Table mounted 3-jaw chuck

[CadRhino]

Never mind, I found it for sale on online metals here - https://www.onlinemetals.com/merchan...=309&top_cat=0
$154 for 12" x 12" plate.

Do you think I could squeeze (2) 6" 3-jaw chucks on a 12" wide plate? I would really like to have (3) chucks on an 18" plate but that would be a squeeze for my Tormach's X travel.
I think the 3-holes in the bottom of the chuck could be rotated to fit in 12" wide but I have to make sure the tightening cam/key faces out like Ray suggested.

[kstrauss]

Don't forget that when the chuck is fully opened the jaws will probably protrude from the chuck body.

What diameter stock are you gripping? Does exact centering in the chuck matter for your work?

[CadRhino]

Good point. I will have to lay the chucks out so they don't run into each other with the jaws open.
I am mostly griping 2" stock with some stock up to 5".
I may have to just face some 1" thick by 7" wide aluminum FB and lay the chucks out so there are no conflicts. I can't afford a nice long piece of Mic-6 though that sounds nice.
Exact centering doesn't really matter as long as I have the layout in CAM properly. The plate willl need to be dialed in X and Y.

To tell the truth, I always have some error when I dial in a long plate in X and Y. There is a little runout in my spindle that causes this with my Haimer. It should be close enough with (3) chucks on board, though.
I may need to get a bigger plate and stagger the chucks so they fit better with my limited 18" X travel on my tormach.

Up until now I have been holding my round parts in soft jaws that are machined for each run of parts. I have been finding some error, though and want to see if chucks are more 'accurate' than machined soft jaws for holding round parts.

Thanks for your input.

Don't forget that when the chuck is fully opened the jaws will probably protrude from the chuck body.

What diameter stock are you gripping? Does exact centering in the chuck matter for your work?

[kstrauss]

You don't say what "some error" means but I suspect that your expectations may not be met. It is optimistic to expect low cost chucks to repeat to closer than a thou or two. My usage of a chuck on the table is mostly to hold round stock by the edge rather than centre it exactly. I would probably try things first using a faced piece of 6061 rather than spending a lot on MIC6. BTW, I find that MIC6 is somewhat gummy and doesn't machine nearly as nicely as 6061.

[CadRhino]

Thanks for the insight.
Ideally I would like to have (3) 6" chucks mounted on one base plate that I could reference so I can do three round parts as accurately as possible.

You don't say what "some error" means but I suspect that your expectations may not be met. It is optimistic to expect low cost chucks to repeat to closer than a thou or two. My usage of a chuck on the table is mostly to hold round stock by the edge rather than centre it exactly. I would probably try things first using a faced piece of 6061 rather than spending a lot on MIC6. BTW, I find that MIC6 is somewhat gummy and doesn't machine nearly as nicely as 6061.

[MFchief]

At the risk of messing up a good thing, I've had good luck finding MIC6 on ebay for almost the same prices as 6061. I believe a lot of the folks selling drops, just think it's " another chunk of aluminum".

Terry

[mountaindew]

Thanks for the insight.
Ideally I would like to have (3) 6" chucks mounted on one base plate that I could reference so I can do three round parts as accurately as possible.

Tormach has 6" 3 jaw chuck for 250$+with what looks to be easy mount plates. With a fixture base plate and as ray mentioned all 3 mounted with the wrench socket forward would be a easy somewhat expensive $1000.00 solution.
Now I see some bison chucks alone cost more then 1k$ so if your asking quality then sky is the limit on chucks from what I see online. I mentioned Tormach because most of their products are of decent grade and I like the backing plates shown. .

[AUSTINMACHINING]

I would like to have (3) 6" chucks mounted on one base plate that I could reference so I can do three round parts as accurately as possible.

For accuracy I would mountil the chucks on the baseplate and not worry about accurate placement. Then indicate all 3 chuck center independently using g54,g55,g56.

[AUSTINMACHINING]

At the risk of messing up a good thing, I've had good luck finding MIC6 on ebay for almost the same prices as 6061. I believe a lot of the folks selling drops, just think it's " another chunk of aluminum".

Terry

Yep, I've got some smokin deals on ebay. One guy was selling guy was selling 12" round 3/8" thick blanks for 1/4 the typical cost. They had a few perimeter holes from another process, so actual usable diameter was 11.5", bUT they were perfect for my application. Our local metal distributor also has an area they call "the drop zone" with a ton of cut plate for various type of aluminium. They keep the drops for atime before sending to recycle, so great deals to be had if you don't mind digging a little.

[kstrauss]

Not to be too picky but their 6-inch 3-jaw (#30291) is $310.20. I doubt that the screw holes, designed to fit the 8-inch 4th axis, match the table T-slots.

[CadRhino]

I think you can get 1/4"-20 threaded t-slots and just use 2 screws to hold the base plate down.
If that doesn't work at least you have a flange to clamp the chuck that is low and not interfering with machining.
I am working up the courage to make a fixture plate with 2-3 chucks mounted on it

Not to be too picky but their 6-inch 3-jaw (#30291) is $310.20. I doubt that the screw holes, designed to fit the 8-inch 4th axis, match the table T-slots.

[CadRhino]

That is a great idea (and something I have never done). I am using Sprutcam for now. How does it work?Would I be able to use cam for one part and then have to go from one chuck mounted part to the next?
I would locate three different centers and then somehow label each one as g54, g55, g56...
I think it would be a challenge for me to precisely mount the chucks and this makes good sense.
Would love to be able how to 'reverse' locate the centers of the chucks and get them in my cam model. Is this something my passive probe could do? this would give me a chance to use my 3-year old probe I have never used.
Thanks!

For accuracy I would mountil the chucks on the baseplate and not worry about accurate placement. Then indicate all 3 chuck center independently using g54,g55,g56.

[CadRhino]

Hi Everyone,

I am reporting back with my plate mounted chuck project. I really appreciated everyone's input.
I endued up making (2) plates. One with a single 6" chuck and one with (3) 6" chucks.
I used 1" thick Mic6 plates.

If there are any surprises using them, I will followup.

Now I need to learn how to do multiple G54,G55 & G56 references in Sprutcam so I can indicate each part for multiple part runs.

-Nathan

That is a great idea (and something I have never done). I am using Sprutcam for now. How does it work?Would I be able to use cam for one part and then have to go from one chuck mounted part to the next?
I would locate three different centers and then somehow label each one as g54, g55, g56...
I think it would be a challenge for me to precisely mount the chucks and this makes good sense.
Would love to be able how to 'reverse' locate the centers of the chucks and get them in my cam model. Is this something my passive probe could do? this would give me a chance to use my 3-year old probe I have never used.
Thanks!

[mountaindew]

Are you wanting to do 1 operation at a time at 3 different offsets? Or a group of operations at each offset?
I have found no easy way to do it without editing and combining programs.

The example shown below I changed a template I have that uses 3 5c collet holders. I just change the fixtures to chucks.
Its setup for different part at each location. Not easy to use because stock definition is hard to get set right.



I bet people that use 2 vise fixtures all the time could explain a better way to cam and combine code for 2 locations. I know this is not the best way

[CadRhino]

Hi mountain
I want to do 1 operation at a time in three locations so I don't have to change tools as much. Basically I don't see any time advantage in doing all the ops on one part then moving in to the next since I will have 10 tool changes
Thanks

Are you wanting to do 1 operation at a time at 3 different offsets? Or a group of operations at each offset?
I have found no easy way to do it without editing and combining programs.

The example shown below I changed a template I have that uses 3 5c collet holders. I just change the fixtures to chucks.
Its setup for different part at each location. Not easy to use because stock definition is hard to get set right.



I bet people that use 2 vise fixtures all the time could explain a better way to cam and combine code for 2 locations. I know this is not the best way

[popspipes]

Hi mountain
I want to do 1 operation at a time in three locations so I don't have to change tools as much. Basically I don't see any time advantage in doing all the ops on one part then moving in to the next since I will have 10 tool changes
Thanks

I make small parts usually 4 or 5 at a time, they are all in one program, I dont mount each individually though.
I would think if you put stock in the three chucks and they are measured to get the distance between them, then write a program to do the three parts it would work, at least for one side, flipping the parts and rechucking wouldnt work very well I wouldnt think??

I do each individual op to all 4 or 5 pieces for all the ops.

[CadRhino]

Thanks for your input Mike.
I am going to try and locate each part via G54, G55,..... since my chucks are not perfectly located and for future accuracy.
Good to know about doing all ops before changing tools

I make small parts usually 4 or 5 at a time, they are all in one program, I dont mount each individually though.
I would think if you put stock in the three chucks and they are measured to get the distance between them, then write a program to do the three parts it would work, at least for one side, flipping the parts and rechucking wouldnt work very well I wouldnt think??

I do each individual op to all 4 or 5 pieces for all the ops.

[SCzEngrgGroup]

Are you wanting to do 1 operation at a time at 3 different offsets? Or a group of operations at each offset?
I have found no easy way to do it without editing and combining programs.

The example shown below I changed a template I have that uses 3 5c collet holders. I just change the fixtures to chucks.
Its setup for different part at each location. Not easy to use because stock definition is hard to get set right.



