FTP Old vs. New...a interesting conundrum....

[www.findmall.com]

Mike, your such a nice guy, to bad you gotta be the one to put out the Fisher fires....

What I don't get is if all the CZ's are properly tuned...why are some 3D's going back due to sub-par performance and most importantly....why is there such a variance in performance even among 3D machines even after they have been serviced?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2012 11:29AM by Aaron.

What does 'properly tuned" mean? Tom ^*#%}~€ can get 11"+ on a dime; maybe the factory spec is only 9" that any flunkie can easily attain with a 99.44% pass rate at 60 units/hr?

It's interesting that Mike posted an "OK" with no text and one edit... an obvious sign of boot licking Findmall Admin.

Gotta be tough being the Guvner...

HA!HA!HA! Ah Man that is too much!

Dave Johnson wrote the entire "CZ TEST AND TUNING MANUAL" (and with a good sense-of-humor to a Tech'ie) ..... and it very clearly states detecting a zinc penny "between 9-11 inches should be a crisp audio blip". ((( NOT 9"...... but........... rather.... 9-11" window...... otherwise Dave would have specifically said 9" ))) ........................ In order to get a '"crisp audio blip"' at this range....... the unit MUST (still have) a bit more detectable range available. I speculate FTP is using the very low end of the statement (9" ) as their standard. . . . . and I (justifiably) even question this. (((I'll explain shortly))). This is in the Mainboard Alignment Procedure (Steps 7 & 8). Then..... step 9 requests swinging the zinc penny at fringe detectable range (which would be a greater range beyond the 9-11" window)............. and adjusting/tuning certain components accordingly. ((( I refuse to divulge 'component-level' detail..... so as to 'protect' ...... as that is where NDA's would protect ))). But........ that being said......... the data above (should FTP read this)....... should help them (the tuning tech's) correct this (5-year long) issue.

Justifying myself: I just received 2 CZ-3D's from FTP. Both have 'audited' stamped on both CZ-3D boxes. ((( I do not know what this means ))).

First CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a clad dime in an air-test .... to a maximum range of 6.4". (After my calibration.... it now detects a clad dime to 10.1" ).

Second CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a clad dime in an air-test to 6.8". ............. And .......... this is where things get interesting. I have calibrated this particular CZ..... spending considerable time with it..... having managed to ascertain 12.2" on a clad dime. This is phenomenal.... and speaks 'volumes'. The important thing I am saying here is..... (and all should walk away with) .... is ...... it CAN be done. "CAN DO" attitude coupled with validated proof of a new (FTP components) unit....... sure indicates more than just 'hope'.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 02:45AM by NASA-Tom.

Two points to be emphasized here:

1 - How is it that, without replacing any hardware, a brand new detector can have its air testing depth nearly doubled? Is this a lack of work instruction or a missed operation? And where was final test, containment and rework? Shame on FIrst Texas!

2 - What did Mike originally write that needed to be deleted? One thing for certain: it risked a potential sale to a Findmall sponsor (and that can't be tolerated.)

Facts can be stubborn things...

Your first question is a very good (and valid) question. Yes.......... in this case ...... it was in a calibration/alignment procedure that brought substantial performance/gain out of the unit........ and NO hardware replacement/change needed (ie balanced quad-driver, oscillator etc..... ).

I do not know what Mike deleted.

Quality control is certainly not up to standards of the old Fisher and lucky to have Tom around to make things right ought to cover it..

I wonder if the techie's work piecework, the more they tune the more they make...or they are required to tune a certain amount in a time frame but get paid by the hour. They get it to 9", good enough, next.

Fisher, you have a good product, why the sub par tune up? Is the difference in labor to tune the cz to its highest potential that much, where it erodes proffit to a point not worth producing it? How much $$$ would you have to add to the price of the cz to have it tuned to its max potential? How much faster would they FLY off the shelves if tuned to 11 +" on a dime?
Tell us the truth, we can handle it.

This is not a "Quality Control" problem as much as a "Quality Assurance" issue. The Quality Assurance group is responsible to ensure that systems are in place to meet specification, not just quality systems but manufacturing processes too. You don't ensure performance through QC; you ensure it through robust work instructions that can be repeatedly performed without failure by 'average' workers trained on the line. The Quality Manager should be all over the Engineering and Production groups to ensure that these processes are in place, and are regularly audited by internal personnel. Of course, Executive Management must support this 'vision of quality.'

It's surprising how often we find that this change costs very little...

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Justifying myself: I just received 2 CZ-3D's from
> FTP. Both have 'audited' stamped on both CZ-3D
> boxes. ((( I do not know what this means ))).
>
> First CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a
> clad dime in an air-test .... to a maximum range
> of 6.4". (After my calibration.... it now detects
> a clad dime to 10.1" ).
>
> Second CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a
> clad dime in an air-test to 6.8". .............
> And .......... this is where things get
> interesting. I have calibrated this particular
> CZ..... spending considerable time with it.....
> having managed to ascertain 12.2" on a clad dime.
> This is phenomenal.... and speaks 'volumes'. The
> important thing I am saying here is..... (and all
> should walk away with) .... is ...... it CAN be
> done. "CAN DO" attitude coupled with validated
> proof of a new (FTP components) unit....... sure
> indicates more than just 'hope'.

That's terrible on FTP's part to put out sub-par units that are capable of almost twice the performance!!! I am sorry, but I WON'T be buying any FTP products until they get their priorities straight. And to think I wanted to become a Fisher dealer... mainly due to the past performance demonstrated by Tom on several of their units. This is alarming at best.

Not sure what is worse , building a machine that cant reach spec or
one that is so out of tune it will not.

I still (would like to) believe there is a glimmer of hope in correcting this issue..... even with it being a 5-year uncorrected run. Here is a FTP unit that "CAN" perform......... albeit the intervention of my tuning. The hardware & software is correct in this case.............. just simply a calibration/tune-up was required.

In addendum........... one of our forum members sent a new FTP CZ-3D in for repair. It needed to be sent back twice ..... to ascertain 'correction'. Then......... the unit was sent to me for 'calibration'. To my surprise.... this new FTP unit is nearly a 12.0" unit....... and "3D" calibration spec's were nearly 'exact'. Once again............. it CAN be done; hence, there's 'hope'.

Where do we go from here.

Well Tom if you were a Fisher dealer , You could get them at dealers cost , tune them and with your stamp.
Thy would all sell.

Again as I originally stated:
"why the variance (in depth) in machines, even after being serviced?"
Tom there has been FTP machines that you have tuned up that were fortunate to get 10".
Some of these machines it appears cannot be helped.
Is this possibly due to not only tuning and or sub-par supplied parts?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 10:56PM by Aaron.

Exact truth sometimes hurts.


Yes........ what do I do with this 10" CZ? It meets factory spec's ....... yet, is sub-par. I do not have spare parts to change/repair new units........ nor do I have the time (or interest) in performing such tasks.

I am not an electronics engineer, however I am a computer repair tech. Bet my bottom dollar that if FTP paid a extra $50.00 per unit for 'quality' components with consistent tight operating spec's.......these machines would be flying off the assembly line.......even with a small price increase per unit. Units from the factory that would consistently get the depths that Tom can achieve (if not hindered by low quality components) would be the best advertising that FTP could wish for. We are a fairly closed community and buyers aint biting on units that no longer have the depth capabilities of same model predecessors.
The old adage applies here.....pennywise & dollar foolish.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dave Johnson wrote the entire "CZ TEST AND TUNING
> MANUAL" (and with a good sense-of-humor to a
> Tech'ie) ..... and it very clearly states
> detecting a zinc penny "between 9-11 inches should
> be a crisp audio blip". ((( NOT 9"......
> but........... rather.... 9-11" window......
> otherwise Dave would have specifically said 9" )))
> ........................
> In order to get a '"crisp audio blip"' at this
> range....... the unit MUST (still have) a bit more
> detectable range available. I speculate FTP is
> using the very low end of the statement (9" ) as
> their standard. . . . . and I (justifiably) even
> question this. (((I'll explain shortly))). This is
> in the Mainboard Alignment Procedure (Steps 7 &
> 8). Then..... step 9 requests swinging the zinc
> penny at fringe detectable range (which would be a
> greater range beyond the 9-11"
> window)............. and adjusting/tuning certain
> components accordingly. ((( I refuse to divulge
> 'component-level' detail..... so as to 'protect'
> ...... as that is where NDA's would protect ))).
> But........ that being said......... the data
> above (should FTP read this)....... should help
> them (the tuning tech's) correct this (5-year
> long) issue.
>
> Justifying myself: I just received 2 CZ-3D's from
> FTP. Both have 'audited' stamped on both CZ-3D
> boxes. ((( I do not know what this means ))).
>
> First CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a
> clad dime in an air-test .... to a maximum range
> of 6.4". (After my calibration.... it now detects
> a clad dime to 10.1" ).
>
> Second CZ-3D = Out of the box...... will detect a
> clad dime in an air-test to 6.8". .............
> And .......... this is where things get
> interesting. I have calibrated this particular
> CZ..... spending considerable time with it.....
> having managed to ascertain 12.2" on a clad dime.
> This is phenomenal.... and speaks 'volumes'. The
> important thing I am saying here is..... (and all
> should walk away with) .... is ...... it CAN be
> done. "CAN DO" attitude coupled with validated
> proof of a new (FTP components) unit....... sure
> indicates more than just 'hope'.


tom! what are your thoughts as to WHY these two units do so poorly in an air test
straight from the factory?.a well known "manager" at (f.t.p.) insists they are ALL
built and tuned properly using the original "parameters" in the tuning guide from dave j.
any thoughts?..thanks!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

It's not just in an air-test..................... as ........................... the unit that achieves 6.8" on a clad dime in an air-test.............. also achieves no greater than 6.8" in my test-garden. Never could it achieve 7" depth capabilities in my test-garden. There is a misconception that the unit will "see better in the dirt". This is not true.

Possible/speculated initiating causes:

No money/budget for managing Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Perceived "non-issue" status
Non-adherence to Test and Tuning Procedure(s) set forth by Dave Johnson
No 'passion' for end-product
Lessor profit margin for CZ platform

Sounds like they think a lot less of the cz platform than we do....hmmmmm

Is First Texas an ISO-9001 (including "Design") or ISO-9002 (excluding "Design") certified company? These are internationally recognized quality systems 'standards'.

No.

That's a shame.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not just in an air-test.....................
> as ........................... the unit that
> achieves 6.8" on a clad dime in an
> air-test.............. also achieves no greater
> than 6.8" in my test-garden. Never could it
> achieve 7" depth capabilities in my test-garden.
> There is a misconception that the unit will "see
> better in the dirt". This is not true.
>
> Possible/speculated initiating causes:
>
> No money/budget for managing Quality
> Assurance/Quality Control
> Perceived "non-issue" status
> Non-adherence to Test and Tuning Procedure(s) set
> forth by Dave Johnson
> No 'passion' for end-product
> Lessor profit margin for CZ platform


if i was a betting man,the "lessor profit margin"
suggestion,would be my pick!..just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I still (would like to) believe there is a glimmer
> of hope in correcting this issue..... even with it
> being a 5-year uncorrected run. Here is a FTP unit
> that "CAN" perform......... albeit the
> intervention of my tuning. The hardware & software
> is correct in this case.............. just simply
> a calibration/tune-up was required.
>
> In addendum........... one of our forum members
> sent a new FTP CZ-3D in for repair. It needed to
> be sent back twice ..... to ascertain
> 'correction'. Then......... the unit was sent to
> me for 'calibration'. To my surprise.... this new
> FTP unit is nearly a 12.0" unit....... and "3D"
> calibration spec's were nearly 'exact'. Once
> again............. it CAN be done; hence, there's
> 'hope'.
>
> Where do we go from here.


this is great news tom!
maybe the additional "publicity"
is having a positive effect!..just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.

TerraDigger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not an electronics engineer, however I am a
> computer repair tech. Bet my bottom dollar that if
> FTP paid a extra $50.00 per unit for 'quality'
> components with consistent tight operating
> spec's.......these machines would be flying off
> the assembly line.......even with a small price
> increase per unit. Units from the factory that
> would consistently get the depths that Tom can
> achieve (if not hindered by low quality
> components) would be the best advertising that FTP
> could wish for. We are a fairly closed community
> and buyers aint biting on units that no longer
> have the depth capabilities of same model
> predecessors.
> The old adage applies here.....pennywise & dollar
> foolish.


i agree! this is EXACTLY WHAT they should be doing,however
i suspect it's NOT being done,because they plan to discontinue it
with the introduction of the new "multi," because it is no longer cost effective.
i really hope they do not,but i wouldn't bet against it!..just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.

The intent of my remarks/comments/observations are never to be taken as negative; rather, the identification (and critical process of problem 'recognition' ) of a 'correctable' issue. Lest we forsake the definition difference between: disparaging vs factual.

tom! it was never my intention to disparage anything you say!
quite the contrary,i "hang" on everything you expound
with "breathless anticipation!"you have my utmost respect,
and undivided attention.

(h.h.!)
j.t.

j.t. ....... No, no. This was not aimed at 'you' ..... but stemming from some questions from different folks (independent from one-another) via PM's.

ok! tom! pleased to know that!
sorry for the misunderstanding!
was wondering! any thoughts on
whether the "new" fisher could possibly be released
sooner than december?possibly in late summer,or
sometime in the fall,before the weather turns 'sour"
across the country?..thanks!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

For now............ I have been requested to keep this data in confidentiality.......... of which I will honor.