Editorial mirrors experiences.
Here's the problem: We have a computer-controlled process to cryogenically treat and improve metals. There is no visible change following the treatment.
It is not until we have cryogenically-treated parts and companies have conducted carefully monitored tests, that they discover the treated parts suffered less breakage, less wear, remained in service far longer between change-outs thus reducing downtime and increasing throughput, that they are able to say, "Cryogenic Treatment does work." This all describes what you described in the Editor's Corner.
Only a small percentage of those I speak to decide to give it a try. How can something you can't see and feel make any change on the parts being treated? In your position at MAN, you can only do what I do: present means of improving efficiency, reducing costs, and improving the bottom line. For those who are open-minded and looking for means of improving their operation, you are making an impact. Others fall into the category, "Don't confuse me with facts because I've made up my mind." Companies can only hope that some day the position will be filled by that open-minded individual who realizes his main goal is to improve the company.
Thanks for letting me support everything you stated in Editor's Corner, and please continue to "tell it like it is" in the future.
Bob Reed, Mining & Construction
Specialist and Motorsports
300 Below, Inc.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Letters to the Editor|
|Publication:||Modern Applications News|
|Article Type:||Letter to the editor|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2007|
|Previous Article:||Domestic oil exploration does not solve energy problem.|
|Next Article:||Tool-productivity relationship not understood by most.|