Looking for Turn/mill testimonies for MAZAK, MORI, INDEX

[Tim Johnson]

I'm looking for positive or negative testimony for;

 

MAZAK Integrex i300st

 

MORI NTx2000SZM

 

INDEX R series (R200, R400)

 

TIA

[mayday]

we have 2 i200s machines. great machine and can do some really nice work. The Matrix 2 control is really nice. I would say the one thing I dont like about them is the limited X travel they have from home to the chuck for tool clearance. But I may be spoiled from our E420H machines

[K2csq7]

i200s can swing a 25.9" part (and turn the od when b is at zero)

y travel of 4.92" from centerline in both directions and x goes 4.92 below center as well.

 

60"between chuck faces IIRC.

 

If you get a 400 you can bar feed 7" diameter! :w00t:

[Tim Johnson]

Thanks TEEJAY. I did think I would have had more replies though. I expected not getting much on the INDEX machine but I thought the MAZAK and MORI wre relatively popoular machines.

 

Here is a link to the INDEX 200. I think this machine more fits our limited quantities of parts. With both milling spindles getting tools from the tool chain the only internal setting up appears to be changing the chuck jaws.

 

If you see an issue with my thinking please let me know.

[Joe788]

That Index with the dual B axis heads is pretty rad. Though, having seen the troubles folks go through just trying to effectively program a regular B axis multi-tasking machine, I have a hard time believing the second head will ever give you any sort of net productivity improvement on anything less than automotive-ish quantities. Probably cheaper and more efficient to have two regular Integrex/NT/Macturn/etc machines with lower turrets.

 

When you say limited quantities of parts, do you mean small lot sizes, or a small number of total different parts that will be run on the machine?

[jas6142]

I don't specifically know that index machine, I watched it run at imts looks way impressive. I will say the last place that I worked we had 5 of their g200's with the b axis top turret's and they were about the most accurate machines we had. They are very proud of them however. the last time the salesmen was hear i think he said the r200 was 1.2 mil?

[Tim Johnson]

That Index with the dual B axis heads is pretty rad. Though, having seen the troubles folks go through just trying to effectively program a regular B axis multi-tasking machine, I have a hard time believing the second head will ever give you any sort of net productivity improvement on anything less than automotive-ish quantities. Probably cheaper and more efficient to have two regular Integrex/NT/Macturn/etc machines with lower turrets.

 

When you say limited quantities of parts, do you mean small lot sizes, or a small number of total different parts that will be run on the machine?

 

I mean small lot sizes (3 to 10) for most of our parts and a lot of different parts along with different materials. We do have parts that will run +100 quantity work orders but not many. We have well over 200 different sets of soft jaws for our two Tsugami Turm/mill machines and one of them is 80+% barwork.

 

We are an analytical instruments manufacturer so our customers are mainly laboratories. Some of our instruments will sell less than 10 per year. Our largest selling instrument is somewhere around 800 units per year. Almost all the instruments are assembled specifically for each customer so many parts won't be in every instrument.

 

I don't specifically know that index machine, I watched it run at imts looks way impressive. I will say the last place that I worked we had 5 of their g200's with the b axis top turret's and they were about the most accurate machines we had. They are very proud of them however. the last time the salesmen was hear i think he said the r200 was 1.2 mil?

 

I can only imagine what the price of the r400 is then.

[Joe788]

Tim, do all of these parts have turning? If it's mostly milling in such low quantities, you'd probably come out WAY ahead in setup, programming, and cycle times, just using a nice trunnion type 5 axis VMC with a variety of easily interchangeable dovetail fixtures. Put a nice 3 or 4 axis VMC right next to it for cutting the dovetails into the raw stock, and doing the final machining away of the dovetail.

[GoetzInd]

Tim, do all of these parts have turning? If it's mostly milling in such low quantities, you'd probably come out WAY ahead in setup, programming, and cycle times, just using a nice trunnion type 5 axis VMC with a variety of easily interchangeable dovetail fixtures. Put a nice 3 or 4 axis VMC right next to it for cutting the dovetails into the raw stock, and doing the final machining away of the dovetail.

 

Exactly what I was thinking. I'm all for mill turns for the right application but a true 5-axis mill is going to smoke a b axis mill turn if the parts ar 90% milling. Have you looked at a matsurra cublex? Also, what kind of Tsugami Turm/mill machine do you have?

 

Mike

[Tim Johnson]

Most of the parts are turning with milling processes on both sides of the part. Some parts are simplistic with just needing alignment between both sides while others are extremely complex. Some parts would fit the trunion 5 axis process but that would also mean there's added processes for prepping material and removing waste material.. The main reason the parts go on our Turn/mills are that they are finished in one process.

[GoetzInd]

In that case I would prob go with a Mazak i200S. I would prob ditch the lower turret as it will just add complexity and it will be a lot more difficult to use effectively on shorter runs except as a tailstock. Do you currently have Tma8's? I've never talked to someone that has em.

 

Mike

[Greg Williams]

We have a NT1000-SZM here,

 

On the Good side;

- Good Y axis travel with vertical column

- Good X minus travel, The machine gets well past X0

- CAPPS/Mapps software is pretty good, Most simple functions are available and it is simple to use. although it is not possible to write production programs

- Large 21" screen

- Small machine footprint

- low power usage

- Reliable

 

On the bad side

- Lower turret can really only work on the main spindle, It can OD turn and face on the sub only

- Sub spindle has zero rigidity, mainly due to the silly BW axis thing where the sub spindle flips over to dump the part

- No parts catcher, this is a real pain in the butt for production with a barfeeder as the programs need way too many macros to get it to run.

- The production process is very complicated and it sorta goes like this

1 - Barfeed first part, So now we have 1 part in the left spindle only, which in turn means the right spindle programs must be jumped

2 - after the left spindle program has run and the part transfers all is ok as there is 1 part in each spindle so this program works fine until the end of bar is reached

3 - Now the fun starts, I like to use the sub spindle to pull the bar out for each new part as it saves time, this becomes an issues at the end of bar as we now need to cut the bar off in a different spot, or have a long remnant, which is a total waste, So we cut the bar off and now we have the remnant in the left spindle and a part in the right spindle, now the left spindle programs need to be jumped. After the right spindle programs have finished the part is ejected out the back with the BW axis. Now we have no parts and a remnant in the left spindle so both spindle programs need to be jumped to allow for the sub spindle to remove the bar end from the chuck. This all means that the jaw design can be very complicated to allow for grabbing the bar end. This needs to be done as dumping the remnant into the chip tray has jammed up the conveyor more than once. After the new bar is barfeed the program is back at the start position with a new bar in the left spindle and nothing in the right side.

- Memory is an issue, Sure the control has a Internal card but as this is a 2 turret control the limitation is that only the top turret can read programs from the card

- The BW axis motor is way too small, Basically the axis jerks like crazy when it moves

 

Just my 2 cents worth

[Tim Johnson]

In that case I would prob go with a Mazak i200S. I would prob ditch the lower turret as it will just add complexity and it will be a lot more difficult to use effectively on shorter runs except as a tailstock. Do you currently have Tma8's? I've never talked to someone that has em.

 

Mike

 

We have two TMA8-II machines with only the B axis milling spindle. These are our first Turn/mills and at this time they are our greatest bottleneck due to their workload. I don't program them as I have my plate full programming our eight horizontals. As far as complexity is concerned, as low as the lot sizes are most of the parts are repeat production and we only have to program them once (most of the time).

[GoetzInd]

What is the reason you're not looking into more Tma8's?

[Tim Johnson]

What is the reason you're not looking into more Tma8's?

 

We are looking for a larger machine with greater bar stock capability.

[Pilot Plant Supervisor]

The new X7 Mill-Turn package from Mastercam is impressive. They already have a list of machines that it is compatable with and a list for machines they are currently working on. I suggest checking with the re-seller to see if the machine you are thinking of is supported.

[K2csq7]

The new X7 Mill-Turn package from Mastercam is impressive. They already have a list of machines that it is compatable with and a list for machines they are currently working on. I suggest checking with the re-seller to see if the machine you are thinking of is supported.

You can bar feed up to 7" dia. with an integrex i400.

[Greg Williams]

You can bar feed up to 7" dia. with an integrex i400.

 

The cutoff blades wont be liking that

[Newbeeee™]

A mate runs both a Matsuura MAM72 5axis and an Integrex i (cant remember but it's a single chuck B axis machine - 12" chuck size by memory).

Anyway, he raves the integrex and reckons it's more rigid at heavy milling than the Matsuura.

[K2csq7]

The cutoff blades wont be liking that

Your boogers probably dont like being picked out of your nose either!

But seriously, Mazak is the benchmark for this type of machine. We are on like the 5th generation...

[FROZEN]

We have Mazak VMC, HMC, and mill/turns. All of them have problems with parts and service. The machine seem good when they are running, but when they go down it can be a couple of days to weeks before back up and running. Mazak sent the wrong drive for live tooling three time before we got the right one!!!! We also have mori-sekie, they seem way better on parts and service. I would stay away from the 5-axis to wimpy!!!

[Tim Johnson]

As to the controls for the MORI NTx2000SZM, the salesman states that we should have the Heidenhain control over Fanuc. Is there that large of a difference between the controls that we should even consider this? We are mainly a Fanuc shop.

[within a thou]

As to the controls for the MORI NTx2000SZM, the salesman states that we should have the Heidenhain control over Fanuc. Is there that large of a difference between the controls that we should even consider this? We are mainly a Fanuc shop.

 

We just signed on for a new Okuma on monday. It will be the first okuma control in our shop. I was leasry about putting one in as opposed to going with a machine with a different control then what we have now which is all Fanuc (minus our haas which is very similiar to the fanuc). If I were you I would not take a salesmans word but instead have him take you to a demo of the control and have him back up his claim and show you the advantages before deciding on either control. There will be a learning curve with the new control make sure its worth the downtime and lost profits while getting as familiar with it as you are with Fanuc.

[Tim Johnson]

The learning curve is a small part of the reason for posting the question.The salesman is stating that surfacing finishes are better on the Heidenhain control due to their better look ahead software and the control is quicker. I should have posted this along with the original question. The look ahead software statement may have merit but the difference in control speed I have a hard time believing. It may be true but how do you demo control speed?

 

Edit, If the difference is similar to a Ford vs. Chevy then we might as well get the Fanuc. If we're comparing Ford vs. Lamborghini then obviously we want the Heidenhain.

[within a thou]

Run the same part on both machines see which performs better for you. Atleast then you can see it for your own eyes and be better informed before making the purchase.