[keen]

Hi Folks. Well here is a contentious subject on several levels.

I kick it off with this video - let me know your thoughts.

Cliff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GY6GCQaBXoo&t=319s

[C*H*U*D]

I'm confused...is this a video comparing a tool changer with one work offset, to manual tool changes with multiple work offsets? If you have a tool changer, can it not do multiple offsets?

I guess I don't understand why they are being compared as an "either/or" type of setup.

[keen]

Hi CHUD. Yes of course you can still run multiple work offsets with a toolchanger.

The reason I am comparing these two options is because of the capital cost and possible process reliability benifits of running multiple parts production.. without purchasing a toolchange and ancillary equipment.

Cheers Cliff

[kstrauss]

I believe that Keen's point is that making multiple parts using offsets and manual tool changes is faster than making one part at a time with an ATC plus is much cheaper and possibly more reliable.

[C*H*U*D]

The reason I am comparing these two options is because of the capital cost and possible process reliability benifits of running multiple parts production.. without purchasing a toolchange and ancillary equipment.

I believe that Keen's point is that making multiple parts using offsets and manual tool changes is faster than making one part at a time with an ATC plus is much cheaper and possibly more reliable.

Ok, that makes sense. I've avoided the tool changer for reliability and cost reasons myself.

[R.DesJardin]

Ok, I have a Beta tool changer that has worked flawlessly for many years, my machines were made in 2008 and 2009. In fact I just bought a second ATC for my 2009 1100 that I have had only a few years, the reason is to free up my time to weld, assemble and package my parts. 99% of the time if I have an issue it is caused my me. I have no issue walking away and letting the machine run while I go to mail packages, or while I go into the house to do something. I don't know what tolerances people run but I think most amateurs design parts with too tight of tolerances for what they really need. My background in machining is tool and die work where ±0.0001 is a real tolerance. My parts I designed to work flawlessly for many many year and not worry about tolerance issues from machining.

[SCzEngrgGroup]

For me, the issue was never cost, or even minimizing production time, but rather minimizing MY time. Having an ATC allows me to start a job then walk away, for as much as four or more hours, letting the machine tend to itself. Without the ATC, I always had to be nearby to handle the next tool change, had to keep track of roughly when that would occur, and make sure I was nearby when it gets close. The ATC frees me to be doing other useful work while the machine takes care of itself, and I only need be aware of when the run will be done, so I can shovel out the chips, load up a new set of "blanks", and start the next run. Even if the machine run takes longer than it would doing it manual tool changes, I don't care - my overall productivity is still greatly increased. This also means I can do more finishing passes, or add purely "cosmetic" features, or do other things that actually increase part quality and/or appearance. Regardless of which approach I use my "production" fixtures are always designed to hold as many parts at one time as the machines work envelope permits (up to several dozen parts in a single run). To get maximum efficiency when doing manual toolchanges, it was always desirable to minimize the number of tool changes, and the time per tool, so I did not have to stand there "baby-sitting" the machine ALL the time. With the ATC, I instead program for the most logical "flow", and don't need to really care if there are "extra" tool changes.

Regards,
Ray L.

[Snecx]

Edit: incomplete post mistakenly posted. Sorry.

[keen]

Great to hear the feedback folks - so far it is about 50/50 positive/negative combined with the youtube comments. Please keep them coming!

Cliff

[Snecx]

I don’t see this being mentioned, but how many of you clock your tools to reduce tool runout?

Despite wanting the ATC for the convenience, I don’t think I can live without clocking my tools for the work I do. This has been a deal breaker so I only have the PDB but not the ATC because I don’t see a way to clock my tools with the ATC.

[keen]

I don’t see this being mentioned, but how many of you clock your tools to reduce tool runout?

Despite wanting the ATC for the convenience, I don’t think I can live without clocking my tools for the work I do. This has been a deal breaker so I only have the PDB but not the ATC because I don’t see a way to clock my tools with the ATC.

Hi - I think you mean you clock critical tools, then rotary position mark them, then always install them in the same position. If so then you are correct, I do that ...but forgot to mention it in my video.

Cheers Cliff

[Snecx]

Yes you’re correct Cliff, thanks for the better description.

Being able to somewhat “cancel out” all the runout (under <0.01mm/0.0004” variance or +/-0.005mm/0.0002”) by aligning the tool to the spindle exactly the same every time, is the only way I can get reliable results when hard milling 62hrc tool steels with small end mills.

For example the feed (Fz) for 3mm endmill I use is 0.01mm. Runout of just 0.01mm or more will be really terrible. Simply rotating the TTS tool in the spindle will change the runout of the end mills dramatically. I’ve tested this with over two dozens of TTS tool holders I bought within the last 12 months. Inserting them “wrong” can produce runout in excess of 0.03mm/0.0012” or more. Even greasing the R8 collet wrong can create more runout problems.

In short, I think this is the special case where running multiple parts with less tool changes would work better than ATC. And it’s the only reason why I didn’t get the ATC.

I’m also curious if the MX series will have spindle orientation with the BT30 spindle.

[kstrauss]

I believe that it is usual to have drive dogs with BT30 so spindle orientation (at least to 0 or 180 degrees from the standard orientation) will be required. Looking at the Tormach site their old BT30 spindle supports drive dogs.

