Are you Wasting Time with Dynamic Toolpaths? | Machine Shop Talk Ep. 96
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лип 2024
- Trochoidal milling is a fantastic approach for tackling machining challenges, but should it always be your go-to solution?
Whether you call it adaptive clear, dynamic milling or just plain trochoidal toolpaths - modern machining approaches often harness this computer-generated toolpath in order to maximize flute engagement and reap the benefits of chip thinning techniques. However, is it ALWAYS the right approach?
Today on Practical Machinist's MACHINE SHOP TALK, Ian Sandusky from Lakewood Machine & Tool is back to put @iscarweb tools to the test, comparing modern toolpath approaches to some more traditional toolpaths to take a look at the options.
From 4-flute solid carbide to 7-flute solid carbide all the way down to exchangeable head and insertable options - we're going to be making some chips fly and seeing when you may want to use more traditional toolpaths, or when you may want to stick to trochoidal milling.
Timestamps:
0:00 INTRO
01:05 SOLID CARBIDE 4 FLUTE
03:06 SOLID CARBIDE 7 FLUTE
06:10 INSERTABLE HEAD
09:25 EXCHANGEABLE HEAD
12:00 OUTRO
Learn more about ISCAR here: www.iscar.com/
And follow them here:
Facebook: / iscarcuttingtools
LinkedIn: / iscar-metals
Instagram: / iscarusa
UA-cam: @iscarweb
Twitter: / iscarltd
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Practical Machinist is the largest and most engaged #metalworking community across the web. With more than 200,000 registered members and 400,000+ social media followers, Practical Machinist is the easiest way to learn new techniques, get answers quickly, and discuss common challenges with your peers. Visit Practical Machinist today to join the community and start connecting with your peers.
Become a Practical Machinist member (www.practicalmachinist.com/)
Like us on Facebook ( / practicalmachinist )
Follow us on Instagram ( / practicalmachinist )
Follow us on Twitter ( / prac_machinist )
Follow us on TikTok ( / practicalmachinist )
Connect with us on LinkedIn ( / practical-machinist )
Connect with Ian Sandusky on LinkedIn ( / ian-sandusky-3a223227 ) or learn more about Lakewood Machine and Tool at
lakewoodmachine.com/
sales@lakewoodmachine.com
(905) 853-6194
Instagram: / lakewoodmachine
Lakewood Machine (lakewoodmachine.com/)
#machineshop #metalworking #machining - Наука та технологія
Broadly speaking, dynamic toolpaths are best suited to dynamic machines. A big 40 taper machine is designed to make big cuts with big tools, but it just doesn't have the acceleration to get the best out of dynamic toolpaths. A VF might in theory have 1000 or 1400ipm rapids, but it won't get up to anywhere near that speed on short movements because there's just too much inertia. Try the same thing on a Speedio or a Robodrill and you'll immediately see the point - these machines aren't as rigid, they don't have as much spindle torque, but they absolutely fly when they're out of cut. Pecking away with light cuts suddenly makes a ton of sense, because it's what those machines are built to do.
The other important factor is process stability. A dynamic toolpath that's more gentle on your cutting tools and workholding might be the better choice even if the MRR is lower, because it's much less likely to result in a scrapped part or a crashed machine. This is particularly true if you're looking to run parts unattended, if you're working with difficult materials or you're running complex parts with long cycle times. A traditional slotting or pocketing toolpath has a much higher pucker factor than the trochoidal or high feed equivalent.
When he said full rapid return, I thought it looked like 25% or slower. I agree the feed could have been much faster too. At least on our mills it could have.
This is the first time I've seen a 40 taper machine referred to as "big".
One of the machines I program is a Cat50 Matsuura that can, and does regularly hit 2500+ipm. Most modern, linear guide machines aren't going to have an issue hitting the higher feed rates.
Try your 850 sfm on your .375 4 flute at 135 ipm. You’re not using chip thinning whatsoever so you are truly slowing yourself down a lot.
correct - I wish the CadCam systems had a chip thickness calc built in according to radial or % of step over.
@@pokeyboy1 MasterCam does this on adaptive tool paths but not for traditional contours.
I only seen it on Mastercam Vendor specific Tool library where it turned on that function. @@FuzzyPeanut00
I may be missing something here, but your first two tools seem to have a very low feed per tooth chip load. They can easily run at .006” per tooth (with a 10 percent step over, I see you’re up around 13) The thru air is key though! Love the dynamic clearing paths on 1018. Tools last forever. We’ve saved an insane amount of time going from traditional milling with insert endmills, to dynamic milling with 1/2” and 3/8” endmills. That’s just my experience though!
Yeah no I apologize - I was hoping I was a little more clear that these were just to show different options that may be quicker depending on how you run them
@@evertons9147yep - title was a bit provocative but I wasn’t aiming to torture test them to failure but you’re not wrong - I could have pushed them harder, we were just trying to illustrate some different ways that still work well
@@iansandusky417 Have you ever used FSWizard to calculate speeds and feeds for dynamic milling? By the way, the guy who created this app lives in Toronto.
@@ov3753I haven’t but I would be interested to give it a shot for sure!
My haas vf2 (non ss)
Would run this all day on the same endmill.
Need to push them numbers Ian! :p
m.ua-cam.com/video/4Cs5R8rYfFA/v-deo.html&pp=ygUISGFhcyBoc20%3D
great demo. I was all traditional up until about 5 years ago when I wanted to learn more about Dynamic. Now Dynamic is my standard ruffing. Even low HP machines can benefit. I learned in steels you need very good tool holders - or the tool will pull out.
many companies like Lakeshore and Helical have very good HSM feed and speed charts - you can go deeper and faster than you think. Especially if you came from a hand G code type learning curve like me.
i only started as a machinist/programmer around 7 years ago and i was taught dynamic from the get go... nowadays i am deciding between indexable and solid tooling based off of the shape of the part and raw material, roughing a shallow slope with lots of radial and not that much axial material to be removed? indexable high feed and vice versa... but most important is to get a good tools in the first place, from my experience Iscar solid carbide tooling is average at best, their indexable stuff is amazing most of the time, but i had much better results with Guhring for example compared to Iscars solid mills...
@@dubi127 I am tentative of going back to index tooling as it sounded like hammers cutting but I was doing traditional tool path. I have a friend that was an iscar engineer and shared a lot of cool data
We had a fixture plate that was 19X10 inches that we had to take a ton of stock off around these bosses in the middle. Originally it was programmed to rough it out with dynamic and it took like 50 mins. We found a 2 or 3 inch insert cutter and roughed it out in literally 10 mins with a simple 2D contour taking depth of cuts using the full width of the cutter . Sometimes on older machines with memory limitations this is also the way to go being that it’s less code .
Oh definitely - with my old machines when the options are drip feed a modern toolpath or use a bigger cutter, you know what I’m going to pick
@@iansandusky417👌🏻
Just don’t say it to Titan. He will show how to mill using Dynamic at 80000 IPM on 4140 prehard with 45% stepover and make your fixture within 2 minutes.
Wow.., Excellent presentation & Test cutting of End Mill Tools.
excellent presentation Ian thanks for all your work very very informative
Thank you very much for checking it out!
Dynamic milling you could run much faster and if you really want to make make this pocket fast you better to rough it with high feed cutter almost with the same diameter as a width of the pocket and then clean corners with solid carbide tool
That would most definitely be the way to do it!
I think for doing small volumes, the time/energy saved just hitting "adaptive all the things" when programming can be worth the potential of a slightly longer cycle time in certain cases. If you're at the point of needing to save a few min per cycle to make big savings then sure seems like there's times when getting specific tools to go HAM on specific geometry makes good sense. But what's the risk of programming errors and such?
I do usually 1-20 part runs so it's often I go very conservative on dynamic toolpaths just because I don't want to loose time to a booboo where we bit off more than it could really chew.
I hear ya man - if you’re not cutting seconds off production for huge runs sometimes it’s easier to just work with what’s working!
i like the idea that when you get a new tool/machine, run it fast and hard to see where the limit is, back off around 10-20% from that failure point and enjoy decent tool life, reliable process and fast cycle times...
I usually do 1-4 part batches, but around once a month i get to program and setup larger baches of parts, sometimes in the thousands, this approach has worked for me pretty well in the last couple of years... Right now i am tweaking a production run of 3500pcs/month on a lathe, progress so far is cycle time halved, tool life pretty much doubled... may even post first operation as a short in a few days...
Great video. Coming from a background of running a lot of tough materials the modern tool paths seems to have a lot more value on those types of material. Especially when you go from the old school thought of large expensive tool with an aggressive tool path vs a smaller tool with a high speed trochoidal tool path.
I've been using dynamic tool paths since I learned about them. I find them far superior to the standard tool paths for roughing in most applications especially when you run them with the proper chip thinning speeds and feeds and they are much easier on the tools and the machine without all the hard directional changes. You can really rip thru material when optimized. I've used the interchangeable heads and they were more expensive than the soild tools and that didn't include the shank. I've never run any of the insert head smaller than 3/4 but the cost of the head and shank and inserts didn't seem Worth it for my job shop
For sure, it really depends on the application - we use a ton of dynamic these days, especially in conjunction with high-feed or insertable tooling - just trying to illustrate some options, not a direct 1 to 1 comparison!
The Iscar sales guy at a recent demo-day told me one of the main benefits of the exchangeable head tools is to reduce setup/changeover time on live tool lathe applications. The price doesn’t make sense for most mill applications where swapping tools isn’t as difficult.
@@poetac15 Iscars Multi-master line of tools is also great for when you need an endmill to reach 12xD deep... you can "Lego" it to suit your needs and special applications...
@jasonbennett9851 you can also use dynamic tool paths with indexable tools, like high feed face mills and use bi-directional cuts for even faster material removal, i had a 52mm FFQ4 face mill from iscar plowing through S355 flame cut plates at around 6600mm/min 1100rpm, ap1mm, ae35mm... It was in one of our old machines with weak spindle, but it happily chewed through material at almost 100% spindle load with pretty much zero time wasted to slow rapids of that machine, cutting time per part from quoted 1hour/part to just below 17 minutes...
As for traditional v. dynamic, here's a question. What would happen if you used that exchangeable head cutter at 70% step over. How much faster would it go? Would it end up being faster? That would be a better comparison, in my mind at least.
Hard to say, I probably should have tried it like that though! I’ll have to give it a shot
Great video and explanation as always! What was the spindle load for each of the tools?
Thank you sir! The trochoidal could have definitely been higher - I’d have to check the loads on the traditional tools but barely anything since the diameters were so small
Apples and oranges? What’s important in mrr is material volume per kilowatt input and time to remove. No way this example had the same spindle load.
No you’re right and I tried to make that clear - just showing options that might work out depending on the application!
I fucking hate the adaptive clear toolpaths. It's also slower than just straight offset cuts.
how fast would a face mill close to the width of the slot be?
Oh yeah if that was the aim, that would definitely be the way to do it!
How far were your rapids turned down on that first dynamic path? 25%? Kind of unfair to the path as half of the moves were slower than intended.
Btw for short traverse moves on my fanuc I've found it likes g5.1 AICC on and to use a fast feed move instead of a rapid for short distances like that.
Interesting video Ian. Are You going to Westec 2023 in Nov.?
Sure am, I’ll be there at least Tuesday / Wednesday!
How do you find the best feeds and speeds?
Rougher mill will be even faster. Overall.
Volumill will also blow away any parallel offset toolpath and an insert cutter.
I don't understand this tool test. U put the exchangeable head taking huge cuts with huge feed. I don't trust that tool to hold much time cutting like that. The first adaptive u go soooo slow. I'm pretty sure u can go with 4x that feed and still trust the tool to do a lot of parts.
Yep that’s a definite advantage to trochoidal toolpaths, tool life can be much higher - but you’d be surprised how good those inserts looked when they were done with that! Just showing some options people may be overlooking.
Thoes adaptive Can be waaaaay faster that what you did there
For sure, you’re not wrong there - I was being pretty conservative
Can that chip be re-consolidated and recycled? Maybe heat it up and cast an end mill? Or hammer out a samurai Dotai sword? Could likely pour some gauge blocks? THAT would be a challenge to you machinists. WHAT can you do (that is of value - or of utility, or of little loss or waste) with your chip?!?
This was very insightful! Unfortunately for myself, my best friend- this looney old grey guy called Bridgeport got some new ideas when I upgraded his DRO’s firmware with some AI code and he ran off with this redhead named Cincinnati. So I’m all alone, and I’m afraid that now this Makita angle grinder is as dynamic as I can be.
The chips will get recycled. Most shops will sell them off to a recycler. The shop I work at is also a foundry so we remelt our chip and make other castings from them.
I agree that there are certainly situations where insert tools and traditional toolpaths are definitely faster, but those are horrible examples of dynamic milling. Clearly this was programmed by someone who has no knowledge of and doesn't know how to leverage radial chip thinning, and those linking moves are atrocious. I'd love to get my hands on these tools myself and see what they can really do for a more accurate comparison.
Do it
@eloymarquez4783 get them to send me what ever tools they're using and I'd happily record the results and put it up.
The faster and more dynamic your maschine is, go to dynamic toolpaths. With slow maschines get the biggest possible cutter and attack. After that, a multiflute for finish is recommended, even in the corners.
On a haas, in that narrow of a slot, you ARE NOT getting anywhere close to 200IPM. Maybe, maybe 80 IPM. The machine does not have that kind of acceleration.
You can see how slow it is, just time it visually. It's going 60-80IPM tops, and it's not accelerating, so the programmed rate isn't even 200IPM.
You use a generalized “dynamic” or “adaptive” style toolpath however they are not all the same, especially when you consider Volumill - it’s unlike any other tooplath and it’s also not a trochoidql tool path. If you’re going to publish something as specific as this - do your homework
I use a HSM 54*30 plate between my cutter and toolhead. It works really well and the plate is a replaceable part
I’ll have to look into those, that’s interesting!
There is no way that 7 flute end mill is 220ipm. Did you mis speak?
Brutally slow first tool path...
Yep, should have made it quicker for sure
uuuughhh, the 2nd tool, is that slowed down? because it sure as shit doesnt look anywhere close to 200 ipm
Man do you even know what trochoidal means ?
None of all the tool paths you've shown actually were trochoidal, trochoidal makes a circular pattern when machining. all your's were straight as possible.
Maybe next time do an actual comparaison instead of just promoting some tool manufactureur ty
Hey man, just trying to show some options people might not have considered - not preach a gospel that dynamic aren’t any good as I was pretty clear about in the video
your pocket clear isn't even close to optimized. You can rapid plunge it outside stock and get rid of repeat passes.
this could have been a useful legit comparison, with true educational value. Instead it's a somewhat misleading tooling ad. Whether intentional or not, this is subpar for PM and far from what Ian typically delivers. Disappointing at best; Shameful at worst.
Could be any vendor. Happened to be Iscar. I learned something and might tool up from Sandvik.
I feel like this is a dishonest comparison.
This was a terrible examination of these toolpaths and tools....