Searching 5-axis universal, looking for input!

[empower]

Okay, originally I thought it was one of those systems that can be easily expanded like the Makino DA300. The sales wasn’t sure, made a few calls and said in theory it’s doable but will cost more at later date.

Point taken, if it wasn’t designed to be integrated in such a manner, would be folly for me to insist. I’ll ask the sales to quote the rotary tool matrix.

Any insight on 120,170,215 tools? Any pitfalls that come to mind I should be aware off?

I also noticed on paper the machine looks decent in terms of floor space. But it does seem to sprawl a little bit with the various chillers, TSC units and what not. Are the position of these slightly flexible or pre-determined? Real estate is insane where I’m located and everything counts. For context the floor space the Mazak HMC sits on is worth half the price of the machine itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah the base machine normally comes with 60 tool carousel which has to be removed for the tool tower to work, hence why integration after the fact is cost prohibitive. no pitfalls that i'm aware of on the towers, just depends on how many tools you think you'll need.

chillers and other accessories come with pretty long hoses so you can configure them however suits your shop space best.

 

[MaxPrairie]

Any insight on 120,170,215 tools? Any pitfalls that come to mind I should be aware off?

Have you mentioned what your mix of work involves? I have a 60 tool changer and do prototype and short run production with a mix of plastics, alum, steel, stainless and rarely have to load a tool unless it is a special. Sometimes, even though all the tools are prestaged, it takes a couple seconds for the belt to get to the correct pod if the next tool is too far away and the current tool has only a few seconds of work to do. (tapping or countersinks for example)

 

[bryan_machine]

Here's a thought on tools for prototyping - I have observed that on many of my projects, which are often quantity 1 or 2, that if all the tools needed are not already in the tool magazine, simply loading them (if there are very many) may take longer than actually running the part. This doesn't really inform 60 vs 90 vs 120 vs 170 directly.

A thing to think about is how many different materials in what mix (all aluminum is different than half H13 and half Titanium), and how well behaved is the universe of drills, taps, and reamers. By which I mean, if everything in your workflow is 2 taps, 1 reamer, 5 drills, and a spot drill, that yields a different answer than if you commonly cover say 11 sizes of bolt, a couple of sizes of shoulder bolts, and so forth. Same idea for chamfering, corner rounding, spotting into deep holes, back chamfering, slotting/slitting, etc.

So production wants a big tool magazine to run a family of parts, change out worn tools automatically, and so forth. Prototyping wants a big tool magazine to avoid spending your entire life swapping tools in and out.

 

[finix]

Have you mentioned what your mix of work involves? I have a 60 tool changer and do prototype and short run production with a mix of plastics, alum, steel, stainless and rarely have to load a tool unless it is a special. Sometimes, even though all the tools are prestaged, it takes a couple seconds for the belt to get to the correct pod if the next tool is too far away and the current tool has only a few seconds of work to do. (tapping or countersinks for example)

For R&D aluminum, plastics, easy steels(1045, 4140.) For prototype I can get by with 60 tools, especially if spindle is HSK-A63(shared with my interface now.) Almost all the tools not in the machine will already be assembled in my tool cabinet.

Here's a thought on tools for prototyping - I have observed that on many of my projects, which are often quantity 1 or 2, that if all the tools needed are not already in the tool magazine, simply loading them (if there are very many) may take longer than actually running the part. This doesn't really inform 60 vs 90 vs 120 vs 170 directly.

A thing to think about is how many different materials in what mix (all aluminum is different than half H13 and half Titanium), and how well behaved is the universe of drills, taps, and reamers. By which I mean, if everything in your workflow is 2 taps, 1 reamer, 5 drills, and a spot drill, that yields a different answer than if you commonly cover say 11 sizes of bolt, a couple of sizes of shoulder bolts, and so forth. Same idea for chamfering, corner rounding, spotting into deep holes, back chamfering, slotting/slitting, etc.

So production wants a big tool magazine to run a family of parts, change out worn tools automatically, and so forth. Prototyping wants a big tool magazine to avoid spending your entire life swapping tools in and out.

160 on our Horizontal really feels about right. It’s big enough that all the tools for repeating jobs are mostly all inside. Small enough that I tell the designer I’m not putting an odd sized drill/reamer in for 1 product, pick a diameter from the tool list. Considering various clearance and gauge lengths on 5 axis 215 seems great. First need to figure out how much it’s going to cost and if I’m willing to go over the budget by that much.

I really like the workflow of different jobs set up on different pallets. Or different parts made from the same block of material for variations in appearance for different customers. Only concern is picking up 215 tools then later finding I want a more dedicated machine. Smaller envelope/ faster rapids, higher speed spindle etc… and having over purchased on the first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bryan_machine]

For R&D aluminum, plastics, easy steels(1045, 4140.) For prototype I can get by with 60 tools, especially if spindle is HSK-A63(shared with my interface now.) Almost all the tools not in the machine will already be assembled in my tool cabinet.

Bingo - another thing that would be nice is for the controllers for various machines to support large T# - so if all your controllers support say 5 digit tool numbers you can arrange that T3251 is always the same thing, whether in machine A, or machine B, or in a cabinet. All the same taper is obvious win.