TR King spot patterns (6 Viewers)

David Spragg

Flush
Site Vendor
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
4,549
Location
UK
Starting with the tri-moon pattern (as it would be the most troublesome) - here are the things, actually in reverse order that need to be overcome.

Assuming that chips could be produced we have to know that the spots would not just fall out, and the only way of testing that is pretty much to make a rack of them and drop them on the floor a few times :)

Back a stage from that we have the assembly. Most spots are inserted into the punched holes and then the chips are gently repressed to make sure they stay in place. The only exception is the pies which have to be assembled at the press by the operator seconds before the repressing. So while tri-moons could theoretically be made the same way it could be tough on the operator as the pieces would be much harder to handle than the pie pieces (tough when they are already at 100 degrees+ before they get put in the press etc.) so we would also need to know if it is feasible for an operator to do this.

Back a stage again is the punching out of the slugs and spots to make the parts in the first place. Each punch is a multi part tool which has to be set in a heavy duty press. From a single enquiry I made in the past these could run up to $5k each and that may not even include the hardened steel 'prongs'. Whether they actually have to be hardened steel I don't know.

So overall, I think $5k+ (plus whatever design costs/CAD drawings) is too much of a risk for something that might not work.

So here is an idea I came across.

I have a company near me that does 3D printing for industrial uses using a plastic filament supposedly 30 times tougher than regular plastic and they have made similar machine parts in the past. I'm aiming to go and see them to see firstly if they could make something (and at what cost) that at the very least would be sufficient to do the testing and see if the tri-moon would be feasible.

If it works it leaves us with a few possibilities.

1. The plastic model could simply be used as a prototype to have a proper steel one made from.
2. If it really is that hard wearing maybe the plastic one could actually be used.
3. If the plastic lasted for a reasonable amount of time and was cheap enough to reproduce, perhaps we could just treat them as 'disposable'
4. Taking the whole thing a stage further - given these only have to be made out of the standard one color filament, a printer of the same industrial type that they use, in the smallest size that would be suitable, appears to run around £1000 ($1300), and their heavy duty filament is £30 ($40) a kilo, which looks to be about the amount needed for a punch, I could get a new toy :)
 
I'm figuring that if it doesn't work, the downside is the cheaper of $1340 or whatever they would charge to make me a prototype vs $5k+.

Not to mention the fact that if the 'print at home' outcome achieved anything then it could be used for other patterns and could even potentially produce at least prototypes for inlay punches as well.
 
Last edited:
Assuming that chips could be produced we have to know that the spots would not just fall out, and the only way of testing that is pretty much to make a rack of them and drop them on the floor a few times :)
Doesn't sound like enough of a test.

If the other hurdles could be overcome, I'll happily make the sacrifice of being a tri-moon play-tester :D

The things I do for the sake of humanity... :cool:
 
Doesn't sound like enough of a test.

If the other hurdles could be overcome, I'll happily make the sacrifice of being a tri-moon play-tester :D

The things I do for the sake of humanity... :cool:

Factory has a solid 12 inch concrete floor with no covering. It's enough of a test, trust me. :)
 
What about a 5k kickstarter to make the metal punch and do the tests? If it is successful, the backers could be rewarded with a credit note towards a future CPC set and priority in TRK-mold set orders. If it fails, no harm done and the community learned what they wanted to know.
 
What about a 5k kickstarter to make the metal punch and do the tests? If it is successful, the backers could be rewarded with a credit note towards a future CPC set and priority in TRK-mold set orders. If it fails, no harm done and the community learned what they wanted to know.

Because it might not be $5k. It could be $6k, $8k, $10k, $15k by the time it's done. You still need a prototype. You still need CAD design etc.
When they were $5k that was on the basis of lots being made at once. Not sure that holds good for one unless you already have the prototype.
What you are suggesting means that we end up paying the $5k. My suggestion merely means CPC risks 1/4 of that and owes no-one anything.
 
Not TRK spots, but since we're talking about potential new spot patterns...
  • 2TA18, 3TA18, 4TA18, 6TA18: Would these in theory be possible with current tooling? I assume the punches for the existing/available *DS18 punch out 3/8" holes in the slug which then are filled with three 1/8" spots, the middle of each the same color as the slug. The price point of these compared to the *18 leads me to guess you're not filling thin individual 1/8" holes in the slug here.
  • 312314, 3V12314: doable by combining existing punches?
  • If you're testing TRK style Tri-Moon / Paulson 3HC, what about Paulson style Tri-Moons? Regarding stability I guess if the one works the other would work too.
  • I already know 6HADS18 is doable :) but any plans on adding support for it in the design tool?
And just some daydreaming, should the "disposable punch" thing turn out to be feasible and in turn enable us to test other punches with very low investment... My personal Paulson spot style favorites, in order:
  1. 4TSA18
  2. 3TA14
  3. 2V/4V/8V (and the 4V418 combination)
  4. 3D38
  5. 4W (and the 2V2W combination)
 
Not TRK spots, but since we're talking about potential new spot patterns...
  • 2TA18, 3TA18, 4TA18, 6TA18: Would these in theory be possible with current tooling? I assume the punches for the existing/available *DS18 punch out 3/8" holes in the slug which then are filled with three 1/8" spots, the middle of each the same color as the slug. The price point of these compared to the *18 leads me to guess you're not filling thin individual 1/8" holes in the slug here.
  • 312314, 3V12314: doable by combining existing punches?
  • If you're testing TRK style Tri-Moon / Paulson 3HC, what about Paulson style Tri-Moons? Regarding stability I guess if the one works the other would work too.
  • I already know 6HADS18 is doable :) but any plans on adding support for it in the design tool?
And just some daydreaming, should the "disposable punch" thing turn out to be feasible and in turn enable us to test other punches with very low investment... My personal Paulson spot style favorites, in order:
  1. 4TSA18
  2. 3TA14
  3. 2V/4V/8V (and the 4V418 combination)
  4. 3D38
  5. 4W (and the 2V2W combination)

Answers in random order.... A few of our punches are set into an auto punch machine. The orientation is random. These include 312 & 314. That's why you can't make 312314 or 3V12314.

There is an element of 'suction effect' in holding the spots in place. The Paulson style tri-moons are too big for this. Paulsons are not assembled by hand. They could afford to invest $5 million to achieve theirs. We can't. Same thing applies to the Paulson 2V/4V/8V combinations. Physically impossible to hand make.
Note that none of these things existed before Paulson opened their Mexico plant for the same reasons.

The *DS18 punches punch out the spots as they are, they do not punch out 3/8 holes so no you can't do any of those or they would have been done long ago. Every achievable pattern is already offered. Reason the *18's are more expensive is they have to be punched by hand a spot at a time.

If you think carefully about combinations not shown such as 6HADS18 they can give way to thousands of permutations. Including those in the tool means you need about 10 times as much code so we have no reason to spend $10,000 adding a single piece of functionality for a couple of people I'm afraid.

Not the best description - but once you are punching out an area over 50% of the circumference the chip warps of self destructs in the punch press. That's why 3916 is the biggest that can be offered and means you cant get the 3TA14 and 3D38 etc.

Please bear in mind something else. This testing often means we have to stop regular production for days. That costs us $1500-$2000 a day in lost production on top of all the testing costs. Just something simple like trying to produce a new color could cost us $5k-$10k and might not work.

Some of the things mentioned could be achievable but we are talking 5 years down the line. We have many high priorities right now.
 
What about a 5k kickstarter to make the metal punch and do the tests? If it is successful, the backers could be rewarded with a credit note towards a future CPC set and priority in TRK-mold set orders. If it fails, no harm done and the community learned what they wanted to know.

