What's new
What's new

Accuracy of Brother W1000Xd2

Hi @gkoenig , could you send me a PM please? I'm looking at bringing in a U500 into our shop. My local Yamazen office has been fantastic with the help so far, but it sounds like you might be able to help with a couple extra questions I have. I'm a long time reader, first time posting here, so it looks like I'm not allowed to send out PMs?

Thank you
Don't be selfish. Post your questions publicly so the rest of us can benefit from it, and the forum can benefit from the added traffic.
 
Don't be selfish. Post your questions publicly so the rest of us can benefit from it, and the forum can benefit from the added traffic.
Fair comment @Radar987 , wasn't trying to be selfish but I can see it looking that way. I was trying not to derail the thread, but also not sure if my questions warranted a new thread.

Because I haven't found much info on the U500 outside the Yamazen website, I'm hoping once we have ours up and going that we can put some info out about our experience with the machine. Seeing a couple of demos and in-person visits with other customers, it has a lot of potential for our shop so I'm excited to get one in here.

For those folks with Speedios, what's your experience with dual-contact BT30 holders? When do you spend the extra money, and when do you not? For example: maybe under 3/8" dia endmills are standard while 3/8" and over might be dual-contact. Or, over a certain tool length no matter the diameter?

What the favorite for CAM simulation for 5-axis Brother machines? We're a Mastercam shop, but I'd be interested to hear other's situations as well.

Thank you
 
I was just up at Yamazen watching a U500 run, and I would love to have one. I can't justify the expense with my own products, and the parts I make for outside companies simply are not a good fit.

Doesn't mean I don't want one any less!

Good question regarding when to buy BBT holders and not. I had put that line at 1/4" hydraulics, as 90% of my tools are 3/8 or less.
 
If the difference isn't so great then why not ONLY get dual contact?

Dual contact should have better Z height matching because the face taper eliminates some or all of the effect of the spindle warming and the tool taper moving in/out.

Some people also think that if you leave non dual contact tools in the spindle then you risk getting dried coolant (and possibly other junk) on the taper face, so this can cause you issues if you don't manually clean the taper from time to time.
 
If the difference isn't so great then why not ONLY get dual contact?

Dual contact should have better Z height matching because the face taper eliminates some or all of the effect of the spindle warming and the tool taper moving in/out.

Some people also think that if you leave non dual contact tools in the spindle then you risk getting dried coolant (and possibly other junk) on the taper face, so this can cause you issues if you don't manually clean the taper from time to time.
I wonder if using non dual contact holders will wear the spindle taper any faster. On my Brother I was measuring .0003"-.0006" of taper preload with dual contact holders and .0011" for taper only contact holders, so dual contacts don't stretch the spindle as much. .0003" of static preload isn't much, and how much of that is left when spinning at 16k?
 
@Fal Grunt , the U500 should be a good fit for the parts we make which all fit in the palm of the hand. It's a great machine, but it might not be for everyone. It looks like it could get tight in the work envelope of the machine. I don't know of any other machine that is this small on the outside and large (enough) on the inside.

I do plan on using smaller tooling than we have been in our CAT40 machine, focusing on under 1/2" diameter. Even in our CAT40 machine, because of the size of our parts, a 3/8" dia tool is really efficient.

To be clear, are you saying you run BBT for 1/4" and 3/8" tools, standard BT for everything else? If so, do you notice a difference with the BBT?

@hi-fly-cnc , good points made there. I had that same concern so I asked and the Brother has a spindle wash at tool change, so the interface should stay clean. As I understand, with other dual contact spindle interfaces the toolholders cannot be mixed but in this case they can.

As to the question why not get only dual contact: price and selection. For some sizes, we'll have to go non dual contact from some brands which is okay. Other brands have the same selection in both BBT and BT, with a difference in price. Price difference can be significant, 20% or more for dual contact. When pricing is close, it does make sense to go only dual contact.

It's possible that I'm overthinking this, and standard holders will actually be fine for most of what we do.

What are experiences between non dual contact and dual contact BT30?
 
I wonder if using non dual contact holders will wear the spindle taper any faster. On my Brother I was measuring .0003"-.0006" of taper preload with dual contact holders and .0011" for taper only contact holders, so dual contacts don't stretch the spindle as much. .0003" of static preload isn't much, and how much of that is left when spinning at 16k?
Do you notice a difference when cutting between a dual contact and non dual contact holder, using the same end mill?
 
@hi-fly-cnc , good points made there. I had that same concern so I asked and the Brother has a spindle wash at tool change, so the interface should stay clean. As I understand, with other dual contact spindle interfaces the toolholders cannot be mixed but in this case they can.

But I guess you have to wash and wipe the spindle interface if you left a non face contact tool in overnight?

I had a mad panic once measuring "non pointy" tool lengths once. There was obviously a layer of dried coolant on the tool length probe and I was getting different answers each time! Eventually I wiped it and I was back to measuring to the same micron each time. However, it was a reminder that dried coolant has thickness. Clean the spindle faces manually from time to time (and the tool flanges).

