[Harp-L] a business systems look at harmonica fastenings.

[karen mass <kdmass7@xxxxxxxxx>]

i think this is actually a pretty good analysis of a business decision.
and it indicates a business model which i believe suzuki and other reed
welders are pursuing.

the other side of the analysis would be:

a) the manufacturers haven't cut the prices on their harps in comparison to
non-welding companies, at least not that i could find on the web.  this
means any cost saving due to the use of welding is passed directly on to
the manufacturer, not the consumer.

b) by welding reeds into place, they  raise the price of changing a reed on
a harmonica to the purchase price of a new harmonica instead of the price
of a new reed.  that's good business for the manufacturer, not so good for
the consumer.  of course, repair set tool costs would have to be factored
in, but over time would probably be small.

the only part of the analysis i would argue with is about the costs for the
spot welding set up.  the cost of set up for a spot welder is a
non-recurring cost.  do it once, and you're done.   after that the welding
process station would fall under manufacturing maintenance.   the only cost
points then would be for periodic electrode replacement, electricity and
occasional alignment.   as i see it, spot welder station set up cost would
be the same or less than for mechanical fastener station setups, and the
cost of electricity, while higher for spot welders than for mechanical
fastener stations, would certainly not even approach the higher costs of
fastener station maintenance.  in a harmonica construction context, very
small weld spots combined with an extremely easy to weld (i.e., low
temperature weld) material such as brass or steel would make for a very low
cost weld.

iowaplayer

>Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 12:14:01 -0500
>From: Joseph Leone <3N037@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [Harp-L] a business systems look at harmonica fastenings.
>To: Harp L Harp L <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Message-ID: <5808AFC9-F021-4082-A8B0-3A871E4C3154@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>In light of the recent posts on harmonica drift pins, escutcheon pins,
screws, et. al., here is a viewpoint.
>
>There are usually reasons why a manufacturer chooses certain methods. I
give some examples.
>Take several 55 gal oil drums and fill them to the top with various
fastenings till they are brimming.
>Then screed off the tops of the drums so that they are all full. Maybe
even vibrate them so that they
>are really full.
>
>Drum # 1 fill this one with welding rods. Now inasmuch as the welding done
on harmonicas is of the
>'spot' type and no extra metal is involved, this drum will be empty. There
won't BE any rods.
> BUT, since set up time and equipment is involved, it will still cost you
to weld, this empty barrel will still
> cost you. Let's say $1,000.oo
>
>Drum #2 fill this one with rivets. There are barrel rivets and blind
rivets. Harmonicas use barrel rivets.
>These are used when something needs to be secured with no intention of
moving it..BUT it CAN be done
>in an emergency. Blind rivets are used on bridges, ships, skyscrapers with
NO intention of movement.
> (Btw, replacing a reed IS an emergency). Barrel rivets work on friction
and when set(or 'bucked), they swell.
>This barrel will cost you $1,500.oo
>
>Drum #3 this one contains drift pins. They also work by friction. The
holding part is drilled to 87.5% of the
>diameter of the pin while the held part is drilled 75%. Then the pins are
forced into the work and act as
>a clamp. They are also used when it isn't intended to separate the parts,
but it CAN be done. Btw, separating
>harmonica plates to effect a repair is also an emergency. This barrel is
worth $2,250.oo
>
>Drum #4 sheet metal screws. These are used when it is expected that parts
can be disassembled. Maybe
>not all the time, but still easy enough. Btw, disassembly of harmonicas is
desirable for obvious reasons.
>This barrel is worth $3,375.oo.
>
>Drum #5 Machine screws. Usually the threads are cut not rolled, made on a
turret mill. Used when it is
>desirable to have parts EASILY disassembled. This barrel is worth $5,
062.5o. I think we see a pattern here.
>
>Drum #6 Machine screws with matching nuts. The use is only too obvious.
Now since the nuts will also
>take up room that the screws would normally occupy, there are far less
screws in this barrel, BUT it will
>still cost you $5,062.5o. The only thing IS? You're going to need (maybe)
another half barrel for your
>assemblies. Sooo, ultimate cost? $7,593.75
>
>Now it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to allow as how dropping to a
'lesser' form of fastening will, in the
>long haul, save you a substantial amount of Drachmas. Maybe this is what
manufactures do? I don't know
>I'm just sayne.
>
>I hope you find this amusing, enlightening, and of some value.
>
>smokey-joe