I guess I should also quantify that going with a straight $5k+ outlay is only going to tell us if a single thing works. Going my route could tell us that perhaps multiple things will work for a much smaller outlay. Even if we had to make the large outlay later we would already know it is going to work.
 
The bigger question about a potential Kickstarter would be, what kind of rewards could CPC reasonably offer - I can't think of any except a variable amount of one single chip design, something general like a show'em or bounty chip.

And even then... what will they do about rewards if they test it and find out it's not working?

I believe Kickstarter is the wrong tool to raise funds for R&D.
 
The bigger question about a potential Kickstarter would be, what kind of rewards could CPC reasonably offer - I can't think of any except a variable amount of one single chip design, something general like a show'em or bounty chip.

And even then... what will they do about rewards if they test it and find out it's not working?

I believe Kickstarter is the wrong tool to raise funds for R&D.

I agree entirely but your German friend made the suggestion :)
If we get to the point where we know it works and then need the additional investment then we can talk about if we want to do our own form of Kickstarter here like we've done before.
 
I guess I should also quantify that going with a straight $5k+ outlay is only going to tell us if a single thing works. Going my route could tell us that perhaps multiple things will work for a much smaller outlay. Even if we had to make the large outlay later we would already know it is going to work.

It’s clear to me that the costs could go up.. the first thing needed would be designs and quotations I suppose.

Regarding the 3D printer option, I have some experience with this technology and I also have access to a reasonably high-end printer. I will send a PM.
 
David, I love both the insight into your development process and the open and detailed discussion with this community on why this may or may not work.

Thank you.

Each time I'm at the factory I try out a few new things, many of which don't work out, so quite often I'm not guessing when I say 'it can't be done', I already tried it but felt no need to report same.
Obviously on my recent trip the main purpose was the crown molds (and helping with some major factory maintenance which needed extra hands) but I did do a few other things that I haven't reported on yet :)

I posted my plan here on the spots etc. as I couldn't see the down side and thought maybe I'd missed something.
If this proto plan worked and I could churn them out in my garage for $40 a time I could probably come up with enough things to justify another trip to the factory to do the testing myself and not affect regular production.
 
It’s clear to me that the costs could go up.. the first thing needed would be designs and quotations I suppose.

Regarding the 3D printer option, I have some experience with this technology and I also have access to a reasonably high-end printer. I will send a PM.

I'm going out for a few hours so may not be able to respond until later.
I have access locally to very high end technology as I said but don't know that cost yet.
I actually have some other potential uses for the technology at home so can justify the 'toy' as long as I know I'm getting something suitable.
What I am not familiar with yet is the software used to create the designs. So I probably need some advice on the last two.
Also, because the punches have to fit in the press and are specifically shaped and sized to do so, the first thing I need is to have the factory mail me over an old worn out one (there are one or two lying about) so I can measure up from it.
 
David, I love both the insight into your development process and the open and detailed discussion with this community on why this may or may not work.

Thank you.
Agreed and I like reading and pretending I know what half the words and concepts you’re mentioning are :)
 
I did do a few other things that I haven't reported on yet :)

giphy.gif
 
I'd pay for that!
So would they. Pretty sure that's a no-no with the gaming comissions. Even if its not, letting too many details out about their operation risks someone making better counterfeit chips and/or replicating the process entirely. None of that is good for their wallets.

I would love to see the facilities myself, but I fear that just isn't in the cards...err, chips.
 
Would putting some sort of holding notch on the moon, under the inlay area, help?
This would probably limit moon spots to inlay chips, but if it works.....
Also, would adding moon spots mean that single , dual and tri would become available?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nex
Would putting some sort of holding notch on the moon, under the inlay area, help?
This would probably limit moon spots to inlay chips, but if it works.....
Also, would adding moon spots mean that single , dual and tri would become available?

No that wouldn't help. They are almost molten when assembled, would make it impossible.
No, single and dual would not become available. Any punch would make the tri-moon in one go.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom