Close

Brian_Donlin
step one
step one
 
Posts: 22
Joined: June 3rd, 2015, 11:21 am
Location: Chicago
Every time I see a hand or power tool, it's almost always overmolded in a few places, especially the grip. The problem is, overmolding prevents recycling at the end of the product's life cycle. Are there any good alternatives to this process? If I were designing for DeWalt/Bosch/Makita/etc., what's the most environmentally-friendly way to accomplish the same thing?


studiomkllc
step three
step three
 
Posts: 175
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 11:35 am
Going to be extremely difficult to reproduce the same qualities. Overmolds are often chemically interlocked and mechanically interlocked. Essentially making the two inseparable. Its also the most economical way to get soft gripability and the strength of the main plastic body in large volumes. Trying to recreate that while also maintaining the design is pretty damn hard short of having a bunch of tight fitting orings wrapped around the grip. Might work but doubt would fit your design vision. Instead of trying to duplicate the process try exploring the materials. Maybe there are some bio friendly soft and hard compatible materials.

User avatar
Online

slippyfish
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 7:07 pm
Location: 48 degrees north
ditto studiomkllc, looking into alternative materials for something less obnoxious is a good baby step.

I've struggled with this in my industry as well, and we've made some headway in replacing overmolded self-skinning urethane foam parts with injection molded parts that performed better. But that's not what you are talking about.

The shock absorption, tight fit, color matching, and low cost for volume manufacturing are the attractive parts of the Santoprene elastomer overmolding. Even if you broke out the grip parts into a smaller assembly (thus being able to recycle the larger components) you'd still be wrestling with more screws/bosses/cost... and does the customer really care anyway?

Maybe there's some paint or spray deposition type process that would be ok.
“Traveling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, boy."

http://www.superformer.com
http://www.coroflot.com/skhid


studiomkllc
step three
step three
 
Posts: 175
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 11:35 am
Yeah lets be honest this is the dirty secret about ID. A lot of the materials we use have such varied an amazing qualities: grip, texture, detail, color, economics, but atleast from my experience they are all toxic and less than ideal for the environment. I actually did work in school on injection molding bio resins. Given that was 7 years ago things may have changed. What i found was some good resins but most were either too expensive, couldnt retain pigment, had major mold flow issues or just ended up looking terrible.

Sorry less than helpful!

User avatar

JEriksson
 
Posts: 17
Joined: November 19th, 2013, 4:20 am
Location: Sweden
You have polyurethane plastics that can span from the elastomer area to the plastic area of shore hardness.
So a core of hard polyurethane overmolded with soft polyurethane would make it recycled as one piece of polyurethane.

User avatar

Cyberdemon
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 3136
Joined: February 7th, 2006, 11:51 pm
Location: New York
The short answer is no, and most of these tools don't end up in a recycling-friendly supply chain at the end of their life anyways. Even if you designed something that could be disassembled, end users won't disassemble it, most areas don't have e-waste recycling programs, and the manufacturers (at least to my knowledge) don't offer any type of take back or recycling incentives. The price of shipping a drill back to a manufacturer would likely be higher than the material gained back in recycling.

But that's just our planet and the moral conundrum of being a person who makes things.


Brian_Donlin
step one
step one
 
Posts: 22
Joined: June 3rd, 2015, 11:21 am
Location: Chicago
slippyfish wrote:The shock absorption, tight fit, color matching, and low cost for volume manufacturing are the attractive parts of the Santoprene elastomer overmolding. Even if you broke out the grip parts into a smaller assembly (thus being able to recycle the larger components) you'd still be wrestling with more screws/bosses/cost... and does the customer really care anyway?

No, the customer doesn't care--I do! (And so does Mother Nature.) I see what you're saying, though. Ultimately those workarounds add complexity and reduce overall product performance.

JEriksson wrote:You have polyurethane plastics that can span from the elastomer area to the plastic area of shore hardness.
So a core of hard polyurethane overmolded with soft polyurethane would make it recycled as one piece of polyurethane.

