586,113 active members*
3,081 visitors online*
Register for free
Login
IndustryArena Forum > MetalWorking Machines > Tormach Personal CNC Mill > Feedback on 1100 milling stainless steel
Page 2 of 2 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1863
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreeze View Post
    That's a very impressive piece for sure Steve. Thanks for sharing. Do we know what the part is for?
    The parts were part of the recoil mechanism for a 60 MM laser guided hand launched mortar.

    These were prototype parts. The production run was to be a casting.
    You can buy GOOD PARTS or you can buy CHEAP PARTS, but you can't buy GOOD CHEAP PARTS.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    121
    I have made lots of small stainless steel parts on the Tormach 1100 with no real problems, except maybe one. Because it has stepper motors, it seems to leave "patterns" or aliasing effects when cutting curves. It's either the individual tiny steps, or maybe the steppers kick up a resonance or something. I posted a thread about it a while ago, but haven't looked into it further. It's not a problem if you polish or do whatever to the surface afterwards.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1863
    Quote Originally Posted by beanbag View Post
    I have made lots of small stainless steel parts on the Tormach 1100 with no real problems, except maybe one. Because it has stepper motors, it seems to leave "patterns" or aliasing effects when cutting curves. It's either the individual tiny steps, or maybe the steppers kick up a resonance or something. I posted a thread about it a while ago, but haven't looked into it further. It's not a problem if you polish or do whatever to the surface afterwards.
    I noticed the resonance problem going around a corner when I got my machine. I cured it by increasing the feed rate. It seemed that if I went around a corner at 10 IPM, the finish almost looked like I had cut it with a hacksaw, but if I increased the feed to 15 IPM, it made a very nice, smooth finish.
    You can buy GOOD PARTS or you can buy CHEAP PARTS, but you can't buy GOOD CHEAP PARTS.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by philbur View Post
    I don't understand why anybody would elect to cut the camera part on a mill if they have a lathe.

    Phil
    Phil,
    I wouldn't expect you to. However I plan to make a similar SS bayonet part for my focuser that holds a large format astro CCD camera on my precision focuser Clement Focuser BTW most of my focuser is made on my Tormach 1100. As I said the issues for this application don’t really deal with roundness or runnout but with planarity and repeatability so when a flat frame is made pixels are held in the exact same position.

    Don

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1543

    Re: Feedback on 1100 milling stainless steel

    Quote Originally Posted by beanbag View Post
    I have made lots of small stainless steel parts on the Tormach 1100 with no real problems, except maybe one. Because it has stepper motors, it seems to leave "patterns" or aliasing effects when cutting curves. It's either the individual tiny steps, or maybe the steppers kick up a resonance or something. I posted a thread about it a while ago, but haven't looked into it further. It's not a problem if you polish or do whatever to the surface afterwards.
    Are you doing an "arc" or many small linear moves? G1 or G2/3

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2512
    Don I would not disagree with this if all a person cares about is functionality, but if they also care about fit, feel and finish (like the OP) then I think the lathe wins ever time.

    Phil

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Clement View Post
    As I said the issues for this application don’t really deal with roundness or runnout but with planarity and repeatability so when a flat frame is made pixels are held in the exact same position.

    Don

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by philbur View Post
    Don I would not disagree with this if all a person cares about is functionality, but if they also care about fit, feel and finish (like the OP) then I think the lathe wins ever time.

    Phil
    Phil,

    I do very much care about fit, feel, and finish. That's why I run all my parts from both lathe and mill through a vibratory deburring machine to remove any artifacts from the machining process. Form follows function and my product shows that and much more.

    Don

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Clement View Post
    Phil,

    I do very much care about fit, feel, and finish. That's why I run all my parts from both lathe and mill through a vibratory deburring machine to remove any artifacts from the machining process. Form follows function and my product shows that and much more.

    Don
    Don, I looked at your Clement Focuser, what a great device! I haven't seen that before for photography, but then, I don't have any experience with astrophotography. I have done a lot of 8x10 work, and we needed critical placement of the film holders, so I can appreciate what you are trying to achieve. Was that made on your 1100?

    Your vibratory deburring machine, does it tend to round off sharp corners quickly, or can I still keep a nice edge on the cuts? As someone pointed out, there will be extra finishing required, as in the watch case example.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3063
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Seebold View Post
    I started with a block 3.5 X 5.5 X 12.5.

    First operation was to send them out to have 2 1.128 diameter 12.25 deep holes gundrilled.

    Then I brought them back and machined the short end complete.

    Then I stood them up in some soft jaws and machined the 1 7/16-16 thread on the 2 legs and finished that end.

    Then I set it up on a indexer and machines the rest of the part.

    It was a challenge, but I took it because my customer told me that this part can not be made.
    Thanks Steve. Did you mill the OD and the recesses on the two long cylinders on that part? I'm having a hard time figuring out how you did that operation and trying to learn.

    Mike

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreeze View Post
    Don, I looked at your Clement Focuser, what a great device! I haven't seen that before for photography, but then, I don't have any experience with astrophotography. I have done a lot of 8x10 work, and we needed critical placement of the film holders, so I can appreciate what you are trying to achieve. Was that made on your 1100?
    Just paid my 11-1/2 year patent maintenance fee for my focuser invention, so it's been around awhile. I have a 4x5 Kodak Masterview camera Google Image Result for http://www.photobooksonline.com/images/kodakmasterview1953origAD.jpg which my mother bought new in 1948. Before Adobe digital Photoshop my mother used to retouch 4x5 film negatives manually on an Adams retouching machine Google Image Result for http://leadholder.com/assets/history/adams-retouching_machine.jpg I have gone to CCD or CMOS imagers over film though.

    Yes I make almost all the parts for my focuser on my Tormach 1100. I am redesigning the focuser to use many more curved surfaces and intend to use the vibratory deburring machine to remove artifacts from the machining process.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dreeze View Post
    Your vibratory deburring machine, does it tend to round off sharp corners quickly, or can I still keep a nice edge on the cuts? As someone pointed out, there will be extra finishing required, as in the watch case example.
    Yes the vibratory deburring machine tends to round off corners and I do depend on that function as yet just another process that doesn't have to be done by e.g. a corner rounding endmill.

    Don Clement

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1543
    Tumbler media has alot to do with the final product in how it works and how fast it works. I have 3 different tumblers - Ceramic,Walnut,Corn Cob - But shape of the media plays a big part in it.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1332
    I agree that the vibratory media shape and material are important but so is the type of vibratory deburring machine. A plain tumbler is inefficient compared to a true vibratory deburring machine. I use a Burr-King 200SX with a GenRad Variac to control speed. American Machinery & Blade - Burr King VibraKing 200SX

    Don Clement

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1543

    Re: Feedback on 1100 milling stainless steel

    I have a phase angle controller I may use on mine, but then again I've never needed the speed to change, I use cheap Brass tumblers...

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3063
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Clement View Post
    I agree that the vibratory media shape and material are important but so is the type of vibratory deburring machine. A plain tumbler is inefficient compared to a true vibratory deburring machine. I use a Burr-King 200SX with a GenRad Variac to control speed. American Machinery & Blade - Burr King VibraKing 200SX

    Don Clement
    Looks like that model sells for $900. Good tools are worth the cost but I wonder if one of the Harbor Freight products might not work almost as well. This one for example:

    18 Lb. Vibratory Bowl w/ Liquid Drain Hose

    HF rates it as 18-lbs and Penn Tool says the 200SX has a 50-lb capacity so the HF is probably quite a bit smaller.

    What sort of medium do you use for aluminum?

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelHenry View Post
    What sort of medium do you use for aluminum?
    I have had ther Burr-King for over ten years and it sees lots of use. The Burr-King SX-200 works great for me.

    For aluminum I use a middle grade abrasive medium embedded in plastic cones. For my application I want a matt finish on aluminum which is then chemically etched at the anodyzer and type II black anodized for optics applications. I typically run parts for several hours and change fluid every run. The fluid is Metal Finishing Compounds MSI-60* solution of 2 oz. per gallon of water. I use a gallon of this solution every run. * available from Manufacturers Service Inc. South El monte, Ca 91733

    Don Clement

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Clement View Post
    I typically run parts for several hours and change fluid every run. The fluid is Metal Finishing Compounds MSI-60* solution of 2 oz. per gallon of water. I use a gallon of this solution every run. * available from Manufacturers Service Inc. South El monte, Ca 91733

    Don Clement
    What do you do with the waste water...Dump it in your back yard or down the drain...

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    71
    I've been using the HF vibratory bowl for a while now with good results. About the biggest part you can put in it is around 8 inches long, smaller parts have no problems. I use the small green pyramid abrasives from HF and add enough water so the parts circulate well. I found a little bit of dish washing soap helps a lot too.
    I cut a piece of plexiglass for a new lid on the bowl which lets me see how things are going without having to open it up each time. It also cuts down on the noise volume and splashing if I get too much water in there.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1543

    Re: Feedback on 1100 milling stainless steel

    Great idea on the lid, I'm going to do that today! 2 of my 3 tumblers have clear lids, never thought to do the other one.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3063
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Clement View Post
    I have had ther Burr-King for over ten years and it sees lots of use. The Burr-King SX-200 works great for me.

    For aluminum I use a middle grade abrasive medium embedded in plastic cones. For my application I want a matt finish on aluminum which is then chemically etched at the anodyzer and type II black anodized for optics applications. I typically run parts for several hours and change fluid every run. The fluid is Metal Finishing Compounds MSI-60* solution of 2 oz. per gallon of water. I use a gallon of this solution every run. * available from Manufacturers Service Inc. South El monte, Ca 91733

    Don Clement
    Thanks Don - this info should be useful for me a month or down the road.

    Mike

Page 2 of 2 12

Similar Threads

  1. Thread Milling Stainless Steel
    By Dull Tool in forum MetalWork Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-02-2011, 05:12 AM
  2. Milling 316L stainless steel!!!
    By cemturkmen in forum MetalWork Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-04-2010, 11:39 PM
  3. milling stainless steel
    By peaceandcalm in forum Material Machining Solutions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-07-2010, 04:14 AM
  4. Milling 420 Stainless Steel
    By Talisman in forum MetalWork Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-06-2008, 07:57 PM
  5. Milling 440c Stainless Steel
    By jafgreen in forum MetalWork Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-31-2007, 02:12 AM

Posting Permissions

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