Shank with flat in a shrink holder to get out of a stick - will it work?
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 36
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1251
    Likes (Received)
    1389

    Default Shank with flat in a shrink holder to get out of a stick - will it work?

    I have a job in with some hydraulic port cavities that are difficult to access, being at the base of a fairly deep vertical wall.

    I have tools on hand, but they have a flat ground on the shank where they were held in a sidelock. New tools minus the flat are on a long lead time.

    One 20mm shank, and one 32mm. If I buy standard shrink holders I will have to turn them down a few mm to clear the wall in both cases. The tools are HSS, and I don't have a fancy shrink machine, so they will be in there for good.

    So, turned down shrink holders, and tools with a flat on the shank. How bad might I expect the runout to be?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    437
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    144
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default

    I believe tools for shrink fit holders have a tighter shank tolerance than standard tooling. Your HSS will probably not be in the tolerance band.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    10,224
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2656

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    I have a job in with some hydraulic port cavities that are difficult to access, being at the base of a fairly deep vertical wall.

    I have tools on hand, but they have a flat ground on the shank where they were held in a sidelock. New tools minus the flat are on a long lead time.

    One 20mm shank, and one 32mm. If I buy standard shrink holders I will have to turn them down a few mm to clear the wall in both cases. The tools are HSS, and I don't have a fancy shrink machine, so they will be in there for good.

    So, turned down shrink holders, and tools with a flat on the shank. How bad might I expect the runout to be?
    .
    full length flat sometimes puts stress on holder and it cracks especially if thin walled. set screw holder often easier to use. sure runout can be higher and it can vary with torque used.
    .
    measure all tool runout with optical tool presetter and after 10,000 measurements with no noticeable or barely noticeable effect you might be surprised at what runout amounts you actually need to worry about. not what some salesman says you need to worry about.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1251
    Likes (Received)
    1389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenton View Post
    I believe tools for shrink fit holders have a tighter shank tolerance than standard tooling. Your HSS will probably not be in the tolerance band.
    Shanks are excellent for size, both of them measure within 3μm of nominal. At least that shouldn't be a concern.

    Quote Originally Posted by DMF_TomB View Post
    .
    full length flat sometimes puts stress on holder and it cracks especially if thin walled. set screw holder often easier to use. sure runout can be higher and it can vary with torque used.
    .
    measure all tool runout with optical tool presetter and after 10,000 measurements with no noticeable or barely noticeable effect you might be surprised at what runout amounts you actually need to worry about. not what some salesman says you need to worry about.
    Wall thickness on the 32mm shank will be 8.5mm, 20mm will be 8mm. Cracks are a concern for sure.

    Runout needs to be just as little as possible. These are form reamers that generate features with fairly tight dimensional tolerances, and tight surface roughness tolerances. Surface finish is usually the first casualty of excessive runout.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    10,224
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2656

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Shanks are excellent for size, both of them measure within 3μm of nominal. At least that shouldn't be a concern.



    Wall thickness on the 32mm shank will be 8.5mm, 20mm will be 8mm. Cracks are a concern for sure.

    Runout needs to be just as little as possible. These are form reamers that generate features with fairly tight dimensional tolerances, and tight surface roughness tolerances. Surface finish is usually the first casualty of excessive runout.
    .
    when i use bigger cutter like 3"dia multi flute full length assembled mill. it gets sent out tool in tool holder and ground or sharpened as a assembled unit. runout is much lower than way. often 10x lower

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    437
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    144
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default

    Tom, have you even read the original post?

  7. Likes Booze Daily, Mtndew, Billetgrip liked this post
  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    10,224
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2656

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenton View Post
    Tom, have you even read the original post?
    i already replied a end mill with full length flat ended up cracking many tool holders which gave varying runout and tool comp would need changing depending on high high the cutting forces were cause it was cracking the tool holders
    .
    hair line cracks often go undetected for years giving intermittent problems. it was determined it was coming from the full length flat on shank mills
    .
    this is dynamic runout changes which runout changes cause crack opening up under load. it gets taught to apprentices to watch out for it from the old timers

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    437
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    144
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default

    OP said he needs to turn down a shrink fit to gain access to a feature, you say use a set screw holder. Op says getting tools remade without the flat is not an option, you say assemble the tool holder and get the whole thing ground. Every suggestion you make has already been covered as to why it is not an option.

