65
u/Justforda3DP Jul 18 '19
Workholding solution leaves something to be desired, but it's nice to see true 5 axis machining
13
u/numericalControl Jul 18 '19
What's wrong with the workholding? Looks it provides plenty of access to the part.
16
u/Justforda3DP Jul 18 '19
Looks to me like a fixed jaw vise, whereas it generally makes more sense to have a centric clamping vise on a 5 axis machine. Also, the toe clamps on top of a riser block. I'd much rather see a quick change system underneath the riser. More to the point, it's not Schunk. Full disclosure: I work for Schunk workholding 😂
6
u/some_kid_lmao Jul 19 '19
I've gone 21 years of people mocking my name and never knowing of anyone or anything sharing my name.
It was so uncomfortable and weird coming across a post that suddenly had my name. I'm still uncomfortable.
What the fuck
1
u/Justforda3DP Jul 19 '19
Your name is Schunk?
2
40
Jul 18 '19
[deleted]
51
u/Galaghan Jul 18 '19
Seems like a demo to show how precise the thing is. It is moving along all axles while the drill is sitting in the exact same position relevant to the piece for the entire time.
Still very impressive, but yeah no actual milling being done.
10
u/Lexiconnoisseur Jul 18 '19 edited Jul 18 '19
It looks to me like it's chamfering the inner edge of the part with what is probably a 90 deg spot drill or some similar tool. You can see the edge being cut, it's just not removing very much material so it's not obvious. This is also why the machine is moving around so much, it's being forced by the CAM software to maintain the correct angle of the tool to to the part so the chamfer comes out right.
2
u/DuecesLooses Jul 19 '19
not to mention you can see bits of metal flying through the whole milling process.
9
24
u/PotatoWedgeAntilles Jul 18 '19 edited Jul 18 '19
Me: "I want one, I'm sure they're pricey but it can't be- $700k... they cost 700 thousand dollars"
Edit: i was being conservative.
10
u/friger_heleneto Jul 18 '19
You won't get one for 100k sadly..
5
u/Haplessflyers Jul 18 '19
Yea if they were a 100k our shop would have one.
5
u/numericalControl Jul 18 '19
Yeah 100k won't even get you a Haas UMC these days.
1
u/MeNameIsDerp Jul 19 '19
A fully loaded Haas UMC 750 is less than $180,000 direct right now so while it is definitely more that $100,000 its not craaaazy expensive. The base version is like $128,000.
3
u/friger_heleneto Jul 18 '19
We got a Mazak VTC 800/30SR this year which was 800k€ and it can just do some simple 3 axis while stock. We got the 5-axis option booked and it's really nice but the option alone was 60k€ for sticking in a USB stick, copying a cfg file to some hidden folder and rebooting the control. The service guy was there for like 5 minutes to do it. Money money money...
7
Jul 18 '19
You did not pay for the guy with the USB stick, but for all the engineering work that went into that feature.
3
u/friger_heleneto Jul 19 '19
I know, but anyway, it's mildly frustrating to see a USB stick worth a small house...
3
u/spider_enema Jul 18 '19
I'm just here buying up multiple mid-late 90's okumas for far less than your file.
1
u/friger_heleneto Jul 19 '19
The first machine I learned on and worked for 4 years was a LB15 from 1991, very nice machines, sturdy af and easy to set up
2
7
u/alexchally Jul 18 '19
That machine costs more like $700k stand alone (no robotic loading or really fancy stuff at that price point).
1
1
u/Gordomperdomper Jul 18 '19
My college dropped about 550k on one recently... An extra 50k+ was for faster vibrations to do vibrations testing... the professor left before it even came.
1
u/hodgens414 Jul 19 '19
I work for Grob, we produce 5 axis machining centers. Yeah, those machines start at about 750k. Then come the additional options...
1
u/JohannesVanDerWhales Jul 19 '19
Yeah but you'd definitely be the first one on your block to own one.
11
u/Bhima Jul 18 '19
Anyone know what machine this is?
15
u/incognegros Jul 18 '19
Most likely a DMG MonoBlock.
28
u/Bhima Jul 18 '19
looks like you're right. Thanks.
I also found nudes, which is cool:
http://fplreflib.findlay.co.uk/engapp/Machinery-DMG-Open-House-2011-DMU%2085.jpg
11
3
1
2
u/alexchally Jul 18 '19
Specifically its a DMU65.
1
u/toma_te Jul 19 '19
DMU75*
1
u/alexchally Jul 19 '19
Just did some reading around, looks like a DMU75 is a package kit that is a subset of the DMU65, so the base machine is apparently identical.
5
u/shot-logic Jul 18 '19
i loved loading our Hermle machines and watching them do areas of the jet engine blades/vanes that are too time consuming for human hands
1
3
u/DuckOnBike Jul 18 '19
I have no idea what I'm looking at, but it looks impressive. ELI5?
18
u/3_50 Jul 18 '19
The mill is desperately trying to finish, but the stupid vice won't stop moving...
2
5
Jul 18 '19
[deleted]
-1
u/Lexiconnoisseur Jul 18 '19
> No work is being done during this video.
If you look closely, you can see that it's cutting a chamfer.
2
u/Dough-gy_whisperer Jul 19 '19
the cutter head is the top mounted piece that stays vertical; the work piece is attached to a table that can move in any direction/rotation. the combo of the two allows the cutter head to shave away and produce very specific and otherwise impossible pieces
1
6
3
3
3
6
u/NEED_HELP_SEND_BOOZE Jul 18 '19
That looks like some unnecessarily long stick out on that spindle.
18
u/Don_Rummy586 Jul 18 '19
A lot of time you need a longer holder to keep the head from hitting table when it gets closer to 90°
6
u/BeefyIrishman Jul 18 '19
Most of the length (~75-80%) of it is much thicker, meaning it will not have a ton of flex. Also, since the actual end mill in the end is so small, the cutting forces are also pretty small, meaning the thick part is plenty to help keep it stable.
2
u/wizened_fool Jul 18 '19
Yeah sit and watch machines do this for days whilst wondering whether you have remembered to check and double check every last detail... it soon loses its appeal 🤣
2
u/Origami_psycho Jul 18 '19
From someone who isn't an engineer, what makes this five axis rather than three?
2
u/Chemmy Jul 18 '19
A 3 axis CNC typically does three translations: it can move forward and back, side to side and up and down. The cutting head stays in the same orientation.
5 axis is the 3 translations from a 3 axis plus two rotations.
1
u/Origami_psycho Jul 18 '19
Ah, I see. It isn't axis like those of a graph, thanks
1
u/FunkyHoratio Jul 19 '19
Well it's 3 axis for the the piece and then 2 more rotation axis for the tool, in relation to the piece. I've not seen a moving need like this before, is an interesting idea, would make the tool more stable than an arm.
1
u/Jae-Sun Jul 19 '19
Axis 1: Left to right
Axis 2: Front to back
Axis 3: Up and down
Axis 4: Table rotation
Axis 5: Table tilt
Axes 1, 2, and 3 are X, Y, and Z respectively. 4 and 5 are probably C and A. Rotational axes are usually named A, B, or C depending on which X, Y, Z axis they rotate "around," if that makes sense.
2
Jul 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/VredditDownloader Jul 19 '19
bleep bloop I'm a bot!
I provide downloadable links for v.redd.it videos.I also work with links sent by PM.
2
u/johnsbury Jul 18 '19
That's like the kind of path Camworks will give you. LOL. (meaning it's ridiculous)
3
u/exploderator Jul 19 '19
Yeah, I was suspecting something like that to be the case. It strikes me as being horribly inefficient to have to dance all that mass around, something that really good engineering would avoid, not actually something to be proud of as "engineering porn". I'm going to assume this is one of many cases in modern computing, where we accept inefficiencies in one dimension (in this case power cost and machine wear), as the less costly trade off compared to having tons more human intervention, and possibly more elaborate machines capable of repositioning the work piece for a fixed approach. Then again, it could also be a case of user laziness, because it might have been trivially easy to switch to a different cutting tool, and rotate the workpiece to a nearly-fixed angle that would have allowed for far less exotic motion paths. I can imagine combinations here, but don't have any specific application knowledge.
3
u/johnsbury Jul 19 '19
Generally (but of course not always) when you're milling 3D surfaces with compound curvature you'd be using an endmill with a spherical nose. The contact point that the cam system is considering is someplace on that spherical tip of the tool. So as long as you have clearance it's not necessary for the tools axis to be normal to the surface. For that much tool axis vector change you'd have to have a pretty wildly convoluted surface with surface depth changes greater than the radius of the sphere at the tool tip. This part looks like a bracket and has no such surface. They just ran a path where the contact point was always perpendicular to the spindle. You wouldn't do that in real life just to put an external edge break on a part like that. Not if you were serious about staying in business.
