Reusing Cat 40 tools
Close
Login to Your Account
Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default Reusing Cat 40 tools

    New Mazak machine. Many, many old Cat 40 holders ranging from common weldon holders to jacobs chucks and collets. Mazak is telling me not to reuse any old tools; I have to buy all new tools (and got a certificate through Sandvik for the first $5K). The old tools don't show any wear and don't have slop in the existing machine(s) (older Cincinnatis). What's the rub? Is it a fear of damaging the new machine, or a fear of lack of accuracy in the old tools?

    Replacing all the old tools seems like a huge expense, when many of them would be perfectly useful for lower accuracy requirements. Of course, I want to take care of the new machine, but I don't want to go to any unnecessary expense, either. What's the rub with reusing tools?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arkansas
    Posts
    886
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    291
    Likes (Received)
    327

    Default

    Sounds like mazak or your machine dealer scammed you into buying an overpriced 5k tooling certificate. See if you can get a refund on that and use the 5k to buy your own tooling through your tooling distributor. If you dont have one, I have one that services you state that always has great deals especially on big kaiser tooling.

    Use your old tools, maybe consider replacing the pull studs just to be safe.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    I'll definitely have to replace the pull studs; they're different between the old Cincinnati machines and the new Mazak, but other than that, I don't see any reason I can't reuse the tool holders. Most are in great shape. The certificate was not optional; it was part of the package and it's useful; I just don't want to have to go out and buy ALL new tooling.

    Thanks for your input!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    2,942
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1140
    Likes (Received)
    1191

    Default

    Whenever you get a new spindle taper you are supposed to replace ALL of your tool holders. As long as your old tool holders don't show any wear then don't worry about it.

  5. Likes 2outof3, 5 axis Fidia guy liked this post
  6. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,046
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    211
    Likes (Received)
    1604

    Default

    If you really want to split hairs Mazak has a valid point. Every spindle will have a different wear pattern over time. It will mirror that pattern on the tool holder ( the holder is softer). Put the used holder in a different spindle and the spindle will get multiple wear patterns on it. Weather this is bad, measurable all depends on many factors.

    The problem is how do you tell someone if it looks like new then it is ok to use on the new machine. Some people really have either poor vision or poor judgement when it comes to precision surfaces. The way I see some people put tool holders in there machines makes me cringe. Litterally push the tool holder crooked into the spindle till the retention knob hits the closed drawbar collet, then they push eject to open the drawbar and force the tool holder in.

    Dual contact I would be less picky on sharing holders between other dual contact machines. Taper takes less wear since the flanges take the load as well. Just my 2 cents.

  7. Likes as9100d, 2outof3, swatkins, LockNut liked this post
  8. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1813
    Likes (Received)
    5462

    Default

    Inspect the tapers of the old holders. If signs of significant fretting or corrosion or mechanical wear, deep-six them or leave for older machines. If just a slight corrosion, clean with non-abrasive wipes and WD-40 or similar.

    But realistically you'll get geometric errors in taper forms between holders from the same make, let alone between manufacturers. It doesn't make sense to worry too much unless you've been buying the very cheapest of import holders, any good brand in good shape is safe to use on a properly ground spindle.

    At worst, blue up some shanks and do some testing, being careful to wipe the tapers clean between fit checks. You'll soon get an idea of what's a good fit and what's not.

  9. Likes wheelieking71 liked this post
  10. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    1,863
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1382
    Likes (Received)
    1357

    Default

    The tapers on older machines and holders were ground to the specifications available at that time. Today, the tapers are held much closer. A need for high speed spindles. Start fresh.

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1813
    Likes (Received)
    5462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2outof3 View Post
    The tapers on older machines and holders were ground to the specifications available at that time. Today, the tapers are held much closer. A need for high speed spindles. Start fresh.
    Industries have been grinding precision surfaces, including tapers, for many, many decades, well before CNC took hold. Or did micrometers and gage blocks have to wait until the last 25 years? Nope, we've had access to precision standards and references for a long time now.

    I can't agree with the idea of having to replace holders "just because" there's a new spindle in town. Dual contact? Yes, of course. But unless this new Mazak has a very high speed spindle (in which case it should be HSK or DC) then a properly made toolholder in good shape will work fine.

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    884
    Likes (Received)
    1485

    Default

    Impossible to know without seeing the toolholders.

    Chances are you have some tools that are perfectly fine and others that should probably stay out of the new machine.

  13. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Milverton, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    642
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    176
    Likes (Received)
    287

    Default

    If im spending someone elses money (and they have it to spare), its new holders for new machines.
    That being said, light duty tooling usually doesnt get beat up too bad.
    Stuff that sees heavy side loading, I'd be buying new.
    Small er collet holder or similar, wouldnt worry too much.

    You should be able to tell just running your hand over the taper if it feels good or not.

    Nice new Mazak, you should be accounting 10% of purchase price for basic tooling IMO

  14. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    1,863
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1382
    Likes (Received)
    1357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    Industries have been grinding precision surfaces, including tapers, for many, many decades, well before CNC took hold. Or did micrometers and gage blocks have to wait until the last 25 years? Nope, we've had access to precision standards and references for a long time now.

    I can't agree with the idea of having to replace holders "just because" there's a new spindle in town. Dual contact? Yes, of course. But unless this new Mazak has a very high speed spindle (in which case it should be HSK or DC) then a properly made toolholder in good shape will work fine.
    When I started 30 years ago, the used tool holders I saw almost always had two fretting lines, about 20% from the top and about 20% from the bottom of the tapers. That is because the holders were made in a reasonable way that like all manufacturing, traded cost versus capability. Of course we could grind to microns then, but you sure would have struggled to hard turn to microns like you can today. The machines were built to run at max speeds like 6,000 or at most 10,000. Today 20,000 RPM is common.

    Holders are wear items, as are the machines. Replace them with new.

  15. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    744

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2outof3 View Post
    Holders are wear items, as are the machines. Replace them with new.
    Yup and, like all such items in manufacturing use, should have a specified life and be changed out when they run out of hours. Obviously life depends on application so it may well make sense to sequester holders according to duty so as to get most bang for buck. What doesn't make sense is on condition inspection to decide whether an holder stays in use or not. Actuals cost of running the inspection system plus potential cost if a just about OK one blows out mid job far outweigh any potential savings. Do you really want to chase down semi random tolerance variations due to a holder that isn't quite up to it, sometimes. Good luck at getting all the guys to recognise a past-it time to change holder too.

    Possibly different for garage shop or one man and two dog band but for a decent size of shop floor you are selling fast, consistent output. Quite enough problems you have to deal without searching for more.

    These days its arguable you don't actually have a proper business if you are running things in "on condition" manner rather than specified life.

    Clive

  16. Likes 2outof3 liked this post
  17. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    4,502
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    776
    Likes (Received)
    1854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clive603 View Post
    Yup and, like all such items in manufacturing use, should have a specified life and be changed out when they run out of hours. Obviously life depends on application so it may well make sense to sequester holders according to duty so as to get most bang for buck. What doesn't make sense is on condition inspection to decide whether an holder stays in use or not. Actuals cost of running the inspection system plus potential cost if a just about OK one blows out mid job far outweigh any potential savings. Do you really want to chase down semi random tolerance variations due to a holder that isn't quite up to it, sometimes. Good luck at getting all the guys to recognise a past-it time to change holder too.

    Possibly different for garage shop or one man and two dog band but for a decent size of shop floor you are selling fast, consistent output. Quite enough problems you have to deal without searching for more.

    These days its arguable you don't actually have a proper business if you are running things in "on condition" manner rather than specified life.


    Clive
    What does that metric look like? How would one gather it in a medium sized shop, say 10-50 machines? And who determines what is good or not good?

  18. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Medina OH
    Posts
    1,976
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    179
    Likes (Received)
    905

    Default

    Keep them for the Old Cincinnati, and when you get rid of that, include the tooling. They will help sell the machine... or convince someone to take it away.

    Shop I used to work at had several mazak's... say 10 or 12. All the 40 taper tools were shared around the shop. The year I left, they bought two 720's, and about 100 holders for each machine. From then on, they segregated the tooling, except for specials.

    Course then I cried a couple years after I left. I came by for a visit and talked to one of my old friends. He has spent a weekend scrapping tooling holders. Several hundred... because they were inch.

  19. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    744

    Default

    These days its arguable you don't actually have a proper business if you are running things in "on condition" manner rather than specified life.

    Clive

    Quote Originally Posted by Cole2534 View Post
    What does that metric look like? How would one gather it in a medium sized shop, say 10-50 machines? And who determines what is good or not good?
    Details are going to differ for every shop. Fundamentally its just a matter of knowing how much money you leave on the table by running only to a sensibly conservative always safe service life as opposed to getting the maximum life out of things. Running to a life makes management much easier and costs more certain. Done well any possible saving from stretching intervals by running on condition is more than made up by management savings. Anywhere the on-condition saving is worth the hassle then you stay on condition.

    The important thing is to know, not assume.

    Bottom line is its just applied common sense and keeping up to date with the relative costs of things against management / worker time. Generally as the years go by things get cheaper, time gets more expensive and the cost of a blow up higher.

    Clive

  20. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    723
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clive603 View Post
    These days its arguable you don't actually have a proper business if you are running things in "on condition" manner rather than specified life.

    Clive



    Details are going to differ for every shop. Fundamentally its just a matter of knowing how much money you leave on the table by running only to a sensibly conservative always safe service life as opposed to getting the maximum life out of things. Running to a life makes management much easier and costs more certain. Done well any possible saving from stretching intervals by running on condition is more than made up by management savings. Anywhere the on-condition saving is worth the hassle then you stay on condition.

    The important thing is to know, not assume.

    Bottom line is its just applied common sense and keeping up to date with the relative costs of things against management / worker time. Generally as the years go by things get cheaper, time gets more expensive and the cost of a blow up higher.

    Clive
    So I guess my business isn't proper since I'm not keeping count of toolchanges on every tool holder? (and how heavily some holders have been ran? how do you even quantify that...) Or am I misinterpreting?

    Sounds like professional bean counter shit to me.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •