[nick888]

Hi,

We are a lighting company in Australia, custom designing a range of generally small-ish (20~60mm OD, 50~300mm length) components that are currently machined or cast+machined in Asia and imported. For a number of reasons including cost, quality control, time-to-market etc, we are considering acquiring an Okuma LB-3000-EX MYW-800. This is the model that's been recommended to us by the Okuma rep. We need the milling capability and Y-axis to ensure we can machine the widest possibly range of designs as automatically as possible. We have no in-house experience with CNC machining at the moment, but will be hiring an experienced person to manage the setup and programming etc. Most of our parts are quite simple.

Anyway,

1. Can anybody with experience of this machine or similar give an opinion as to the virtues of the Okuma?
2. Are we looking at a Rolls Royce when a Toyota would suffice?
3. Would [insert other brand here, eg. DMG-MORI] offer more (or less) features at the same price point?
4. Are there particular quirks to the Okuma that should be noted? (I appreciate the programming approaches differ between brands).
5. Is a CAM system suggested or will IGF/AOT system be enough for most parts?

Thanks for any input offered - I appreciate any advice at all!

Nick

[ghyman]

1. I've worked on a number of projects that were centered around Okuma machines - and every time, I am surprised by their rigidity, stability, and accuracy. We set up 7 machines, fully tooled (50+ tools per machine) and ran off 3 weeks of parts at the customer's facility. The machines were holding jig grinder tolerances - out of 300-ish features, they were holding ~20 features to within 20 micron (0.020mm) tolerances on size and location. A current project is re-tasking a half dozen LU machines to a new component. These machines are 3 years old, and with new tooling and workholding for the new product line, are hitting several 15-micron tolerances, as well as an angled slot being held to a ±0°5' tolerance to a cpk of 2.5 over a 300 pc run. The Okuma control is not a huge leap from Fanuc or Fanuc clones, so a very pleasant learning curve.
2. You are looking at the Rolls Royce of the industry, but without knowing your components or their details, I can't say if a Toyota (Mazak) or even a Pinto (Haas) would be sufficient.
3. Features are great - if you actually need them. In my experience, durability and longevity are key, additional functionality can usually be added with a software upgrade if the need arises. Machines that come with High-Pressure, High-Speed, 256-Axis, Automatic Everything, Web-connected, Skynet-level AI, and enough bonus options to stuff a pony are mostly worthless if the underlying machine and basic control can't stand the test of actual long-term performance.
4. The ability to use custom-defined local variable names is very nice - that is, you can use nearly any four-letter 'word' as a variable, rather than the cryptic #501 format. Custom-writing M-code functions make it very easy to personalize your machine for moves/cuts/logic that is specific to your parts or your facility. Beyond that, the control has pretty much the same capabilities as any other (although mid-cycle manual and editing is sweet!)
5. Your mileage may vary - the conversational is pretty nice (light years ahead of the Mazak conversational IMHO) but I'm an old G-code guy, so my opinion may be slanted. I generally only use a CAM system for complex cutter paths, and do most programming at the control or in a text editor.

The LB line has always been very robust, I think you'll be happy with it for a very long time.

[nick888]

Hi Ghyman,

Thanks for the detailed reply!

In terms of features, I've not really after all the bells and whistles but yes, something that can produce what we need it to produce reliably and repeatedly. I've gathered a few bad stories of people opting for cheaper (much cheaper) units of similar initial capability, only to have sit idle for months waiting for something to get fixed. Okuma support here is pretty good apparently so even if something does happen, I don't expect to be kept waiting.

Thanks again

[nick888]

Hello everyone,

Thanks again for the responses from 5 years ago, here's an update so I don't leave this thread dangling.

We have an Okuma LB3000 EXii MYC x 950 inbound from Japan, due to arrive in about a month. Optioned up with high-pressure coolant, auto-doors and all the rest, but no sub-spindle. We ended up deciding that would wait for a 2nd machine if it turns out we really could use it.

Our new machine shop manager is setting up now, we have a full suite of Sandvik tools coming, based around their Capto system.

We're looking at using Fusion 360 CAM (our parts are not that complicated) and setting up our turret / tools in 3D as accurately as possible.

Bringing more manufacturing back to Australia.

Nick

[deadlykitten]

hy nick

in the last 5 years, genos line got stronger, because of the increased competition in the basic/common lathe size segment; you can save 30-50% by using a genos instead of lb, and still be guaranted that the genos is the best in it's class, compared to other brands, and should deliver the same things that you are allready machining on your existing lb's ( or lb, if just one )

Optioned up with high-pressure coolant, auto-doors and all the rest, but no sub-spindle.

options are pricey; for some of them are alternatives :
... get a higher pump and drop it in the sewer when it rains; for increase output debit, mess with the pipes, especially after reaching the turret
... auto-doors can be also manufactured, or buy from aftermarket
... software tricks
... talk with the cnc one user : kurmay

... but no sub-spindle. We ended up deciding that would wait for a 2nd machine if it turns out we really could use it

you could really use it, only if, at this moment, you are machining some of your parts in more than a single clamp/setup

on a dual spindle machine, there is a very high chance to machine all the parts that you are crafting now, but faster; if your parts are :
... short & simple, then use the 2nd spindle to finish them
... short & complex, then still use the 2nd spindle to finish them, and analyze the downtime created by the fact that both spindles aren't always cutting
... loooong, then take your bigger part to a shop where they have such a dual spindle machine, and clamp it between those 2 chucks, or use a livecenter inside the 2nd
* so, analize your production profile, and decide, or simply, just get one because you have a big chance to find it usefull after you start using it; but, for some parts, the 2nd spindle is not suitable, so ...

one more thing : there are few common crash scenarios :
... turrets on y lathes may be rotated in yz, not only xz plane, but never aligned them back unless is really needed, like for deeeep drilling, and even then, it may be enough to custom-align the toolholders
... dual spindle lathes during transfers; this one, in most cases, is more severe, so, if you ever get such a lathe, strongly consider monitoring during transfer

we have a full suite of Sandvik tools coming, based around their Capto system

if money is not a problem + you buy only things that you need ( thus not only use ), then analyze your production profile, and consider an atc behind your lathe; if you are allready at an organized level, then this may boost you

is possible to craft in-house a capto tool and holder, with larger / stronger profile

We're looking at using Fusion 360 CAM (our parts are not that complicated) and setting up our turret / tools in 3D as accurately as possible

for simple parts, with repetability, the CAS&IGF combo delivers a nice program, and 3d collision proof ; i mean okuma created those for such, and once you understand them, they are quick, and for such setups is waaaay quicker to create&change&proof an edit inside your program, rather than using a cam / kindly

[nick888]

Thanks all again for your input.

Re the drum filter, it seems we are being persuaded in that direction! I really don't want us to find out 6~12months down the track with our heads in the coolant tanks more often than we'd like.

Regarding AOT/IGF/P200 vs 300 etc - I guess we will get into that in due course and find out for ourselves.

Teahole: I will ask our Okuma rep about the DXF feature and also the fact that IGF can't let you 'pull' the bar stock with the sub spindle, only pure transfer.

Thanks again! Will update with our decision.

[deadlykitten]

..

[deadlykitten]

1. I've worked on ....

The LB line has always been very robust, I think you'll be happy with it for a very long time.

// nick888, this reply is not to your post ... please, you may find my opinion at #17

- some one loved one machine-mechanics so much, and give it a 2nd chance by replacing all electronics, not with new ones, but another control

- also, i am not lucky, a new lathe got wear on X axis guide/sadle/ ?(don't know englis word) : 0.05 in less than one year, without much working


considering a medium cnc performance = P,at price $, than okuma is PxA, at price $xB ... B/A > supraunitar, so maybe sometimes is better to buy more machines at a lower price, instead of a cheaper one

medium performance = P
okuma performance = PxA
parts required performance = P .... PxA *0.8

do some rough things on a PxA machine, and performance will decrease in time
so put rough on P machine, and consider fine touches on PxA machine
you lose time with moving parts between machines: so you use and mantain machine capabilites,

but you lose time

only in a mass production factory can these be seen
hope you have such a factory )

this can go on and on

i would like to build such machines, because mechanics are limited by electronics and you can't do some jobs, must look for a way around, etc ...

well, i wish you the best !

[budgieW]

Nick,

Okuma support is Australia is good, I would say better than there peers in my experience, they have local Sydney based, service and appliactions which is pretty important when moving into CNC. Okuma machine are solid. As for software well that really comes down to what you want to make and how complex it is. If the parts are have simple turning, drilling pocketing then IGF may surfice

[tea hole]

I apologize for being late to the conversation. (as though my opinion holds any weight)
1. The LB3000MYW machine will not leave you wanting. I prefer the Y axis on any lathe if only to put turning tools on spindle centerline while turning, so be sure to look for the off center turning function (i think that's what it's called) to allow feeding the machine while the Y axis is not at "turning position". This is only software so if you need it and the machine doesn't have it, only software is needed. As for virtues of Okuma, that is a topic of debate. They are not perfect if that's what you are looking for. If you want perfect, you are looking for a Unicorn. I appreciate the lack of back and forth between control maker and machine builder. IE: Fanuc blames Kitamura, Kitamura blames Fanuc. Neither company wants to help with an issue which leaves me angry at both. And the machine down. Okuma makes their own control, so they can't point at anyone else. They use distributors, so occasionally, Okuma America (or Australia in your case) and or Japan need to be contacted which is less than expedient at times, though I imagine it is shorter when you're in the same time zone as opposed to on a different day.
2. As for Rolls Royce/Toyota, I would say more like a VW. Great tech and innovations, better than the Japanese(automakers) for overall build quality, and a bit quirky in their handling of sales/service compared to the Toyotas of the world. However, not quite as pretty as some out there. However, I don't buy machines to be pretty, I buy them to make parts. And today they make parts exceeding quality expectations. And tomorrow. And the next day. And the next...
3. As for features, I'm not sure what you're after. I would recommend finding someone local(ish) who doesn't have a dog in the fight and ask them their opinion and go see their (comparable/identical) machine. If features are what you're after, the machine again doesn't leave you wanting, but it's easy to fall in love with the idea of an option rather than have a practical need for it, as ghyman iterated above/below (depending on if you're logged in to this website or not) so eloquently.
4. This question is slightly loaded. I think every machine and maker have quirks. Okuma lathes vs. Okuma mills, for example, use V# and VC# respectively to designate common variables. However, you can use VC[#] in both. You won't be diving in and changing the ladder around like one would in a Fanuc machine, though I've never found the need on an Okuma. Older mills have a quirk that if you command T1 M6 while T1 is in the spindle, you will get an alarm. A vast majority of users have a G11# macro for tool change to prevent the alarm. The new control added a parameter for this, though if you have older machines too you probably still use the macro like me.
5. As an old school G/M code guy, if the part is production, I prefer to hand write the codes. Factually, the program will run faster than a posted program if you take the time to make it so. All posted programs are designed to simplify programming to expedite that process, alternatively; making the part quickly is secondary. On 10s of parts, or 100's of parts, not that big a deal in time savings, use AOT, but if you're looking at 1000's or more of parts, you should be hand writing them IMHO. Also, if you have a limited number of parts to be in the machine, IE: Machine bought with 10-15 specific parts in mind, AOT is useful at first, but by the time it is used again you will forget how to use it. Is it enough for most parts? Yes. Will you need it? I have no idea.

Basically: What he (ghyman) said.

To supplement the LB comment, I have a friend who owns LB15 machines to make parts all day every day (aside from general maintenance which is higher on older machines in general). The machines are literally older than he is. (produced in 1983)

Don't forget to share what you decide

[nick888]

Thanks teahole for the detailed reply (also budgieW for your comment too).

We are still progressing, I've had both Okuma & DMG quote now, quite similar prices for the package and mostly similar specs with a few notable differences (live tool RPM, bar stock capacity, max turning length). The DMG machines look better imho, but as you say teahole that's not really a viable factor to base an investment of this sort on!

We'll be making a decision within the next 4-6 weeks, so will reply back here for the record with what we do.

[andytpks]

Hi, i use an Okuma LB3000EXII MY 1000.

Rigidity, affidability for the future and accuracy are the best.

OSP-P300 is a good software, i prefer use traditional G code but IGF is not impossible to use.

Just a tip, purchase optional for Y turning and optional for the M185 code (rotation of the spindle if the spindle is open).

If you look other brand look only Dmg Mori but Mori Seiki machine, not other... i hope you look the NLX model, no CTX...

[nick888]

Thanks again to those who replied, it's really helped.

We are getting closer to making our final decision on this machine and have a decision that we are a bit stuck on:

Standard Hinge filter or Drum Filter for an extra ~$20K.

We are machining Brass & Aluminium 90% of the time and we are being told that the drum filter whilst expensive will save significant time on coolant tank clean-outs and general conveyor cleaning. We just have no actual experience to be able to quantify how much time that actually is. If it really is a lot, then we'd consider it even with the extra expense.

Thanks again for any input!

[andytpks]

For italian market standard conveyor is from company "mayfran" and is not good for aluminium.

For small lots is not a big problem but for me, in a big production, is a problem and is better change type of conveyor with filter and other.

[OkumaWiz]

If you are going to do a lot of aluminum and brass, the chips will float and go everywhere, so I'd get the drum style even with the extra expense. It will pay for itself. I'd go with the Okuma since you are running smallish higher volume parts. The okuma has the ability to power up and go with no zero return, can check it's own switches for proper setting, I'd also get it because of the load monitoring capability and the ability to upload download your setup information including load monitor with each job using a "TOP" file. Standard 3D graphics also help you considerably, although the P300 is a step backwards IMHO compared to the ease of the P200. They claim they are brining back the "easier graphics" but so far have floundered. The LB is one of their best and will give you years of high accuracy parts and while different from other controls, most people find them easier and more logical to use. EOB insert will be a thing of the past.

OK, start firing boys!

Best regards,

[tea hole]

Agree to buy the drum filter.
Disagree the p300 graphics is more difficult. Tooling may be slightly more cumbersome but the functionality and power of the tie in with AOT and CAS is substantially better. The material graphics of it are incredibly easy comparatively.
PT,LF,LC[0,0],[50,50],[80,0],4
That's archaic.
The new update does allow AOT to attach tooling and you can highlight positions and define tools similar to the old way. I didn't like it when I saw it but some might.

Hope you get it figured out.

[deadlykitten]

If you are going to do a lot of aluminum and brass, the chips will float and go everywhere, so I'd get the drum style even with the extra expense. It will pay for itself. I'd go with the Okuma since you are running smallish higher volume parts. The okuma has the ability to power up and go with no zero return, can check it's own switches for proper setting, I'd also get it because of the load monitoring capability and the ability to upload download your setup information including load monitor with each job using a "TOP" file. Standard 3D graphics also help you considerably, although the P300 is a step backwards IMHO compared to the ease of the P200. They claim they are brining back the "easier graphics" but so far have floundered. The LB is one of their best and will give you years of high accuracy parts and while different from other controls, most people find them easier and more logical to use. EOB insert will be a thing of the past.

OK, start firing boys!

Best regards,

Please, what is a drum filter ? what it does, where it is located ? does it has a conection with the chip conveyor ? please enlight me

[deadlykitten]

i don't know what is a drum filter, but is there a chance to built it on your own, with costs signifiantly under 20k $, so to save money ?

also, a new machine needs tools/holders/etc ... and this might hit 10-40k $, depending on what you do


it was not about me trying to figure it out what a drum filter is ... i think is just a box

[Algirdas]

additionally about IGF. Just give a time to try. IGF is perfect when you understand it. It needs proper set up at the beginning. You set your strategies one-by-one and go. The part programming is easy as drawing the shape of it.

[tea hole]

additionally about IGF. Just give a time to try. IGF is perfect when you understand it. It needs proper set up at the beginning. You set your strategies one-by-one and go. The part programming is easy as drawing the shape of it.

Disagree on this.

IE: the pickoff only allows part transfer but I never just transfer. In my barfed parts I always pull with the sub spindle. No way to do that sans g/m code.
Will say I used the DXF feature recently and damn. That's just too easy. Limitations on live tooling operations that interface with it but holy cow.
If it were my money I wouldn't buy it but I'm not writing the checks so my vote only counts for so much.