  10. Likes Mtndew liked this post
  11. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    10,224
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2656

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenton View Post
    OP said he needs to turn down a shrink fit to gain access to a feature, you say use a set screw holder. Op says getting tools remade without the flat is not an option, you say assemble the tool holder and get the whole thing ground. Every suggestion you make has already been covered as to why it is not an option.
    .
    the discussion is will it work and whats discussed is possible problems. if nothing else runout with a shrink fit on completely round shank might be different that the shank with flat cause of uneven pressures with press fit on shank with flat
    .
    and of course a tool has sharpening error runout. you can take a dowel pin in tool holder and get completely different runout that the actual cutting edges cause it was resharpened with runout and it was discussed how to minimize this
    .
    and i discussed take 10,000 actual tool in tool holder runout measurements and you usually find runout not causing problems, is much higher that thought before the 10,000 measurements. i measure actual tool in tool holder runout including sharpening runout every day. very few tools have zero sharpening runout
    .
    i use set screw holders where tool is sharpened tool in tool holder assembled for lowest actual runout. as i said it usually works 10x better

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    437
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    144
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DMF_TomB View Post
    .
    the discussion is will it work and whats discussed is possible problems. if nothing else runout with a shrink fit on completely round shank might be different that the shank with flat cause of uneven pressures with press fit on shank with flat
    .
    and of course a tool has sharpening error runout. you can take a dowel pin in tool holder and get completely different runout that the actual cutting edges cause it was resharpened with runout and it was discussed how to minimize this
    .
    and i discussed take 10,000 actual tool in tool holder runout measurements and you usually find runout not causing problems, is much higher that thought before the 10,000 measurements. i measure actual tool in tool holder runout including sharpening runout every day. very few tools have zero sharpening runout
    .
    i use set screw holders where tool is sharpened tool in tool holder assembled for lowest actual runout. as i said it usually works 10x better
    That is all fantastic data, but none of it is relevant other than "tools with flats don't work well in shrink fit holders".

  13. Likes empwoer liked this post
  14. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,691
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    848
    Likes (Received)
    2547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenton View Post
    OP said he needs to turn down a shrink fit to gain access to a feature, you say use a set screw holder. Op says getting tools remade without the flat is not an option, you say assemble the tool holder and get the whole thing ground. Every suggestion you make has already been covered as to why it is not an option.
    DMF always gives responses that are about 99% irrelevant to the OP`s question. I think most here realize that and just pass over his rambling.

  15. Likes Booze Daily, Mtndew, empwoer liked this post
  16. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    MI, USA
    Posts
    812
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    61
    Likes (Received)
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DMF_TomB View Post
    .
    the discussion is BLAH BLAH BLAH
    Do you have any constructive information to copy paste, or are you still going on about 10000 tools and their runout values?



    I do not have any shrink holders, but gut reaction would say it should be fine.

    However, as for an actual idea that may or may not help at all...


    What if you were to cut the part of the shank with the weldon on it completely off (or grind it down a bit).

    I don't know how long the shanks are, and how much would be left, but if you did that, wouldn't that stop any "uneven shrink" you would otherwise face?

    Edit: a possibly better idea than above: Grind a groove into the shank where the weldon flat is, so that -none- of the shank around where the weldon flat is against the shrink fit holder. Above and below it would be full diameter, just grooved down where the weldon flat is. This would make the shrink even radially while leaving the shank length the same.

    I would think that turning some off the OD of the tool would possibly cause a bigger issue than the weldon flat would, post shrink. But I still don't think it should be "too much" ??

    How far down does this tool have to reach?


    Quote Originally Posted by kenton View Post
    OP said he needs to turn down a shrink fit to gain access to a feature, you say use a set screw holder. Op says getting tools remade without the flat is not an option, you say assemble the tool holder and get the whole thing ground. Every suggestion you make has already been covered as to why it is not an option.
    Doesn't he make you want to bang your head on a wall?

  17. Likes kenton, Booze Daily, Mtndew liked this post
  18. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1813
    Likes (Received)
    5462

    Default

    Hi Gregor,
    I've dealt with similar issues in the past by making small segments from steel of the missing geometry, in your case much like a wide Woodruff key. You can profile a few to fit the measured gap, plus ~25U on the OD, then "superglue" them in place with the thinnest amount of adhesive that still secures the segments.

    Before insertion you take the insert and, with a clean, new flat file of sufficient width and fine cut, "round over" the excess insert radius to match the HSS shank material on either side. This can also be done with a strip of medium grit silicon carbide paper on a hard backing, but is more likely to take the stray micron or two from the shank itself.

    You do want to make sure your insert is well adhered and will not fall out during insertion, and to correct size. Ideally, check it with a matching diameter hydraulic chuck, something you can progressively tighten and observe wear marks from twisting on the soft insert. A second choice would be a good colleted chuck used similarly.

