# Pre-made wax comb, why not?



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

I understand it would be hard to remove from its mold, but machines do exist that could do this. The cost might be high, but perhaps it would lead to a cheaper why?? :scratch:

Ever see one of those things that make plastic parts in a liquid? Just seems doable if enough effort was put into it, no???

Some one must have attempted to make "drawn" comb at some point, anyone know of any attempts, good or bad?

Wayne


----------



## beeware10 (Jul 25, 2010)

the bees already know how to do this. man has tried all kinds of artificial comb only to be second best. better to spend time to learn to work with the bees not against them. good luck


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

But it would make the manufacturer rich, man messes with everything, it's what we do, ever eat raw wheat flour? Oh, you cook it first? Bleach it, inrich it? What, mother nature knows how to make bees but not food? Do you live in a cave or under a fallen tree? You didn't buy or rent a house did you? And I assume you walk everywhere, no un-natural travel for you! OH MY GOD, YOUR USEING A COMPUTOR, TALKING IS THE ONLY WAY MOTHER NATURE GAVE US!!!! Opps, we did the talking thing too, I guess you can make gestures with your hands. Sure was nice to hear from you before you go all natural.

And you only get honey from hollow trees, killing all the bees?


Sorry I could not resist, I agree with what you are saying to a point, but mankind only progresses when we help/destroy nature. Sad but true.

Wayne


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think people have been trying for years. However we do have fully drawn artificial comb, it's just made of plastic and that's a good thing when you have small hive beetles and wax moths...


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

wkinne said:


> I understand it would be hard to remove from its mold, but machines do exist that could do this. The cost might be high, but perhaps it would lead to a cheaper why?? :scratch:
> 
> Wayne


It is doable but I am not sure the bees would accept it readily. I am not sure the comb would have the structural strength equal to the bees version either. That would only make it blow apart during the extraction process.
The machine you speak of I believe uses a monomer (liquid) and with a laser turns it into a polymer. It can't be reversed. It is not like liquefied water or bees wax or for that matter injection molded plastic.

If beekeepers would accept a higher cost then you could have a business using bees just to build comb on frames. Pump them full of HFCS and set them to work. I don't know what price you could get for such a product.


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

Acebird said:


> If beekeepers would accept a higher cost then you could have a business using bees just to build comb on frames. Pump them full of HFCS and set them to work. I don't know what price you could get for such a product.


Is feeding of HFCS the fastest way to make comb?

TIA

Wayne


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> I think people have been trying for years. However we do have fully drawn artificial comb, it's just made of plastic and that's a good thing when you have small hive beetles and wax moths...


I have read some of your posts on the plastic comb, you said it is hard to get them to start useing it. Have you came up with anything that helps speed this up?

TIA

Wayne


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

wkinne said:


> Is feeding of HFCS the fastest way to make comb?
> 
> TIA
> 
> Wayne


I don't know about fastest but it would be the cheapest compared to sugar cane. The cheapest would be let the bees forage but as we all know that is the slowest too.


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

Having worked as an engineer in the plastics injection molding industry for the past twenty+ years, I can see several problems with this idea.

One, the tooling would be exceeding expensive. Particularly with the difficulty in demolding the parts. I haven't seen any in person yet, but I would guess the HSS comb is likely simply ejected from the tool with compressed air.

Two, the end product would be particularly fragile. Either your packaging would be cost prohibitive, or your loss to breakage would be. These properties would also be closely tied to the ambient temperature... ...you would need to have controlled conditions for storage and transportation adding costs...

Three, the consistency of wax would be difficult to control, sourcing even more so and pricing even more so. Where can you buy 1000+ lbs of beeswax with consistent rheological properties, sterilized to prevent disease transmission, for less than $1.00 per pound? 
I can buy rail cars full of narrow specification polypropylene for ~$0.65/lb.

I am sure there are more reasons, but this is the first short list I thought of.

Let the bees do it...

Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

As I understand it takes thousands of pounds of pressure to kick the PermaComb/HSC out of the mold...

>I have read some of your posts on the plastic comb, you said it is hard to get them to start useing it. Have you came up with anything that helps speed this up?

