Should I sell my plm 2000 and get a tormach?

[philbur]

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

Originally Posted by InspirationTool 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

[Deviant]

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.

[tobyaxis]

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.

[philbur]

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

Originally Posted by tobyaxis 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

[tobyaxis]

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.