PDA

View Full Version : ISO 30 Spindle



wildcat
12-11-2006, 07:02 PM
Anyone else see the following? What is your opinion on replacing the R8 spindle with this one?

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/spindle.htm

philbur
12-11-2006, 08:25 PM
Tooling is expensive, R8 can handle 2 or 3 horse power OK. So the only real use is if you are going for an ATC.

I speced my manual RF40 with an ISO30. I wish I hadn't. Thought I was being clever. Ya well.

Regards
Phil


Anyone else see the following? What is your opinion on replacing the R8 spindle with this one?

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/spindle.htm

kimoyo
12-11-2006, 11:08 PM
I haven't brought any tooling yet and it said while supplies last so I ordered it already :).

I'm probably not going to do an ATC but I plan on using more the one endmill when I'm cncing. So this and a power drawbar would make changes very quick.

philbur
12-12-2006, 03:26 AM
There are ways of achieving quick change tooling with an R8. Have you priced an ISO30 endmill holder. ISO30 has come down in price in recent years, but still I think it is more expensive and hard to find.

What did you pay for the spindle.

Regards
Phil


I haven't brought any tooling yet and it said while supplies last so I ordered it already :).

I'm probably not going to do an ATC but I plan on using more the one endmill when I'm cncing. So this and a power drawbar would make changes very quick.

Runner4404spd
12-12-2006, 08:16 AM
i bought my ISO 30 spindle as well. it was only $65, and they should fit all the square column mills. i am waiting for aaron to release the torque procedure for the angular contact bearings, for the spindle, as well as the belt drive setup to all me to run up to 4500 RPM.

then i plan on building and ATC. this iso spindle will be pretty slick, i can't wait to get it assembled.

kimoyo
12-12-2006, 08:21 AM
There are ways of achieving quick change tooling with an R8. Have you priced an ISO30 endmill holder. ISO30 has come down in price in recent years, but still I think it is more expensive and hard to find.

What did you pay for the spindle.

Regards
Phil

The spindle is $65 and in the kbc catalog the holders are between $95-$105 for collis and $35-$43 for the kbc ones.

kimoyo
12-12-2006, 08:24 AM
i am waiting for aaron to release the torque procedure for the angular contact bearings, for the spindle, as well as the belt drive setup to all me to run up to 4500 RPM.

Did you speak to Aaron about this, did he give you idea of when and how he's going to do this? Thanks.

philbur
12-12-2006, 09:21 AM
$65, is that for a complete spindle assembly, including bearings, or just the "central" spindle shaft.

Looks to me like you should evaluate the price for alternative quick change systems, including tooling, before you make the switch to ISO 30.

Phil


The spindle is $65 and in the kbc catalog the holders are between $95-$105 for collis and $35-$43 for the kbc ones.

Richards
12-12-2006, 10:21 AM
Am I missing something? Sixty-five dollars for an industrial quality spindle? Add two bearings and a little work and you've got a first-class tool change system. The last time I checked, tool holders were available for $30 on up to over $100. Compare the quality of the spindle that Aaron is offering to the hobby-class R8 quick-change systems others are offering. Compare the size of the tools that can be used with the various systems. I'm just not aware of a 'downside'. It seems to me that if R8 is good enough, then all of us who own an IH mill already have that. For those of us who would prefer a heavy-duty quick change system so that we can pre-set tool lengths and change tools in a matter of seconds, then Aaron's system would be a perfect match. The other 'systems' on the market look light-weight to me, better suited to light cuts and smaller tooling.

Loadedagain
12-12-2006, 03:14 PM
says it all...


Am I missing something? Sixty-five dollars for an industrial quality spindle? Add two bearings and a little work and you've got a first-class tool change system. The last time I checked, tool holders were available for $30 on up to over $100. Compare the quality of the spindle that Aaron is offering to the hobby-class R8 quick-change systems others are offering. Compare the size of the tools that can be used with the various systems. I'm just not aware of a 'downside'. It seems to me that if R8 is good enough, then all of us who own an IH mill already have that. For those of us who would prefer a heavy-duty quick change system so that we can pre-set tool lengths and change tools in a matter of seconds, then Aaron's system would be a perfect match. The other 'systems' on the market look light-weight to me, better suited to light cuts and smaller tooling.

BobWarfield
12-12-2006, 04:38 PM
I bought one. I expect the NMTB 30 will be a bit more rigid, and the idea of a toolchanger is nice, but the main reason is I want to build a belt drive without taking the gear head out of service. At the rate I complete my projects, I would get the gear head disassembled, need to do more milling and change the design, and just get stuck for years. Building a simpler head around this spindle, I can have a working mill at all times to facilitate.

I'm going to set it up to take the larger sized motor right out of the box without having to turn the shaft down. I'll probably just build it so I can bolt it up to the column in place of the existing IH head. I'm expecting to build it out of 1" aluminum plate so I don't have to worry about the metal warping at all. Should be a fun project. I will eliminate the quill as well, to wind up with a CNC-only head.

Best,

BW

philbur
12-12-2006, 05:00 PM
What does the ISO 30 give you:

1) A tooling system designed for 5 to 10 hp on a 2 hp machine.
2) Additional rigidity. Have you concluded that the mill is rigid enough to benefit from IOS 30. R8 is good enough for a Bridgeport.
3) A quick change system. Not until you add a powered draw bar. But then you could add a powered draw bar to your current R8 system.
4) Repeatable Z axis location for pre-set tool locations Don't you have this with R8 tooling, the taper angles are similar. Agreed not with and R8 collet style quick change, but then you don't have the possibility of even using collets with an ISO 30 in the first place, or do you.

Will a light weight mill like a 2hp square column bench mill really benefit from ISO 30, why not ISO 50, or are you better off spending your time, money and energy elsewhere.

Just some questions from a novice trying to understand, so please correct my understanding, don't roast me.(chair)

Regards
Phil



says it all...

BobWarfield
12-12-2006, 08:03 PM
What does the ISO 30 give you:

1) A tooling system designed for 5 to 10 hp on a 2 hp machine.
2) Additional rigidity. Have you concluded that the mill is rigid enough to benefit from IOS 30. R8 is good enough for a Bridgeport.
3) A quick change system. Not until you add a powered draw bar. But then you could add a powered draw bar to your current R8 system.
4) Repeatable Z axis location for pre-set tool locations Don't you have this with R8 tooling, the taper angles are similar. Agreed not with and R8 collet style quick change, but then you don't have the possibility of even using collets with an ISO 30 in the first place, or do you.

Will a light weight mill like a 2hp square column bench mill really benefit from ISO 30, why not ISO 50, or are you better off spending your time, money and energy elsewhere.

Just some questions from a novice trying to understand, so please correct my understanding, don't roast me.(chair)

Regards
Phil

Lots of questions here. Let me give you my response in no particular order.

First of all, if you plan to spend your time and energy elsewhere, where else would you choose to spend it? At about $165 for the spindle with bearings, and with the desire I already mentioned to build a new head that runs higher rpms, it's hard for me to see how I go wrong on this deal.

It has been argued that ISO 30 is real expensive compared to R8. It is definitely more expensive, but I don't see it as hugely more expensive. Enco wants $39 for a 1/2" 30 taper mill holder and $31 for an R8. The stuff is available, you just have to look a little harder. In addition, you can purchase an NMTB 30 to R8 adapter so you can still run any R8 tooling you may have. They are not expensive, and will make a nice transition if you already have some tooling in hand or want to keep the option to have access to the bigger range of R8 products available.

RE rigidity and why not a 40 taper or even a 50? Well, there are not 40 and 50 taper spindles for sale a this price, but there is a 30. I'll take the 30, because as I said, I think it is a great price and I do believe 30 is an improvement over the R8.

Wasn't r8 good enough for Bridgeport? No, evidently not. Even they moved away from it on their light CNC machines as did most of the rest of the market. R8 was designed a LONG time ago and there have been better ideas since. Better ideas than this 30 too, but as I say, 30 is what's for sale, so that's what I'm buying.

Is a bench mill rigid enough to take advantage of a 30 taper? Well, we won't know if we don't try, eh? I will say that a lot of folks told me this machine wouldn't be able to cut much due to rigidity, poor tolerances, and general bad Chinese practices. I have so far found that has been a lot of poppycock. I can take a 1" roughing endmill and use it successfully to cut mild steel without chatter at recommended feeds and speeds for the cutter. I have had to crank up feedrates to uncomfortable hand cranking speeds with aluminum because I can't spin the cutter fast enough with the gear head. I am not seeing much evidence of rigidity problems here, and there is certainly quite a lot of mass. I would say the odds are good that we can benefit from the 30 taper.

You can have a quick change just as easily with R8 and a powered drawbar. True. That's why I'm busy finishing up a powered drawbar as we speak. I expect it will work great with the 30 taper as well. However, a toolchange system is a different proposition. The flange and bigger seating base are going to work worlds better with any kind of automated toolchanger than R8. The flange is going to give the tool a fixed place to sit in the carousel that is lacking with R8 tooling unless you do something nonstandard that requires you to fabricate it, or unless you buy something like the Tormach Tooling System and then build a changer for that.

Don't you have repeatable z-axis with R8? No, definitely not! It's that pesky flange on the ISO 30 (and other tapers made for the CNC world). It locates how far into the bore the holder can go. There is no such feature on an R8, and the holder's travel into the bore is going to be a function of how precisely you can repeat the drawbar tightening exercise. In the end, not very good repeatability at all. The quick change systems designed for R8, like the Tormach Tooling System, add a mechanism to index the holder in Z each time you insert a new one.

Speaking of the Tormach Tooling System, that seems like a comparison to make as well. Additional holders are cheaper--$20 for an additional 1/2" holder. However, the initial system is $600. I believe I can build my new head for quite a bit less than that and I wind up with a lot more benefit than what I get just with the TTS. Hard to believe that R8 with the additional contrivance levered off the end would be nearly as rigid as the 30 Taper, however. Their operating manual specifically cautions against anything but light cutting operations with cutters more than 1/2". I will say again, I have used a 1" roughing end mill successfully on the IH mill in an R8 mill holder, and that's only going to get better with a 30 taper.

Let's not pick on Tormach though. Their tooling system is innovative and well designed. Virtually all of the tooling systems that convert R8 to quick change have the same caveat. You will lose some Z-travel with the contraption on the end of the R8 and you will lose some significant rigidity. I see this 30 taper as a way to avoid those disadvantages while picking up significant advantages. And I do have sufficient experience with this mill to be concerned that a loss of rigidity in the tooling system would be felt.

BTW, did I mention that the price is right? :p

I mean c'mon, buy one and set it aside for possible future use. What else can you buy for $65 that is nearly as interesting to debate? (chair)

I just got off the phone with Aaron. He has just shipped mine out today. I was ordering a set of optical limits. It's going to be summer before I get around to installing my CNC conversion on the mill at the rate I'm going, and I wanted to get them before he closes his doors altogether. Very nice fellow to talk to. Seems quite excited about the future, and a bit melanchology to be leaving IH behind.

Best,

BW

IndHobby
12-12-2006, 08:34 PM
An ISO 30 taper is a lot more rigid that other tooling systems, 40-50% of the tool holder goes through the lower bearing. Other tooling systems like to see how far they can push it out from the lower spindle. Can you say chatter?

Repeatability is improved over an R8 because of the increased taper.

Ejectability is improved. If you think about it for a while you can make an ATC out of a power drawbar and a tray of tools. R8 doesn’t eject.

ISO is a lot bigger than an individual manufacturer, so if someone goes out of business, it’s not an issue.

Bison tool holders (available from Enco) are made in Poland and are cheap. Poland makes better tools than China.

Lastly, R8 was developed by Bridgeport as a proprietary holder, why use a standard when you can do something different and make money on the accessories, or the licensing of the design?

philbur
12-12-2006, 08:48 PM
Not on the ISO 30 spindle in my manual machine, and it doesn't appear to be designed to. I can see the taper between the flange and the spindle. The Z axis location appears to be determined by the taper not the flange. I thought that it was only tapers like the HSK that have both flange and taper contact.

Is the IH spindle designed for dual contact location? Whats the cost of HSK tooling.

I'm still learning.:)

Regards
Phil




It's that pesky flange on the ISO 30 (and other tapers made for the CNC world). It locates how far into the bore the holder can go.

BW

pstockley
12-12-2006, 09:16 PM
ISO 30 isn't dual contact like HSK or Tormach style holders.

To get repeatability you need a drawbar that always excerts a consistent force. So if you use an impact wrench style drawbar you will not be able to get exact Z heights each time you change tools.

The flange on CNC versions of the holder has notches in it to engage with the dogs on the spindle. If you don't have dogs on your spindle you can have problems slipping under heavy loads e.g. drilling or tapping.

kimoyo
12-13-2006, 10:10 AM
$65, is that for a complete spindle assembly, including bearings, or just the "central" spindle shaft.

Looks to me like you should evaluate the price for alternative quick change systems, including tooling, before you make the switch to ISO 30.

Phil

I'm still learning also, so please excuse my lack of knowledge. Someone asked about getting a spindle, some bearings and switching over to a belt system a few weeks ago. And you suggested spending $550 on the tormach spindle cartridge which is R8 but $65 for a iso 30 spindle and $100 for bearings is too expensive? Am I missing something?


You can buy the Tormach PCNC1100 spindle cartridge for around USD 550. It's good for at least 4,500 rpm. The Tormach doen't have a quill and no counter weights or gas springs either.

Regards
Phil



2) Additional rigidity. Have you concluded that the mill is rigid enough to benefit from IOS 30. R8 is good enough for a Bridgeport.



Will a light weight mill like a 2hp square column bench mill really benefit from ISO 30, why not ISO 50, or are you better off spending your time, money and energy elsewhere.

Just some questions from a novice trying to understand, so please correct my understanding, don't roast me.(chair)

Regards
Phil

If this is the case, why use ground ballscrews (not talking about them being from China) instead of rolled? Will the proposed slight benefit be noticeable on these, as you put it, light weight mills?

philbur
12-13-2006, 11:04 AM
I think you have misunderstood the context of the post that you quote.

The post that the quote was an answer too identified the Tormach drive system as a possible system the poster was interested in. I suggested nothing, I merely pointed out that he could buy the spindle for $550. I was trying to be helpful. In any case an IH spindle converted to ISO 30 would not have resolved his particular issues. If you read the post that I was replying too and then read my post I think all will be revealed.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is regarding ground or rolled ball screws in relation to the attached quotes?

Regards:)
Phil


I'm still learning also, so please excuse my lack of knowledge. Someone asked about getting a spindle, some bearings and switching over to a belt system a few weeks ago. And you suggested spending $550 on the tormach spindle cartridge which is R8 but $65 for a iso 30 spindle and $100 for bearings is too expensive? Am I missing something?





If this is the case, why use ground ballscrews (not talking about them being from China) instead of rolled? Will the proposed slight benefit be noticeable on these, as you put it, light weight mills?

IndHobby
12-13-2006, 11:56 AM
It’s the taper that determines the depth of the tool is every case. The flange should never contact the nose of the spindle. What makes it repeatable is the taper is a lot shallower than R8 plus there is a bigger contact area.

Runner4404spd
12-13-2006, 12:59 PM
the difference in the tapers between R8 and the ISO 30 is that the ISO 30 is solid and not used for clamping, therefore you get a repeatable positive metal to metal stop everytime. with R8 collets you tighten the drawbar and pull the collet further up into the head. this pulling will affect the z- measurement all the time.

philbur
12-13-2006, 01:39 PM
Hi Aaron, I think you are mistaken on the taper. A R8 taper has a 16.5 degree included angle. An ISO 30 has a 7:24 taper which gives an included angle of 16.26 degrees. This is confirmed by a visual comparison of the two. Interestingly the major diameter of the taper (the business end) in both cases is 1.25". So the only significant difference is the actual length of the taper, which is approximately twice that of the R8. In favour of the R8 is the fact that it is also supported at it top end, which makes the overall supported length twice that of the IOS 30. I'm not convinced that the increased taper length gives you any useful increase in Z-axis repeatability, especially when you take into account the actual repeatability of the z-axis itself, and the requirement for higher tolerance on the taper if its going to maintain contact over it entire length.

I will check the repeatability of the R8 when I get a chance. Also maybe I can come up with a set-up that will allow me to check the repeatability of the ISO 30 on my manual machine.

I have to say that when I lay the two along side each other, and look at the business part only, the ISO 30 doesn't look some much more impressive.

Regards
Phil



It’s the taper that determines the depth of the tool is every case. The flange should never contact the nose of the spindle. What makes it repeatable is the taper is a lot shallower than R8 plus there is a bigger contact area.

philbur
12-13-2006, 01:41 PM
Yes but the proposal is not to use collets but solid R8 tool holders in order to achieve some order of repeatability comparable with the ISO 30.

Regards
Phil


the difference in the tapers between R8 and the ISO 30 is that the ISO 30 is solid and not used for clamping, therefore you get a repeatable positive metal to metal stop everytime. with R8 collets you tighten the drawbar and pull the collet further up into the head. this pulling will affect the z- measurement all the time.

BobWarfield
12-13-2006, 01:57 PM
Poor Philbur. He has the ISO 30, but wants an R8. He wants it so badly he'll take anyone who has an R8 and wants an ISO 30 to task.

At this point, there does not seem to be much useful additional information being contributed, just back and forth on minor definitions.

Sorry you didn't get what you wanted, Philbur. I hope that ISO 30 didn't cost you too much extra.

BW

philbur
12-13-2006, 02:45 PM
More inaccurate information. My current machine has a R8, read the posts. The machine I am soon to sell has ISO 30. Wana buy it. Ill gives you a good price.

No additional useful information - for whom?

Minor definitions? - which post are you referring to.

The start of this thread said:
.............................................

ISO 30 Spindle - Anyone else see the following? What is your opinion on replacing the R8 spindle with this one?
............................................

I'm giving my opinion (and facts) on the subject of the thread, Your opinions appear to be getting personal?

Regards
Phil



Poor Philbur. He has the ISO 30, but wants an R8. He wants it so badly he'll take anyone who has an R8 and wants an ISO 30 to task.

At this point, there does not seem to be much useful additional information being contributed, just back and forth on minor definitions.

Sorry you didn't get what you wanted, Philbur. I hope that ISO 30 didn't cost you too much extra.

BW

Richards
12-13-2006, 04:39 PM
Phil,
I did a Google search on ISO 30 tools and got 775 hits. Not all of them were about ISO 30 tools, but a good percentage were. What is more important to me is that specific data about the ISO 30 tool holder was easily obtainable. I only spent an hour reading a small part of the available information, but that short time convinced me that installing the 30 spindle would be a major advantage over the R8, to me, even in a manual mill. What I'm looking for and what you're looking for in a tool holder may be completely different, so I won't list the advantages, as I see them; however, after a few minutes reading, you'll be able to decide whether the ISO 30 tooling would be an advantage over the tooling that you now use.

philbur
12-13-2006, 05:09 PM
Can you give a couple of the best links.

Regards
Phil


Phil,
I did a Google search on ISO 30 tools and got 775 hits. Not all of them were about ISO 30 tools, but a good percentage were. What is more important to me is that specific data about the ISO 30 tool holder was easily obtainable. I only spent an hour reading a small part of the available information, but that short time convinced me that installing the 30 spindle would be a major advantage over the R8, to me, even in a manual mill. What I'm looking for and what you're looking for in a tool holder may be completely different, so I won't list the advantages, as I see them; however, after a few minutes reading, you'll be able to decide whether the ISO 30 tooling would be an advantage over the tooling that you now use.

Richards
12-13-2006, 06:05 PM
Phil,
It's kind of like doing your own homework. If I do it for you, I get the benefit of looking and learning.

Just do a Google search of the words ISO 30 tools, or maybe, ISO 30 tool holders, and you'll get page after page of listings. On the first few pages of listings, using the search terms, ISO 30 tool holders, I found a technical guide, machine taper specifications, PDS Colombo information (the spindle that I use on my CNC router).

Back in 1967, when I first entered University, I was totally captivated by the large university library. Until that time, I had only visited small community libraries that were mostly filled with fiction. For the first time in my life, I could roam through acre after acre of books that gave almost unlimited information on any subject that I wanted to learn about. I spent every available minute in that library searching and reading and comparing information. Years later, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when the personal computer first became available and my interests turned to process control, I often drove 810 miles each way from my home in Salt Lake City, Utah to San Jose, California to browse the book stores that specialized in computers and computer science. It took a little effort and a little money, but getting the information was worth the trouble. Now, with the Internet, that huge university library and those specialized book stores look like the little quaint community libraries of my youth. Turn on your computer, wade in and start clicking.

BobWarfield
12-13-2006, 06:22 PM
http://www.thewarfields.com/img/Toys/MachineTools/CADDrawings/NMTB30/NMTB30R8Comp.jpg

Some advantages of NMTB 30 over R8 not yet mentioned:

- It is shorter, and hence may require less mill head motion to change tools. This may also be helpful if clearances are tight.

- Does away with the little drive pin used by R8. I fine this a pain to line up when I change tools. The big locators on the NMTB 30 flange are much easier to line up. Getting a tool change to work with that pin automatically on R8 would be painful.

- Tooling ejects without requiring a whack on the drawbar. Faster for manual changes, better for automatic changes.

- According to the second PM link below, it takes about 3/4 turn of the drawbar to tighten or eject an NMTB 30 holder. Fewer turns, no need for a hammer whack, no need to line up a drive pin, all adds up to faster manual changes even without a power drawbar.

When the question came up on PM, not one single poster recommended the R8 even though it was cheaper:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/1/9503.html?

RE alternate quick change systems:

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/1/8972.html?

Wherein people like Forrest Addy find aftermarket quickchange systems to be "marginal at best" for reasons of rigidity. Forrest goes on to say R8 is "barely adequate". If you look at the cost of these quick change systems vs $165 for this spindle and bearings, I can't see why that makes any sense at all. This is the post that says it takes 3/4 turn on the drawbar to drop the holder.

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/30/2217.html#000000

"If I had $15K to burn on a new mill, I would never go for R8" in response to the query R8 versus NMTB 30 or 40 for a new mill purchaser. No dissents.

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/30/1433.html#000020

"I would reccommend a #30 milling taper in some common variant (R-8 spindles are SO lame)"

"My thoughts too. Why on earth would you want a super mill that uses Model T toolholding?

The only redeeming factor for an R-8 spindle is the wide availability of tooling at low cost. Tooling a 30 Taper machine costs more because of the greater amount of material used to make the toolholder. For that same reason, those toolholders offer less deflection & greater accuracy than an R-8."

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/23427.html#000009

"R8 means lots of tooling available, but the holding power of the taper is just adequate for the machine. The NMTB30 is a more robust taper and will allow heavier cuts, but the tooling is a bit more expensive."

These posts just go on and on from machinists familiar with both tapers.

Philbur, not sure why you are so touchy, but I am glad to hear you do have an R8 machine after all and need not have the 30 taper darken your door for much longer.

I am at least equally as pleased that Aaron has made these spindles available at a reasonable price. I'm really looking forward to the upgrade.

Best,

BW

philbur
12-13-2006, 06:54 PM
Come on you know this is the same thing again. You say my reason for claiming ISO 30 is best is out there somewhere in 700 odd links. You use this argument to support your case, so give the references. Give me facts, don't tell me imy reasons are out there somewhere, go and look them it.

Jesus was black. If you google you will see I'm correct. Thats a no brainer.

Regards
Phil


Phil,
It's kind of like doing your own homework. If I do it for you, I get the benefit of looking and learning.

BobWarfield
12-13-2006, 07:38 PM
Come on you know this is the same thing again. You say my reason for claiming ISO 30 is best is out there somewhere in 700 odd links. You use this argument to support your case, so give the references. Give me facts, don't tell me imy reasons are out there somewhere, go and look them it.

Jesus was black. If you google you will see I'm correct. Thats a no brainer.

Regards
Phil

Why Phil, I thought you said you were here to learn? Go read some links. Learning to be had out there.

Sincerely,

BW

philbur
12-13-2006, 08:17 PM
Yes but which out of the 700 hundred. Give me a break.

Regards
Phil


Why Phil, I thought you said you were here to learn? Go read some links. Learning to be had out there.

Sincerely,

BW

Richards
12-13-2006, 08:23 PM
Phil,
You must be royalty. :) You might ask your manservant for help; however, if you want to learn something, be prepared to work for it. Knowledge is a treasure buried everywhere, including books, articles, data sheets, and web sites. Like any buried treasure, you're going to have to dig for it.

-Mike

philbur
12-13-2006, 08:25 PM
Well I’m glad you have at least made an attempt to return to a rational discussion, but a little bit dissapointed you still feel it is necessary to finish with a cheap shot. So lets discuss your rational points.

Firstly I have taken the liberty of modified your sketch to more clearly reflect the area under discussion. See below. The flange is only there to engage the dogs.

Secondly the thread is not “is ISO 30 better than R8” the thread is about should I bother to change my R8 for a ISO 30 bearing in mind I am not interested in the possibility of ATC.

Now lets discuss your specific points:

“- It is shorter, and hence may require less mill head motion to change tools. This may also be helpful if clearances are tight.”

Agreed but hardly a clincher.

“- Does away with the little drive pin used by R8. I fine this a pain to line up when I change tools. The big locators on the NMTB 30 flange are much easier to line up. “

Again agreed but still hardly a clincher. Actually if you note the orientation of the key-way when you remove a tool it’s not so difficult to align the next one.

Getting a tool change to work with that pin automatically on R8 would be painful.

Again agreed but not relevant in the context of the original post.

“- Tooling ejects without requiring a whack on the drawbar. Faster for manual changes”

My experience with ISO 30 is that it also needs a bit of a whack. This may go to tolerances on the taper for the cheaper varieties. It could cause an awful mess on an ATC carrousel. Sorry that’s out of context.

“better for automatic changes.”

Reference context.

“- According to the second PM link below, it takes about 3/4 turn of the drawbar to tighten or eject an NMTB 30 holder.”

Same turns for an R8 tool holder, but not collets I agree.

“Fewer turns, no need for a hammer whack, no need to line up a drive pin, all adds up to faster manual changes even without a power drawbar. “

See above. Also ISO does have a drive pin, actually 2, that require alignment.

“When the question came up on PM, not one single poster recommended the R8 even though it was cheaper:”

This on the surface seems like it might be a valid point. However these guys are generally talking about larger industrial machines. Did you ask them how many have a beloved bridgeport and how many had bothered to converted to ISO 30 and ditch their current tooling. This again goes to the context of the thread.

The only poster you quote that I accept un-questioned is Forrest Addy. However you chose to quote him out of context.

Your quote “Forrest goes on to say R8 is "barely adequate".

His post actually said “R8 spindle taper and the BP spindle and quill is barely adequate”. Which is not the same thing. The main point he was tying to make in the thread was that powered drawbars are the best addition you can make for quick tool changes. I agree. I have included his full post below.

“Those quick change tooling systems are very nice and convenient but remember that the R8 spindle taper and the BP spindle and quill is barely adequate as it is. Adding tooling extension reduces spindle tooling rigidity. The time you save in quick tool changes costs you in reduced stock removal.

If your milling workload has a lot of detail requiring many tool changes then these QC tooling systems can make you some money. Most shops that use them remove them for the stock removal tooling and replace them for the details cuts.

I've used many QC systems and found most worthy of modest praise only. I think by far the best time saveer on a milling machine besides a DRO is is a power drawbar. Push a button and boom! the tool falls in your hand.”

The rest of the posters that you put so much stock in are unknown to me. They give no reasons for their opinions and for all I know they are making similar assumptions as you made when you claimed the ISO 30 is supported on the flange. It starts to become like a religion. Everybody else believes, so it must be true. Also I see nobody advocating going to the trouble of converting from R8 to ISO 30, back to context.

I’m not sure it is worth saying more, so this is my last word on the subject.

Regards
Phil

BobWarfield
12-13-2006, 08:55 PM
I’m not sure it is worth saying more, so this is my last word on the subject.

Yeah Phil, I reached that conclusion some time back as I mentioned in a post this morning, but you raised further points and seemed to want to continue to gather information to learn from, so I thought I would oblige. I see that you have not gotten much learning from it, other than to find more things to disagree with. Sorry for that, but in the end, this thread seems more for the other folks than you anyway, since you have expressed a desire to leave the #30 taper world firmly behind.

We're going to have to differ on Forrest's quote. I think it's pretty clear and was not taken out of context. There are many more just like it expressing a view that R8 is a marginal taper on the Bridgeport.

Incidentally, the flange does contribute mass and rigidity to the holder, and if driven by dogs (which the IH spindle is set up to do) versus a little set screw pin, plays a role there as well, so I'll stick to my original drawing of the toolholder just as it comes. I see little instructive in your "revision".

I'm also not clear on why you think automatic toolchangers are out of context for a CNC forum or even this thread. Keeping the option open to build one would be a reason to adopt the NMTB 30 spindle. Anyone not interested can certainly discount it, but those who are interested will care and it is perfectly reasonable to discuss it for that reason.

Phil, I'm genuinely happy you've got what you want. Please be happy for those of us who are also getting what we want. Your days will be so much more pleasant if you try to be less confrontational with everyone. Merely because someone disagrees with you is no reason to go on the attack, particularly if you really are here to learn, which is what you've said.



Cheers,

BW

kimoyo
12-13-2006, 09:13 PM
I think you have misunderstood the context of the post that you quote.

The post that the quote was an answer too identified the Tormach drive system as a possible system the poster was interested in. I suggested nothing, I merely pointed out that he could buy the spindle for $550. I was trying to be helpful. In any case an IH spindle converted to ISO 30 would not have resolved his particular issues. If you read the post that I was replying too and then read my post I think all will be revealed.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is regarding ground or rolled ball screws in relation to the attached quotes?

Regards:)
Phil

The quote is from the thread "Belt Drive Spindle Possible?" in the IH forum. And the quote you were responding to was this.



If you can find a cartridge spindle with angular contact bearings I would do away with the gear head assembly and replace it with a 2 speed belt driven spindle and a 3 phase vfd controlled motor similar to the PCNC1100 spindle or a DC PWM controlled motor. The bearings in the original gear head will handle 3000 rpm ok; however, there isn't any provision for preload adjustment and a two bearing spindle is marginal in every way. The Gilman spindle Swede has would be perfect on an IH mill. If time is no issue and you or a good friend is a good machinist with a healthy bank account anything is possible.

Mike

Clearly, Mike was talking about upgrading the IH spindle and converting the IH mill to belt driven because that's what he said. He didn't say I want to buy a tormach or I'm interested in a tormach like you just said. It was in response to this message



I would love to convert the whole head assembly to a Cat 30 spindle belt driven by a servo motor thru a VFD (kind of like a HAAS). Skip the quill and counterbalance the head for easy up/down movement. Maybe relocate the hand crank? It would only help for the eventual conversion to CNC. It may take me a couple years, but I will come up with something as the current amount of slop is not tolerable.

Which was also talking about an IH mill, which makes sense because the thread was about doing a belt drive conversion on an IH mill. Its also exactly what some of us are talking about in this thread, converting to ISO 30 and belt driven. You responded in that thread about converting an IH mill head in the IH forum buy suggesting he buy a tormach head for $550 and put it on an IH mill, lol. Now you say in this thread that $165 is too expensive for a better spindle :). This seems very contradictory.

ger21
12-13-2006, 09:35 PM
Can we please try to stay on topic here.

DiscretePID
12-15-2006, 05:46 PM
BW, let me play devil's advocate first... the quotes you listed above are all opinions - good information and food for thought, but opinions nonetheless. To me, they prove the point no better or worse than the opinions expressed here from either camp.

Now, if I could find some objective data like: "ISO30 is 43% stiffer laterally at the tool holder base than R8", then that would make it onto the "advantage" column instead of mere personal "preference" in my book.

Having said all that, I must say I agree with your thought process on buying the ISO spindle and bearings. I might just do the same because... well, because I'm a tinkerer. I think most here are. $65 spindle + $100 bearings just seem like a good excuse to start a tinkering project. Sometimes, comprehensive analytical justification is just not a prerequisite for tinkering.

I had wanted to do a belt drive conversion to my ZAY7045, but decided it would cost too much and put my mill out of commission too long. Your idea of machining another head to mount the ISO30 spindle sounds like the most logical way to take advantage of this deal. Hurry up and do it so I can copy ya!

Willbird
12-15-2006, 11:05 PM
The flange as originally intended does NOT locate the tool. HOWEVER they DO make a setup that blueprints everything so it does bear on the flage for CAT tooling, this makes the system more rigid and allows use of lomger milling and boring tools. You COULD do that with r8 too..but the downfall of any such system is the bearings that support the spindle.

If the ISO 30 has a bigger more robust bearing pack it will be more rigid...looking at the spindle however, if it had a smaller hole (r8) it would be even more rigid :-)

no doubt about it the iso30 SHOULD control a tool better than an R8, it looks to have a lot longer register distance on the tool. One could not have EITHER the OD, or the ID grinding done for the $65.00, let alone both, and the rough machine, and the heat treat, and the spline.

it's a steal at $65 even if all you do with it is look at it on your desk :-)


Bill

BobWarfield
12-15-2006, 11:38 PM
I've started a belt drive worklog and notes page:

http://www.thewarfields.com/MT/CCMillBeltDrive.html

It's just sketches and notes at the moment:

http://www.thewarfields.com/img/Toys/MachineTools/CADDrawings/NMTB30/MillHeadGhost.jpg

http://www.thewarfields.com/img/Toys/MachineTools/CADDrawings/NMTB30/MillHeadCartPullMot.jpg

http://www.thewarfields.com/img/Toys/MachineTools/CADDrawings/NMTB30/MillHeadSpindCart.jpg

Lots more research to be done. I've decided that if I want to achieve the greater potential of the #30 taper, I'll probably have to spend for a more sophisticated bearing package. Hence the sketches are based around a duplex pair of AC bearings at the bottom. Quite a bit more expensive than what Aaron spec'd.

I also opted for a cartridge design because I think its easier to achieve the necessary precision machining a cylinder. Dimensions are chosen for 3 1/2" OD x 5/8" wall DOM, which is readily available.

Lots of research and fooling around needed before any chips will fly. I am happy to report that my powered drawbar continues to move along nicely. I hope to get it installed before leaving for Christmas vacation. If not, it'll be early next year. The IH mill cuts really nice. More rigidity and spindle speed would make for quite a mill once CNC'd.

Best,

BW

kochevnik
12-16-2006, 01:03 AM
-
I have a Tormach with the R8 spindle cartridge - and I am considering changing it to the ISO 30 so that down the road I could build a simple ATC. I have the Tormach Tooling but I think it would be quite a bear to get it to work in an ATC system.

Has anyone here had any experience changing a cartridge spindle system ? What kinds of pitfalls should I be looking for ?

Any ideas on how I could tell whether or not Aaron's spindle would fit in my Tormach ?

And doesn't CAT 30 tooling have a retention knob on the top ? This looks like the drawbar screws right into the top of the end mill holder where the retention knob goes ? (Or am I an idiot and missing something completely obvious ?)

Also, I noticed Tormach has a BT30 spindle cartridge mentioned in their manual, I'm assuming this would work well for an ATC design, the problem would be finding BT30 tooling for a reasonable price, right ?

Sorry for all the questions, just trying to feel my way around in the dark here :)

Willbird
12-16-2006, 06:20 AM
The retention knob is a modular acessory, there are at least 3 types in common use, and many many other types out there. So you can take the ret stud out and simply thread a drawbar into where it was, the NTB-30 threads are purpose desiigned for a drawbar I'd think, tha CAT holders on the other hand the threads were not purpose designed for that use(drawbar) ..so will they wear excessively ?? One thing that comes to mind is there might be enough room dia wise to use a threaded bushing that you could change as it became worn, thus the threads in your holder would not wear out. To be honest I have seen drawbars get stripped and worn but do not recall ever having an R8 collet or a holder's threads wear out even in daily use with a power drawbar.

Another idea to throw in the mix is the devlieg flash changer.


Billhttp://cgi.ebay.com/DeVlieg-Flash-Change-40-Taper-3-8-End-Mill-Holder_W0QQitemZ130058514671QQihZ003QQcategoryZ45019QQcmdZViewItem

I have used these in the 50 size and they repeat very accurately, and I have ran 2" HSS endmills with them on a boring mill, they are very rigid.....they would require the spindle to stick out of the head further....BUT you could use the flash on some stuff and normal holders with a drawbar when you wanted to.

The other posibility is to drill and tap the FACE of the spindle to allow bolting a cutter directly to it, many horizontal mills and hydrotels were made this way, ends up a very short rigid solid deal for just slab milling

philbur
12-16-2006, 09:23 AM
The tolereance on the gauge line for both NMTB type spindles tapers and toolholder tapers appears to be + or - 0.015" on each. So there are a number of potential problems with blue printing.

1) You would have to blue print every toolholder as well as the spindle.
2) If you were unlucky your standard spindle and tool holders would require material to be added in order to blue print.
3) The tool holder flange face would require precision grinding.
4) I think the precision necessary to ensure the 7/24 taper and the flange "come up" together may be tight in the extreme.

I would suggest that if you plan to use the flange of an 7/24 NMTB taper as a part of the location system that you dig out the tolerance specs for something like the HSK system and evaluate if you are able to duplicate or do better on a NMTB taper. I think the 1:10 taper of the HSK system may be the key to achieving the tolerances necessary for dual contact.

This link makes some very interesting initial reading.

http://www.mmsonline.com/articles/100105.html

Regards
Phil



The flange as originally intended does NOT locate the tool. HOWEVER they DO make a setup that blueprints everything so it does bear on the flage for CAT tooling, this makes the system more rigid and allows use of lomger milling and boring tools. You COULD do that with r8 too...

Bill

BobWarfield
12-16-2006, 11:20 AM
In the end, I think a useful key to repeatability on a home built machine with cheap toolholders is going to be a tool touchsetter. It's straightforward to tie one back into Mach 3 and it eliminates the need to fuss with presetting the tool or worry about how closely your toolchanger and taper system can repeat. Just write your toolchange macro so it touches off the toolsetter to establish what's really going on.

For those looking to do some experiments, it seems relatively straightforward to take this radial stiffness measure between two spindles with a toolholder and either a reference rod in the holder. You just need a dial indicator to measure the deflection and a consistent means of applying sideways force. It would be quite interesting to see these figures even across different mills with the same taper system. At the top of this page are measurements for a Bridgeport VMC (not an R8 Bridgie as most think of them!):

http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/455492

Radial stiffness is quoted as: 60 lbf/0.00004 in

That same Bridgeport, BTW, has 4 angular contact bearings on the driven end of each ballscrew and 3 on the floating end. The ballscrews are 32mm in diameter. The spindle is running 4 angular contact bearings at the nose and a single roller bearing at the rear.

http://www.jitsupplygroup.com/machinery/cncc.pdf

Compare and contrast that to some of these low end machines and conversions!

Best,

BW

Richards
12-16-2006, 11:46 AM
I agree with Bob. Once a mill has CNC controls, using a touch sensor eliminates the axial variable. Then it comes down to whether the ISO-30 or the R8 is better radially. I'm still wading through web sites to find reputable tests that show why it would be better to switch from an ISO-30 to an R8. So far, 100% of the recommendations have been just the opposite, to switch from R8 to ISO-30 (or ISO-40 or ISO-50).

No matter what piece of equipment we use, we have to work within the limits of that piece of equipment. Debating endlessly whether something is the 'best' has never been a hobby horse that I like to ride. On the other hand, overlooking serious flaws, because they can be 'worked around', when there is a better solution, isn't very pratical either.

Until I add CNC to my IH, the question is mute. Handcranking gives me immediate feedback on how the cut is progessing. The closed-loop system between my fingers and my ancient brain still works well enough that I can compensate.

philbur
12-16-2006, 12:39 PM
Hi Bob, I'm sure you will think I am attacking you again but that is not the case and you should not take it as such.

The stiffness figure you quote is for the spindle not the complete machine.

.........................start quote..............................
Further, the exclusive, German-built SKF spindle is twice as stiff as those on competitively classed machines. Its radial stiffness is 60 lbf./0.00004”, axial stiffness is 70 lbf./0.00004”.
........................ end quote.......................

Whether you can detect the relative stiffness of different spindle arrangments will depend on the overall machine stiffness. Stiff machines benifit from stiff spindles, whereas stiff spindles may be a waste of time and effort on a not so stiff machine.

Where the IH, Tormach or any other RF45 type machine fits in this scheme of things with respect to useful spindle stiffness is what is interesting.

Regards
Phil





In the end, I think a useful key to repeatability on a home built machine with cheap toolholders is going to be a tool touchsetter. It's straightforward to tie one back into Mach 3 and it eliminates the need to fuss with presetting the tool or worry about how closely your toolchanger and taper system can repeat. Just write your toolchange macro so it touches off the toolsetter to establish what's really going on.

For those looking to do some experiments, it seems relatively straightforward to take this radial stiffness measure between two spindles with a toolholder and either a reference rod in the holder. You just need a dial indicator to measure the deflection and a consistent means of applying sideways force. It would be quite interesting to see these figures even across different mills with the same taper system. At the top of this page are measurements for a Bridgeport VMC (not an R8 Bridgie as most think of them!):

http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/455492

Radial stiffness is quoted as: 60 lbf/0.00004 in

That same Bridgeport, BTW, has 4 angular contact bearings on the driven end of each ballscrew and 3 on the floating end. The ballscrews are 32mm in diameter. The spindle is running 4 angular contact bearings at the nose and a single roller bearing at the rear.

http://www.jitsupplygroup.com/machinery/cncc.pdf

Compare and contrast that to some of these low end machines and conversions!

Best,

BW

philbur
12-16-2006, 01:21 PM
This raises an interesting point. A person could easily measure the static stiffness of various parts of his machine, including vertical and horizontal and slop in the ways/gib adjustment, in order to determine where best to direct their attention with respect to improving overall machine stiffness.

If a set of standard tests were defined then quantitative comparison between machines would be possible and a person would be able to see if they have room to improve in a particular area compared to what others have achieved. This would remove the subjectiveness of current comparisons over the net.

Regards
Phil


Hi Bob, I'm sure you will think I am attacking you again but that is not the case and you should not take it as such.

The stiffness figure you quote is for the spindle not the complete machine.

.........................start quote..............................
Further, the exclusive, German-built SKF spindle is twice as stiff as those on competitively classed machines. Its radial stiffness is 60 lbf./0.00004”, axial stiffness is 70 lbf./0.00004”.
........................ end quote.......................

Whether you can detect the relative stiffness of different spindle arrangments will depend on the overall machine stiffness. Stiff machines benifit from stiff spindles, whereas stiff spindles may be a waste of time and effort on a not so stiff machine.

Where the IH, Tormach or any other RF45 type machine fits in this scheme of things with respect to useful spindle stiffness is what is interesting.

Regards
Phil

BobWarfield
12-16-2006, 02:15 PM
Hi Bob, I'm sure you will think I am attacking you again but that is not the case and you should not take it as such.

The stiffness figure you quote is for the spindle not the complete machine.

.........................start quote..............................
Further, the exclusive, German-built SKF spindle is twice as stiff as those on competitively classed machines. Its radial stiffness is 60 lbf./0.00004”, axial stiffness is 70 lbf./0.00004”.
........................ end quote.......................

Whether you can detect the relative stiffness of different spindle arrangments will depend on the overall machine stiffness. Stiff machines benifit from stiff spindles, whereas stiff spindles may be a waste of time and effort on a not so stiff machine.

Where the IH, Tormach or any other RF45 type machine fits in this scheme of things with respect to useful spindle stiffness is what is interesting.

Regards
Phil

I agree completely, hence my comment, "It would be quite interesting to see these figures even across different mills with the same taper system."

In fact, it would be interesting to understand a deflection stiffness for a lot of individual parts of mills such as the column itself. It should be possible to tie it all together to find the weak points if you're seeking to tune up a mill.

Meanwhile, having an overall figure is an interesting way to compare mills. Somewhere I have seen an interesting test that was done using cuts with the mill. I saved it away somewhare. I believe it was an MMS article that specified a technique to find the highest chatter free feeds and speeds in a systematic way for a particular cutter. Applying that methodology to a variety of mills and tapers would also be interesting data.

Lastly, I have commented more than once that it would be quite worthwhile to run through the Tormach QA certification on a variety of mills and see what the results there would be too.

Data is always a good thing, and darned hard to come by, versus opinion, which is very easy to come by!

Best,

BW

IndHobby
12-16-2006, 04:42 PM
At a car show the quickest way to start a fist fight is to start an argument about if Ford or Chevy is a “better” make of car.

At a Machinist convention, the quickest way is to start an argument is about Hardinge or Monarch lathes.

And here, which taper is “better” R8 or ISO 30.

“Better” is a loose term, ambiguous at best. Each has advantages and disadvantages.

I sell both, I have both, I like both.

2 complete sets of tooling, 2 of everything.

Why? Because each has its place.

R8 works better on custom setups, one off operations, on my old mill I do mostly custom mill modifications, each setup is special. The work is always unique and the tooling varies quite a bit. R8 provides a lot of flexibility in the setup. Collets are quick and easy, you can put a drill bit in a collet and get good rigidity (for example), and then switch over to a fly cutter while using the same collet (both 3/4”). The work is custom, it is ok it takes few minutes to change over and re-zero.

On my production mill, ISO wins, I know exactly what I’m making each time. I do not re-zero during the entire production run of 8 hours and 48 tool changes. Changes take about 1 minute (or less) and repeatability is second to none. The tooling cost more, but I save the time and get more parts produced.

Purpose; is what it all comes down to. What is the purpose?

Insofar as which is more rigid? ISO wins hands down in my book. The contact area of the taper is what maters, ISO 30 has 2-3 times the contact of the R8. The rear shank of the R8 doesn’t matter as there is a few thou gap for clearance in there. In a perfect world is will not even be touching on the sides up near the top. It is touches equally (ie perfect fit) you run the risk of the collet getting stuck in the spindle after operation because of heat expansion. That will only happen once in every shop I’ve seen, they will make it so the collet comes out.