The simplest thing is to spray them down with some syrup with HBH (Honey Bee Healthy) in it or some honey. But the most successful way is to heat the HSC or PermaComb to 200 F and dip it in 212 F wax until it's full, and shake all the wax back out. These are perfectly accepted. The manufactures of PermaComb have come out with a new product called PermaPlus that has beeswax mixed in with the plastic. I have some but have not been available to try it out to see how well it's accepted. I also don't know who is selling it.


----------



## Matt Little (Jan 13, 2010)

3D printing is slowly coming of age as a technology. It would be slow, but doable?


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> But the most successful way is to heat the HSC or PermaComb to 200 F and dip it in 212 F wax until it's full, and shake all the wax back out. These are perfectly accepted.


I thought wax had a flash point of like 197, less than 212, are you double boiling to get your 212 number or putting a thermometer in the wax?

While I have your attention:

I have bought some drawn frames from some old beeks (in their mid 80's) it looks like stuff I would melt down but they insist it will be reworked just fine. This stuff even seems to have junk in some of the cells, dead ladybugs, and such. I went to another old beek (76) and the comb he wanted to cell me looked the same, is this old crap why they are having over 50% winter losses or is it normal to keep useing this stuff? It would be sweet if some pics were posted on a sticky where beeks could vote and say "yes I would use" or "nope". As a new beek with no mentor it it's a lot of conflicting information. Just a thought.

Thanks again,
Wayne


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

PermaComb already exists, though it isn't beeswax, which is what the OP was asking about.

Pre-made wax comb? I have lots of them. How many do you want? What will you pay me for them? They aren't manmade. I hope that isn't a problem. They are old and used, but still work just fine.


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

Matt Little said:


> 3D printing is slowly coming of age as a technology. It would be slow, but doable?


I think you have hit a winner, wax can be printed like ink it just needs to be heated a little. It might take a bit of work and thinking but I think this is doable, great thinking! Now all we need is for the right person to read this and say "I can do that"


Wayne


----------



## wkinne (Jul 17, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> They are old and used, but still work just fine.


I have bought such comb before, it looks like it should have been recycled years ago. Post pics! 

"but still work just fine" Thats what the old beeks tell me, I installed 12 frames in 6 hives yesterday (2 per hive and logged their position in the hive ), I will pop the hood in 10 days and find out if they rebuild it. 


Wayne


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Why would they rebuild it? They'll clean it up and make it useable. They won't tear it down and rebuild. Or is that what you meant?

I use it on my bees year after year. Seems to hold up well, unless wax moth gets it.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I thought wax had a flash point of like 197, less than 212, are you double boiling to get your 212 number or putting a thermometer in the wax?

The melting point of beeswax is 144 to 147 °F (62 to 64 °C ). 
If beeswax is heated above 185 °F (85 °C) discoloration occurs. 
The flash point of beeswax is 400 °F (204.4 °C)

I heat it to 250 °F all the time when I'm dipping equipment.

>I have bought some drawn frames from some old beeks (in their mid 80's) it looks like stuff I would melt down but they insist it will be reworked just fine. This stuff even seems to have junk in some of the cells, dead ladybugs, and such. I went to another old beek (76) and the comb he wanted to cell me looked the same, is this old crap why they are having over 50% winter losses or is it normal to keep useing this stuff?

The losses are not from dead ladybugs and cocoons.

>It would be sweet if some pics were posted on a sticky where beeks could vote and say "yes I would use" or "nope". As a new beek with no mentor it it's a lot of conflicting information. Just a thought.

It's the chemical contamination that worries me. The other thing to look for is AFB scale.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Pre-made wax comb? I have lots of them. How many do you want? What will you pay me for them? They aren't manmade.


Bee made?

You are always fishing ... what would you sell them for?



> 3D printing is slowly coming of age as a technology. It would be slow, but doable?


http://uprint.dimensionprinting.com...gle_Modeling&gclid=CIrWiJjJtaoCFQEKKgodbWdI4g

Supposing you could modify this printer to make wax parts. At 15 grand you would have to make that many frames of comb to get the tool amortization down to a buck. I am not sure it would last that long.
Now assuming it would last that long 15,000 frames @10minutes a frame = 150,000 minutes of run time. 408 minutes per 8 hr shift = 367 days. So that is a years salary plus overhead that has to be factored in. Without the wax you are up to about 3 bucks a frame. Anybody interested?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Bee made? You are always fishing ... what would you sell them for?


