X axis motion is backward on a Haas CL-1

[Donkey Hotey]

The first design review is this Friday I believe.
My exposure thus far is this solid model and a query from the designer:
Engineer: "Could you make these?
They need to be SUPER accurate."

Me: "Like tenths accurate"?

Engineer: "Yeah the very accuratest you can make them!"

That's it... no drawings, no tolerances, no assembly model only the part model you've seen the cross section of.

Sounds like you're having fun with it. And didn't realize you were semi-retired and this was some kind of consulting gig for you. I totally get what you're saying about doing the impossible but, I also want them to know that what they're asking for is not conventional or cheap.

As we established already, it's not the common experience to need so many tools on the turret for probably 90% of the jobs the machine will do.
But I can gang up two for not much more cost than having only one per turret station.

And that's the whole reason I read the thread and was so invested. My TL-1, with the four-position tool post, is even more limited. I've spent many nights trying to come up with a universal gang setup or hybrid for the powered turret that I actually liked. The meat servo that currently changes tools is slower than I'd like for 50-100 parts.

Whatever you come up with, I'm learning from that and thank you. Lack of available tools in a cycle has been my main roadblock to finally installing the turret. I keep about 15 different tools touched off and ready at all times. The very simple parts I was making the other day used five. The four-hole turret obviously wasn't gonna work.

 

[implmex]

Hi again Donkey Hotey:
Here are a few views of an octagonal laydown turret occupieed with some tools:
First unmodified conventional tooling in two possible orientations on the turret:

You can see a couple of problems immediately.
First, the tool at station 8 clutters up the turret.
Second, by the time you add a holder block to clamp the tool the one at station 8 is hard to make and grabs the tool way back from the cutting edge unless you make something creative.
If you want to mount two tools the way I show, the holder at station 2 uses a single screw unless you use the tee slot at station 1 too, in which case the toolholder prevents you from turning a long workpiece with the tool in station 8.

No problem, let's just cut off the tools and make them stubby to de-clutter the turret:

Now your tool clamps get really interesting to implement, and station 1 is still unusable, except maybe if you can crowd a shortie centerline tool in there and juggle everything so you don't hit anything.

OK, you say...let's mount a mix of stick tooling and gang tooling:


You can see where this goes with an octagonal turret...it's not a great design if you want to use conventional tooling mounted similarly to how you'd mount tools if you had no turrret and had a conventional toolpost instead.

Contrast that to your square turret:
Since the corners are not clipped off, you can mount tools pretty much conventionally and run them like you'd run a four way toolpost like Asian lathes are commonly supplied with.
The drawback, as you know is that you have fewer tools you can mount and ganging tools across the turret face is harder because the turrret body gets in the way for all the tools you try to mount in the center of the face.
Tools at the front end of the square turret and tools at the back end of the turret are OK...you can hang the back of the bar , or drill chuck arbor or whatever into the slots that are parallel to the spindle axis, but this sometimes crowds out those slots so they become unavailable to you.

If you want to gang across the face, your best option is to cut off the top of the turret like they've done with the CL-1...now you can take better advantage of the real estate the turret provides, and find the best holder block scheme to cram as many tools as you can across the turret faces .

But now, with a square turret, if you mount any conventional stick tools in a station, perpendicular to the spindle axis, you cannot mount centerline tools or gang mounted tools on the adjacent station (the one that faces the chuck) or you'll pound them into the chuck or the workpiece when you try to run the stick tools, unless you set up very carefully.

That's why I'm such a fan of gang tooling layouts on these tiny machines with octagonal laydown turrets.
But the square turret remains a problem any time you gang mount tools...with the octagonal turret, the adjacent stations allow the tools to be angled away from the chuck and workpiece, so you have a better chance of success without whanging anything.
On your square turret, you actually increase the hazard if you gang mount some of your tools...so I'm not a fan of square turrets when you need to be able to mount lots of tools...machines that use toolposts are safer IMO, especially for beginners.
It may be slow and require you to change the tools out manually, but at least the chances of a collision are less.

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com


On edit:
A stray thought...if you gang everything and abandon all your stick tools for your TL-1, you could run it without hazard.
Station 1 is facing the spindle...2 and 3 are pointing to X positive and X negative
Station 4 is pointing to Z positive.
Nothing will crash as long as the turret stays to the right of the end of the workpiece...so bars for all external turning.

Mill off the top of the turret until it is 0.5" below the centerline of the spindle and put tee slots around the periphery.
Mount 2 gang toolholder blocks for 3/4" bars all pointing outward like guns on a battleship.
Enjoy 8 available stations.

Alternatively:
Make two blocks with 3/4" bores all the way through and bolt them into two slots positioned 180 degrees apart.
Make them fat enough that you can put two cross holes in each one so you have two blind holes facing out to X positive and X negative.
Make two double ended bars for the through holes

Get four straight shank collet chucks for the blind bores and cut them off short so they don't hang out too far.
Populate your turret with 8 tools and make the external tools back to back so each can cut on the opposite side of the spindle from its counterpart.
That should work well and it's easy to implement.
Bonus...you don't have to modify the turret.
Drawback, you have to accept the Z length of the tools that go in the blind bores because you obviously can't adjust the length of the stickout in Z

MC

 

[EmGo]

You say those things are fifty grand to start ? Wish you'd called, coulda saved you fifteen ... including the robot. Hope the Y axis wouldn't confuse them

 

[Donkey Hotey]

You can see a couple of problems immediately.
First, the tool at station 8 clutters up the turret.
Second, by the time you add a holder block to clamp the tool the one at station 8 is hard to make and grabs the tool way back from the cutting edge unless you make something creative.
If you want to mount two tools the way I show, the holder at station 2 uses a single screw unless you use the tee slot at station 1 too, in which case the toolholder prevents you from turning a long workpiece with the tool in station 8.

Yep, the same thought process I go through with the four position turret. In the case of the octagon, I'd probably take advantage of at least one of the adjacent positions to place longer ID tools along the 45 degree face (totally custom block). Why? Things with long stick-out like deep drills or large drills. Even in stubby, a 3/4" drill or a large tap will be longer than most other ID tools. I'd take advantage of the setback of the adjacent pocket to hide some of that length and more closely match the tip positions of other ID tools.

But then this will be part dependent and it becomes an even larger mountain of custom tools.

On edit:
A stray thought...if you gang everything and abandon all your stick tools for your TL-1, you could run it without hazard.
Station 1 is facing the spindle...2 and 3 are pointing to X positive and X negative
Station 4 is pointing to Z positive.
Nothing will crash as long as the turret stays to the right of the end of the workpiece...so bars for all external turning.

I do things that are far too varied in size for this to work, though I agree with what you've suggested. I have 3.5" diameter slugs waiting to make some 3" diameter, very flat parts. They'll include parting all the way to centerline. When they're done, I'll be switching to 0.75" stainless bar and making long, slender parts (3.5" long custom screws). In between are some 1.5 and 1.75" diameter aluminum parts--again--very flat.

Those conflicting needs are what have ultimately kept it a toolpost machine. If I have a need for hundreds of something, it'll make sense to install the turret and settle for one of these compromises. Installing and removing the turret isn't so bad once all the plumbing and electrical is installed. The biggest loss at that point is all the preset tool block values stored in the machine. That's a few hours of work every time the post is bumped or removed.

 

[EmGo]

Those conflicting needs are what have ultimately kept it a toolpost machine.

so you take those quick-switch jobberdoos, the little tapered pins that work sort of like pallet aligners on a horizontal ? and put them on the slide. Then for production needing 8 tools (not sure why impl's lathe can't do this ?) you drop on a plate with all the tools preset



(probably not the live ones tho). For onesy-twosies put on your toolpost plate with multifix attachment.

Best of both worlds

 

[Donkey Hotey]

so you take those quick-switch jobberdoos, the little tapered pins that work sort of like pallet aligners on a horizontal ? and put them on the slide. Then for production needing 8 tools (not sure why impl's lathe can't do this ?) you drop on a plate with all the tools preset

Ehh, I wouldn't trust the pins to repeat closely enough. I use a Mitutoyo Digimatic indicator in a chuck-holder to preset everything to a tenth. I even jog into the indicator and repeat the approach a few times because it shows the slack in the ball screw and motor couplers. One wouldn't think a TL-1 could hit the targets and tolerances it does but, it does reward methodical setup.

I know people are going to say the Dorian tool-post won't repeat that well. I used to think that but was stunned to discover that it will repeat to about 0.0001". I'm careful about pressure on the handle and keeping it clean.

 

[Donkey Hotey]

Marcus,

Not necessarily the original subject but: why don't you design, manufacture and offer tooling for the Haas 8-position turret? I genuinely mean that. Did a little more digging and it's obvious that the turret came from the TL-1 and TL-2. That's at least three models that could use your offering.