I wonder if dried on coolant will give you wonky tool length readings for the first bunch of tool changes in the morning? Dunno... I only have dual contact and keep them loaded when the machine isn't in use.
 
Do you notice a difference when cutting between a dual contact and non dual contact holder, using the same end mill?
No, but I haven't had any tools tell me they were unhappy with the cut due to the taper contact in 2 years, and I don't baby the machine. All things considered, I went all dual contact but I have a few non dual contact holders and don't treat them any differently.
 
But I guess you have to wash and wipe the spindle interface if you left a non face contact tool in overnight?

I had a mad panic once measuring "non pointy" tool lengths once. There was obviously a layer of dried coolant on the tool length probe and I was getting different answers each time! Eventually I wiped it and I was back to measuring to the same micron each time. However, it was a reminder that dried coolant has thickness. Clean the spindle faces manually from time to time (and the tool flanges).

I wonder if dried on coolant will give you wonky tool length readings for the first bunch of tool changes in the morning? Dunno... I only have dual contact and keep them loaded when the machine isn't in use.

I didn't ask specifically about leaving non dual contact holders in the spindle overnight, just the issue of chips getting in the way. I see your point, and we already clean the CAT40 taper and toolholders between setups so that's not much more to do. Seems like the spindle probe needs to be dual contact as well to maintain continuity.

I appreciate the feedback, and knowing that you only use dual contact holders. I think we'll be doing the same.
 
No, but I haven't had any tools tell me they were unhappy with the cut due to the taper contact in 2 years, and I don't baby the machine. All things considered, I went all dual contact but I have a few non dual contact holders and don't treat them any differently.

Good to know, thank you. It's reassuring to hear we can push these BT30 machines.

Seems like dual contact is the way to go. To add for anyone who might be interested, @gkoenig also pointed out to me that on a 5-axis machine with typically longer gauge length tools that dual contact is even more important than on a 3-axis.

So it makes sense that it's not just about tool diameter, but also gauge length, that makes dual contact important and worth the extra cost.

Thank you everyone, I appreciate it! Apologies for derailing the W1000 thread. I'll try to post more in a new thread when we take delivery of our U500.
 
What the favorite for CAM simulation for 5-axis Brother machines? We're a Mastercam shop, but I'd be interested to hear other's situations as well.
A local client of ours that I work closely with has two U500s. They use MasterCam with Vericut. Post processor through Postability. They are very happy with the system. They post and run. Programs run nice with the Force optimization too. Knocked about 40% off the cycle time so far, vs their 40 taper, machining a 17-4 H900 part that is about the size of your hand...
20240522_110755_resized.jpg
 
@Fal Grunt , the U500 should be a good fit for the parts we make which all fit in the palm of the hand. It's a great machine, but it might not be for everyone. It looks like it could get tight in the work envelope of the machine. I don't know of any other machine that is this small on the outside and large (enough) on the inside.

I do plan on using smaller tooling than we have been in our CAT40 machine, focusing on under 1/2" diameter. Even in our CAT40 machine, because of the size of our parts, a 3/8" dia tool is really efficient.

To be clear, are you saying you run BBT for 1/4" and 3/8" tools, standard BT for everything else? If so, do you notice a difference with the BBT?
My experience with BBT was with a CAT 40 machine, we only ran bigger tools, 3/4 and up, facemills, etc, with BBT holders. Everything else was standard tooling. I ran a 3/4" inserted cutter in standard tooling and in BBT tooling and there was a significant difference in sound, but the company I worked at I was running pieces parts, not production. So I had no long term comparison. I can tell you I never saw another machinist wipe the spindle, before, during, or after loading tools.

For me it is also a matter of cost. The owner of the previous company I mentioned was an epic tight wad. He'd spend $20 to save $1. Ie, $20 in my labor to save $1. Some might appreciate this, and he probably thought he was doing me a favor, but I don't see it that way as a business owner. However, write up your list of tooling, and compare BBT to non BBT. I just wrote up a basic tooling package for a job I am working on quoting, and the "mixed" tooling was around $8k. I don't have the spreadsheet on this computer, but I think running only BBT it was .... $10k? Maybe more.

With the above job I am quoting everything is +/- .0005", so running BBT tools will hopefully help. However, I am ignorant as to whether running the BBT would help with a 1/16 endmill running at 16k trying to hold .0005. It sounds like some of the above posts advocate that it would be beneficial to run ALL BBT, even on the smaller tools. I always viewed BBT by the rule of thumb I was told, which is BBT increases rigidity approximately to the next size. Ie, a BBT 30 runs like a standard 40, which is great when hogging with a rougher or facemill. I never considered how it impacts tiny tools.

So.... That $2k difference may be irrelevant, if in the end it contributes to accuracy holding tolerance with small tools.
 
My experience with BBT was with a CAT 40 machine, we only ran bigger tools, 3/4 and up, facemills, etc, with BBT holders. Everything else was standard tooling. I ran a 3/4" inserted cutter in standard tooling and in BBT tooling and there was a significant difference in sound, but the company I worked at I was running pieces parts, not production. So I had no long term comparison. I can tell you I never saw another machinist wipe the spindle, before, during, or after loading tools.