Just about everything I have is for sale. If someone is willing to pay for it. This doesn't mean I am selling out. Just that if it is worth more to you than it is to me, I'd be foolish not to sell it to you. Something I learned from an older beekeeper who figures he sold his whole operation three or four times during the time he was in business.

Bee made of course.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Still don't know what it is worth to you.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

The main reason I would not use it is that bees that are not drawing comb, spend their energy prepping to swarm. I was always taught to insert a few frames of undrawn foundation into hive in an effort to reduce swarming. Bees of a certian age must have comb to work on or they move somewhere they can make comb. Just like guard bees need and entrance to defend and nurse bees need brood to care for. In the nurse bee stage they need comb to build.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Still don't know what it is worth to you.


I would part w/ deep combs at $5.00 each. How many do you want? What are they worth to you?


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

How well does the uncapping knife work on the PermaComb? Any issues?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>How well does the uncapping knife work on the PermaComb? Any issues? 

If it's in the supers and it's been capped really thick (8 or 9 frames to a ten frame super) a knife works fine. If they decide to cap it right at the top either because you have ten frames in a ten frame box or because the flow let out, then you'll need a Hackler Honey Punch or equivalent.

http://www.plastools.com/honey_punch.htm

You would think that the wide one would work best, but it takes more pressure to push hard enough and actually the narrower ones are easier to work...


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

You can actually use a cold knife on the PermaComb if it's thick. In fact I have uncapped it with a hive tool if you don't mind cutting the wax back down to the thickness of the plastic...


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

nice! thanks for the info, Michael


----------



## fatscher (Apr 18, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> I would part w/ deep combs at $5.00 each. How many do you want? What are they worth to you?


I want some! Can you deliver to Alabama? I bet you want extra for shipping.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> then you'll need a Hackler Honey Punch or equivalent.


Has anybody tried a heat gun?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The PermaComb melts at 220 F.


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Has anybody tried a heat gun?


Saw a u-tube video of a guy using a heat gun. Didn't look very efficient.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

'I would part w/ deep combs at $5.00 each. How many do you want? What are they worth to you?'

Pick out a 1/2 dozen (really nice brood comb) for me. I would like to see if we can make a mold from deep combs, and then make casts out of a bioceramic material. 

I'm not kidding.


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

does anybody know or tried how much spraying with HBH syrup on PermaComb helps with first time acceptance?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> The PermaComb melts at 220 F.


Doesn't the wax melt at 147? Also if the cells are filled with honey the wall of the cell wouldn't melt that easily even if the gun was set on 300.

Mac, I haven't tried it yet so I don't know how efficient it is. I could see it being extremely fast and easy to automated vs. a hot knife.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

WLC said:


> I would like to see if we can make a mold from deep combs, and then make casts out of a bioceramic material.
> 
> I'm not kidding.


Now here is a case where you should use the 3D printer to create a mold. Bee made comb is anything but perfect and I think you will need that perfection in order to get the casts out of the mold unless you destroy each and every mold in the process.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I've thought about using 3D printing to do just that. You can 3D scan the comb to create a model.

Regardless, I'd like to try out a foam like material for the mold first. It'll 'give' just enough to get it off of the model or the cast if I'm right.

Besides, there's something 'artsy' about using a real frame of brood comb as a model for casts.

PS-I got my 3D printed tray the other day. I couldn't have imagined that I could create a 3D design and have it printed up before now.


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

-Michael, how many inch size do you prefer for the Hackler Honey Punch? Looks like the smallest two sizes are the 2" and the 4 1/4".
-Do you use it and does it work well for natural drawn comb uncapping/extracting?
Thanks
Serge


----------



## MJC417 (Jul 26, 2008)

Why doesnt somebody make nano robot bees that collect sugar syrup from plastic flowers? Just kidding!


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>-Michael, how many inch size do you prefer for the Hackler Honey Punch? Looks like the smallest two sizes are the 2" and the 4 1/4".

I think the one I have is 4 1/4" The problem is while it's the right width for the frame, it takes more pressure on it to puncture the caps. If I were buying another I'd get the 2" so in several passes of less stress on my wrist I could get them punctured.

>-Do you use it

Only on the PermaComb and the Honey Super Cell.

> and does it work well for natural drawn comb uncapping/extracting?

The Hackler clogs up quickly and has to be washed off all the time. I have better luck using the hot knife anywhere it is appropriate (meaning where it won't melt the plastic). Maybe if I used the 2" one and worked out a system, I might like it, but I never did and probably won't.


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >-Only on the PermaComb and the Honey Super Cell.


Michael,
What is the difference between the PermaComb and the Super Cell?
Thanks
Serge


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>What is the difference between the PermaComb and the Super Cell?

They are the same material and the same concept. Honey Super Cell has hoffman style spacers, PermaComb doesn't. Honey Super Cell is Deeps (9 1/4" deep) and PermaComb is mediums (6" deep). Honey Super Cell is 4.9mm cell size equivalent. PermaComb is 5.0mm cell size equivalent (allowing for the thicker cell walls in the calculation).


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

wkinne said:


> I think you have hit a winner, wax can be printed like ink it just needs to be heated a little.


3D printing is to slow. You could fairly easily do it but it would take 15 minutes to hours depending on how fast of a machine you have to print it. For a machine like that you'd be paying 75-200$ an hour.

The way to go would be a plastic injection, in this case wax, mold. Probably going to be an expensive mold. 

The real problem is not the mold, but the wax. Where you going to get the wax? If everyone started using completely preformed combs you'd be using 15x as much wax per comb that you use for foundation. 

You can come pretty close to getting enough wax from cappings from one frame to make foundation for one frame. It would take 15-20 frames of cappings to make one frame of fully drawn wax. In short order you'd be using all the available wax and cost of wax would go thru the roof.

~Matt


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I've come to similar conclusions about 3D printing of comb and hive components. However, I did use 3D printing to make a model that I can make a mold from to cast a bioceramic material.

I felt that plastic wasn't a good choice either for a number of reasons. 

So, I've moved on to magnesium oxide/phosphate based cements.

What I like about the material is that bioceramics are not only used in medical applications, bone replacement and drug delivery, but that these materials are also being employed in 'Green' building.

What's even more appealing, is that a bioceramic can be made out of common agricultural products like fertilizers to make the binder. Various fillers and aggregates (including treatments) can then be added to give the hive components the desired properties.

More importantly, the price is right.

Now if I can get it to work...


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The real problem is that it takes thousands of pounds of force to remove the mold from the comb when you are done. I see no way that will work with wax.


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> The real problem is that it takes thousands of pounds of force to remove the mold from the comb when you are done. I see no way that will work with wax.


You'd do it the same way you do it with plastic, lots of ejector pins.

Also if you inject hot wax, quick cool the mold, the wax will shrink and will take far less force, possibly none, to eject. Shrink mixed with the proper draft might be enough to have the comb just fall out. Not sure how the bees would react to the draft though. 

In the end I really don't see much of a point. Foundation is selling for 1$ a frame, more or less. I doubt you'd be able to sell full comb with similar wax prices made out of wax for less than 5-10$ a frame even after paying off the mold costs. We already had someone offer to sell comb for 5$ a frame and someone suggested you can get an entire drawn box for 25$, 2.50$ a frame. 

Now making it out of another material that was cheaper, easier to work with etc is an option, but then you'd have to make sure the bees accept it and then that the market would accept it.

~Matt


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

It would be a real technical challenge to try to cast wax comb onto frames.

While I don't think that it's impossible, it would have to have some real benefits in its useful properties to be viable.

Also, it would have to beat the $2-3 for each frame. Otherwise, you might as well let the bees do it.

I think that you can cast a material other than plastic into comb/frames. Plastic has a closed structure so that it would be hard to remove from a mold. If you use a material other than plastic, with an open cell structure, then you wouldn't have problems with a vacuum being created as you try to remove the material.


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

*Re: Pre-made wax comb, why?*



WLC said:


> So, I've moved on to magnesium oxide/phosphate based cements.


Regardless, I still don't see where you have a product... I don't think you have thought this out very well.

The main advantages to plastics are that the materials are extremely durable. This is at all stages of processing and handling: demolding is easy(simplifies the tool design, lowers tool $$$), packaging, storage and transportation. 

At least if they were molded in wax, the bees would be capable of repair. In practice, individual cell walls broken in storage and/or handling wouldn't be too much of a issue, however as a retail product, consumers expect perfection (or a large discount). 

