my plm has servos and linear rails, and cuts aluminum very nice, but it has an upgraded spindle, so it turns around 3000-10000rpm, software is d.o.s based. which I will upgrade to mach 3 if I keep it. but I cant cut steel because of the spindle speed, and the machine is hard to find anything for.
the tormach I hear cuts steel like butter, is obviosly a much more rigid machine, has a bigger cutting area, mine is only 6x12 but I think Its smaller because I havent been able to get that much out of it. the only thing that concerns me with the tormach is what do they mean by short production runs? does that mean I cant run it any longer the a certain period of time? and if so what is that time frame? last does anybody have any cons about the tormach.

I have realy been beating myself up over this, I know I can sell my mill for close to what the tormach goes for. and I have some extra money now and I want to get the most out of it. thanks for the help, mike

You might want to post this in the Tormach section here or in the Tormach Yahoo group if you haven't already.

From what I can tell, Tormach limits the feed rate and rapid speed to 65 ipm, which makes it a bit slow for large production runs as each part will take longer to make than it would on the more mainstream CNC mills, which apparently can feed and rapid at much higher speeds (200 ipm?).

The thought is that the part design and CAM time for prototypes and short runs will take the bulk of the overall part production time and that faster mill speeds are not cost effective in that context. This is all covered to some extent in the mill design document available on Tormach's web site.

If you are a hobbyist or a pro that only makes a few parts per run, the mill should be fine. If you want to run parts 24/7 in a competitive market you might want to look at higher range mills.

I'm a hobbyist and the feature set should be just about right for me, so I just placed an order and should have the mill in about 6 weeks.

Mike

there is a tormach section

Just wondering, what's a plm 2000? I've seen the Pro-Light 1000, but not a 2000... Any links to pictures?

Just trying to compare to my Tormach...

Thanks,
Dave

I dont have much info on it either, it is a pro light machine, sorry I dont have a better pic, waiting on camera. I have found some information here and there on the web, the 2000 model has a regular spindle the 2500 model has 45000rpm liquid cooled spindle. the machine weighs about 425 lbs. its very fast on rapid traverse. which I dont use very much being new at this im always worried about putting that in the wrong spot.

From what I can tell, Tormach limits the feed rate and rapid speed to 65 ipm, which makes it a bit slow for large production runs as each part will take longer to make than it would on the more mainstream CNC mills, which apparently can feed and rapid at much higher speeds (200 ipm?).

The thought is that the part design and CAM time for prototypes and short runs will take the bulk of the overall part production time and that faster mill speeds are not cost effective in that context. This is all covered to some extent in the mill design document available on Tormach's web site.

I'm a hobbyist and the feature set should be just about right for me, so I just placed an order and should have the mill in about 6 weeks.

Mike

The 200+ Rapids for Production on New CNC's is around 1200-2800 IPM depending on the travels of the machine and the distance to be traveled.

Ex. A CNC Swisss Screw Machine has Gang Type tooling on both sides of the guide bushing and a travel in the X/Y of 1.5 inches. The Rapids are around 800 IPM. Very Fast.

As a suggestion if I may, the Tormach seems to me like a Tough Little CNC Mill that should do well cutting Steel. As a note you can get production out of the Tormach with a little method I like to Call "Raising the Z". If you were to place a 2" inch thick block under your vise or fixture you reduce the amount of travel in the Z axis. This means the Z has less of a distance to travel, hence a slightly lower cycle time and less wear-n-tear on the Z axis Ball Screw. ;)

:cheers:

I spoke to two tormach customers who are actually running the machine 9+ hours a day in a production environment. Both have been very very happy with the machines. One is producing medical molds in SS with the 4th axis.. and the other oil pump housing for turbine motors if I remember correctly.

Tormach seems to be conservative with the machines capability. I think the purpose of that statement was to set customers expectation... Its wasnt designed as a production machine, despite the fact some are using it that way.

With that said, after speaking to a few tormach customers and Greg Jackson of Tormach, I placed my order and should be receiving my machine in a week or so! :D

David

I think im going to go with the tormach, it has more capability then mine. plus it has accessories you can get, like a 4th axis would be nice, not that im ready now but when the time comes. im still working on 2 axis programing.

I think im going to go with the tormach, it has more capability then mine. plus it has accessories you can get, like a 4th axis would be nice, not that im ready now but when the time comes. im still working on 2 axis programing.


If you decide to get a Tormach let everyone know how you make out with it. Are you having trouble programming? If it's EIA/ISO G-Code maybe I can help.

Good Luck with what ever you decide to do. (pssssst... go for the 4th axis) ;)

Surely if you write the correct gcode you will not have 2 inches of unecessary z-axis travel in the first place.

Regards
Phil

As a note you can get production out of the Tormach with a little method I like to Call "Raising the Z". If you were to place a 2" inch thick block under your vise or fixture you reduce the amount of travel in the Z axis. This means the Z has less of a distance to travel, hence a slightly lower cycle time and less wear-n-tear on the Z axis Ball Screw. ;)

:cheers:

Surely if you write the correct gcode you will not have 2 inches of unecessary z-axis travel in the first place.

Regards
Phil

What are you refering too? Do you even understand the method in which I speak? From your statement I think you may be a bit confused.

It is quite possible that I misunderstand. However I still cannot see how you reduce cycle time by raising the vice 2 inches. Could you be a bit more explicit about the method?

Regards
Phil


What are you refering too? Do you even understand the method in which I speak? From your statement I think you may be a bit confused.

Ok I'll bite. What do you mean Toby? For us non machinist types :D

It is quite possible that I misunderstand. However I still cannot see how you reduce cycle time by raising the vice 2 inches. Could you be a bit more explicit about the method?

Regards
Phil

In a standard VMC usually there is about 20 to 25 Inches of travel in the Z Axis. In this case 2" won't do squat. On a larger application I usually go 5 to 10 inches and have fixtures already made for this. But on a tiny Tormach this can work wonders for someone because a small Tormach does not have an ATC (unless I have missed something on their website, which is a possibility), so they will only use one tool per Cycle. I would have suggested more but someone may want a little room to load and unload parts or change a broken tool if need be. Do you get it now.

2" was just a simple example of raising a vise a little more above the table to reduce the amount of travel in the Z Axis. This method is widely used in shops that make parts in the Thousands, 100 Thousands, and Million Piece Runs.
;) :cheers:

I'm afraid not.

You seem to start you explanation assuming the reader already has knowledge of what you speak. I clearly don't. What is the concept involved here?

How does raising the vice shorted the cycle time?

I can understand how it would work with an ATC but ,as you point out, the Tormach does not have one.

Surely the spindle only has to move up sufficient distance in order to allow a move to the next step or to allow a tool change. How can raising the vice make upward movement any less?

regards
Phil


Do you get it now.

Surely the spindle only has to move up Phil
In a Mill the tool starts at Z home which is above the part so the tool would have less distance to top of part. But if at end of program your move is only up and away a little. The 2" is not a factor.As you would position tool to be out of the way for part change. I would use a 1 1/2 alum. subplate drilled and steel instert threads for machine table.

I'm afraid not.

You seem to start you explanation assuming the reader already has knowledge of what you speak. I clearly don't. What is the concept involved here?

How does raising the vice shorted the cycle time?

I can understand how it would work with an ATC but ,as you point out, the Tormach does not have one.

Surely the spindle only has to move up sufficient distance in order to allow a move to the next step or to allow a tool change. How can raising the vice make upward movement any less?

regards
Phil

Ok, so I am not used to teaching the basic principals of machining. My Bad.

I'll give you a working example.
Tormach Z axis total travel is 15 inches from the tool tip to the work. If the distance is reduced by say 3" what happens, now your total travel is 12". With 65 IPM Maximum Rapid the tool now can reach the target destination in less time from the Home position. Hence, a reduction in actual cycle time from one part cycle to the next.

Programming has nothing to do with it with the exception of the initial point return or safe Z level rapiding from one point of th work to the next point. ex. Multipal pockets, Drill Cycles, Counter Bores etc.

:)

I'm still not quite there.

Apart for referencing the z-axis when I turn the machine on why would I want to "home" the z-axis (or any axis) from one part cycle to the next.

Regards
Phil


With 65 IPM Maximum Rapid the tool now can reach the target destination in less time from the Home position. Hence, a reduction in actual cycle time from one part cycle to the next.

:)

I'm still not quite there.

Apart for referencing the z-axis when I turn the machine on why would I want to "home" the z-axis (or any axis) from one part cycle to the next.

Regards
Phil

To have enough room to load and unload parts with out bumping into the sharp tool in the Spindle. Or you could just Home the X and Y Axes on a small machine like a Tormach. What ever you want really.

I guess you would have to see an example first hand. Or Geof could explain this to you better than I can. Why don't you PM him. He has a way with explaining things the right way. I'm just a Machinist. ;)

Sorry I couldn't help you to understand. :(

Of course, but you don't necessarily have to "home" it 15 inches to change out the part, surely you write the gcode to move the tool the shortest possible distance necessary to allow you to change out the part. This distance will be the same regardless of whether you raise the vice or not.

Regards
Phil

To have enough room to load and unload parts with out bumping into the sharp tool in the Spindle. Or you could just Home the X and Y Axes on a small machine like a Tormach. What ever you want really.:(

Of course, but you don't necessarily have to "home" it 15 inches to change out the part, surely you write the gcode to move the tool the shortest possible distance necessary to allow you to change out the part. This distance will be the same regardless of whether you raise the vice or not.

Regards
Phil

Now your just being a PITA :mad: Grow Up! Obviously you do not work in a professional environment and this information does not pertain to you. :D

I am relatively new to CNC and concerned that I have missed a key issue regarding the point of raising the work to reduce cycle times. As Tobyaxis appears either unwilling or unable to answer my last point, which I thought was quite valid, can anybody else who has followed this thread, enlighten me as to what I am misunderstanding.

Regards
Phil


Now your just being a PITA :mad:

I would say: follow your own logic. A raiser can come in handy with a toolchanger, where the machine has to position to the toolchanger. This is the Cut to Cut race. If you don't have a toolchanger, there is no reason to go "milling on a tower". There only has be a handy, reasonable distance between workpiece and tool. This would elevate equally with the raiser.

Please resist the urge to curse, flame, degrade, insult or embarrass someone in your post. We encourage the free flow of your ideas, but believe that they can be communicated (and received) much more effectively if you keep things civil. If you have to vent, take it offline. We carefully monitor posts and will ban individuals who engage in offensive conduct within the forums. Thanks. (cnczone rules)
Why the discussion have to go this way, contrary to the rules above, is a mystery to me.

I had the same confusion...

Is there some need for "homing" on the limit switches every cycle to re-check accuracy or something? Then I could see the need for the riser.

I think if not you would just re-set "home" for part changes.

I think you made the right choice on the Tormach. I'm gonna be getting an X3 with a kit, thinking of it as a poor mans Tormach :)

-Jeff

My conclusion is that raising the vice on a none ATC machine is of no benifit.

Also I don't think it is necessary to "home" to re-check the accuracy. If you "home" on the Tormach you will have to reset your tool/part offset reference point again. If you set each subsequent part in the same position in the vice then the machine will still know where the tool is and where the part is without re-referencing.

Regards
Phil

I had the same confusion...

Is there some need for "homing" on the limit switches every cycle to re-check accuracy or something? Then I could see the need for the riser.

I think if not you would just re-set "home" for part changes.

I think you made the right choice on the Tormach. I'm gonna be getting an X3 with a kit, thinking of it as a poor mans Tormach :)

-Jeff

I'll chew on this a little bit.

I agree that raising the vise really has no use, assuming that you are making the same part over and over. Or always use the same home value, per fixture.

I think what toby was trying to explain was using production machines that make use of default homing in every one of the programs via homing/limit switches.

Say all you make is 1 inch parts, then ideally you'd want to move the part as close to your limit switch homing location. Which could be near a automatic tool changer, or on the outside of the part location for manual changing.

If you don't use homing switches and you just clear out the homing in your driving software.... i.e. Mach3, then it doesn't matter. As your code should take into account that location.

I think the concept is sound, but doesn't really apply to custom gcode, that is executed from a home location set on an individual part. I.e. Centered on a predrilled hole for 2nd operation on a part.

But it would really shine in an production envioroment where you have a thousands of different parts that could range in different sizes. If your code always takes into account that known starting location. Then you would want to position the part as close as possible.

I hope that clears up the misunderstandings.

May be you could understand this a little better if you read this. I program CNC's with Fanuc, Yasnac, and Acromatic controls, not Mach3. The machines I use are Enshu, Nakamura-Tome, Tsugami, Matsuura, Kia, Toyada, Mazak, Dainichi, Ikegai, and Hitachi Seiki just to name a few.

Read this artical in Modern Machine Shop and you should understand what I was trying to explain to you. The only exception is that I apply this method using a Riser under a 10" Kurt Vise.

Sorry if I offended anyone, and have a nice day.

http://www.mmsonline.com/articles/1001scan1.html ;)


| Home | Article Archive | Latest Issue | Talk To Us | Previous Page (or Use Back Button) |
| Online Tools & Calculators | Subscribe To MMS' OTW Infoletter |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Scanning the Horizon

When Length Equals Speed




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


For More Information
...about long-reach tooling visit Precision Components' MMS Online Showroom, call (800) 525-1373, or select the MMS Direct icon at right.

Link a Friend to This Page Via E-mail
Print this article

Pat Fitzpatrick of Precision Components (Troy, Michigan) believes that long-reach tooling has been pigeonholed as a product reserved for mold and die shops. In this article, Mr. Fitzpatrick discusses how these products can benefit other types of machine shops.

Long-reach toolholders are used most commonly in mold shops that operate large machining centers with powerful spindles. This machinery is frequently used for steel milling at depths of 25 inches or more. But how do longer toolholders apply to metalworking operations that run the gamut from short-run jobs to high-volume production?

Although they're not practical for shallow machining operations, extended toolholders can save time when performing tasks such as drilling, tapping and counter boring. This is true because longer tooling reduces Z-axis travel distances. All milling machines have a home position for tool changes, and the same amount of time is required to index a 2-inch toolholder as is necessary for a 12-inch toolholder.

During center drilling, for example, a 12-inch toolholder only needs to travel 1 inch before the tool begins feeding into the workpiece. When using a 2-inch toolholder, however, an additional 10 inches of travel is required before the tool begins to feed. Each time the tooling needs changed, this 10 inches becomes 20 inches. For a simple task such as a part that incorporates two drilled and tapped holes, the machining cycle requires five tool changes. Using the longer tool, this translates to a savings of 100 inches in travel per cycle.


Using extended tooling in applications does not affect machining quality, but it does eliminate a significant amount of cycle time.

Expanding this hypothetical example, let's assume a rapid traverse rate of 500 ipm and a cycle time of 4 minutes. Applied to two 8-hour daily shifts that are running 5 days per week, the results of using long-reach tooling would be as follows:

100 inches saved per cycle,
12 seconds saved per cycle,
3 minutes saved per hour,
48 minutes saved per day (two shifts),
and 4 hours saved per week.
Although the rapid traverse rate of 500 ipm used in this example might appear to be slow, a survey of machining centers used by Precision Components concluded that rapid rates ranged from 400 to 857 ipm. The slower the rapid rate of a particular machine, of course, the greater the advantage of using extended tooling. Using extended tooling in these applications does not affect machining quality, but it does eliminate a significant amount of cycle time. This can represent an important competitive advantage when important customers such as automobile manufacturers are demanding cost reductions for the coming year.—MMS


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MMS Online is a trademark of Gardner Publications, Inc, copyright 1997-2006.
MMS Online and all contents are properties of Gardner Publications, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

Tobyaxis, this whole discussion started with you making the following recommendation.
..........................................................
As a note you can get production out of the Tormach with a little method I like to Call "Raising the Z". If you were to place a 2" inch thick block under your vise or fixture you reduce the amount of travel in the Z axis. This means the Z has less of a distance to travel, hence a slightly lower cycle time and less wear-n-tear on the Z axis Ball Screw.
.........................................................

Take a look from post #7 onward.

No mention of Fanuc, Yasnac, and Acromatic controls, or Enshu, Nakamura-Tome, Tsugami, Matsuura, Kia, Toyada, Mazak, Dainichi, Ikegai, and Hitachi Seiki.

The Tormach uses Mach2 as standard and does not have an ATC.

Your recommendation regarding the Tormach is apparently incorrect and directly lead to the subsequent confusion.

Regards
Phil

May be you could understand this a little better if you read this. I program CNC's with Fanuc, Yasnac, and Acromatic controls, not Mach3. The machines I use are Enshu, Nakamura-Tome, Tsugami, Matsuura, Kia, Toyada, Mazak, Dainichi, Ikegai, and Hitachi Seiki just to name a few.

Read this artical in Modern Machine Shop and you should understand what I was trying to explain to you. The only exception is that I apply this method using a Riser under a 10" Kurt Vise.

Sorry if I offended anyone, and have a nice day.

http://www.mmsonline.com/articles/1001scan1.html ;)

No problem, the information obviously was meant for Professionals and I had no right to share useful practice with an audience that doesn't need it. :D