"Ed Huntress" wrote:

You shouldn't have any trouble with it at all in aluminum. But pay close
attention to how your machine behaves when climb-cutting in steel. In a
small, conventional machine like yours, everything has to be tight or it
will chatter or generate some other vibration.

You'll know soon enough when you start using it.

I've found running carbide on bridgeports, climb milling works out better than using hss.
Likely because I don't push carbide hard since it tends to snap and I've got the rpm
cranked up as fast as the charts indicate for steel or the machine can do. There is
something about the rpm that keeps things mellow. It is counter intuitive but it works
for me usually. Locking axes that are not moving is of course good practice.

I'm usually using 5/8" ground em's and 1 3/8 inserted. Hardened items, well, that can be
thorny and I may go conventional with carbide on that kind of work.

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Ignoramus18915 fired this volley in
:

It weighs 5,000 lbs


Iggy... friend... IF the table weighed 5000lb, it wouldn't be an issue.
Total weight of the machine is NOT a guarantee that the table won't take up
"lost motion" when climbing. Just sayin'...

LLoyd

"Ignoramus18915" wrote in message
...
On 2010-07-30, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ignoramus18915" wrote in message
...
On 2010-07-30, Wes wrote:
Ignoramus18915 wrote:

Pete, I will try some more. The problem is, one mistake and the
endmill snaps off. I think that I should practice with square end
endmills instead of the ball ends. I have much more of those.


I've never used ball end end mills so I'm speculating here.

Can you rough out the cavity with a conventional square end end mill?

EXACTLY WHAT i WILL DO

Since you piqued my interest about ball nose, I'm looking around a bit.
Go read page
28-30+

http://www.ingersoll.com/ictc/ictcpu...e/C-C580-3.pdf

Very fun stuff.



Also read:

http://www.kennametal.com/images/pdf...PCFEVMCQFBYIV0

nice, just what i need

Do you know the difference between climb milling vs conventional? I
prefer climb whenever
the machine can handle it. I usually climb mill on bridgeports with
leadscrews and on a
cnc it is the normal way since you don't have backlash to any degree
compared to lead
screws.

I am reworking everything nowto use climb.


You shouldn't have any trouble with it at all in aluminum. But pay close
attention to how your machine behaves when climb-cutting in steel. In a
small, conventional machine like yours, everything has to be tight or it
will chatter or generate some other vibration.

It weighs 5,000 lbs

Aha. I must have missed the model. Still, climb milling in steel will test
the rigidity of everything.


You'll know soon enough when you start using it.


--
Ed Huntress

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

You shouldn't have any trouble with it at all in aluminum. But pay close
attention to how your machine behaves when climb-cutting in steel. In a
small, conventional machine like yours, everything has to be tight or it
will chatter or generate some other vibration.

You'll know soon enough when you start using it.

I've found running carbide on bridgeports, climb milling works out better
than using hss.
Likely because I don't push carbide hard since it tends to snap and I've
got the rpm
cranked up as fast as the charts indicate for steel or the machine can do.
There is
something about the rpm that keeps things mellow. It is counter intuitive
but it works
for me usually. Locking axes that are not moving is of course good
practice.

I'm usually using 5/8" ground em's and 1 3/8 inserted. Hardened items,
well, that can be
thorny and I may go conventional with carbide on that kind of work.

Wes

I haven't done much climb milling, having had little access to machines that
will do it. But feedrate in steel is important, with smaller bites causing
much less drama, and I'm not surprised that higher rpm helps.

It's s.o.p. in production today, but those machines tend to be really rigid
throughout, with fixed beds and really rigid head support.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

I'm usually using 5/8" ground em's and 1 3/8 inserted. Hardened items,
well, that can be
thorny and I may go conventional with carbide on that kind of work.

Wes

I haven't done much climb milling, having had little access to machines that
will do it. But feedrate in steel is important, with smaller bites causing
much less drama, and I'm not surprised that higher rpm helps.

It's s.o.p. in production today, but those machines tend to be really rigid
throughout, with fixed beds and really rigid head support.

I suspect if I get out of my cutter range, I'd run into problems very quickly.

My first few attempts with carbide ended up with snaps. I must have learned something in
the interim. Maybe I have the 'feel' now. Small endmills and inconsistant feeds are a
formula for disastor on a manual mill.

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Wes fired this volley in
:

My first few attempts with carbide ended up with snaps. I must have
learned something in the interim. Maybe I have the 'feel' now. Small
endmills and inconsistant feeds are a formula for disastor on a manual
mill.


I don't know why this hasn't been mentioned before, but I have much better
luck on surface finish with HSS cutters on 6061 than with carbide.

I love carbide for steel, but I always lean toward HSS for Al.

LLoyd

On 2010-07-31, Wes wrote:
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

I'm usually using 5/8" ground em's and 1 3/8 inserted. Hardened items,
well, that can be
thorny and I may go conventional with carbide on that kind of work.

Wes

I haven't done much climb milling, having had little access to machines that
will do it. But feedrate in steel is important, with smaller bites causing
much less drama, and I'm not surprised that higher rpm helps.

It's s.o.p. in production today, but those machines tend to be really rigid
throughout, with fixed beds and really rigid head support.

I suspect if I get out of my cutter range, I'd run into problems very quickly.

My first few attempts with carbide ended up with snaps. I must have learned something in
the interim. Maybe I have the 'feel' now. Small endmills and inconsistant feeds are a
formula for disastor on a manual mill.

On my manual mill, I had a good feel. Endmill should not squeal, red
hot chips are too hot, blued chips are likely too hot, etc

Ignoramus18915 fired this volley in
:

blued chips are likely too hot, etc


NOT! SMOKIN' blue chips are "the right feed rate" for steel.

Red chips are not... G

LLoyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...
Ignoramus18915 fired this volley in
:

blued chips are likely too hot, etc


NOT! SMOKIN' blue chips are "the right feed rate" for steel.

Red chips are not... G

Unless you're doing high-speed machining in hardened steel. I looks like a
grinding operation from hell, with red-hot chips hitting the machine covers
like machine gun fire.

It's performed dry, BTW, usually with cubic boron nitride inserts.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
Unless you're doing high-speed machining in hardened steel. I looks like a
grinding operation from hell, with red-hot chips hitting the machine covers
like machine gun fire.

It's performed dry, BTW, usually with cubic boron nitride inserts.

I witnessed a test at the NIST shops they were doing for Picatinny
arsenal, making 105mm
artillery rounds out of 1075 (I think) steel. They had all sorts of
instruments on the toolpost
of a Freyer turning center. It made this HUGE WHAAAAAA when they
started the spindle, I'm sure you could have easily heard it out in the
parking lot. The light coming off the chips was bright yellow, and lit
up the area like a 500 W floodlight. They machined the round from a
chunk of bar stock it under a minute.

Gee, I wished I'd paid more attention to the insert they were using, but
I SEEM to recall it was just a coated carbide.

The testing was because gun barrels were being damaged prematurely, and
the arsenal figured out they needed to specify the actual machining
processes (insert, surface speed, feedrates, etc.) and not just the
material and final dimensions, to obtain the right surface qualities on
the round
from the several contract manufacturers.

Jon

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:39:52 -0500, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Ignoramus18915 fired this volley in
:

It weighs 5,000 lbs


Iggy... friend... IF the table weighed 5000lb, it wouldn't be an issue.
Total weight of the machine is NOT a guarantee that the table won't take up
"lost motion" when climbing. Just sayin'...

LLoyd

Very well said!

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 23:53:56 -0500, Jon Elson
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
Unless you're doing high-speed machining in hardened steel. I looks like a
grinding operation from hell, with red-hot chips hitting the machine covers
like machine gun fire.

It's performed dry, BTW, usually with cubic boron nitride inserts.

I witnessed a test at the NIST shops they were doing for Picatinny
arsenal, making 105mm
artillery rounds out of 1075 (I think) steel. They had all sorts of
instruments on the toolpost
of a Freyer turning center. It made this HUGE WHAAAAAA when they
started the spindle, I'm sure you could have easily heard it out in the
parking lot. The light coming off the chips was bright yellow, and lit
up the area like a 500 W floodlight. They machined the round from a
chunk of bar stock it under a minute.

Gee, I wished I'd paid more attention to the insert they were using, but
I SEEM to recall it was just a coated carbide.

The testing was because gun barrels were being damaged prematurely, and
the arsenal figured out they needed to specify the actual machining
processes (insert, surface speed, feedrates, etc.) and not just the
material and final dimensions, to obtain the right surface qualities on
the round
from the several contract manufacturers.

Jon


I thought that most arty of that size was driven by copper driving bands
rather than rifling graving the case of the round?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

Gunner Asch wrote:

I thought that most arty of that size was driven by copper driving bands
rather than rifling graving the case of the round?

That would make sense to me, and the NIST folks were not revealing
everything about the project.
So, I really don't know what the real story was. It is possible it had
nothing to do with the barrels, and everything to do with armor piercing
qualities of the round.

Jon