In wax (or bio-ceramics) your demolding issues and tool design required would still drive your tool price out of any realistic price range to have a product. 
After my last post as an exercise in tool design, I even modeling up a couple tool design concepts (in 3D in SolidWorks, part of my role at work...). Some looked like they could work (reverse ejection on every other hexagon cell core to relieve compression due to die-swell) but none would be cheap, none as simple as a plastics tool with air eject.

As a business plan, even if you captured a huge percentage of the market, EVEN ALL OF IT (how many frames are sold a year???). The product volume could never justify the tooling expense. As an educated guess (based on 20+ years experience and the design concept above), I would think at a minimum your tooling would be $100K (or + + +).

Yes, the magnesium oxide powders are very cheap, but I think you are also DRAMATICALLY underestimating the high processing cost of the materials. The I have worked with several powder/binder based materials and work with these processes currently (metal and ceramic injection molding). 

Most bio-ceramics require a sintering process in their manufacture. Costs of a high-temperature sintering furnace start at around $500K for a relatively small batch furnace. Due to long cycle times, throughput for such a large product would be very low. The pusher furnaces we use run about $1.2MM each. Again, you would only be able to sinter a limited number of frames per hour. Shares of these cost would again need to be added to the product 

(EDIT: THESE PRICES ARE JUST FOR THE ACTUAL FURNACE, NOT INCLUDING INSTALLATION COSTS AND COSTS OF THE HYDROGEN and NITROGEN STORAGE TANKS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN A SINTERING ATMOSPHERE!).

Due to high wear rates in molding these materials, the carrying (repair) costs for the tooling is VERY HIGH *(adding to the already prohibitive tool costs above). Slip casting wouldn't be feasible at all due to the thin walled geometry needed.

In the green state, many ceramics are even more fragile than the wax used to liquify and carry to powder/binder matrix into the tooling. In injection molding feedstocks, this constitutes roughly 1/2 of the processing binder material. Debound, (wax component removed) they get even more brittle than the as-molded or "green" state. 


As you can tell from the length of my reply, I certainly don't mind entertaining someone's muse and I am of course also familiar with the story told time and again in nearly every engineering class: 
_*PARAPHRASED*_


> "Henry Ford, when told by his engineers that windshield glass couldn't be made the size needed. Instead of taking "no" as the answer, he went out and hired engineers that didn't know it couldn't be done..."


IMO: The title for this thread should be changed to: "Re: Pre-made wax comb, WHY?

Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

MJuric said:


> You'd do it the same way you do it with plastic, lots of ejector pins.
> 
> (SNIP)
> ~Matt


Nope, wouldn't work. The green tensile strength of the materials (wax OR ceramic) would not be strong enough to allow the thin walls of the comb to demold on pins.

Also if you look at the plastic frames, it looks like air ejectors (same as used to mold plastic bottle caps), not pins. Ejector pin holes are not free to add in a tool.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

The ceramics I'm working with don't require sintering, or anything like it. They can be mixed cold, and with the right additive, poured as a slurry.

However, I don't think that if it's necessary to mold frames with comb on it. A cell pattern might be enough.

As for it's strength, I think that it could be thin cast and set as hard, or harder, than portland cement (4X I've read).

Would we want to make things more technically challenging by trying to cast broodcomb onto the frames?

I dunno, but it might be something to try just to push the edge of the envelope.


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

But the question still remains...

"*Re: Pre-made wax comb, why???*


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Why premade comb?

It can give you an advantage in productivity: brood, pollen, and honey. If you miss the flow because your bees are still building comb, that can be costly.

It can reduce pathogen/pest transmision. Why risk contaminating everything down the line?

The only real reason for most would be if it is cost effective. Otherwise, why do it?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

MJuric said:


> 3D The real problem is not the mold, but the wax. Where you going to get the wax? If everyone started using completely preformed combs you'd be using 15x as much wax per comb that you use for foundation.


If beekeepers crushed and strained to harvest honey their would be all the wax you need. yes their are some losses but bees will also produce more wax because that is what they do. You are not going to fill your whole hive with manmade comb some of it will still be produced by the bees.

I am not convinced that injection molding is right for comb. Ejector pins would not push wax off a mold the wax is too soft. What I think might work is extrusion. Extrude the comb into a water tank and maybe slice it off about 3/4 high with a water jet. Then marry the comb to a thin sheet of wax so it has a bottom. You would be making one sided comb. Maybe you would want to install two back to back to create a regular frame. I also thought about just making the comb 3/8 high and letting the bees finish drawing the comb out. Three eights is enough for the queen to deposit eggs or the bees to start filling with stores.

The cell walls are very thin and I just don't see that being molded too successfully out of wax. Room temperature wax is very delicate, not like plastic at all.


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

Acebird said:


> Ejector pins would not push wax off a mold the wax is too soft. What I think might work is extrusion. Extrude the comb into a water tank and maybe slice it off about 3/4 high with a water jet.


The web plate/profile extrusion die face would be 17" x 9" in size??? I think you would still have a very significant tooling cost issue (yes, I've worked in profile extrusion before as well). You still have breakage and handling issues to address, these will add to (if not compound) your costs for the product.

Queens will lay in foundation with the walls barely drawn out at all. I have found eggs in cells drawn out less than 1/4". 

Plastic foundation is injection molded with short rim around the cell bottoms, the coated with wax. It is tough, durable, easy to package, store and ship.

Wax foundation is made as a continuous sheet by calendering (embossed rolled sheet), then cut to length. This is cheap and effective to manufacture. It is simple to stack with just a thin sheet of tissue to keep them separated and shipped in bulk. The tissue paper and wires are actually used as part of the manufacturing (higher tensile strength) to draw the wax off of the embossing roller.

So for me, the *WHY?* is still far from answered. I just don't see it. 

The bees efforts and resources needed in drawing comb on foundation is hardly enough justification (by weight, this amounts to very little wax per frame). 
Changing out combs to prevent diseases is common practice (regardless of the types of frames used). 


Good luck in your pursuit, but I just don't see a need or any sort of viable product here.
I am out...

Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

pturley said:


> The web plate/profile extrusion die face would be 17" x 9" in size???


Says you. The size could be 4.5 x4.5 and assembled on the sheet of wax to any size you desired. Any imperfections in the joints could be dealt with by the bees. I hear they are very adaptable. I would not introduce wires because it screws up the crush and stain technique. I would sooner mount the single sided comb to a 1/16 plywood foundation on each side and strip it off during harvest to be used again. Just dip the plywood in a hot wax. Remember wax is 99.9% recyclable, almost no losses. Alright if you wanted to injection mold the foundation sheet and frame tabs be my guest, but I know wood is acceptable to bees without any further treatment.

The why ... is simply productivity. Having drawn comb so the bees can either fill right away or the queen can lay to her hearts content. Among a host of other advantages is the recycling of wax, purification of wax and control of disease. Hobbyist would desire manmade comb so they can go right into honey harvest the first year making all the mistakes that they normally make starting out. People in drought areas would love it because honey wouldn't be lost just making comb. They are all ready scrambling with the cost of feeding trying to salvage their hives. What is it that you don't see?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

'but I just don't see a need or any sort of viable product here.'

O.K., let's try and take a different approach, Logistics.

If you can increase the number of bees, hives, nucs, packages and honey, etc. because you don't have to wait for the bees to draw out comb before the queen can lay eggs, or workers can start storing nectar & pollen, then you'll understand.

If instead of waiting weeks, you could start each step of production immediately, then we are talking double digit, and greater, increases in productivity.

How that translates into profit all depends on costs, but it could be worth it.

Just keep in mind that we are dealing with a biological organism with an astonishing capacity for reproduction.

The rate limiting step is always something that you want to identify, whether it's the amount of time that it takes to get a new queen, or how quickly they can start laying up a storm. It would be better if it's a matter of how fast you can get queens rather than how fast comb becomes available.

That's one possible justification for ready made comb, wax or otherwise.


----------



## SERGE (Sep 14, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> ...They are the same material and the same concept. Honey Super Cell has hoffman style spacers, PermaComb doesn't. Honey Super Cell is Deeps (9 1/4" deep) and PermaComb is mediums (6" deep). Honey Super Cell is 4.9mm cell size equivalent. PermaComb is 5.0mm cell size equivalent (allowing for the thicker cell walls in the calculation)...


