As featured in:
	Embracing Automation Should Take the Intensity Out Of Our Labor-Intensive Process by Robert Dunne Automating your rotational molding process can't replace brilliant design ideas but it can change the role of our operators while controlling costs When the waterwheel replaced manual labor as the most efficient, effective way to grind grain into flour, it was hailed as a remarkable advance that would feed more people than ever before. In fact, its immense surge in milling productivity helped drive a surge in population growth. For centuries, automation was viewed with grateful wonder. But today it prompts images of robots replacing fine people on assembly lines. We think of the industrial revolution as being driven by human labor but the reality is the need for human labor was triggered by the development of machinery that automated previously manual tasks that were much slower and often less effective. No, automation is not new, and it's not even new to rotational molding. We've always automated as many steps in the process as technology and finances would allow. In our facilities and in many others, I'm sure, we all use some automation. We draft parts using CAD (Computer Automated Design), transfer material from railcars to silos through automated pneumatic conveying systems, and perform routing, drilling and other secondary operations on computer numerically controlled (CNC) - automated - machinery. We print bar codes and labels on our products with automated printing and tracking equipment and then we shrinkwrap the pallet load using automated packaging equipment. (Granted, sometimes it's only semi-automatic.) It is clear that automation has played a key role in bringing the efficiency of rotomolding plant operations and the ability to control costs up to the levels we experience today. Yet very few of us are reveling in these cost control abilities today and outside forces are not exactly helping. For the most part, rotomolding is still a labor-intensive business wherein we face a looming shortage of qualified workers. We compete against other processes that are less labor intensive, offer greater choice in material selections and greater productivity. Our industry is being strangled by volatility and uncertainty in material costs (that is, we are not certain by how much costs will increase) and we are being pressured by international competitors who are neither as affected by the same labor, energy and material costs, nor constrained by our environmental controls and quality assurance parameters. Passing our price increases on to the customer can only go on for so long. At some point, we need to step back as an industry and reassess the entire rotomolding process in terms of labor, energy and material costs and productivity. In doing so, it becomes clear that while our rotomolding machinery is neither patently inefficient nor ineffective, it is inherently designed to consume large amounts of what have become our highest input costs. In fact, molding may be the only step in the process that has not been touched by a significant upgrade through automation as electronic upgrades have only indirectly addressed fundamental cost issues. This is due largely because the machine itself just hadn't become a burdensome cost - until now. Enter Leonardo: It's A System, Not Just A Machine That so little has changed in the basic process of rotational molding over the years made the introduction of Persico's automated Leonardo system seem especially groundbreaking and earth shattering. A lot of new technology had been introduced and applied to machine design but little of it had been applied to rotomolding machinery. In developing the Leonardo automated system, Persico went back to the drawing board and considered the most efficient, effective ways to perform the rotomolding process. In doing so and almost by definition, they addressed the key drivers of our high operating costs. Heating and cooling with thermal transfer fluids rather than forced air concentrates heat where it is desired and minimizes loss to the environment. It eliminates reliance on ambient air for faster, more consistent cooling. Its advanced process control system promises to do more for quality control and part to part consistency than we've ever thought possible. Start with a wider processing window. Then add more precise control over in-mold foaming and cross-linking reactions, more control during curing and the ability to rotomold materials that had heretofore been too troublesome to work with and it seems too good to be true. The base line of the Leonardo system (and it is a system, not just a machine) could deliver such gains in quality and consistency that rotomolders could win jobs that previously were only feasible by blow molding and injection molding. With these improvements in quality and energy-efficiency come reductions in reject rates, energy costs and waste material and increased productivity rates. It also creates capacity that would otherwise be needed to rerun parts that failed to meet specifications. If I were starting a rotomolding company today and evaluating the most efficient, effective machinery, the decision to invest in traditional, oven-based machinery vs. an automated system like Leonardo as the foundation of my operation would be an easy one. Over time, molders using this more efficient machinery with lower, more certain operating costs will enjoy substantial advantages over more established companies running aging machinery. This is very much akin to the growth of the Asian steel industry. Labor Costs It would be impossible to discuss the merits of automation without addressing its impact on the workforce. For rotomolders (in the United States anyway), demographics, widespread economic opportunity and an educational system that demeans technical careers have conspired to create a lack of available workers. In the coming years, this lack of workers will become a severe shortage. While automated systems like Leonardo eliminate some repetitive tasks typically borne by manual labor such as heavy lifting, part handling and screwing in mold inserts, its ability to alleviate the coming labor crisis can go only so far. The reality that I have observed is that even automated machinery of this magnitude requires operators who understand the rotomolding process and are committed to achieving the quality and efficiency levels that Leonardo permits. That is why the most likely candidates to run such automated machinery are the very same people running our traditional rotomolding machines. It makes far more sense to train an experienced operator to apply his or her knowledge to a computerized control system then to recruit and train someone from square one. And for a company like ours with 21 traditional machines, integrating Leonardo into the mix hardly eliminates the need for our many dedicated workers. Furthermore, machinery - whether manually or automatically operated - is still machinery and the applications for traditional equipment will not suddenly vanish. The Cost of Productivity From 1980 to 2005, real shipments and real value added for the plastics industry grew 122% and 118% respectively, significantly faster than manufacturing as a whole, according to data from the Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. This was driven largely by demand for plastics as a material of choice. Yet during the same period, productivity growth in plastics manufacturing grew by about the same rate as for the manufacturing sector as a whole, 2.1 percent per year. This suggests we processors have been enjoying more business than other types of manufacturers but we haven't pursued productivity diligently enough. While demand for plastic products will likely increase in the foreseeable future, increases in material, energy and labor costs will likely thwart any growth in our margins unless it is countered by cost controls and productivity improvements. Any such improvements due to compensation and incentivization have been tapped out for years. Gains from computerizing internal procedures are still rippling through the industry. It is technology applied through automation that may offer the dramatic productivity gains required for us to thrive in the coming years. Eventually, such automation may be integrated in a linear fashion at every step in the process from powder handling to molding through packaging, shipping and reordering. In my view, rotomolders who embrace this next phase of automation will be well positioned for long-term profitability for years to come. If you have comments or questions, I would love to hear from you. Send comments to Bob Dunne at rdunne1@usa.net or see www.Rotomolding.com/bobdunne.shtml. Meese Orbitron Dunne Co. is the first rotomolder in North America to invest in the Leonardo system. Its parent company, Tingue, Brown & Co., Saddle Brook, New Jersey, has a history of bold moves since 1902 that include pioneering the use of plastics for rotomolding laundry handling products.