I bet people that use 2 vise fixtures all the time could explain a better way to cam and combine code for 2 locations. I know this is not the best way

The answer depends on your CAD/CAD. Most modern systems (Solidworks, Fusion, etc.) give you several ways of doing it, regardless of whether the fixtures are evenly spaced, or randomly spaced. In most cases, I build a 3D model of both the fixture and the parts. I can define the CAM operations for a single part in the first fixture, then pattern the operation to duplicate it to the other fixtures, whether they are equi-spaced, or randomly spaced. Equi-spaced simply makes it a tiny bit less work.

The pattern allows the order of operations to be chosen to do all operations on the first fixture, then do all operations on the second fixture, etc. or to order the operations for fewest tool changes. I also have tremendous flexibility in how things are ordered simply by how I define the CAM operations. If you don't have this level of flexibility with your CAD/CAM and actually have to manually edit g-code, or laboriously, manually define numerous toollpaths, or run multiple g-code files, then I would suggest you need to get better CAD/CAM tools. I NEVER manually edit my g-code, and have never had a problem handling multiple fixtures in exactly the way I want to, within a single program, even with 4 or more fixtures, and dozens of operations per fixture, machining several sides of each part.

Regards,
Ray L.

[mountaindew]

Hi mountain
I want to do 1 operation at a time in three locations so I don't have to change tools as much. Basically I don't see any time advantage in doing all the ops on one part then moving in to the next since I will have 10 tool changes
Thanks

I asked only because it matters how the tempate is setup. The method I shown is to complete one side of the part in first fixture. The 2nd side of part in the 2nd fixture and if required a 3 rd fixture for 3rd side of part. This is the method Steve mentions he uses to put raw stock in one side and remove finished 2 or 3 sided parts at other end. When your done you only have to run the last 2 or 1 set of ops to finish the last side or 2 and when you start the set you only have to run the first set of ops for first raw stock part and repeat as needed. I like it because I can come back 3 days later and restart half finished parts and run only those ops for that location. Path pilot makes it easy because I get decent homing accuracy.

If you want to put 3 of same parts and use 3 offsets to perform all operations in a series. Each operation in sprutcam needs to be set to the offset it uses. I found this to be confusing and very hard to get right in sprutcam but if you organize it right and review it carefully so the right surfaces are in the right ops at the right offset location "bobs your uncle" Otherwise I spend time chasing those errors in my input




At any rate if you want to see it like I show above its not real easy to do with fixtures but it can be done. Note some operations go crazy when you set parts of this way roughing waterline operation always has problems with complex setups like this with fixtures and other model features.


Ray posted above note while I was writing this one. I ALSO NEVER EDIT CODE !!!!!!!!
Couple years ago if anyone researches your post you were not setting up cam programs as you mentioned above. The proof is in your posts. Or you were not saying what you were doing. Maybe you upgraded you cam and now setup programs with different side offsets.. even in this thread you state you use only one offset most the time. or I am confused, not the first time.
If you research my posts from years ago you will see I was setting this up with examples while you and others were talking about using 1 file for each side

I post pictures not just say I can do it! I would like to see pictures of your modern cam system with fixtures and multiple parts and multiple offsets and all the ops all setup eye candy

[mountaindew]

The answer depends on your CAD/CAD. Most modern systems (Solidworks, Fusion, etc.) give you several ways of doing it, regardless of whether the fixtures are evenly spaced, or randomly spaced. In most cases, I build a 3D model of both the fixture and the parts. I can define the CAM operations for a single part in the first fixture, then pattern the operation to duplicate it to the other fixtures, whether they are equi-spaced, or randomly spaced. Equi-spaced simply makes it a tiny bit less work.

The pattern allows the order of operations to be chosen to do all operations on the first fixture, then do all operations on the second fixture, etc. or to order the operations for fewest tool changes. I also have tremendous flexibility in how things are ordered simply by how I define the CAM operations. If you don't have this level of flexibility with your CAD/CAM and actually have to manually edit g-code, or laboriously, manually define numerous toollpaths, or run multiple g-code files, then I would suggest you need to get better CAD/CAM tools. I NEVER manually edit my g-code, and have never had a problem handling multiple fixtures in exactly the way I want to, within a single program, even with 4 or more fixtures, and dozens of operations per fixture, machining several sides of each part.

Regards,
Ray L.

Lets see a picture of your cam system showing 3 parts with 3 stock definitions at 3 offset locations with 3 fixtures and one operation performed at each offset. I know if this is hard to setup in sprutcam I bet it is equal hard to do in any other program. From what I see most high end programs work about the same. Anyway proof is in pictures or real life example not words I can say anything!