[sansbury]

Embrace the healing power of "and"

I think of this in terms of two key metrics: total operator time per part, and how long the spindle is on in between operator actions. For a large operation or long production run, the difference between 30 and 90 seconds of operator time per part may be very significant. For a sole proprietor, the difference between needing to swap tools every 5-10 minutes or being able to walk away for 30+ minutes may be a lot more significant.

I made a few runs (totaling about 60 each of 4 parts) for a customer without an ATC. I did a few sets in the vise as a first article test, and when he said he'd want a couple dozen at least, I made a fixture that could hold ten each of any of the parts using Mitee-Bite hex clamps. The time to design and make the fixture was considerable even amortized over 200+ parts, but I couldn't have done that number of parts without it.

Still, because the run time of each operation was relatively low (~1 minute per part per tool), I basically ended up standing in front of the machine the whole time. When the customer came back and said he wanted 100-200 sets, I told him it was probably time to find a "real shop" as that would have meant a full 40+ week in front of the machine, and the money wasn't enough to make that worthwhile for me. An ATC wouldn't have reduced the total run time, but it might have allowed me to do anything else in the shop, so I might have taken that on.

As it happens, I *just* got an ATC delivered this week and am hoping to get it up this weekend. I bought this largely as a late Christmas present to myself, and will be curious to see how much it affects my work. These days I do mostly one-off parts for my own projects, so there's fewer opportunities to save time with multi-part fixtures.

[footpetaljones]

I believe that it is usual to have drive dogs with BT30 so spindle orientation (at least to 0 or 180 degrees from the standard orientation) will be required. Looking at the Tormach site their old BT30 spindle supports drive dogs.

Drive dogs are nearly universal, but not required for BT30.

[TurboStep]

Great to hear the feedback folks - so far it is about 50/50 positive/negative combined with the youtube comments. Please keep them coming!
Cliff

Hi Cliff, you asked my opinion in another thread but I thought it would be better here.
I don't own an ATC, but if I used my mill for business I would almost certainly have one. Their price (and shipping costs) is the only reason I don't have one now. Some have reported issues with reliability but I suspect you'd be able to sort anything out. If you pick up an older version make sure you upgrade to the latest PathPilot version.
Instead of 3 jaw chucks I'd probably have made a fixture with mitee-bites to hold far more parts, and for the parts you showed in the video this should be fairly straightforward. Once set up, a combination of a fixture together with an ATC would allow you to machine for stock with very little effort. I believe individual tools can still be changed manually if necessary, but would more likely be the exception than the rule.
I'd go for the new 12 tool version (which some have reported to be usable on non M series mills) just in case, but the 10 tool version is most likely more than adequate. You know your jobs best, so it should be fairly easy to estimate the maximum number of tools you'll need.
Creating a fixture is always an option, but using an ATC is only an option if you own one!
Step

[sansbury]

I'd go for the new 12 tool version (which some have reported to be usable on non M series mills) just in case, but the 10 tool version is most likely more than adequate.

The M-derived #39009 ATC is now the only one offered on Tormach's store for 1100 Series 3 machines. I never saw or ran the earlier version so can't comment as to differences beyond capacity, but mine has handled at least twenty tool changes well since I installed it a couple weeks ago

While it took me a little while to figure out the flow logic of the system at first (the documentation is a little confusing as written), I like the way the whole system works. Ultimately, I think the weak link in the system is the PDB, and that's the same as it's always been. I felt OK with that as I do mostly lighter milling and have never had a problem with tool pullout.

[popspipes]

I have never used multiple offsets, I should check that out maybe??
I make multiple parts 4 or 5 at a time on one fixture and one offset, I manually change the tools, really not a big deal for me.

I draw up the parts in CAD as multiples then CAM up the file and machine it, I use each tool for each op on all the parts, then change the tool and do the same, some have 9 or ten different tools, I do this all on a G54 offset.

But then I am relatively new to CNC and there are many things I need to learn...........

[jwatte]

For tools, you don't want to use the G54-type offsets, you will want to use the Hn Tn G42 M6 type offsets.
There's a table on the "Offsets" page in PathPilot that lets you measure the length of each tool (with a tool setter/gauge) and the mill knows where the tip of the tool is once you change to it.
(Assuming you have the correct tool offset in effect when you set your initial zero.)
The TTS system is designed to make this work -- the ground flat on the holder slams against the nose of the spindle, so you get a good reference every time. (The tool setter measures distance from flat of holder to tip of tool.)

Of course, if you do R8 collets and take the tool/collet out of the spindle for each change, the measurements won't work. (But you could have a tool setter instead, for a similar workflow?)
Assuming workholding is repeatable, and you have a power drawbar, it's probably easier to change tools (with offset) while the part is clamped, rather than swap out the parts.
But, back when I used a 1100 with manual drawbar, it was easier to keep the tool mounted, and swap the part out. So it depends on your specific workflow.

[C*H*U*D]

I have never used multiple offsets, I should check that out maybe??
I make multiple parts 4 or 5 at a time on one fixture and one offset, I manually change the tools, really not a big deal for me.

I draw up the parts in CAD as multiples then CAM up the file and machine it, I use each tool for each op on all the parts, then change the tool and do the same, some have 9 or ten different tools, I do this all on a G54 offset.

But then I am relatively new to CNC and there are many things I need to learn...........

Hey Mike, for me the real power of multiple offsets is when I'm doing multiple setups on the same part...a different offset for each op. That way I'm taking off completed parts with each loading.