For me it is also a matter of cost. The owner of the previous company I mentioned was an epic tight wad. He'd spend $20 to save $1. Ie, $20 in my labor to save $1. Some might appreciate this, and he probably thought he was doing me a favor, but I don't see it that way as a business owner. However, write up your list of tooling, and compare BBT to non BBT. I just wrote up a basic tooling package for a job I am working on quoting, and the "mixed" tooling was around $8k. I don't have the spreadsheet on this computer, but I think running only BBT it was .... $10k? Maybe more.

With the above job I am quoting everything is +/- .0005", so running BBT tools will hopefully help. However, I am ignorant as to whether running the BBT would help with a 1/16 endmill running at 16k trying to hold .0005. It sounds like some of the above posts advocate that it would be beneficial to run ALL BBT, even on the smaller tools. I always viewed BBT by the rule of thumb I was told, which is BBT increases rigidity approximately to the next size. Ie, a BBT 30 runs like a standard 40, which is great when hogging with a rougher or facemill. I never considered how it impacts tiny tools.

So.... That $2k difference may be irrelevant, if in the end it contributes to accuracy holding tolerance with small tools.

Thanks @Fal Grunt , we're not that budget conscious that we'd need to worry about a $1 but we do want to spend wisely so I agree it's a matter of cost. I appreciate your specific example as well, makes sense that insert tooling will need the extra rigidity also. Even if it's not production, I have to think there'd be a difference in surface finish and tool life if there's a significant difference in the sound of the cut.

Just looking at a few size examples of toolholders we'll need, dual contact can be roughly 20% more than non dual contact which is similar to your example costs. I think we'll go with dual contact for the first order of holders and at some point test out a non dual contact holder.

Thanks for the info and picture @BROTHERFRANK , looks like those would certainly be productive.

Looks like we'll also be going with Postability for a post processor since the pricing makes sense and they have an established post already.

Thanks again!
 
A local client of ours that I work closely with has two U500s. They use MasterCam with Vericut. Post processor through Postability. They are very happy with the system. They post and run. Programs run nice with the Force optimization too. Knocked about 40% off the cycle time so far, vs their 40 taper, machining a 17-4 H900 part that is about the size of your hand...
View attachment 443113
Is that a single chip conveyor and coolant tank spanning two machines?
 
Last edited:
A local client of ours that I work closely with has two U500s. They use MasterCam with Vericut. Post processor through Postability. They are very happy with the system. They post and run. Programs run nice with the Force optimization too. Knocked about 40% off the cycle time so far, vs their 40 taper, machining a 17-4 H900 part that is about the size of your hand...
View attachment 443113
Ultimate garage setup right here!
I bet that setup mints money.

How much (ballpark) is it add a feedio setup to a U500?
 
Is that a single chip conveyor and coolant tank spanning two machines?

Has anyone done four machines on one tank/conveyor (2 x 2)? That would be awesome.

My guess is that it's not one tank + conveyor for the two machines because it looks like the tank ends before it goes past the Feedio:
1718237100016.png

I've been told that one conveyor can dump into the next one over to have a chain ending in a container. Maybe that's this setup, or the other conveyor discharges out the other side?

I've also been told that a tank could be built for two machines right next to each other but it gets cumbersome with moving the tank for cleaning. I'd have to think with the Feedio in the middle that one tank for the two would be extreme.
 
Ultimate garage setup right here!
I bet that setup mints money.

How much (ballpark) is it add a feedio setup to a U500?
Absolutely!

I don't remember what the price is on that because we're not in the market for one, but if you look into them they're a well-done bit of automation.
 
Is that a single chip conveyor and coolant tank spanning two machines?

That customer did singles for each machine.

I'm working with Mayfran on a 4x machine Mega Conveyor which will be interesting.

More exciting; Mayfran also has remote central coolant systems. Catch pan behind the machine has a grinder pump and 4" hose sending *everything* back to a central collection unit. Short/wide conveyor takes up all the big stuff into the hopper, coolant goes through a paper band filter, then into a 500 gallon tank with a chiller on it. Individual pumps on the top feed back to a 30 gallon sump on each machine where the machine's washdown/flood/tsc pump live.

Coolant is constantly circulated to keep the big 4" line primed.

The floor space savings are exceptional. Remember - it isn't jus the tanks and chip conveyor, but the space for the hopper, and the floor space to get that hopper in/out from behind the machines comfortably and efficiently. The Mayfran system removes all of that - you can pack them in like sardines, but unlike digging troughs out on your shop floor, you can still add/remove/move machines in the system.

Rough pricing (every one of these is custom, and there are *many* options) but about $120k for 4 machines - not much more than if you bought 4 mid-range filtering conveyors. Way less than buying 4x filtering/scraper conveyors with backwash drums (about $45k each), and this setup plus the paper band filter and chiller make it even higher performance.
 








 
Back
Top