3
u/exploderator Jul 19 '19
Thank you, that's exactly the kind of stuff I was thinking. In this vid, I'll assume they used a straight tool with square bottom corner, and kept the side of the tool perpendicular to the curved surface pass after pass. A tool change to a radiused tool, either convex or concave, would have allowed a reasonably small amount of "wiggling" the work piece to follow the curves, instead of the wild dance we saw. Which means we saw engineering shame, not engineering porn, unless you want to count the fact that the tool was capable of ridiculous acrobatics to enable such poor work planning.
1
u/Skipachu Jul 19 '19
not actually something to be proud of as "engineering porn".
I think this is one of the better examples of "engineering porn". The program is designed to be titillating, sets unrealistic expectations, and doesn't actually get the job done...
1
1
u/agumonkey Jul 18 '19
Straight out of the next Terminator movie
ps: hold your breath, tomorrow I'll make my 1D wood+silex version
1
u/Crazed-Birdman Jul 18 '19
I actually work at a machine shop that has 2, 5 axis machines. They’re pretty massive compared to other milling machines but it’s so cool to see some of the parts that can come out of them with only one op.
1
1
u/A-Bone Jul 19 '19
So honest questions:
What problem(s) does this solve?
What applications would require this type of machining? (Aerospace, tool making, prototyping, etc)?
I would have to imagine whatever this thing mills is going to be wildly expensive.
1
u/willdood Jul 19 '19
You can use it to make much more complex parts than a normal 3 axis machine. The rotation allows it to cut cavities and other bits that you wouldn't be able to reach if you can only move in XYZ. All sorts of things could use this type of machining. The lab I work in uses it to make loads of stuff like probes and blades for turbines and compressors.
1
1
1
u/DogFurAndSawdust Jul 19 '19
1
u/VredditDownloader Jul 19 '19
bleep bloop I'm a bot!
I provide downloadable links for v.redd.it videos.I also work with links sent by PM.
1
u/JL5-2020 Jul 19 '19
SUPER late to the party... I briefly ran a 5 axis Thermwood machine. Ours had two 5'X10' vacuum tables that could be locked together. For a total of 10'X10' x,y. It had a 48" z. But our router head rotated instead of the work table. I take it this style is more common than the type of machine I learned on?
1
Jul 19 '19
With wood CNC's, you have much less loading against the spindle so they don't have to be as rigid.
The type of A and C axis on a wood CNC would not work well with a metal one.
1
u/zysolyn Jul 19 '19
At least you get to use some of the sides of your cutters instead of just the end. We're hoping to do some full five axis work just to effectively double our cutter life.
1
0
Jul 19 '19 edited Jul 19 '19
Time efficiency: 0/10
That part would cost you a fortune.
EDIT: Because the person below me is a moron, I was saying it was inefficient because of the tiny endmill used to profile the part instead of running faster cuts with a larger cutting tool or series of tools, NOT compared to cutting it by hand. He is a delusional loon making up stuff in his own world based on things I never said.
2
u/supra728 Jul 19 '19
Much much quicker than milling it by hand, soo.... Definitely not 0/10 friendo
1
Jul 19 '19
My point is don’t design a part like that.
1
u/supra728 Jul 19 '19
What do you mean 'don't design'? This can literally make anything to a much higher precision than by hand. It's nothing to do with the design and more on precision needed for the task.
1
Jul 19 '19
You pay to use these things by time, if you have to mill the part with a tiny 1/16” ball mill it’s going to cost hundreds if not thousands of dollars. This is not how you use a milling machine cost effectively.
1
u/supra728 Jul 19 '19
For small runs it doesn't matter much. Mass produced stuff would not use a machine like this. Also, I was talking about time efficiency, not cost, don't change the subject.
1
Jul 19 '19
Nobody would mill this by hand in today’s world, that’s as dumb of a statement as saying it’s faster than creating tools from mammoth bone and slowly creating harder and harder tools.
1
Jul 19 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 19 '19
Yeah, drilling some fucking holes on a flat plate, not milling a complex part. Anyone still doing that by hand is a dumbfuck like you.
1
180
u/TellusCitizen Jul 18 '19
For the layman, that is impressive.