Japanese machines vs. Haas

[specv]

A bit off topic...tho one place I was at had a similar system in place. When programming, we had to define the holder and the projection, which in turn gave us a gage length. That information was loaded into a file. The operators had to set the tools according to this.  When a tool was called up in the machine, the length offset of the tool in the spindle was compared to the length that was in the tool file. If it was different by anymore than .100"  then the machine alarmed out. So many checks like this can be implemented, it just takes some leg work up front.

 

This is exactly what we do here, the toolcrib guys get +/-.04 from the gage length value (simple to do with a presetter), otherwise the machine alarms out.

[Zoober]

One thing that hasn't been touched on (or I missed it), is that the Makino is simply faster. In feeds maintained, acc/dec, etc.

Even on our verticals, if we move work from a Mori or Matsuura to our F5, we instantly claim a 10-25% decrease in cycle time. All else equal. Guy running, cutters, tool path, etc. add more % for dynamic.

Now, add all of the other benefits Bob has mentioned, and you are losing money by not buying the better machine.

[gaijin_2007]

 

 

you are losing money by not buying the better machine

^

This.

+1000000 (plus a lot more zeros)

 

Buying cheap is generally a false economy whether it is tools or software or machines, you might initially save some expenditure but you will lose out in the long term on what revenue you could have generated with the higher initial investment.

Cheap actually has more potential risk attached to it in terms of costing your business money then buying expensive.

 

The biggest mistake I see so many shops make is trying to save money rather than looking at ways to make more money.

[metalmansteve]

Bob, you say (and I believe you) that the Makino produces $200k more in a year then your Haas. I'm curious, did you have a customer lined up telling you you're getting this ramp up in business and you're forced to find a way to get it done? It's one thing to add capacity but it's another to find work to feed that's capacity. It sucks adding capacity and then waiting for that forecast that doesn't come to fruition.

[Bob W.]

Bob, you say (and I believe you) that the Makino produces $200k more in a year then your Haas. I'm curious, did you have a customer lined up telling you you're getting this ramp up in business and you're forced to find a way to get it done? It's one thing to add capacity but it's another to find work to feed that's capacity. It sucks adding capacity and then waiting for that forecast that doesn't come to fruition.

I didn't have any work lined up for the first A51 HMC, it was a complete leap of faith.  I saw it as a way to put the shop in a whole different category quality wise and I also felt it would really make us more efficient in project change overs.  It exceeded my expectations and put the shop on a whole different trajectory all together.  It made the $5 (commodity) part extremely profitable and gave us a ton of versatility in what work we decide to do.  We can do 1000 basic widgets that anyone can do, then turn around and do orthopedic molds that are extremely demanding, and knock them both out of the park. 

[crazy^millman]

Build it and they will come???

 

Yes plenty of work out there for quality places. We can compete with any nation in the world when it comes to machining parts. Bob thinking it like my own and to be honest it is refreshing to see.

 

Build it and they will come. He built it and they are lining up to get quality and good prices.

 

Thanks for being a voice of reason.

[Zoffen]

I have a macro call built into the tool changes of all my machines that does numerous tool checks.  One such check is a minimum tool length check.  If the tool length is shorter than 2.5" it will alarm the machine.  There is a lot that can be done to make things more bullet proof by automating checks such as this, and pallet checks, etc... through macros.

 Hey Bob,

 

One thing i am currently implementing is an automatic tool length check against the tool length in the vericut tool library for our i-700 cell. Thought this might be applicable to your shop

 

The general way it will work is as follows:

-Vericut tool lib is an xml file, contains Assembly OAL = approx tool length on machine

-Custom program reads xml file and converts that into a macro program with the necessary data  that lives on the machine control. (this is run a specified intervals to keep up to date)

-Instead of calling an M6 for a toolchange i call a custom mcode that will call the tool length checking macro + toolchange. (Or use the regular tool call with the check afterwards, might make adding to legacy programs alot easier???)

-In this macro it will compare the tool# and check that the length is within .125(or whatever value i want)

-I will also have a /9 block skip on the length check lines to override this check if necessary

-We use tool group numers(fyi)

 

Hope this helps someone out. I love to make things as bullet/idiot proof as possible because sometimes i'm a big idiot and i love having my xxxx saved by automation!