I don't know how you manage tool offsets but, I believe you can use tool and offset number separately, in a single call:

T1 just uses the tool 1 offset value, T2 uses the tool 2 offset, etc.

T101 is also tool 1, offset 1. If it works the way I believe, you could have three tools in position one and address them as T101, T111, T121, T131. Tool 2 would be T202, T212, T222, etc. In your tool table you'd jump every ten to get to the next tool offset. Shouldn't be too hard to keep track of.

The turret top plate is flat and has nothing blocking the back of other tools from occupying that space. You could solve all the problems of long tools like drills sticking too far out of the holders by holding them further back on the turret. Make some sawtoothed, offset holder position for stick tools. Make the set screws shallow enough to be able to flip the holder and use the backside if your parts needs them staggered the other way.

You've obviously spent a lot of time tooling setups and thinking about these problems. May as well cash in on them.

 

[implmex]

Hi again Donkey Hotey:
It's a great suggestion, and if I were a younger man, I'd certainly consider it.
Sadly I'm on my way out of this world...I have progressive MS and I'm losing function pretty steadily now, month by month, slowly thank God, but steadily too.

So the consulting gig with the robot guys is a way for me to stay relevant as my physical capabilities slowly desert me.

Moving back to the TL-1:
Yeah with the mix of work it appears you do, a gang machine of any kind has pretty severe limitations.
So here's another thought:
Is there room on the X axis slide of a TL-1 to allow you to mount both your 4 way turret, and the Dorian toolpost on the back side of the spindle?
That way both can stay mounted and both can serve simultaneously.

If I had to re-mount and align either the turret or the toolpost, I'd move heaven and earth to solve that...I can't imagine a bigger PITA when you want to set up for a job.
It'd be worth it to me to even build a custom X axis slide if I had to, just to avoid the hassle of ripping stuff off the machine constantly.

When you send the tools home, you can run G28W0 only, so you don't smack the tools that are on the opposite side of the spindle.
Of course your code has to have a G01 clearance move in X first, so you don't drag the tool point across your freshly cut surface and dig a big divot in it.
But that's just a matter of tweaking how you code in Mastercam, and a minor edit to the post so it doesn't put in G28U0 moves.
Those are the kiss of death when you've gang tooled a machine...especially if you run that code before the G28W0 move.
The noise it makes is most unpleasant!
So is the sensation when you have to change your shorts!

Your choice how you populate each station...stick tools on the turret and drills and other long centerline tools on the Dorian would probably be where I start.
If you pin the toolpost body to the slide you can push decent sized drills...the cantilever is not ideal, but it's surprising what you can get away with as I'm sure you know already.
If you have to resort to a custom slide, you could even drop a tee slot in it right behind the center of where a drill will go, oriented in Z, so you can mount a push block behind it and relieve the cantilever stress on the post a bit.
Minor pain but you may find it worth it.

Sadly, you cannot easily gang tools on the turret if you mix stick and centerline tools, so it probably has to be one or the other on the turret.
Obviously you can have whatever you want in whatever mix you want on the Dorian.

So never having run a TL-1 in the wild...is this even a possibility or are you short on X axis stroke?

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com

 

[Donkey Hotey]

It's a great suggestion, and if I were a younger man, I'd certainly consider it.
Sadly I'm on my way out of this world...I have progressive MS and I'm losing function pretty steadily now, month by month, slowly thank God, but steadily too.

We're all deteriorating in our own ways. You're still making the most of it. Keep sharing with the youngins.

Moving back to the TL-1:
Yeah with the mix of work it appears you do, a gang machine of any kind has pretty severe limitations.

Add in the mix or work holding that complicates this more. The 8" 3-jaw spends most of the time in there but in order of use:

• 5C drawbar collet nose
• 8" 6-jaw
• 8" 4-jaw
• Various large faceplates and holding jigs for non-round parts needing lathe work
• 16C & 3J noses (for loading material up to the 2" bore size)

So something like the faceplates end up occupying the space radially around the headstock, where adjacent tools could hit. It's basically the opposite of a long-nose collet holder. It's a super-versatile machine but, I pay for that versatility in the limitations of those options.

So here's another thought:
Is there room on the X axis slide of a TL-1 to allow you to mount both your 4 way turret, and the Dorian toolpost on the back side of the spindle?
That way both can stay mounted and both can serve simultaneously.