Thanks for the Info, Michael


----------



## pturley (Oct 4, 2010)

Acebird said:


> Says you. The size could be 4.5 x4.5 and assembled on the sheet of wax to any size you desired.
> 
> The why ... is simply productivity. (SNIP)
> 
> What is it that you don't see?


OK, one more post:
I went ahead and modeled up and extrusion die plate for a section 3" x 5" of honeycomb profile (5mm width) so that I could generate some accurate numbers for our conversation. Hopefully, this should illustrate how the *WHY?* is still far from answered.










To make this (limited size) die plate, you would need a tool shop with an EDM hole popper, a wire EDM machine with a CNC controlled table to vary the wire angles, and likely also a plunge EDM. Along with all the various mills, surface grinders, etc you would already expect from a capable tool shop. 

In the plate illustrated, you have at total of 784 individual pilot holes at the corners of each of the cells that are necessary to thread the wire EDM through. 
To make these holes, and still maintain ~0.010" thick cell walls, these would be done with an EDM hole popper using nearly the smallest size cannula available (slowest burn rates + highest consumption rate on the electrodes = highest cost holes to make). At typical tool shop rates, each of these holes would be in a range of $10~$25 each.

From there, the plate would be mounted in a wire EDM machine to cut the clearances for the cell walls. This is threading wire through each of these 784 holes, making three cuts (only two on the edges), then indexing over to the next hole. This would be cut with a 0.004" wire and a 0.003" overburn per side. 
These would be cut in threes, each pilot hole being the center of motion. The table movement would need to angle the wire all the way to the next hole over, then cut the next hole back to the original location (yielding a tapered feature from each corner). This would need to repeated, in three directions in nearly all (save the outside cells) of the pilot holes.
Each cut would be relatively fast, but the re-threading (even assuming an auto-threading feature on the wire EDM) would be very time consuming. This is on a machine where typical shop rates are $125-$150/hour.

The shop would then likely have to machine or EDM clearances to allow the wax to flow through the die plate, while maintaining enough of a web to support each individual cell core.

So, by the time it is all said and done you are likely looking at a tooling cost for just the die plate of around $20,000-25,000 (at a minimum!).

This before you have paid anything for the adapter plates for the extruder, extrusion costs, cutting and ASSEMBLY costs needed to make your resulting wax comb. 

The resulting assembled product, as I pointed out in my first post would fragile, bulky, difficult to package, store and ship. Your losses due to breakage would be significant. 
The costs to your retailers would be a deterrent, as they would take up a lot of space, require special handling, etc. The last time I bought frames pre-assembled with plastic foundation, the box had been upended. I simply pulled frames out of a bulk box where they were all thrown in together.

And this product, with all of the associated costs and losses would be competing against something that RETAILS for $3.00 each, complete, assembled in a wooden frame and ready for use? The bees just have to draw out at a cost of likely less than 1lb. of honey each frame over the season.

OR, even to compete against molded plastic frames that RETAIL for $5.00 each? With no guarantees that bee acceptance of your sterilized/processed wax would be ANY faster than acceptance of the wax coated plastic frames...

Again the *WHY? *(PLURAL) is far from answered. 

*WHY* is the product necessary when low cost alternatives that are more practical, easier to process, handle, store and ship. 
*WHY* when the competing products are available for MUCH cheaper and already proven to work? 
*WHY* would anyone consider investing is such a manufacturing process when stock lossing would be so costly and prevalent?
*WHY* when the economics simply don't make any sense?

So as an answer to why?, the very basic arguement of hive productivity just isn't enough...


Besides, if you want to look at hive efficiencies and bioenergetics, the cost of wax likely shouldn't be your focus. There are more expensive bioenergetic costs in a hive to consider:

http://solaroregon.org/news/solar-powered-beehive-coolers-increase-yields


Good luck in your venture.


Sincerely,
Paul E. Turley


----------



## ryandebny (Apr 17, 2010)

I've been carving some by hand. I'm almost finish my first foundation. I started it in 1977 and hope to finish in a year or 2


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

opcorn: hmmm sometimes it seems nature's way just might be the more effecient and cost-effective.
Regards,
Steven


----------



## alphatango (Aug 8, 2014)

StevenG said:


> opcorn: hmmm sometimes it seems nature's way just might be the more effecient and cost-effective.
> Regards,
> Steven


Hi, I'm not sure, that the nature in all case is more efficient...


----------