Very interesting, I never thought about that. This could be a good option if it's feasible. I'm going to dive deeper into this.

studiomkllc wrote:Yeah lets be honest this is the dirty secret about ID. A lot of the materials we use have such varied an amazing qualities: grip, texture, detail, color, economics, but atleast from my experience they are all toxic and less than ideal for the environment. I actually did work in school on injection molding bio resins. Given that was 7 years ago things may have changed. What i found was some good resins but most were either too expensive, couldnt retain pigment, had major mold flow issues or just ended up looking terrible.

New material technologies are always going to be more expensive at first, though... I'm willing to at least investigate the cost for the sake of comparison. As for the other issues, those are certainly a deterrent. Biotech has made huge strides in the last 7 years though, so let's hope things have changed!

Cyberdemon wrote:The short answer is no, and most of these tools don't end up in a recycling-friendly supply chain at the end of their life anyways. Even if you designed something that could be disassembled, end users won't disassemble it, most areas don't have e-waste recycling programs, and the manufacturers (at least to my knowledge) don't offer any type of take back or recycling incentives. The price of shipping a drill back to a manufacturer would likely be higher than the material gained back in recycling.

But that's just our planet and the moral conundrum of being a person who makes things.

None of those problems are insurmountable, though, are they? And the solutions need to start somewhere. Lawmakers need to do their part to improve recycling programs, and designers need to do their part to design for recycling and educate users. It feels like sort of a cop-out to blame the existing systems and users; we're all guilty of doing it.

User avatar

Cyberdemon
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 3136
Joined: February 7th, 2006, 11:51 pm
Location: New York
Brian_Donlin wrote:None of those problems are insurmountable, though, are they? And the solutions need to start somewhere. Lawmakers need to do their part to improve recycling programs, and designers need to do their part to design for recycling and educate users. It feels like sort of a cop-out to blame the existing systems and users; we're all guilty of doing it.


No one is forcing you to use overmolded parts. If this design for disassembly & recycling is a priority, you could make housings from metal, or from rigid plastics that are only assembled. You can also petition your company to start an internal recycling/refurbishing process.

The reality though is in most cases, sustainability falls too little too late. The government can't even agree on global warming, you can petition your local municipality for an e-Waste recycling program, but even with that the reality is we ship 90% of that waste to China, where they just tear it apart with zero regard for the earth.

As long as some country is willing to take our garbage, we will never have incentives that make this viable from a business perspective. It will most likely take the dystopian future where the sun gets blocked out from the smoke clouds and we're all regretting our decisions to fuel consumerism.


Brian_Donlin
step one
step one
 
Posts: 22
Joined: June 3rd, 2015, 11:21 am
Location: Chicago
Cyberdemon wrote:No one is forcing you to use overmolded parts.

No one is forcing me personally to use them--but I'm sure designers at major tool brands are being told they need to overmold because their competitors are doing it. And there is a quality increase. Shock absorption, for example.

Cyberdemon wrote:If this design for disassembly & recycling is a priority, you could make housings from metal, or from rigid plastics that are only assembled. You can also petition your company to start an internal recycling/refurbishing process.

The reality though is in most cases, sustainability falls too little too late. The government can't even agree on global warming, you can petition your local municipality for an e-Waste recycling program, but even with that the reality is we ship 90% of that waste to China, where they just tear it apart with zero regard for the earth.

As long as some country is willing to take our garbage, we will never have incentives that make this viable from a business perspective. It will most likely take the dystopian future where the sun gets blocked out from the smoke clouds and we're all regretting our decisions to fuel consumerism.

All good points. If/when we get to that dystopian future, I just want to be able to say I did the best I could, you know what I mean? E-waste is a whole other can of worms. I don't even know where to start with that. Frankly, it's probably a much bigger issue than overmolding, given the types of chemicals you find in e-waste.

User avatar
Online

slippyfish
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 7:07 pm
Location: 48 degrees north
Brian_Donlin wrote:
slippyfish wrote:The shock absorption, tight fit, color matching, and low cost for volume manufacturing are the attractive parts of the Santoprene elastomer overmolding. Even if you broke out the grip parts into a smaller assembly (thus being able to recycle the larger components) you'd still be wrestling with more screws/bosses/cost... and does the customer really care anyway?

No, the customer doesn't care--I do! (And so does Mother Nature.) I see what you're saying, though. Ultimately those workarounds add complexity and reduce overall product performance.


