On an earlier video I commented that this is real engineering. Someone disagreed. Well, here's more proof that TITANS of CNC are REAL engineers. Amazing stuff guys!
Depends on on your definition of engineering. There are valid definitions that can argue either way. This is amazing stuff, and *well* beyond "wrench monkey", but at the same time I didn't see any talk about things like computing how fast the part changer could actually be allowed to spin before the part tips, how much difference in deflection you get by milling it from top to bottom or how much thermal expansion different milling plans would experience. At the same time, I'm not saying they were negligent in _not_ doing those things because this is likely a case where tho cost of doing that level of engineering far exceeds the benefit of just being over conservative. Which costs more; an hour doing math in the office or an extra 20 seconds on the machine from running the part changer as slow as you can?
@@abhirmalhotra5103 I disagree. "Plugging numbers" is not engineering by any definition I'd acknowledge. The engineering is understanding the underlying system well enough to know what questions to ask and how to answer them. Usually the full answer ends up including numbers, but very often the important part is done before you get to the arithmetic. As an example, for the part changing operation, what needs to be considered relating to the part tipping over? How fast the changer spins around is one thing, but that's actually only an indirect issue because it causes sideways acceleration on the part, and another thing that causes that is starting and stopping the rotation. That is to say you could have a situation where the part would be fine with a normal change cycle and only tip if you manually jog it around. You might or might not need the numbers, but thinking through the implications of the math is about half of what engineering is. (The other major bit is getting specific about the requirements: turning "the part doesn't fall over" into "the total acceleration vector always points inside the contact points of the support arm".)
I wish I worked at a shop that took on jobs like this. Maybe a few times a month I’ll have someone come to me with a print and tell me to make it, otherwise it’s a bunch of cast iron, cast stainless, or plastic.
Would the material removal rate have been better with a high feed mill instead Barry? Or possibly a large indexable endmill, coming back in for pre finish with the Harvey 1.
The problem was that the high feed mill i wanted to use was 4” diameter. And would only take a .078” depth. An endmill is so much more forgiving, and the TE is so versatile. Thats why we went with that method
nice part berry. and compared to the parts i use to do on a manuel lathe and mill its nice and small ( we had two 6 ton cealing crances but they couldnt even lift our part's even when combined. so we had to do janky crane lift from outisde through the bay port with a 23 ton extended moveing crane xD. that was jank and no one was even close to it well it was moveing around. wounder why xD. btw the 80 ton crane was not setup up yet. it was still laying outside on the fround when i left that companny)
@@verakoo6187 that would be a little let down. I mean sure its am impressive part size wise. But a functional part is a different game altogether. Lets see...
Can you let us know how many of those endmills it took to rough that part? Ive always wondered the lifespan of the harvey 1, if it would be practical to spend upwards of 500 for a single tool. i work in a job shop with 4 employees and use endmills alot to rough stainless, the 200$ price range cutters bust edges very quick. It seems like these harvey cutters are 15x the strength of anything ive ever cut with, any info about this topic would help me so much. Its hard to convince my bosses to purchase expensive tools because of a small shop budget. we do alot of 316l, 304l and a2, d2 tool steel as well.
@@barrysetzer okay awesome, thank you for sharing! 100 ipm on an endmill is dark arts, i will get to that point one day. I bought my own version of fusion 360 this year and have been using it as much as possible. We only have 3 axis machines, but once this shop closes or i get tired of being underpaid im going for a position like one at titans! I want to be surrounded by motivational and positive guys that actually have a passion for machining so im not the only one whos nerding out and understands whats going on. Thank you and the team for providing this little bit of info! Keep it up
Could most of the materiel removal been done from top to bottom by spinning it and moving the end mill in and out? In principle that seem like it should work, and it would maximize rigidity, but I'm guessing there's some good (but not obvious) reason to not do it beyond "we didn't think of that", and I'm interested in what that reason is.
Having the rotary move unlocks a clamp on the axis, and actually reduces the rigidity of the machine. That's why 3+2 operations are still so common nowadays even with fancy machines. Also the linear axes typically can handle a heavier load than the rotary axis can
@@Marlfox570 interesting. I know I've seen machines milling on rotating parts (so clearly you can make that axis tight enough), but I could see how it would be simpler to build the table if only need high precision and rigidity when it's not moving (you could build it like the taper in a tool holder for example).
@@benjaminshropshire2900 well you can still machine with the B axis unclamped no problem in many cases but you're now relying on the strength of the motor attached to said axis versus having it clamped down. Having it stationary is going to be better for very heavy cuts in harder materials.
Well actually most horizontal machines (that only have 4 axes) come with a weaker motor that isn't recommended to use with simultaneous 4 axis milling. Though many manufacturers allow you to upgrade said motor for $$$
@@Marlfox570 are you thinking about rotational rigidity around the B axis? If so, then at least for the round portions of the part, that shouldn't matter as the un-commanded motion should be parallels to the surface. As for around the features sticking out, would there be enough backlash to mess up a roughing pass? For a finishing pass, different story.
Love how you said the 2nd video (which i presumed was finishing) would come out 3d after the first one or so. Now thats been out for a month and still no sign of it :( Also its crazy to me that you still use mastercam for these parts, weve had so mqny issues with it.
I still can't understand why this wasn't done on a Mill-Turn and completely avoided the complicated setup on the Heller. Also, you can leave all the material in the world, you get a chunk of carbide embedded in it...that whole chunk of steel is scrap until you get it burned out with EDM.
surely the most efficient way would be on a mill turn , E tower mazak or similar. far better option imo. Cool to see what can be done just in a shop with bags of free high end machines I would rather see it on where it’s best suited.
you can rip the metal out faster on a mill turn , Round features both ends and you can hit the through hole at the same time on a steady. Apart from the fancy external detail we do valve bodies like this all the time never once would we consider this as a faster more reliable option .
Would it have been at all practical machine-time-wise to make the program as (at least for the portions it would work) one rotating hogging cut from the top down?(Think the video with this title: "MURDERING Material on Our NEW HELLER CP 6000") Assuming X is the axis in line with the spindle, really only really using X to bring the tool in and out(and obviously Z to move down) to create the form as it spins.
Because all the features like the mounting feet etc. on this machine, i could have rough turned it, but it would have removed very little material because of the obstacles
Love to see that project completed. Is it a full flow ball valve or a gate valve type or something else? I love the videos...great work guys (and girls)...
On an earlier video I commented that this is real engineering. Someone disagreed. Well, here's more proof that TITANS of CNC are REAL engineers. Amazing stuff guys!
Depends on on your definition of engineering. There are valid definitions that can argue either way.
This is amazing stuff, and *well* beyond "wrench monkey", but at the same time I didn't see any talk about things like computing how fast the part changer could actually be allowed to spin before the part tips, how much difference in deflection you get by milling it from top to bottom or how much thermal expansion different milling plans would experience. At the same time, I'm not saying they were negligent in _not_ doing those things because this is likely a case where tho cost of doing that level of engineering far exceeds the benefit of just being over conservative. Which costs more; an hour doing math in the office or an extra 20 seconds on the machine from running the part changer as slow as you can?
This is engineering at its core. Nerds who do nothing creative and plug values into a formula will tell you otherwise though.
@@benjaminshropshire2900just keep quiet.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 Interesting stuff!
@@abhirmalhotra5103 I disagree. "Plugging numbers" is not engineering by any definition I'd acknowledge. The engineering is understanding the underlying system well enough to know what questions to ask and how to answer them. Usually the full answer ends up including numbers, but very often the important part is done before you get to the arithmetic.
As an example, for the part changing operation, what needs to be considered relating to the part tipping over? How fast the changer spins around is one thing, but that's actually only an indirect issue because it causes sideways acceleration on the part, and another thing that causes that is starting and stopping the rotation. That is to say you could have a situation where the part would be fine with a normal change cycle and only tip if you manually jog it around. You might or might not need the numbers, but thinking through the implications of the math is about half of what engineering is. (The other major bit is getting specific about the requirements: turning "the part doesn't fall over" into "the total acceleration vector always points inside the contact points of the support arm".)
