing
up in the product that has been produced and is in the field.
Drying the material (or lack of, in this case) is another area where costs
could be trimmed which in turn is going to affect the engineering plastics
that are used in replacing metal parts.
You notice that I use the word metal rather than steel or aluminum because
there are all those kinds and a few others that are used in building a well
made camera. The same would/will be true for the plastic parts as you cannot
use like materials in parts that interact with one another, in general.

In having these kinds of problems of course, at that time it is often too
late for the camera because the customer has voiced his/her opinion, through
every avenue possible, in effect, sounding the death knell for that model or
even the manufacturer.

I think I am a bit skeptical because of my knowledge, you think?

Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Culberson" <waynecul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 7:47 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] "poor-quality" plastic cameras


>
> > Plastic is popular because, if it's of the right quality and used
> correctly,
> > it's a better structural material for cameras than metal. You might not
> like
> > that (I don't like it, myself), but it's true.
> >
> >Snip



< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz