Bigblue&Goldie
Well-known member
It's a 6mm
The Machine Work Thread
- Thread starter Hephaestus29
- Start date
Toolmaker51
Well-known member
The few .001's difference isn't the end of the problem. It's what difference a few .001's and slightly rounded apex of a wrench miss the corner and barely engage the flat of hex socket. Fine until it gets a little torque and de-broaches the hex contour.
That's why Torx are seemingly infinite size differences, none will drive imperial or mm hex, and engage like a spline. The best example is increased life of Torx over hex, no longer prevalent for insert tool holders, even the tiniest.
RoninB4
Well-known member
Valid points points but I still think Torx Sux. The "broached" depth is seldom deep enough to get what I feel is a solid grip on the fastener. Also, once the opening is fubar'd it's more difficult to extract while a standard hex still has a few possibilities for extraction. My final objection to Torx is, particularly with cutting tool inserts, that people will still over-torque the fastener so that rounding the Torx pocket is possible. Replacing that trashed fastener is not as readily available. JMO
Nice!
kazlx
Well-known member
Wrapped up the most stressful machining job I've done so far. Turned a 345 lb block of 316 stainless into two 43 lb parts for a giant yacht, all in 3 days. Worth it. Started out with parts that neatly fit into a 9" D x 7" thick round. After some last minute design changes, it turned into a 14" diameter x 7" thick round, that ended up being 14-3/16 x 7.5" when it arrived. I did this all in my 30 taper Speedio. Got the call on a a Monday, was supposed to have material Tuesday, which turned into that Wednesday. Ended up getting started about 5pm and had to have the parts finished that Saturday before flying to Cancun first thing that Sunday morning. Nailed it. Here's some pics.
ez-duzit
Well-known member
k--well done. Who did the polishing?
kazlx
Well-known member
The guy that hired me to machine did the welding and polishing. He knocked it out of the park.
ez-duzit
Well-known member
I'll say he did.
ClappedOutBport
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2016
- Messages
- 998
Poor 30 taper speedio! Got it done though. Looks great.
kazlx
Well-known member
The Big plus HT spindle would have been nice haha. Time to start looking at Okumas.
paulsomlo
Well-known member
I have a feeling that the guy who owns that "boat", is not a GJ member.
kazlx
Well-known member
Somehow I doubt it. I did get a tour today. I feel poor.
slodat
ALLIANCE MEMBER
This is a component of a tooling kit I make.
Been a fun one to get sorted out. It's starting to look like something. Getting the soft jaws, toolpaths, and everything setup on this part has taken a lot of time. So far, so good. What it starts out as in the rear, after OP1 in foreground.
Been a fun one to get sorted out. It's starting to look like something. Getting the soft jaws, toolpaths, and everything setup on this part has taken a lot of time. So far, so good. What it starts out as in the rear, after OP1 in foreground.
whateg01
Well-known member
I'm sure you have your reasons, but that sure looks like it would have been better as a weldment.This is a component of a tooling kit I make.
Been a fun one to get sorted out. It's starting to look like something. Getting the soft jaws, toolpaths, and everything setup on this part has taken a lot of time. So far, so good. What it starts out as in the rear, after OP1 in foreground.
Toolmaker51
Well-known member
I look at drawings and see geometric forms, and yes, most would produce that as a weldment. Impossible to say that's wrong way to get so and so part.
That geometry, I see being excised by bandsaw. Easier (and less) chips to clean, plus a nice bit of usable material remains.
On other hand, the upright end with larger hole hasn't a lot of contact with flat side, maybe a clearance issue, for a weld.
Often, prototypes get carved from billet as there isn't tooling to support a fabricated version. It's not a small part, completely covers width of what is likely a 6 inch vise.
logixjock
Well-known member
I came up in the world building asphalt plants, to my mind, everything I see starts out as a weldment.
Toolmaker51
Well-known member
I've got some time in weldments too. We'd make various pieces, they'd be welded - normalized - blasted or tumbled and come back for 2nd operations like boring and milling. Seems most weren't items for end user but components of fixtures and tooling. There was a lot of marine engineering, that was certain.
Elsewhere, I worked for some partially illiterate (or just failed phonics) clowns whose diction pronounced it weld-ae-ments. Very impressive to say the least.
Sturgeon MO, huh? Hit many small areas around there, but not specifically. Puts you about 2-1/4 hours west of me, good ol' I-70.
Elsewhere, I worked for some partially illiterate (or just failed phonics) clowns whose diction pronounced it weld-ae-ments. Very impressive to say the least.
Sturgeon MO, huh? Hit many small areas around there, but not specifically. Puts you about 2-1/4 hours west of me, good ol' I-70.
ez-duzit
Well-known member
That is the very first thing that came to mind when I saw it.
slodat
ALLIANCE MEMBER
The reason it's carved out of a chunk is because it meets the design intent of the part. And, I don't have a big enough AC TIG to weld 1/2" aluminum.
slodat
ALLIANCE MEMBER
This component is part of an electrical testing tool kit. Kind of surprised a machining thread is full of "why don't you weld it" comments, but whatever.. I was sharing because I'm excited to have gotten the part this far.
Please don't take my question as a dig on your machining, it's quite opposite actually. I recognize the amount of setup and/or programming involved in your accomplishment and the fact that sometimes using a solid billet is in fact the best way to go. Perhaps you can expand on what it took to get the part this far for those who aren't well versed in the process?
A weldment isn't always the most cost effective solution contrary to the belief of many.
slodat
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Ahh.. Not intending to come across defensive. This part, and the tooling kit, are used to temporarily connect a high current test set to various circuit breakers for primary current injection testing. I don't have a big enough AC TIG to weld the 1/2 aluminum. And, I'd need some consistency/predictability in a weldment to then machine it to final shape and size. Making from one billet means I can run the part in a few setups. Stock prep is a bandsaw cut and move on to machining. This part is three operations because of the large hole.
OP1:
All of the toolpaths:
After OP1:
I don't model the chamfer shown in red or the fillets shown in blue. The fillets are done with a 0.060 radius end mill. There's no benefiit to modeling the chamfers.
Part setup in softjaw for OP2:
OP2 removes the carrier, drill and thread mill the two holes, and outside chamfer. OP3 turns the part on its side to bore the large hole and chamfer. I'm pretty sure I'll go ahead and flip the part and do an OP4 to get the other side chamfers.
OP1:
All of the toolpaths:
After OP1:
I don't model the chamfer shown in red or the fillets shown in blue. The fillets are done with a 0.060 radius end mill. There's no benefiit to modeling the chamfers.
Part setup in softjaw for OP2:
OP2 removes the carrier, drill and thread mill the two holes, and outside chamfer. OP3 turns the part on its side to bore the large hole and chamfer. I'm pretty sure I'll go ahead and flip the part and do an OP4 to get the other side chamfers.
bugnut
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Working in fabrication I often had to weigh cost to manufacture. Many times, unattended machining time is much cheaper than welding. Especially if it is a handful of parts, that require second, third or other operations. Just my $.02...YMMV
kazlx
Well-known member
Ahh.. Not intending to come across defensive. This part, and the tooling kit, are used to temporarily connect a high current test set to various circuit breakers for primary current injection testing. I don't have a big enough AC TIG to weld the 1/2 aluminum. And, I'd need some consistency/predictability in a weldment to then machine it to final shape and size. Making from one billet means I can run the part in a few setups. Stock prep is a bandsaw cut and move on to machining. This part is three operations because of the large hole.
OP1:
All of the toolpaths:
After OP1:
I don't model the chamfer shown in red or the fillets shown in blue. The fillets are done with a 0.060 radius end mill. There's no benefiit to modeling the chamfers.
Part setup in softjaw for OP2:
OP2 removes the carrier, drill and thread mill the two holes, and outside chamfer. OP3 turns the part on its side to bore the large hole and chamfer. I'm pretty sure I'll go ahead and flip the part and do an OP4 to get the other side chamfers.
Get a double chamfer mill or a threadmill and hit top and bottom (well technically left and right I guess) on op3.
Toolmaker51
Well-known member
Generally, if not absolutely, no one is saying otherwise. When a "I made this........." shows up, knowing there are countless ways to process most anything, and none of us have matching facilities, "I made this....." instantly becomes "How would I make that......". Personally, of all the different items I've made, none caught enough interest for me to consider production.
At the same time, answering posts is rarely aimed only who wrote OP; I'm addressing anyone who reads it from that moment on.
For example, a part might have a perfect sound weld, but that doesn't mean the features haven't moved in some manner, exactly why a lot of weldments get machined. Point is, there will (hopefully) be a steady stream of newbies, armed with nothing beyond a few terms and desire to learn.
slodat
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Impressively well said! Thank you!
As soon as i noticed it was aluminum I guessed it was due to difficulty of welding aluminum in that size. If loading stress allowed a bolted joint, and if was for me, I would have made it two pieces bolted together. Or in steel, two pieces welded. My Tig isn’t big enough either, only 185 amps. End result looks like the print and that’s what counts. Good job.
fartymarty
Well-known member
Wow!,... over a year since anybody posted in this thread. Probably the intimidation factor scaring the amateur machinists away...how are you gonna show off the spacer you made on your mini lathe after seeing something like this:
Well, I don't really have anything to show of my own. I'm here more to ask a question. I've done some machining at home and many decades ago I did it for a living. Perhaps I've lived a sheltered life when it comes to cutting threads. In high school machine shop we had a project where we had to cut double acme threads both internal and external. By double I mean acme threads that started 180 degrees opposite each other on the shaft and in the bore, but both were right handed threads. Until recently I thought that would probably be the most complicated thread I'd ever see (for a real application not just spectacle). Until now that is. I'm refurbishing a used Delta wood lathe (circa 1957) to give as a present to my nephew and I notice that the face plate is purposely cross threaded (1" 8TPI R.H. & L.H.) so that it will spin on to either a right hand thread or a left hand thread. I see why they did it, so that bowls and larger items could be turned on the back side of the head stock. I think it is pretty cool really but since I've never seen such a thing before I was curious if there are many applications for such cross threading and it is really a very wide spread process that I've never heard of. Are there many applications beside wood lathes that use cross threads of both R.H. and L.H in the same bore? How about shafts? All my personal cross threads have been unintentional.
Well, I don't really have anything to show of my own. I'm here more to ask a question. I've done some machining at home and many decades ago I did it for a living. Perhaps I've lived a sheltered life when it comes to cutting threads. In high school machine shop we had a project where we had to cut double acme threads both internal and external. By double I mean acme threads that started 180 degrees opposite each other on the shaft and in the bore, but both were right handed threads. Until recently I thought that would probably be the most complicated thread I'd ever see (for a real application not just spectacle). Until now that is. I'm refurbishing a used Delta wood lathe (circa 1957) to give as a present to my nephew and I notice that the face plate is purposely cross threaded (1" 8TPI R.H. & L.H.) so that it will spin on to either a right hand thread or a left hand thread. I see why they did it, so that bowls and larger items could be turned on the back side of the head stock. I think it is pretty cool really but since I've never seen such a thing before I was curious if there are many applications for such cross threading and it is really a very wide spread process that I've never heard of. Are there many applications beside wood lathes that use cross threads of both R.H. and L.H in the same bore? How about shafts? All my personal cross threads have been unintentional.
Last edited: