ISO 30 Spindle - Page 4


Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 116

Thread: ISO 30 Spindle

  1. #37
    Registered
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    14
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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!



  2. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    262
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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



  3. #39
    Gold Member BobWarfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2502
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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:







    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



  4. #40
    Registered
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    76
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    -
    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



  5. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    262
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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



  6. #42
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    2512
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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


    Quote Originally Posted by Willbird View Post
    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




  7. #43
    Gold Member BobWarfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2502
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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



  8. #44
    Registered
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    205
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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.



  9. #45
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    2512
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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




    Quote Originally Posted by BobWarfield View Post
    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




  10. #46
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    2512
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    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

    Quote Originally Posted by philbur View Post
    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




  11. #47
    Gold Member BobWarfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2502
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by philbur View Post
    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



  12. #48
    Registered
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    66
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default R8 or ISO

    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.

    Aaron Moss

    www.IndustrialHobbies.com


Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


About CNCzone.com

    We are the largest and most active discussion forum for manufacturing industry. The site is 100% free to join and use, so join today!

Follow us on


Our Brands

ISO 30 Spindle

ISO 30 Spindle