Did you guys somehow get fired off this job? 4 months later and no finish machining.
I wonder if maybe the client didn't want to have the finished part on youtube for some reason.
Man I thought y’all had given up making videos! We having withdrawals over here. Post more often for us junkies!
Thanks
We have been posting shorts everyday but skipped a few long form for BOOMBASTIC
@TITANSofCNC we don't need shorts we need more old school videos like you used to do
I’m just imagining the cost of accidentally having a wrong tool path at one step and ruining the part. Amazing
Crazy i actually talked to berry about the tower tipping during the Boombastic openhouse!
Hahahaha pleasure to hang out and talk chips!
Absolutely, Hope to do it again some day!
I wish I worked at a shop that took on jobs like this. Maybe a few times a month I’ll have someone come to me with a print and tell me to make it, otherwise it’s a bunch of cast iron, cast stainless, or plastic.
Would the material removal rate have been better with a high feed mill instead Barry? Or possibly a large indexable endmill, coming back in for pre finish with the Harvey 1.
The problem was that the high feed mill i wanted to use was 4” diameter. And would only take a .078” depth. An endmill is so much more forgiving, and the TE is so versatile. Thats why we went with that method
I hope you guys leave the finish like that. Because it looks outstanding.
Absolutely a work of CNC art ain't it.
Love the sound of the machines eating! 🎶
nice part berry. and compared to the parts i use to do on a manuel lathe and mill its nice and small ( we had two 6 ton cealing crances but they couldnt even lift our part's even when combined. so we had to do janky crane lift from outisde through the bay port with a 23 ton extended moveing crane xD. that was jank and no one was even close to it well it was moveing around. wounder why xD. btw the 80 ton crane was not setup up yet. it was still laying outside on the fround when i left that companny)
Hahaha i hear that! Big is relative! At General Atomics we had a Waldrich Coburg VTL with a 60 foot diameter table
@@barrysetzer see that the size that i use to work on
weeeeell, that tool would still be cutting, but thank you for that sick footage without cooling......
When is the video of programming the whole part come out??
For such parts, a code generator based on a 3D model is used
Idk wtf that part is or for but it's fucking beautiful if anything its a cool piece of art
Im still waiting on internal features, how you gonna do the ID? With a 5 foot endmill?
Pretty sure this is just an dislpay piece for the yacht's owner, not a functional part.
@@verakoo6187 that would be a little let down. I mean sure its am impressive part size wise. But a functional part is a different game altogether. Lets see...
Can you let us know how many of those endmills it took to rough that part? Ive always wondered the lifespan of the harvey 1, if it would be practical to spend upwards of 500 for a single tool. i work in a job shop with 4 employees and use endmills alot to rough stainless, the 200$ price range cutters bust edges very quick. It seems like these harvey cutters are 15x the strength of anything ive ever cut with, any info about this topic would help me so much. Its hard to convince my bosses to purchase expensive tools because of a small shop budget. we do alot of 316l, 304l and a2, d2 tool steel as well.
At 100ipm, .1” stepover, 3” deep, i was getting around 8 hours. But thats kinda unfair because i had it doing some brutal toolpaths
@@barrysetzer okay awesome, thank you for sharing! 100 ipm on an endmill is dark arts, i will get to that point one day. I bought my own version of fusion 360 this year and have been using it as much as possible. We only have 3 axis machines, but once this shop closes or i get tired of being underpaid im going for a position like one at titans! I want to be surrounded by motivational and positive guys that actually have a passion for machining so im not the only one whos nerding out and understands whats going on. Thank you and the team for providing this little bit of info! Keep it up
What about having an arm that comes in to pin the part down on the top face that can move out of the way as required?
Could most of the materiel removal been done from top to bottom by spinning it and moving the end mill in and out? In principle that seem like it should work, and it would maximize rigidity, but I'm guessing there's some good (but not obvious) reason to not do it beyond "we didn't think of that", and I'm interested in what that reason is.
Having the rotary move unlocks a clamp on the axis, and actually reduces the rigidity of the machine. That's why 3+2 operations are still so common nowadays even with fancy machines. Also the linear axes typically can handle a heavier load than the rotary axis can
@@Marlfox570 interesting. I know I've seen machines milling on rotating parts (so clearly you can make that axis tight enough), but I could see how it would be simpler to build the table if only need high precision and rigidity when it's not moving (you could build it like the taper in a tool holder for example).
@@benjaminshropshire2900 well you can still machine with the B axis unclamped no problem in many cases but you're now relying on the strength of the motor attached to said axis versus having it clamped down. Having it stationary is going to be better for very heavy cuts in harder materials.
Well actually most horizontal machines (that only have 4 axes) come with a weaker motor that isn't recommended to use with simultaneous 4 axis milling. Though many manufacturers allow you to upgrade said motor for $$$
@@Marlfox570 are you thinking about rotational rigidity around the B axis? If so, then at least for the round portions of the part, that shouldn't matter as the un-commanded motion should be parallels to the surface. As for around the features sticking out, would there be enough backlash to mess up a roughing pass? For a finishing pass, different story.
With the roughing endmill, did you have to account for tool wear, or did you leave that untouched since you left 0.100" of stock?
Nah i didnt account for wear. Honestly, i was very interested in seeing how long the endmill would survive
@@barrysetzer how many hours did it last?
I did not see it tip over!! I really wanted to see that!!
Lol not ME
Love how you said the 2nd video (which i presumed was finishing) would come out 3d after the first one or so. Now thats been out for a month and still no sign of it :(
Also its crazy to me that you still use mastercam for these parts, weve had so mqny issues with it.
that is the bad ass ball valve, LEAVE it alone it looks super cool
I still can't understand why this wasn't done on a Mill-Turn and completely avoided the complicated setup on the Heller. Also, you can leave all the material in the world, you get a chunk of carbide embedded in it...that whole chunk of steel is scrap until you get it burned out with EDM.
surely the most efficient way would be on a mill turn , E tower mazak or similar. far better option imo. Cool to see what can be done just in a shop with bags of free high end machines I would rather see it on where it’s best suited.
Ummmm this was done on a mill turn. But you cant turn this part. Soooooo thanks anyway
you can rip the metal out faster on a mill turn , Round features both ends and you can hit the through hole at the same time on a steady. Apart from the fancy external detail we do valve bodies like this all the time never once would we consider this as a faster more reliable option .
@@barrysetzer Personally, I thought it was a great example of adaptability. You use what is available and responsibly. 👍
Go Barry!
Why are you not running a coolant through system.
Would it have been at all practical machine-time-wise to make the program as (at least for the portions it would work) one rotating hogging cut from the top down?(Think the video with this title: "MURDERING Material on Our NEW HELLER CP 6000") Assuming X is the axis in line with the spindle, really only really using X to bring the tool in and out(and obviously Z to move down) to create the form as it spins.
in the other video you said it went down from 80hrs to 20hr now you're saying it was 60hrs to 16hrs - so which one is it?
2:52 and 3:16 why isn't the tool holder the same?
😂😂😂
3:27 can someone explain the meaning of the colors?
these just display the different toolpath operations. you can set it to display different colors for each operation or for each tool.
@@ipadize oh okay, thank you! Kinda makes sense that it's able to display whatever they want.
Obviously now that I think about it. 🥴😀
Still wondering how you're going to hollow it out
Why wasnt the first roughing done on like a big lathe and all done in a mill?
Asking because i dont know much not because I think i know better
Because all the features like the mounting feet etc. on this machine, i could have rough turned it, but it would have removed very little material because of the obstacles
Molybdenum magnets are good for removing metal from eyes sometimes, keep one in your first aid kit
Why not just keep it rough cut? It would save time and money and be only slightly heavier.
is this a truck axle?
oh no, i thought Berry is going to put his huge Shunk back at work. 😔 maybe next time
Love to see that project completed. Is it a full flow ball valve or a gate valve type or something else?
I love the videos...great work guys (and girls)...
$500 for a 1 inch cutter, ez100% profit on each EM.
This is the NON talking video
Broooosss, you guys machined ball valve?? That's mad
Are your fking computers liquid nitrogen cooled at this point or what!?!?!?