Taping it with a wrench is not the top of the collet binding, is overcoming the taper/compression lock. Beating it with a sledge hammer is heat bind. (been there...once).

Back to the R8, if it touches only on one side at the top, (not sure how this will happen) the end mill will wobble.


Often it comes down to the creation, the origin of a product that defines its purpose.

ISO stands for:

Industry
Standards
Organization

And is made up of bunches of people from each field of expertise and they give up time (for free) to make the world a better place for manufacturing and consumers. Then they publish those standards. You cannot copyright or patent a “standard”, but you can produce it without any royalty charge.

Basically, these masters in a field of expertise give their time for free (often they pay hotel expenses and flights and out of pocket by themselves), for the honor and privilege to determine how the “world” should do something. It is done out of respect for the industry. If you are on an ISO team you ARE the best of the best.

R8 is NOT an ISO standard, it will never be because it endorses a particular manufacturer. It was designed by a group of people to make a profit, from direct sales or royalties. It has become a ‘de facto’ industry standard, patents have long expired. Anyone can produce it.

Now here is the fun part, companies have engineers, engineers do NOT make decisions, marketing departments make decisions, marketing guys are not engineers. Their job is to market, to make money, the more the better.

Bridgeport gained popularity during WWII, Bridgeport sold the best (least affordable) knee mill in the country. We needed a lot of them. They came with collets that were made by the same company. More money, more collets, single vendor.. Bridgeport.

The war ended, people (machinists) in general buy what they know, Bridgeport. Good or bad doesn’t matter. Buy what you know.

Tada, a de facto standard is born. It only took, one marketing department, one war, and what ? 55 million dead?

You have to remember during WWII the United States produced more machinery and more heavy equipment then was EVER produced up until that time. We out produced the entire world and all of history up until then. That is a HUGE achievement.

So the R8 has earned its respect, but it is not the better tool, it is the better marketed tool.

Their lies the difference.

philbur
12-16-2006, 08:49 PM
ISO actual stands for "International Organization for Standardization". These types of committees are normally populate by professionals from organizations that have a vested interest and whose time and costs are paid for by those organizations. Nice story though.

Regards
Phil




ISO stands for:

Industry
Standards
Organization

And is made up of bunches of people from each field of expertise and they give up time (for free) to make the world a better place for manufacturing and consumers. Then they publish those standards. You cannot copyright or patent a “standard”, but you can produce it without any royalty charge.

Basically, these masters in a field of expertise give their time for free (often they pay hotel expenses and flights and out of pocket by themselves), for the honor and privilege to determine how the “world” should do something. It is done out of respect for the industry. If you are on an ISO team you ARE the best of the best.

Richards
12-16-2006, 09:47 PM
Phil,
ISO is a non-governmental organization whose responsibility is to verify that proposed standards have been given due process before being recognized as standards. Edited: As Aaron pointed out, ISO-30 is a standard recognized world-wide while R8 is not recognized by ISO.

"International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a non-governmental global organization established in 1947 that works to develop standards across goods and services."
www.softsite.org/copydvd/glossary/

"ISO (International Standards Organization) is the International Standards Organizations. They do not create standards but (as with ANSI) provide a means of verifying that a proposed standard has met certain requirements for due process, consensus, and other criteria by those developing the standard."
www.orafaq.com/glossary/faqglosi.htm

"International Standards Organization: An organization established to develop standards to facilitate the international exchanges of goods and services and to develop mutual cooperation in areas of intellectual, scientific, technological, and economic activity."
www.sivideo.com/9pcterms.htm

-Mike

philbur
12-16-2006, 10:06 PM
Yes I know. Nt sure what your point is though.

Try the the horses mouth:

http://www.iso.org/iso/en/aboutiso/introduction/index.html#nineteen.

This is a small exstract:

"ISO standards are developed by technical committees comprising experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use. These experts may be joined by others with relevant knowledge, such as representatives of government agencies, testing laboratories, consumer associations, environmentalists, academic circles and so on."

The ISO organization is just the facilitator, industry produces the actual standard.

I hope that is clearer for you.:)

Regards
Phil


Phil,
ISO is a non-governmental organization whose responsibility is to verify that proposed standards have been given due process before being recognized as standards. Edited: As Aaron pointed out, ISO-30 is a standard recognized world-wide while R8 is not recognized by ISO.

"International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a non-governmental global organization established in 1947 that works to develop standards across goods and services."
www.softsite.org/copydvd/glossary/

"ISO (International Standards Organization) is the International Standards Organizations. They do not create standards but (as with ANSI) provide a means of verifying that a proposed standard has met certain requirements for due process, consensus, and other criteria by those developing the standard."
www.orafaq.com/glossary/faqglosi.htm

"International Standards Organization: An organization established to develop standards to facilitate the international exchanges of goods and services and to develop mutual cooperation in areas of intellectual, scientific, technological, and economic activity."
www.sivideo.com/9pcterms.htm

-Mike

Willbird
12-16-2006, 10:58 PM
To be fair, there were competing knee mills to Bridgeports, and some offered a few things like longer quill travel and a powered knee (Wells Index maybe?)...but none of them IMHO offered the same balance of strength and fitness that the BP does, the only thing that ever really competed with it is cheap foriegn copies of itself, "Millport" being one of the first ones, made on stolen bridgeport patterns, the castinf said "bridgeport" right on them and they riveted a sheet metal cover over that that said "millport" on it. Now we have copies of copies out there.

The smaller machines like you made (not to lump cheap junk in with your machines) hit a niche market of guys that cannot afford or do not have room for a full sized machine.

My two bridgeports may Dad bought new, one in 1972 for $2500, one in 1982 for AROUND $6000, 34 and 24 years later both machines are still mechanically sound, and I can but any part of them as far as I know if needed and MOST if not all parts between the 72 and the 82 are exactly the same........even amoung american iron that is an outstanding design IMHO.

Even Bridgeport didnt use an R8 to start off :-)..they like most other machine tool mfg. developed what they needed, Brown nd Sharp is one example that used non standard threads and tapers on it's prodcut, there is NO reason for a 3/4-12 thread like they used on some screw machine parts like the nut that holds a gear onto a shaft...other than making things so the guy HAS to buy BS parts :-).

Looking at the other tapers used in knee mills at the time the R8 came out none of them are remotely as nice to use, and in fact some just plain SUCK if your used to how nice an R8 actually works out day to day.

I do agree the ISO-30 offers something.......

The other taper in that size range that is finding some use in industry is ER32, they are making more and more crap to go into an er-32 and other er holders that is not a collet as such, tap holders, heat sjring holders, etc.

One other one that could be used but may be impractical is capto. It is very rigid and would work with a drawbar.

Bill






Bridgeport gained popularity during WWII, Bridgeport sold the best (least affordable) knee mill in the country. We needed a lot of them. They came with collets that were made by the same company. More money, more collets, single vendor.. Bridgeport.

The war ended, people (machinists) in general buy what they know, Bridgeport. Good or bad doesn’t matter. Buy what you know.

Tada, a de facto standard is born. It only took, one marketing department, one war, and what ? 55 million dead?

You have to remember during WWII the United States produced more machinery and more heavy equipment then was EVER produced up until that time. We out produced the entire world and all of history up until then. That is a HUGE achievement.

So the R8 has earned its respect, but it is not the better tool, it is the better marketed tool.

Their lies the difference.

Willbird
12-16-2006, 11:04 PM
The system to draw up on the flange of a CAT holder is already in place, the idea is surely not mine...it's right in the Parlec catalog :-)

one thing the steep taper offers is that it has some tolerance for sloppy worn tool holders...which to some extant become part of any high speed high production environment.

The HSK system may make some inroads, but I'd bet my $$ that you will have to look long and hard in even 10 years to find it in a shop local to you :-)....The small co. I work for probably has 10,000 or MORE CAT50 holders now and thats a co. with 100 employees and 3 plants...any machine other than cat50 is going to be a hard sell.



The tolereance on the gauge line for both NMTB type spindles tapers and toolholder tapers appears to be + or - 0.015" on each. So there are a number of potential problems with blue printing.

1) You would have to blue print every toolholder as well as the spindle.
2) If you were unlucky your standard spindle and tool holders would require material to be added in order to blue print.
3) The tool holder flange face would require precision grinding.
4) I think the precision necessary to ensure the 7/24 taper and the flange "come up" together may be tight in the extreme.

I would suggest that if you plan to use the flange of an 7/24 NMTB taper as a part of the location system that you dig out the tolerance specs for something like the HSK system and evaluate if you are able to duplicate or do better on a NMTB taper. I think the 1:10 taper of the HSK system may be the key to achieving the tolerances necessary for dual contact.

This link makes some very interesting initial reading.

http://www.mmsonline.com/articles/100105.html

Regards
Phil

philbur
12-16-2006, 11:32 PM
If you are talking about the "Simul-Fit System/Dual Contact Taper Shrink Fit CAT Holder with plate assembly" it looks to me like a precision spacer is added to each tool holder flange to adjust for the gauge line tolerance. Which is a kinda material added solution as I indicated in my last post. The standard CAT however still has the gauge line tolerance issue to deal with.

Regards
Phil


The system to draw up on the flange of a CAT holder is already in place, the idea is surely not mine...it's right in the Parlec catalog :-)

philbur
12-16-2006, 11:53 PM
I may have missed your point. It does seem to show that the dual contact concept is possible with a 7/24 taper. How well it works would depend on what standard you are able to excecute the modification. The precision spacer arrangement would also suggest that you would possibly not need to modify the spindle.

Regards
Phil


The system to draw up on the flange of a CAT holder is already in place, the idea is surely not mine...it's right in the Parlec catalog :-)

one thing the steep taper offers is that it has some tolerance for sloppy worn tool holders...which to some extant become part of any high speed high production environment.

The HSK system may make some inroads, but I'd bet my $$ that you will have to look long and hard in even 10 years to find it in a shop local to you :-)....The small co. I work for probably has 10,000 or MORE CAT50 holders now and thats a co. with 100 employees and 3 plants...any machine other than cat50 is going to be a hard sell.

Willbird
12-17-2006, 12:03 AM
I have not seen any system like that in actual use, I read about it years ago in a mag like metalfax, and happened to notice the other day that it was in the parlec catalog. I do understand from reading that it takes some tweaking to make sure it works, and I would think it may only get used on tools in the program that benefit from it, while other stuff like say a #7 drill tap drill for 1/4-20 would use a normal non flange contact holder. In the real world of machine shops the deal is probably too finiscky to work well.............it's primary benefit originally was aimed at preventing the taper from wedging deeper into the spindle at high rpm and long duration tool runs. This is noticed more on machines that to not have a good knockout built right into the tool retention plan, I have seen some machines that had a 2lb deadblow right there to wack tools stuck in the spindle from that :-). On the OKK HM80S we have the only time tools stick is if the knockout is not set up right. For the home shop cnc deal you really could simply install a couple setscrews(in the fnalge of the offending holders) properly adjusted and locked down to prevent the tool from sucking deeper into the spindle and being a bear to remove without a slap to the drawbar. This is more of an issue with spindles that are a bit dainty too, thin out at the exit of the taper.


Bill

Richards
12-17-2006, 09:19 AM
Phil,
My post was basically to support and expand on your post: "These types of committees are normally populate by professionals from organizations that have a vested interest and whose time and costs are paid for by those organizations."

The reference that you cited: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/aboutiso/i....html#nineteen. has two sections that answer WHO developes ISO standards and HOW those standanrds are impremented.

"Who develops ISO standards

ISO standards are developed by technical committees comprising experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use. These experts may be joined by others with relevant knowledge, such as representatives of government agencies, testing laboratories, consumer associations, environmentalists, academic circles and so on. The experts participate as national delegations, chosen by the ISO national member institute for the country concerned. These delegations are required to represent not just the views of the organizations in which their participating experts work, but of other stakeholders too. According to ISO rules, the member institute is expected to take account of the views of the range of parties interested in the standard under development and to present a consolidated, national consensus position to the technical committee.


How ISO standards are developed

The national delegations of experts of a technical committee meet to discuss, debate and argue until they reach consensus on a draft agreement. This is then circulated as a Draft International Standard (DIS) to ISO's membership as a whole for comment and balloting. Many members have public review procedures for making draft standards known and available to interested parties and to the general public. The ISO members then take account of any feedback they receive in formulating their position on the draft standard. If the voting is in favour, the document, with eventual modifications, is circulated to the ISO members as a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS). If that vote is positive, the document is then published as an International Standard."

Bottom line - the specifications for ISO 30 tooling - the tooling that this thread is all about - went through the ISO process and is now accepted world-wide as tooling that has been (1) examined by experts on a technical committee, (2) debated and argued by those experts, (3) voted on by ISO members, and (4) published as a world-wide standard. Others have already done the work for us. All we have to do is to decide whether it is worth $65 to purchase the spindle so that we can start building a replacement for our current R8 spindles.

-Mike

philbur
12-17-2006, 09:47 AM
Well thank you Mike.

Just one final passing thought. You have probably heard the phrase:

"It must have been designed by a committee".

To bring it back to where we started. I have never claimed that the R8 provides for a stiffer set-up or that ISO30 is not an appropriate conversion if you are intent on fitting an ATC. The starting point was: Does it warrant the time, cost and effort to replace an R8 spindle (and tooling) on an RF45 type mill, bearing in mind the overall stiffness of the machine. Perhaps we need an ISO standard for RF45 type machines.

Regards
Phil



Phil,
My post was basically to support and expand on your post: "These types of committees are normally populate by professionals from organizations that have a vested interest and whose time and costs are paid for by those organizations."

The reference that you cited: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/aboutiso/i....html#nineteen. has two sections that answer WHO developes ISO standards and HOW those standanrds are impremented.

"Who develops ISO standards

ISO standards are developed by technical committees comprising experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use. These experts may be joined by others with relevant knowledge, such as representatives of government agencies, testing laboratories, consumer associations, environmentalists, academic circles and so on. The experts participate as national delegations, chosen by the ISO national member institute for the country concerned. These delegations are required to represent not just the views of the organizations in which their participating experts work, but of other stakeholders too. According to ISO rules, the member institute is expected to take account of the views of the range of parties interested in the standard under development and to present a consolidated, national consensus position to the technical committee.


How ISO standards are developed

The national delegations of experts of a technical committee meet to discuss, debate and argue until they reach consensus on a draft agreement. This is then circulated as a Draft International Standard (DIS) to ISO's membership as a whole for comment and balloting. Many members have public review procedures for making draft standards known and available to interested parties and to the general public. The ISO members then take account of any feedback they receive in formulating their position on the draft standard. If the voting is in favour, the document, with eventual modifications, is circulated to the ISO members as a Final Draft International Standard (FDIS). If that vote is positive, the document is then published as an International Standard."

Bottom line - the specifications for ISO 30 tooling - the tooling that this thread is all about - went through the ISO process and is now accepted world-wide as tooling that has been (1) examined by experts on a technical committee, (2) debated and argued by those experts, (3) voted on by ISO members, and (4) published as a world-wide standard. Others have already done the work for us. All we have to do is to decide whether it is worth $65 to purchase the spindle so that we can start building a replacement for our current R8 spindles.

-Mike

Richards
12-17-2006, 10:52 AM
Phil,
I think that we're coming to a concensus here using a process much like the ISO people. Someone posed the question about whether the ISO-30 spindle that Aaron is offering would be a good replacement for the R8 spindle that ships with the machine. You added your input about Automatic Tool Changers. Many others gave their opinions about the merites of ISO-30 tooling vs R8. Bob Warfield submitted some preliminary designs about how he would implement the change-over. Rebuttals were made. Tempers may have flared once or twice, but, in the end, the overall tone is that for $65 for the bare spindle - not including bearings or modifications to the IH mill - ISO-30 tooling would be a worthwhile conversion in a non-ATC environment. (I believe that you are the only expert on the committee that has taken a stand on ATC - perhaps another thread should be started where ATC tooling is debated.) So, this 'committee" of "experts" (at least in our own minds) has reviewed and debated the issue. All that is left is the voting.

I vote to recommend that Aaron's $65 spindle be regarded as a worthwhile addition to the IH mill for those looking for something that meets ISO standards.

-Mike

philbur
12-17-2006, 11:13 AM
Go for it. Let us know how you get on.

I don't think tempers flared. I would prefer to call it a passionate debate. They are invariably the most interesting. Differing opinions always produce the best results.

Regards
Phil



Phil,
I think that we're coming to a concensus here using a process much like the ISO people. Someone posed the question about whether the ISO-30 spindle that Aaron is offering would be a good replacement for the R8 spindle that ships with the machine. You added your input about Automatic Tool Changers. Many others gave their opinions about the merites of ISO-30 tooling vs R8. Bob Warfield submitted some preliminary designs about how he would implement the change-over. Rebuttals were made. Tempers may have flared once or twice, but, in the end, the overall tone is that for $65 for the bare spindle - not including bearings or modifications to the IH mill - ISO-30 tooling would be a worthwhile conversion in a non-ATC environment. (I believe that you are the only expert on the committee that has taken a stand on ATC - perhaps another thread should be started where ATC tooling is debated.) So, this 'committee" of "experts" (at least in our own minds) has reviewed and debated the issue. All that is left is the voting.

I vote to recommend that Aaron's $65 spindle be regarded as a worthwhile addition to the IH mill for those looking for something that meets ISO standards.

-Mike

philbur
12-17-2006, 06:46 PM
An R8 spindle in action.

http://www.tormach.com/MfgDatabase/MFG_20102.wmv

It's a 25 megabyte file but quite impressive. Im sure an ISO30 would have been equally impressive on a machine of this size.

Regards
Phil

BobWarfield
12-17-2006, 08:08 PM
As R8 demonstrations on machines of that size go, I found this one to be more interesting:

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/sample_part/sample_part.mpg

That's inch and a half aluminum. OTOH, it may have been a #30 taper since spindles are available for both.

Phil, you must have some pictures of things you've made on your Tormach mill. Share some. I've had a hard time tracking anything down since the mill is so new. Mayhugh's turner's cubes were nice on the Yahoo Group.

Best,

BW

philbur
12-17-2006, 08:46 PM
Very nice. Is it a R8 or ISO30 spindle.

Regards
Phil



As R8 demonstrations on machines of that size go, I found this one to be more interesting:

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/sample_part/sample_part.mpg

That's inch and a half aluminum. OTOH, it may have been a #30 taper since spindles are available for both.

Phil, you must have some pictures of things you've made on your Tormach mill. Share some. I've had a hard time tracking anything down since the mill is so new. Mayhugh's turner's cubes were nice on the Yahoo Group.

Best,

BW

wildcat
12-17-2006, 09:06 PM
An R8 spindle in action.

http://www.tormach.com/MfgDatabase/MFG_20102.wmv

It's a 25 megabyte file but quite impressive.


Wow! The Tormach sliced through that plate like butter... now I wonder how many steps were lost in the process...

Sorry but I had to say it :)

wildcat
12-17-2006, 09:12 PM
Very nice. Is it a R8 or ISO30 spindle.

Regards
Phil

Don't think it is ever explicitly stated. However, he is clearly not using an R8 in the following:

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/howto/production_notes/height_gauge/height_gauge_pt2.htm

Also, here is the support page for the video that Bob posted with some details

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/sample_part_1.htm

philbur
12-17-2006, 09:32 PM
If its slices like butter possibly none.

Regards
Phil


Wow! The Tormach sliced through that plate like butter... now I wonder how many steps were lost in the process...

Sorry but I had to say it :)

philbur
12-17-2006, 09:37 PM
I think it would be bad practice to use one spindle type for the videos and then sell the machine with a different spindle.

Regards
Phil



Don't think it is ever explicitly stated. However, he is clearly not using an R8 in the following:

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/howto/production_notes/height_gauge/height_gauge_pt2.htm

Also, here is the support page for the video that Bob posted with some details

http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/sample_part_1.htm

Willbird
12-17-2006, 10:13 PM
The Tormach video is done with a roughing endmill, lets see them do that with a 4 flute finisher :-).

I do know from running FADALS which are limited as to the spindle and general machine rigidity that you can pull things off with a corncob that would SHRIEEEEEEKKKKKK with a normal endmill :-)

Bill

unterhaus
12-18-2006, 02:13 AM
I have a bridgeport series II with a NMTB30 spindle, and it's good for that. I might be selling some tooling, so all of you go buy this spindle so I can get a higher price :) At one time I wished that I had an R8 machine because of the costs. I don't even want to think about how much I've spent on tooling, it's a lot. I still need to buy a jacobs taper attachment and probably some other specialized tooling, but I have tons of the standard stuff.

$65 is a great price for a spindle, don't know if I can justify buying another project though. It would be nice to have a spindle I can move around, I was just cutting a 2" hole in the bridgeport tonight, what a pain!

I'm under the impression that NMTB 30/40/50 tooling is getting pretty rare in new machines. They seem to all use the Cat tooling because of the superior tool changing capabilities.

It's funny, I always though that Bridgeports were all I needed in a mill until I was milling large holes in some mild steel on the Series I at work. Turns out it's fairly easy to get the head and column moving on a bridgeport.

Richards
12-18-2006, 09:15 AM
Phil,

re: your post: "I think it would be bad practice to use one spindle type for the videos and then sell the machine with a different spindle."

When I visited IH late in the summer and bought my manual mill, three versions were available: 1. Manual mill, 2. Manual mill with standard CNC kit, 3. Manual mill with Light Industrial kit. Options available for all mills included different motors and the ISO-30 spindle. Of course the kits were available with or without the mill.

It was just like buying a new car. I selected the model and options that suited me. Unlike buying a car, there was absolutly no pressure from the salesman (Aaron). He knew that the machine would sell itself. Perhaps the best part about that experience was that I knew going in that I could add ISO-30 tooling to my mill because it was an option - not something that I would have to figure out on my own.

Randall
12-18-2006, 01:08 PM
Hi everyone
I purchased the 30 spindle from Aaron cause my R8 tab is almost gone ( dont ask me how). So this spindle I dont have to worry about the tab. Fot me its a godsend thanks Aaron.
Randy

unterhaus
12-18-2006, 07:49 PM
when you say tab, do you mean the pin inside that keeps the collet from spinning when you tighten it up? I would think you could replace it. I know the machinist at work replaced the one in a Bridgeport.

IndHobby
12-20-2006, 02:57 AM
Take the R8 pin out, it makes tool changes a lot faster.

BobWarfield
12-20-2006, 09:48 AM
Take the R8 pin out, it makes tool changes a lot faster.

I was hoping someone would say that!

FWIW, on another site, a fellow seems to have figured out how to do this without even removing the spindle:

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/lathemaster/message/2777

I'm sure Aaron can do this blindfolded with one hand tied behind his back, but the rest can look to the link for details, or, here is the salient paragraph:


I had recalled from earlier inspections a slot in the quill that was
exposed when I lowered the spindle. I wondered if it was placed such
that I could gain access to the spindle pin from the outside. Sure
enough, it was. I had to rotate the spindle to expose the pin but
the slot was perfectly positioned axially so that I could effect my
repair.


