What's new
What's new

Steel / Stainless roughers for older machines with flood coolant and traditional paths?

Really depends on your situation in life. Small shop, doing prototypes, short runs, mom and pop, bought a nice mill and want to keep it until they kick, there's no need to beat stuff up. It doesn't give you anything, you'll spend more time waiting for UPS to arrive than you'll save on the parts and there's no more parts to make today anyhow, have to draw up that thing Joe sent and write a program anyhow.

Totally, there is a difference, there's running the machine, then there is beating it to make money, as you said.

Things like my Haas DM2 inexpensive machine, wicked fast at everything, that is literally what it is for.

Now, if you have 40,000 in process and it's a decent-size biz with everything ready for the next 50,000 of something else and the tax benefits matter as much as the machine itself, that's a totally different matter.

So, you get guys arguing over what's right but diff'rent strokes ...

There is definitely no right/wrong, always context. But also just because your going high speed with a HSM path doesn't mean your beating the machine either.

I'm also a believer that these hsm toolpaths ? I swear some of them are slower than the old-fashioned way. A lot of them spend half their time driving around in the air, cutting nothing. I know they ain't supposed to but sure seems like it. Just drop a 1" cutter and chomp through there on a machine with square ways and a real spindle, I bet a lot of the time it'd be quicker. Not always, just sometimes.
I think its actually good, just like we talk about the manual skills before CNC, there is also the standard CNC programming separate from HSM programming.
You need to know it all, that way you can apply what ever is most efficient.
Doing both for so long I can look at a part and be like, yeah no, standard programming is gonna be faster on this than HSM.
Sometimes I don't let the software calculate the machining path, I create an auto pilot path then hand mod it into a franken path that's faster.

Those extra air cuts you see in milling is like you say with the lathe, just lazy programs.
I will pre cut with a standard pass to remove material that consistently causes air cuts, and then program a HSM path with stock to leave to remove air cuts all the time.
gotta be a jack of programming, as you already know.

And that's one thing I like with Gibbs, if I cant totally get a complex path I like, I convert the path to geometry, modify the geometry, and convert that back into a cutting path.
don't know what other software you can do that on, but its handy. :D
 
Last edited:
Here you go.
I saw @Mtndew :ROFLMAO: on this one, So I wanted to esplain Lucy,

You generally don't manage these process tiles with large # of machining processes, this is for doing your standard part stuff.

Once you get larger # of processes, or you get ninja status using Gibbs you use the 'Operation Manager'
Its easier, faster, and gives access to see and modify EVERYTHING!.

You also don't create new processes for everything, you create copy/instances and use 'operation modifiers'

 
its not the force on the spindle I'm concerned about, its the high feed rates slamming the table and ball screws around I find an issue with. The shops I know that started it when it first came out are having problems with drive servos and ball screws now... (hate to say I told you so but...)

The air blast thang though, heat is a problem, air blast simply isn't enough for anything but a quick couple of cuts, any prolonged cutting and the heat works into the holder and spindle, creating other issues with both accuracy and tools getting stuck in the spindle, never mind that the inserts are hot enough to burn your fingers, even with cold air blast set on stun... (never mind that some machines Haas... use coolant through the spindle housing to cool the spindle as much as the tooling)

Coolant, is only an issue if you cool off already hot carbide, (that fracturing the salesmen are so fond of describing) as in red hot carbide, otherwise you WILL get more time per insert with coolant then without.
One of my biggest findings with air blast is chip evacuation. No, it doesn't have lubricity, no it doesn't have much cooling capacity, but it does get chips out of places that flood coolant will not. For pockets and slots I have had better luck with air blast in steel than flood. OD contouring its a toss up.
Stainless steel seems like it needs the extra lubricity because flood almost always wins for me in 304.
 
You're missing the boat here.

Let's say that the Mori shop billed at $25/hr more than you do, because they are hauling ass and "beating up their machines". I'd bet that the deficit is a LOT more than that, but we'll use $25/hr for this example: That is $576,000 more they billed than you over 12 years.

I'm pretty sure they can afford to replace some drives or thrust washers or spindles or whatever boogie man keeps you up at night, and keep on making more money than you.
well... the moral of this story, is that shop went TU in October of last year, 2 of the 3 mori's were down cause they couldn't afford to repair them, the Akira mill, down for the same reason... I mean, they called me in to help get the last few jobs out before everything went to auction as is. (I worked there for 9 years, was the supervisor before I left for the woods)

Lets say they "could have" made .5mil, that requires the mills to be running, if they aint running they ain't making money, but you still have wages, rent, power, ins to pay.

As for the HSM, sure its cool, but I've seen a boat load of spindles get tanked on HS capable machines too, and yeah its neato but at what cost? (granted this has more to do with "programmers" running the spindles at max speed rather then backing them off a little, so they just get hot, or worse run out of grunt, causing undue stress... electric motors run out of horse ponies the closer you get to max RiPM's)

The thing is, I'm not convinced that the high feed milling is any better then conventional insert mills, not when you consider insert replacements, insert cost,(and its an insert hungry process) gods forbid a crash at those feed rates. Start really plotting it out, and the cost vs profit starts looking about dead even, but one option has far less risk.
 
If reliability is the goal, nothing beats adaptive toolpaths.
'Adaptive' seems to be a common word for mousey-munching now. Umm, where is the "adapting" in this method ? K&T had adaptive control but it was either finish or power settings, feedrates that actually "adapted" to conditions. (You could set it for either surface finish or metal removal, then the control would speed up or slow down the feed to maximize either one, by itself).

I don't see any adapting going on in these high-feed, low-cut methods, where did the word come from ?
 
'Adaptive' seems to be a common word for mousey-munching now. Umm, where is the "adapting" in this method ? K&T had adaptive control but it was either finish or power settings, feedrates that actually "adapted" to conditions. (You could set it for either surface finish or metal removal, then the control would speed up or slow down the feed to maximize either one, by itself).

I don't see any adapting going on in these high-feed, low-cut methods, where did the word come from ?

The adapting is done with the program, not the machine.

I know there are adaptive controls. Our makino has "adaptive control monitor", although we seldom use it. Can speed up or slow down feedrates to achieve a certain load, etc.

But with "adaptive toolpaths", the adapting is done by adjusting cut widths and feedrates based on where it is. Will speed up around outside corners, slows down on inside corners, will reduce cutter engagement in tight areas, etc.

Maybe there should have been a different term coined for it but it seems to work as a catch-all when each software calls theirs something a little different. Better than "high speed milling", which this type of toolpath does not technically have to be. Feel free to use "high speed toolpaths" with your HSS tools, it does work... although not as fast as carbide


Mousey-munching toolpaths sounds fine, lets call it that.
 
with "adaptive toolpaths", the adapting is done by adjusting cut widths and feedrates based on where it is. Will speed up around outside corners, slows down on inside corners, will reduce cutter engagement in tight areas, etc.
Every toolpath does that tho. Or every well-written one anyhow. "Adaptive" would be if it actually changed according to conditions. Like you got a batch of harder than usual steel so the toolpaths changed. Took six lighter roughing passes instead of normally it'd be four, or something.

Seems like just a big baloney buzzword to me. The Makino and K&T "adaptive" really does adapt.

HSM I could live with, I guess. At least it gest the idea across that the tool is buzzing around like a little beaver or something. "Adaptive" just seems like someone pulled it out their marketspeak ass :(
 
Every toolpath does that tho. Or every well-written one anyhow. "Adaptive" would be if it actually changed according to conditions. Like you got a batch of harder than usual steel so the toolpaths changed. Took six lighter roughing passes instead of normally it'd be four, or something.

Seems like just a big baloney buzzword to me. The Makino and K&T "adaptive" really does adapt.

HSM I could live with, I guess. At least it gest the idea across that the tool is buzzing around like a little beaver or something. "Adaptive" just seems like someone pulled it out their marketspeak ass :(
And 'adaptive' is not the general word for it anyway.
GibbsCAM and other software's don't use the word 'adaptive'.
There's just too many people on here using Masterscam and conFusion360.

Originally these paths were called high speed machining paths, so actually HSM is the more correct general term, not 'adaptive'

but because of the large cult of Masterscam, and conFusion they all call it adaptive.

I never heard the word adaptive for HSM paths for years after it cam out.
This was probably due to the patent of the original and the reverse engineering that happened.
 
the last shop I worked at talked a lot of S about Gibbs, But after running some of their programs, pretty sure gibbs wasn't at fault. For some reason their "programmers" realllly didn't want my input, since I was the programmer for the shop they had bought out, they had switched to Fusion I think? claiming Gibbs customer service wasn't supporting them? (having only recently refined my own posts through gibbs... I may have been a little confused at their reasoning)

They also threw out 30 years worth of tooling and process on repeat parts, reprogrammed everything, while ignoring the folks that had been running these jobs so?

They did end up losing all the customers we brought with us, and all the good people from the original shop quit or got fired for "not working well with others"
 
the last shop I worked at talked a lot of S about Gibbs, But after running some of their programs, pretty sure gibbs wasn't at fault. For some reason their "programmers" realllly didn't want my input, since I was the programmer for the shop they had bought out, they had switched to Fusion I think? claiming Gibbs customer service wasn't supporting them? (having only recently refined my own posts through gibbs... I may have been a little confused at their reasoning)

They also threw out 30 years worth of tooling and process on repeat parts, reprogrammed everything, while ignoring the folks that had been running these jobs so?

They did end up losing all the customers we brought with us, and all the good people from the original shop quit or got fired for "not working well with others"
Good times, yeah if your running any of the top CAM software's you cant blame software, its something else.
Mastercam, Siemens, Gibbs...have been around a long time, you could complain if using Fusion360, its only been out a few years, and its not in the same tier as the others.
Even AD bought out and has PowerMill as a higher tier CAM software.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. I've been running my machines at max RPM and with high feed / high speed tool paths since 2007, and I've worn out exactly one thrust bearing.
 
Last edited:
We'll have to agree to disagree. I've been running my machines at max RPM and with high feed / high speed tool paths since 2007, and I've worn out exactly one thrust washer.
Agree, I haven't had any issues with even junk Haas/Milltronics machines.
It's an old school non factual belief.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. I've been running my machines at max RPM and with high feed / high speed tool paths since 2007, and I've worn out exactly one thrust bearing.
The slides on your mills don't weigh a thousand pounds, either. I kicked mine back from 400 ipm to about 250 because it was effing scary. Hell, it was probably more than a thousand pounds, the lower turret alone had to be 350 (just calculated at 1 lb/cubic inch).
 
The slides on your mills don't weigh a thousand pounds, either. I kicked mine back from 400 ipm to about 250 because it was effing scary. Hell, it was probably more than a thousand pounds, the lower turret alone had to be 350 (just calculated at 1 lb/cubic inch).
Yeah slinging around a big heavy old machine not the same with a eating disorder machine with extreme acc. dec. on a lighter table.
 








 
Back
Top