Not really. It's got 16" of X (8" of actual travel). I have considered some kind of back turning tool post for something like even the parting tool. The true solution is probably installing this on turret position 4:

FS or WTT: Aloris CXA - H Universal Mounting, Super-Precision Single-Dovetail Head

Aloris CXA - H Mounts via (2) 3/8 inch dia bolts or 0.97 inch tab. Potential uses include as an addition to an existing 4-way tool post. Does not include the Aloris handle but a 7/16 wrench will activate the dovetail clamp. $150 + $ 10.25 USPS flat rate shipping Payment via PayPal or...

www.practicalmachinist.com

And then treat that location as the tool post. Load commonly used tools to the other three stations. Every job gets one oddball tool to get loaded from the assortment of Dorian holders. The remaining 3 would stay loaded with: OD turning, Parting and...I dunno...the drilling holder? Man, I do a lot of threading. Would that get it? I'd have to think about it.

If you pin the toolpost body to the slide you can push decent sized drills...the cantilever is not ideal, but it's surprising what you can get away with as I'm sure you know already.

You just nailed why I most often have to redo all the offsets: the post rotating from heavy drilling. Dammit, the thing rotates and the first giveaway is the next part has blown OD dimensions. Stop, unload and get out the indicators. It's often over an hour before it's cutting again.

I happened to rewatch the CL-1 setup video this morning:

It looks like what I suggested yesterday was exactly how they intended the tool offsets to be used in a gang setup. At least I'm not a total idiot.

I had also forgotten how small the interior of that machine is. 5C sounds like a good idea until one realizes it's not sticking out very far like it would on a collet nose. There goes some of the available space to move gang tools into. Even with a turret, that creates clearance problems.

After refreshing myself with the CL-1 features and limitations, it seems like a very odd choice for a prototyping machine. The issues with the X travel direction that you kicked off this thread with, are only one of the things to dance with when programming it.

I see it as a machine a manufacturer would buy to make one part design or maybe a family of similar, small parts. You'd go through the pain of programming it once and it would sit in a very small area of the shop, cranking out parts all day long.

They'd choose the CL-1 over an ST because the ST with a bar feeder and other options is probably $15-20K more when having the unattended processing option. Then again, the CL can only consume one meter of bar per load so an ST with a puller is probably closer to matching capability. At this point: the ability to move the CL on a pallet jack and marginally smaller footprint seems to be the only advantage.

From what you've shared, I assume this CL isn't being used in that role. The ST10 would have been a far better choice for barely any more money. You'd have a 6K rpm spindle but, it's 15HP. It's also a standard A2-5 nose so it would accept any of the tooling I'm currently running on the TL-1 (TL-1 has since moved to A2-6 size).

Anyway, not your monkeys and not your circus. You're there to keep the lions from eating them.

 

[implmex]

Hi again Donkey Hotey:
They chose this machine for two reasons:
1) the biggest part they will ever turn might be 0.75" diameter and 1.5" long.
They are developing a robotic hand for a general purpose robot, so think finger joint bushings, and 3mm custom hydraulic fittings 8mm long and 1 mm diameter headed pins.
If that machine ever sees a 1" diameter piece of barstock I'll be shocked.

2) The space is maybe 15 feet wide and 30 feet long...it's TINY.
They can just about fit that CL-1 into it and they got a pretty good deal on the machine, so they went for it without asking my opinion.
There isn't even enough space to put the bar feeder on it, so it's sitting in pieces on the floor, crammed behind the machine.
If they ever make 100 pcs of any given part I'll also be shocked...I've been building their stuff for the past 4 years now and the most I've ever made of any single part has been fifty pieces.

So it's not an awful choice for them.
I'll make it work!

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com

 

[Donkey Hotey]

They chose this machine for two reasons:
1) the biggest part they will ever turn might be 0.75" diameter and 1.5" long.

The ST10 wins here, even for the few extra square feet it would have used. Wasn't your choice. Got it. I'm sure they would have looked at the stripped ST for the same money and said "We aren't a production shop. We don't need that."

...and they got a pretty good deal on the machine, so they went for it without asking my opinion.

Ahhh, there we go. The sales person had a special available and they thought they got an awesome deal. Say no more.

They are developing a robotic hand for a general purpose robot, so think finger joint bushings, and 3mm custom hydraulic fittings 8mm long and 1 mm diameter headed pins.