Yes...you have to keep trying, we all have to keep trying. It might not be this go-around, or the next, or the tenth. I don't know the magic bullet, or I would tell you. When I ask "does the customer care" its because those intentional design choices have a way of finding themselves on the bottom line of profitability, and many times its a matter of cents that make these projects actually go to market or not. But when you feel strongly about something, you have to keep pushing and trying to find a way to make it happen.

In 1995 I did a school project on a completely modular music system, where individual components (CD transport, tray, PCB, power supply) were individual parts. It made the most sense to me at the time. Fast forward 20 years and CE companies are still investigating projects like this (Google Aura).

One day we will figure it out.
“Traveling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, boy."

http://www.superformer.com
http://www.coroflot.com/skhid

Re: Overmolding alternatives, especially for tools

Postby iab » February 20th, 2017, 8:59 am


iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
Brian_Donlin wrote:Very interesting, I never thought about that. This could be a good option if it's feasible. I'm going to dive deeper into this.


Thermoset polyurethane is not recyclable.

Thermoplastic polyurethane is a class 7 recyclable. Meaning no one recycles it. I would say, while expensive, it is most definitely less toxic and "better" for the environment than PVC.

Re: Overmolding alternatives, especially for tools

Postby iab » February 20th, 2017, 9:01 am


iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
Also, my experience with TPUs is mostly breathable films.

Is there a TPU that would be rigid enough for a drill housing?

User avatar

JEriksson
 
Posts: 17
Joined: November 19th, 2013, 4:20 am
Location: Sweden
iab wrote:
Brian_Donlin wrote:Very interesting, I never thought about that. This could be a good option if it's feasible. I'm going to dive deeper into this.


Thermoset polyurethane is not recyclable.

Thermoplastic polyurethane is a class 7 recyclable. Meaning no one recycles it. I would say, while expensive, it is most definitely less toxic and "better" for the environment than PVC.


Good point. But to be honest I don't believe in recycling plastics, the properties degrade too much after recycling and there are almost no pure plastics today. Most of the plastics used in the industry and consumer products are a mix of many different plastics. But there are exceptions, PET bottles are quite successful and have a high yield of recycling.

Even we swedes who recycle everything, end up using plastic for fuel in our combined heat-power biomass plants. It is more economical and more environmentally effective then to refine and ship the plastic back to china for new products.

And I don't see the problem to take it one step further, why bother separating the parts of a cordless drill when you can grind everything down to dust, separate the metal, burn the rest and continue to separate the untouched materials in the ash. Products made entirely from one type of material especially glass, wood/paper, plastics such as PET or metal should still be recycled separate because of the high yield.

Designers should focus on design - recycling plants on recycling.

User avatar
Online

slippyfish
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 1366
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 7:07 pm
Location: 48 degrees north
JEriksson wrote:But to be honest I don't believe in recycling plastics, the properties degrade too much after recycling and there are almost no pure plastics today. Most of the plastics used in the industry and consumer products are a mix of many different plastics....Designers should focus on design - recycling plants on recycling.


Although this sounds like "throw it over the wall, its not the designer's problem", I think its a valuable perspective. Designers can reasonably hope to control only their front-end activities and some of production. Of course being able to spec materials that could be ground into dust or combusted more readily would be the responsible angle for a designer. But your statement reminds me of one of our VP's constantly saying that product development cannot and should not be perceived as the Heroes coming to save the damsels in distress (operations, marketing, etc.) and instead doing our job as best as possible.
“Traveling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, boy."

http://www.superformer.com
http://www.coroflot.com/skhid

Re: Overmolding alternatives, especially for tools

Postby iab » February 21st, 2017, 12:28 pm


iab
full self-realization
full self-realization
 
Posts: 2339
Joined: January 5th, 2004, 6:03 pm
slippyfish wrote:But your statement reminds me of one of our VP's constantly saying that product development cannot and should not be perceived as the Heroes coming to save the damsels in distress (operations, marketing, etc.) and instead doing our job as best as possible.


I had a marketing person tell me to make the plastic product bigger and "greener" in the same sentence.

Boggles the mind.

Go to the Next Page

Return to materials and processes