    Otherwise, you'll be very cross...

  19. #14
    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 dandrummerman21 View Post

    Doesn't he make you want to bang your head on a wall?
    Are you implying that there's times you DON'T want to head bang?

    You've been going to the wrong clubs...

  20. Likes dandrummerman21, Mtndew liked this post
  21. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    MI, USA
    Posts
    812
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    61
    Likes (Received)
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    Are you implying that there's times you DON'T want to head bang?

    You've been going to the wrong clubs...
    Well, I do still have the long hair to do it. But I haven't been to a metal concert in the last few years. Last show was, uh, Exodus maybe? In 2015.

    Getting married and having kids will do that I guess. Oh where has the time gone.

  22. Likes cameraman, Milland, Mtndew liked this post
  23. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,891
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3420
    Likes (Received)
    797

    Default

    I'm kinda interested in this more from a "learning perspective" .

    @Gregormarwick If you have time can you make little sketch (crappy as you like) of this including the rough lengths of everything + obstructive wall (and maybe a link to the intended tool holders ) ?

    For worries about runout, the lengths of everything + the height of the interfering wall + form tolerances of the feature you are trying to machine seem pretty important all together … (captain obvious); as you of course know.

    Wondering what the actual cutting tool geometries/ edges are ? What tools are you actually using for this ?

    Probably you'll have all sorted before you can find time to make a crappy or good sketch of the problem ;-)

    Cheers / Ta.

  24. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Country
    CANADA
    State/Province
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    19
    Likes (Received)
    125

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dandrummerman21 View Post
    Do you have any constructive information to copy paste, or are you still going on about 10000 tools and their runout values?



    I do not have any shrink holders

    These two lines are great. "Do you have anything of value to add? Also I don't have any experience with the subject at hand, here's some information I came up with!"
    Last edited by isaac338; 07-25-2019 at 10:48 PM.

  25. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    3,972
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1593
    Likes (Received)
    1852

    Default

    Are the flats ground the length of the shank? I thought I saw that, but not in the OP. If it is just a small flat like a weldon (?) it won't matter*. I would be more concerned with the HSS, but you said you measured them and they are good so I guess no problems?

    *At another job we were getting into shrink fit and the Haimer guy that came to set it up and show us how to use the machine said flats on endmills were not deal breakers, but he advised in the future to get plain round shanks. Now if it is going to stick out of the shrink fit and leave a gap, I dunno what that might do. I can't imagine it would be much (imagining just a small flat here, just enough for a set screw), if anything at all...

  26. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Idaho
    Posts
    692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    145
    Likes (Received)
    740

    Default

    Sorry I can't solve your problem on the shrink fit tool... but I can solve a problem that everyone else is having on this thread:

    Click on the persons "User Name";
    Click "View Profile";
    Click "Add to Ignore List";
    Click "Yes";

    I have been much happier with my user experience since doing this, I no longer have to wade through mumbled up bullshit to read a thread. As a courtesy to those of us that chose to "Ignore" fucktards; please refrain from quoting their asinine keyboard diarrhea. If you find this objectionable, please feel free to use the above forum functions on me. I will be happy to help you sound out the big words if you get confused.

  27. Likes empwoer liked this post
  28. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    3,621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1251
    Likes (Received)
    1389

    Default

    Thanks for the replies so far.

    Clear a few things up: The flats on these cutters are full length, not weldon. There is a very short cylindrical area near the bottom of the shank, but most of that would fall in the lead in area of a shrink holder I'd imagine.

    The flats are pretty shallow, such that Millands suggestion of making inserts would be pretty tough to do. I'll take some measurements tomorrow and post them.

    The features in this case are simple SAE (J1926-1) cavities, so nothing demanding in terms of dimensional tolerances, but I do need a good finish. Workpiece is aluminium, 6061/6082 T6. The cutters are full form cavity (everything from thread minor to spot face)

    The depth I need to reach from the top of the wall is only 120mm or so, but these are very short cutters, normally used on the surface of the part.

    A 32mm shrink holder is 53mm outer diameter, I'd need to turn it down to 49mm.

    A 20mm shrink holder is 42mm outer diameter, I'd need to turn it down to 36mm.

    The cutters all have a ground face at the base of the shank, so an alternative would be to get some silver steel blanks, bore them to a light interference fit on the shanks, cut some threads in the tops of the shanks of the tools, and pull them in with a drawbar. Of course the cutters are good quality solid HSS, so threadmilling the shanks would be tough, although doable.

  29. Likes cameraman liked this post

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
  •