Best,

BW

krymis
12-31-2006, 09:16 AM
so we can take the r8 pin out and it will still tighten properly on the drawbar? I just added the same power drawbar that bob did. I gotta say I will be doing another with a better base plate for the ih mill and I will be doing a couple for the minimills that are going on ebay. If i could get rid of this then my toolchanger will work out perfectly. That along with two other issues were holding me back.

Loadedagain
12-31-2006, 01:25 PM
does anyone have the bearing part numbers for this spindle? looks like aaron took them off his web site when he shut down the shop.

Loadedagain
12-31-2006, 03:13 PM
never mind... found the link is still active on the ih site. here it is copied (so i don't lose it again).



http://www.industrialhobbies.com/Products/spindle.htm

A 30 taper spindle goes by a few names:

* ISO 30
* National 30
* NMTB 30
* Erickson Quickchange 30
* Some catalogs will just say 30 taper

A CAT 30 taper is the same taper angle, but a slightly different design but I hear it too will work properly.

It is NOT BT 30.

The top bearing is must have an ID of 30mm, for angular bearings this would be a 7206 (McMaster PN 6680K17)

The lower bearing is must have an ID of 35mm, for angular bearings this would be a 7207 (McMaster PN 6680K18)

Although the McMaster catalog states they are ABEC 1 we have found them to be ABEC 3.

kimoyo
01-01-2007, 08:32 PM
Does anyone know if there would be enough room to mount a duplex pair of angular bearings in the sleeve and on the new spindle? I've looked at the diagram but haven't taken it apart yet.

These would be for the lower bearings, http://bearingsdirect.com/products/index.php?action=item&id=292&prevaction=category&previd=4&prevstart=0

and these for the top, http://bearingsdirect.com/products/index.php?action=item&id=291&prevaction=category&previd=4&prevstart=0

But since there are two I guess they would be twice the width.

Loadedagain
01-01-2007, 10:19 PM
not sure about adding bearings, but isn't abec7 a little excessive? what do you feel the benefits are as opposed to the abec1/3 is? they're $20... and the 7's are almost $600 for a pair.

BobWarfield
01-02-2007, 11:45 AM
ABEC7 probably is excessive, but it depends on what other bearing sources you have available. This is a duplex pair, so you don't need 2 of these, just 1 at least.

Kimoyo, it does look to me like there is room for a duplex pair. The next question will be, "Where is a cheaper 7207 duplex pair?"

Failing a duplex pair, you'll have to create the preload with a spacer, which is a pretty finicky operation. A pair has a much higher likelihood for success.

Best,

BW

kimoyo
01-03-2007, 10:28 PM
not sure about adding bearings, but isn't abec7 a little excessive? what do you feel the benefits are as opposed to the abec1/3 is? they're $20... and the 7's are almost $600 for a pair.
A pair is $300 which is still alot. But after reading this thread, http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17759&highlight=abec7+nc+cams, I realized that it would probably be money well spent. I would only get the pair for the lower bearings but I'm am concerned if the spindle housing is toleranced well enough for the bearings.

Bob -

Where are you getting your pulley to fit the spindle shape? Any ideas how your going to tension the belts yet?

BobWarfield
01-04-2007, 10:22 AM
RE pulleys, many different suppliers have them. I've just looked at McMaster Carr for design purposes to see their dimensions. Before beginning the project I would need to find who has the best deal. As I've mentioned, for me this project is behind a few other things in the queue, so I won't expect to get started on it for quite a few months.

RE tensioning, I intend to build a new housing for this spindle, rather than trying to reuse the old one. I'll be milling some slots for the motor so it can slide to provide that tension. I could also mount the motor on a plate in a slideway with a threaded bolt to provide the tension. We will see.

One design issue I'm still pondering is speed ranges. I would like to get 6K to 8K rpm for aluminum, but steel wants to run a lot slower. If I cover that whole range with just the VFD, there is not going to be much torque available for steel. It seems inevitable that the system wants a Hi/Lo range for best performance over a broad range of spindle speeds. Still contemplating the best way to go about providing that.

I may investigate a tumbler back gear arrangement at the motor end that can halve the motor speed for cutting tougher materials. I hate the thought of changing pulleys, but that is another simpler possibility.

If any of us actually get the silly thing to work well for $300 in bearings and a $65 spindle, it will be a lifetime achievement award and very cheap for a decent spindle. Try not to think too hard about what it'll be like if you get the preload wrong and burnup a few sets of those bearing--Doh!

Spindles have to be one of the more finicky and difficult projects one could tackle.

Best,

BW

philbur
01-04-2007, 10:26 AM
NC Cams last words in the last post of the thread you identify were:

..................................quote....................................
Sherline example is this: the abec 1's worked fine in a commercially built/tolearnced item. Do NOTHING more than replace 1/s with 7's and abject misery sets in. Yet, in an ABEC 7 toleranced housing (worked on some of them too) the thing "fell" together.

Morale: you can't take a sow's ear housing, install rocket ship quality bearings and expect it to work. The converse should also be true although I haven't wasted the time trying to prove it...
...................................end quote...................................................

Kinda sums it all up. If the bearing tolerances are specified in microns then so are the tolerances for the housing and the spindle. So when you upgrade to ABEC 7's what to do about upgrading the housing. Also what about the tolerance on concentricity of the spindle taper to the spindle bearing seats and the seat diameteres themselves, microns as well I guess.

Regards
Phil


A pair is $300 which is still alot. But after reading this thread, http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17759&highlight=abec7+nc+cams, I realized that it would probably be money well spent. I would only get the pair for the lower bearings but I'm am concerned if the spindle housing is toleranced well enough for the bearings.

Bob -

Where are you getting your pulley to fit the spindle shape? Any ideas how your going to tension the belts yet?

BobWarfield
01-04-2007, 10:53 AM
Kinda sums it all up. If the bearing tolerances are specified in microns then so are the tolerances for the housing and the spindle. So when you upgrade to ABEC 7's what to do about upgrading the housing. Also what about the tolerance on concentricity of the spindle taper to the spindle bearing seats and the seat diameteres themselves, microns as well I guess.

Regards
Phil

First, recall I intend to make a cartridge spindle and not reuse the original housing. I'll also eliminate the quill function altogether, as this will be a CNC only spindle. That means I have to build it all anyway, and can do the housing as a piece of DOM tubing, which simplifies the task of fitting bearings.

Per Fafnir (Timken if you prefer), we need an OD fit within 2.5 tenths, and the same ID fit on their ABEC7 AC bearings for machine tool spindles. These are doable numbers in a home shop, but the easy answer is you take it to a grinding shop and let them worry about it. This would include regrinding the taper with the bearings installed to ensure concentricity, OD grinding the spindle/bearing mating surface, and ID grinding the DOM spindle cartridge. The bearing catalogs, as NC Cams is wont to point out many times, have all the info you need. p202 of the Fafnir Super Precision Bearings catalog walks through these considerations, for example.

For the more ambitious, you can have a go at tolerances yourself. Again, 2.5 tenths ought to be very feasible. A toolpost grinder is the likely approach, though one could also investigate the techniques of the turbine building crowd or the build your own tool grinder crowd. 5Bears, for example, has a nice treatise on accurately fitting shafts and bearings to precise tolerances. There are a lot of techniques available to help sneak up on the accuracy successfully, but it still won't be an easy job. As I mention above, getting it all done without blowing up at least one set of bearings on the learning curve will be a major achievement.

I have collected quite a list of resources on this in my research. Even came across a guy who rebuild a Haas spindle, which was pretty interesting. That was definitely an ABEC-7 situation and he managed to get it done in home shop level environment and never having done it before. Those bearings were a lot more than $300 a pair too! He checked his taper to see if it would need to be reground, but ultimately decided not to.

I would check the taper last, after the spindle has been run on the bench for a bit to ensure all else is well, and in particular, that the bearings aren't running too hot, and that your lubrication system is working for your application. The latter cannot be underestimated!

Best,

BW

JRouche
01-11-2007, 12:37 AM
I also bought the IH 30 taper spindle. Why not. I cant make it for sixty five bucks. But, I think I could ebay it on up in the future if I don’t get to THAT project. Lotta projects going.

As for which taper is better? Dunno..I guess it could depend on how much tooling you already have. For example. If you already have many tool holders in 30 taper because you have three other mills using it that taper would be a time saver.

I have a Bridgeport in 30 taper (kwik switch 30 actually) and I don’t notice any difference in performance verses the R-8 taper in another mill. The KS is quicker but only due to the mounting. I am not speaking of that, only performance as far as stiffness and run out are concerned.

Sometimes I wonder if folks are tightening (seating) the tapers enough. To be a good seat the tool holder needs to be pulled up quite firmly within the spindle.

Now, as far as R-8 collets go. Hatem..A weak collet IMO.. I don’t use them.

Going back, I think it comes down to tooling. If you already have a large selection of 30 taper tooling it makes sense to incorporate another machine that will use that tooling.....JRouche

BobWarfield
01-11-2007, 09:44 AM
I agree JRouche, your decision makes sense. As I have mentioned, I bought mine because I wanted to build a new spindle to run at higher speeds for aluminum. As a secondary, I am also interested at some point in setting up a toolchanger, which is easier with the 30 taper than an R8. With that said, if IH had offered both and R8 and the 30 taper for $65, I would've been in a real quandry about which to buy!

I have a set of R8 collets, but have never used them. I've no inherent bias against them, I just like keeping a set of mill holders tooled up and ready to go. With my power drawbar, I just grab what I need and pop 'em in. It's very fast and convenient. If I do need to use a collet for something oddball, I have an ER32 system that I like really well. I use it like a mill holder that's all set up, so I have the tooling for a particular job ready to go.

Given your remarks about drawbar tightness, I am wondering whether my power drawbar hasn't helped that out quite a bit.

I never unload tooling from the holders until I need to reuse the holder, so my most commonly used cutters tend to already be sitting in a cutter somewhere. If I had 5 or 6 more holders, that would be even more the case.

I also have to agree with the sentiment that I couldn't make a taper for $65, so why not.

Best,

BW

david_geng
02-12-2007, 07:08 PM
One question about the ISO spindle. When the tool holder being installed, will its flange actually touch the lower end of the spindle, like the TTC system? If yes, does it require very precise size between the taper and the flange? If not, how can it maintain the Z repeatability?

IndHobby
02-13-2007, 02:56 AM
The flange does not touch the bottom of the spindle.

It maintains the repeatability because of the inability to pull tool through the spindle. Hence a tapered fit.

Keep in mind that the ISO 30 taper has been around for a long time, and is IMO more repeatable then the R8.

Thanks
Aaron Moss

philbur
02-13-2007, 03:13 AM
I think you have to remember that the ISO30 is not a collet as in the TTS but a solid lump of steel, so as long as the pullling force is reasonably consistent it will pull in the same distance each time. Personally I doubt you would see any practical difference in Z repeatablility between solid ISO30 and R8 tool holders, they both have the same taper angle, although the ISO30 does have a larger contact surface. If you need state of the art Z repeatablility then probably neither would be suitable.