I get you're the guy pulling the rabbits out of the hat but, come-on! I'm officially declaring shenanigans on their design. No flipping way they need the tolerances they're pushing on you. I totally get precise bearing fits and tolerances but...

Preaching to the choir. Never mind.

 

[implmex]

Yeah Donkey Hotey, you were right;
I participated in the design review today, and the young designer must have been smoking something.

The revised part looks quite a bit different (easier to make) and that internal thread can now be tapped or single pointed...machinist's choice assuming a tap can be found.

That goofy looking curved orifice is moved to be in line with the thread relief on the OD so you can cross drill it with a live tool, and the thread is M5 x 0.25 so access is much easier and I don't need to cobble up some grotesque nosepicker boring bar to reach in and cut it.

Nobody gives a rat's behind if the OD thread is dead nuts concentric with the ID thread so I can break it up into two ops if I want.

An altogether different part than it was before the meeting this morning.

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com

 

[Donkey Hotey]

I participated in the design review today, and the young designer must have been smoking something.

You know that things you teach them now will stick with them for the rest of their career. That's awesome all the way around.

Are you supposed to make the parts, are the engineers supposed to make the parts or does management allow/expect a cooperative, workshop approach where they make the parts and you supervise, etc?

 

[implmex]

Hi again Donkey Hotey:
I sit comfortably in a nice chair in the shop and get them going step by step on most of the
projects they are willing to take on.
I usually participate in that decision and try to pick things for them to do that will involve some useful learning for them but isn't way outside their current scope.
Stuff they don't have the equipment for like wire or sinker EDM, surface or cylindrical grinding, precision lapping or laser welding I do in my own shop.

I always try to set them up for success, so they have a positive experience with me and will want to learn more of what I can teach them, and they've all responded really well.

I get a nice personal reward when we've successfully tackled a project together and I make it a policy to encourage an atmosphere where they can learn without fear of a screeching match if something goes sideways...but that's really rare and usually happens when they get ahead of their skis (often when I'm not around and someone got a bit cocky).
Part of the learning I like to convey is how to not beat themselves up when it happens, and how to plan and execute a recovery.

I teach them to plan their own projects...the hope is they don't need me to hold their hands forever, so I quiz them on how they want to tackle a project and walk through it with them, advising them on the details of the processes they plan to use and only catching them if their approach or setup is unsafe or doomed to fail.
I like to show them the basics of how to take a cut, how hard to push a machine, what to look for when an operation is running...all that stuff that you and I take for granted having done it for so long, but that they have no experience with.

It's a really rewarding way to spend some of my retirement years...sure beats shuffleboard with a whole bunch of other old sick gomers at the Old Folk's Home.
I really like being around these bright young people...they keep me young and alive too.

I keep getting invited back to take yet another learner under my wing, so I'm calling that approach a success.
I'm at their shop 2 days a week and at my shop the other 4 days a week.
I'm slowing down a lot, so I have to spend a lot more time in my man-cave, but it's a fun place to be and I'm happy I can still stagger off in the morning and noodle around in my shop.

I've always loved what I do...I was a dentist for a foolish interval of seven years (my brother in law was a dentist in Australia and drove a Porsche so I wanted it too...silly me!) and I hated that fucking job...this is truly a pleasure!

Cheers

Marcus
www.implant-mechanix.com
www.vancouverwireedm.com

 

[Donkey Hotey]

I usually participate in that decision and try to pick things for them to do that will involve some useful learning for them but isn't way outside their current scope.

Very, very interesting. We (obviously) have different personalities when it comes to how we approach this. You're doing things the polite way and I did it a bit--uhh--differently? Management usually wasn't happy with my approach but, at least understood it when I explained.

Many engineers (at least the ones I sought out) obviously followed that path because they had some other interest, hobby, etc, that revolved around making things, working on things, seeing how things work, etc.

What I used to tell them was that I was going to teach them everything I possibly could about using the machines and software, design, etc. I advocated strongly for going to trade shows, even if it meant offsetting hours or taking vacation. I'd offer to drive. Being in the Los Angeles area, that meant going to Westec, and every Haas Demo Days event (at a minimum). We also occasionally did the big multi discipline show in Anaheim. I even managed once to wrangle IMTS for two of us, paid, for the entire week.

Yeah, the employer should pay for such things but, we have to look out for ourselves and our own long-term interests. "I'm going to teach you everything you need to know to go out and buy this for yourself, start your own business and do your own development. Maybe even manufacturing. I'm going to give you the tools to either get a better job or start your own company."

And then I'd turn to the gobsmacked management and say, "Now you have to make this place so good that they don't want to leave." No, they usually weren't happy about it. Didn't care. An engineer should be able to get 1-2 paid days a year to attend relevant trade events. We even managed to find out about free Comsol training events where they'd give you a morning of training and a 30 day license of the software to play with it. Nope. On the engineer's dime if they want to attend.

Unless the engineer sees a value path from learning manufacturing techniques, directly to their own career advancement, it's going to be a big ask. When the right engineer realizes the opportunity in front of them (like you have), they'll dive in the deep end, spend their own time, etc, etc. It's awesome that you're getting to do that.

 

[CarbideBob]

I advocated strongly for going to trade shows,

In the 80's-90's when I was a much bigger shop each year we would load up the cars with 30-60 people and go to IMTS or Detroit in the off years.
One day all paid. I'd turn them loose and say meet back here at some time. At IMTS many things I had not seen.
I think it was a great investment. They would come back with all sorts of new ideas and things to talk about.
If nothing else it was good team building. Let's all go to Chi-town for a long day and then dinner in a great place.

 

[Donkey Hotey]

In the 80's-90's when I was a much bigger shop each year we would load up the cars with 30-60 people and go to IMTS or Detroit in the off years.
One day all paid. I'd turn them loose and say meet back here at some time. At IMTS many things I had not seen.
I think it was a great investment. They would come back with all sorts of new ideas and things to talk about.
If nothing else it was good team building. Let's all go to Chi-town for a long day.

A million times...THIS. I couldn't convince management that it literally takes 4-5 days to get through IMTS. We took 4.5 days for the four halls. We literally got to the end at noon on Friday and had the afternoon for anything we wanted to revisit.

Since I'm writing another book here, the way I got to go to IMTS: my manager asked what training goals I had for the year. I replied that I understand they never have any money, blah, blah. She got irritated and said, "You tell me what you need and I'll figure out how to pay for it." Fine. Labor hours were always the issue. I said if they sent me to Chicago, paid for the hotel, car and flight, I would use vacation and pay my own meals for the week. I wanted to go that badly. She said that was reasonable and went to work.

Well, the business people got hold of that and squealed that it would look like the company paid for my vacation. It went up and down the food chain a few times. By that point they were too embarrased (that an employee would offer to use personal time for a business related event). I got reluctant approval--paid. As a condition, an upper manager that was convinced I was setting up a boondoggle to Chicago, said I had to take another coworker as some kind of chaperone. Hahahaha! So a buddy and I got to attend for the week.

Otherwise, management claimed to have employees who would go to a trade show for an hour and then goof off somewhere else (golfing, fancy restaurant, whatever). I don't know if that was real or just lore that the management used for their excuse. Worse: I knew engineers who thought they knew everything and said they could get through it in a few hours. Yeah, you don't know jack. Whatever.

Another year they were pushing really hard for a development goal. This is what I offered:

• I will go to Westec on my own time. I will return with a list of key technologies or new manufacturing developments that directly relate to what we do. I will make a Powerpoint presentation that night (also on my time).
• The next morning at 7:00 AM I will brief the entire department (maybe ten engineers). They'll each get a handout with the booth locations.
• I will personally drive them in a company vanpool, to the convention center and turn them loose. They all have the rest of the day to explore. There will be no shenanigans because I'm their ride home.
• Each of them has the goal of discovering something else to bring back and share with the group at the next staff meeting.

Total cost to the department: one man-day per employee. The company already covers the van. I said I'd even pay the parking. All I got was a nervous chuckle and, "no, we can't afford that." They also argued that if I already found the information, I could bring it back and share it and that was the same. I tried to explain that trade shows are about the technology that you don't already know. The thing you discover casually walking by and spotting something. Nope. Not going to happen.

Same year: they sent most of the women engineers to the same convention center for Society of Women Engineers conference. The technology brought back (not) from that was stunning and brave. Nope. Don't question. Sit down and shut up.

Another year, SME got told by executive management of the big aerospace companies that they couldn't send engineers because of transportation costs. SME paid for fleets of tour buses to pick up and drop off from remote parking lots 40-80 miles away. Those buses were almost entirely empty. Engineers and manufacturing people got the same excuses. More than half my career in that place was spent advocating for this. Never made a dent.