Regards
Phil


One question about the ISO spindle. When the tool holder being installed, will its flange actually touch the lower end of the spindle, like the TTC system? If yes, does it require very precise size between the taper and the flange? If not, how can it maintain the Z repeatability?

rodzilla
03-01-2007, 08:40 PM
Does anybody know where i can purchase one of these ISO30 spindles or would anybody be willing to part with one. I called IH and they said they are going to be getting more in but it is going to take about 6 months and i kind of don't want to wait that long. My only other option is an R8 to 30 taper Quick Change adapter but i would rather have the spindle as with the other way i lose z axis

Newby2
03-02-2007, 10:52 PM
Just received the Grizzly 2007 catalouge. They show the NT 30 tool holders, 3/8 to 1 1/2 " for $27.95 to $34.95. They also have a NT30 collet chuck complete with 8 collets, 1/8" to 1" for $198.00. You can find them at
www.grizzly.com
Steve

EverythingCNC
07-02-2007, 03:23 PM
Would any member please post some pictures of the ISO 30 Spindle?

Thanks.

Tan Ta

wildcat
07-02-2007, 07:48 PM
Would any member please post some pictures of the ISO 30 Spindle?


Absolutely. I ended up selling mine to someone who was actually going to make immediate use of it. Mine would probably still be sitting on the shelf otherwise. I hope he eventually posts some pictures of his installation work.

http://www.cnczone.com/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_4256.jpg

http://www.cnczone.com/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_4262.jpg

http://www.cnczone.com/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_4260.jpg

http://www.cnczone.com/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_4261.jpg

kimoyo
07-19-2007, 07:46 AM
Hey,

I'm in the process of changing out my spindle right now and its actually gone pretty well. Haven't had any surprises, I just followed what was done in this thread, http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26850 , and I already have the spindle sleeve out. But now I'm a little stuck. I need to remove the spindle from the sleeve and install the new spindle into the sleeve and I have a few questions.

What do I use to loosen the nut (shown below) from the spindle?

http://www.cnczone.com/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_4260.jpg
Could I use a torx socket for the spindle? I have a torque wrench and I guess I can grip it from the top? What would I use for the nut itself, it has 4 ridges on its side? Also, does anyone have sizes in case I need to order stuff and is there a certain amount of torque I should apply when tightening this back down?

I already removed my oil seals at the top of the spindles for replacement but I'm wondering if there is anything between the spindle and spindle sleeve that I might have to replace. It don't think there would be an oil seal there but I saw a diagram for a similar machine that said there was a retaining (not sure what this is yet) there. Anyone know any issues I should be concerned about? Also, how does the spindle stay lubricated when inside the spindle sleeve, does it need to?

Thanks.

Runner4404spd
07-19-2007, 07:49 AM
i used a spanner wrench to get mine apart. however, on setting the torque i'm as lost as you are. i snug the bearings down until the lower spindle bearing is warm to the touch.

kimoyo
07-19-2007, 08:26 AM
i used a spanner wrench to get mine apart. however, on setting the torque i'm as lost as you are. i snug the bearings down until the lower spindle bearing is warm to the touch.

Thanks on the spanner wrench for the nut! What about the spindle, did you use a torx socket and torque wrench? Any idea how to get in touch with Aaron, not sure if Gene has even done this?

I guess I could use the torque wrench when I take it off but I'll be loosening as I try the different settings. That thing is definitely on there tight.

jfc11
07-19-2007, 11:35 PM
What if you act as if your going to tighten it and start off with a low torque setting and keep adjusting the torque until it close to making the nut turn tighter.....that will give you the tightening torque close enough to re install it at that same setting
Just my 2 cents worth
jim

kimoyo
07-20-2007, 12:22 AM
What if you act as if your going to tighten it and start off with a low torque setting and keep adjusting the torque until it close to making the nut turn tighter.....that will give you the tightening torque close enough to re install it at that same setting
Just my 2 cents worth
jim

Doh, lol. That's a good idea but I didn't find any sockets I could use with my torque wrench. And my torque wrench isn't one of those pass-thru gear wrench you use to put the spindle all the way thru, if they even make a torque wrench like that.

sweFredrik
10-09-2007, 01:41 AM
I know this thread is abit old. But does anyone have a CAD file or at least dimentions of the spindle bought from industrialhobbies.com?

Any other source to buy a iso30 spindle from?

/fredrik

SMW Precision
10-11-2007, 02:16 PM
I know this thread is abit old. But does anyone have a CAD file or at least dimentions of the spindle bought from industrialhobbies.com?

Any other source to buy a iso30 spindle from?

/fredrik

IH does have spindle kits in stock. Just call Gene!

jfc11
10-11-2007, 06:45 PM
there spindle is 325.00 that includes the bearings and drawbar

sweFredrik
10-12-2007, 04:49 PM
yepp, I emailed him and got the same price. Any of you guys have that spindle modeled in 3d? or 2d?

georgebarr
01-12-2008, 06:04 PM
I recently sent my order in for a IH CNC Turn Key Mill with the NT30 spindle option. I am now in the process of deciding which tool holders to buy. I have a few questions:

- Does CAT30, BT30, ISO30, NTMB30 all work with this spindle?
- IH says that the included drawbar has a 0.5"-13 screw (0.5" size with 13 threads per inch). This thread must screw on perfectly to the toolholder (where the retention knob is usually installed). I noticed the BT30 has a M12 x 1.75 thread on the retention knob which will not work for the NT30 spindle & drawbar. Which of the CAT, BT, ISO, and NTMB will work with the supplied drawbar threads?
- Is it possible to install a different drawbar with a different thread to make it work with the BT30 tool holders, which is my preferred tool holder?

Thanks,

Runner4404spd
01-12-2008, 07:25 PM
you can buy NMTB 30 tool holders. i would buy those. as for name brand i like bison as they seem to be good quality, but i'm sure the import ones will work to. there are some variations between the cat, iso, nmtb etc that i'm not 100% sure what the differences are. i am pretty sure the tapers are the same but the lower geometry and stud geometry may be different.

also if need be changing a drawbar is not that hard, you just pull it out and replace it with another one.

philbur
01-12-2008, 09:20 PM
Google works pretty good. For example look here:

http://www.coventrytoolholders.co.uk/pdfs/A6-A10.pdf

It seems they are all M12 so it doesn't look like any will work with the supplied draw-bar.

You can of course make your own draw-bar. However not all tapers appear to have the same taper length.

Phil


I recently sent my order in for a IH CNC Turn Key Mill with the NT30 spindle option. I am now in the process of deciding which tool holders to buy. I have a few questions:

- Does CAT30, BT30, ISO30, NTMB30 all work with this spindle?
- IH says that the included drawbar has a 0.5"-13 screw (0.5" size with 13 threads per inch). This thread must screw on perfectly to the toolholder (where the retention knob is usually installed). I noticed the BT30 has a M12 x 1.75 thread on the retention knob which will not work for the NT30 spindle & drawbar. Which of the CAT, BT, ISO, and NTMB will work with the supplied drawbar threads?
- Is it possible to install a different drawbar with a different thread to make it work with the BT30 tool holders, which is my preferred tool holder?

Thanks,

Chivo
01-16-2008, 01:48 AM
Hello
Does anyone know the dimensions of the tool holder ISO 30

saulij
01-16-2008, 02:31 AM
Look at http://www.netikka.net/saulij/cnc/ISO-kartio.jpg

Sauli

georgebarr
01-16-2008, 02:53 AM
I called Industrial Hobbies and they said they will make me a BT30 style drawbar when the machine is ready to ship. Therefore, this will already be pre-installed. So, this solves my problem.

Thanks,

philbur
01-16-2008, 03:12 AM
I don't think this is ISO 30. Check the link in post 105. ISO tapers have a short parallel section at the top of the taper. This will at least make a difference to the draw-bar length.

Phil


Look at http://www.netikka.net/saulij/cnc/ISO-kartio.jpg

Sauli

saulij
01-19-2008, 09:57 AM
ISO taper is designed for manual tool change, DV (DIN 69871) is for automatic tool changer with retention knob (called ISO taper also). Taper dimensions are identical in ISO, DV and BT-tapers. Main differences are in flange for tool changer.

Sauli

philbur
01-20-2008, 08:17 AM
Also, due to the parallel section on the ISO30 taper, it will need a 20mm shorter draw bar.

Phil


Main differences are in flange for tool changer.

Sauli

mung
11-03-2008, 08:06 AM
This thread was a year or more ago, I cannot see any $65 iso 30 spindles available on a google search. Are they still available, where from, web link??????

Glennza
11-09-2008, 04:11 AM
The $65 price is from several years ago. This was about the time that Aaron was winding down his ownership of Industrial Hobbies. It was never stated as such, but I believe he was cleaning off the shelves and reduced the price to move these out. I know that he did offer his last few mills at an attractive price and they were gone in just a few days. Wish I'd had the dollars available at the time.

Glenn

EvanVH
11-29-2008, 03:37 PM
I am no expert and this is my opinion. So take it or leave it.


Iso 30 or R-8

In the early 90s I was a quality manager at a tooling shop. We built fixtures for everything from very small plastic parts to robotic welding fixtures. I programmed a CMM (Brown and Sharpe) for all of the inspection and tuning needed.

So for 10 hours a day I helped the tool makers tune the fixtures and then did a final inspection. All of the tool makers had there personnel machine the company provided the mill but no one else used it. They were Lagun knee mills with an R-8 spindles. I learned that these mills were very accurate and the R-8 spindle was repeatable. These tool makers made there living and reputation with yes an R-8 spindle.

How much torque was used to tighten the R-8? No body cared as long as you did not suck an end mill.

Bottom line the repeatability of an R-8 spindle was never a problem.

What about rigidity?

Well I have seen 1 ½ dia 3 carbide insert face mill taking a .200 thousands deep pass in mild steel. I have seen a knee mill with a 5/8 roughing end mill buried @ ¾ of an inch in mild steel. The force it took was stalling a Servo power feed. Rate of feed ??? I don’t know but it was slow.

I personally would never abuse a machine like that. Nor do I recommend it.

Most of the hogging was done on:

1st was a #3 (?) horizontal milling machine (not a knee mill) with a ISO 40 spindle. I believe it had a 7 hp motor. This 5,000 lb monster took care of most of the hogging.

2nd Machine used for hogging was a 18,000 dollar band saw. Man did this save the company time and money.


It comes down to how much time you have. I don’t push any of the milling/lathe tools I own. I just shortens up the life of the machine.





Evan

Cruiser
12-18-2008, 06:46 PM
I'm wondering why this old thread was resurected ? OK, some one needs an answer to the old question, Why would a 30 taper holder be wanted ? The ONLY answer to this question that would make any sense is that you already have a machine which had a variety of these holders and you wanted to be able to use them to save expense ! I've worked in a very large machine shop and when I got privy to any of the info being bantered about it boiled down to two major points one being can we use are existing base of tools and will it do the jobs we intend and will the fixtures mount to machine. Those holders are very expensive compared to the r8 and i've found some quick change holders that are small, light, strong, and reasonably priced. I don't have any other machines to borrow holders and tools from and the r8 will handle more HP than i'll ever put on this machine. Consider the "Weakest link" principle for a moment. You will not gain accuracy, nore rigidity, torque, speed, or the ability to change tools fast enough to make any differance by going to any 30 40 or other holders. All that increases is the expense. You may be able to mount some very large cutters, but weakest link points to lack of torque to hog the material that would make it profitable. They will sell it to you if you want it, and rightfully so ! Is it better than the r8 well, that would depend on application wouldn't it ! When your putting together a home based shop and you ask questions about this type of situation you must consider all the scholars that have read everything and know everything except whats real and whats imagined. Get a 30 lb bag of salt instead and throw it freely !

Uguessedit
05-06-2018, 04:10 PM
not sure about adding bearings, but isn't abec7 a little excessive? what do you feel the benefits are as opposed to the abec1/3 is? they're $20... and the 7's are almost $600 for a pair.

Don’t use anything besides Abec 7 on a spindle. They can be had for $150/pair if you look around.