I drive by EMUGE's US headquarters once a week; perhaps their European compadres could've had them do some proofreading

Wow, that website is bad; I would think an American company could put some decent English on their webpage.

Innnnnnnnnnnnnnteresting

Curious that Emuge's website makes no reference to that thing at all. The threads look like xxxx on the video, but I would like to know a little more about the product.

How did you trip across this?

 

Operators should never be the one making the decision about speeds & feeds or depth of cut.

That decision should be always be made by the person who processed and programmed the job.

Selected input from operators is useful but allowing the inmates to run the asylum is a road to disaster.

I have yet to meet one who didn't think they know more than every engineer and programmer.

 

In a non-production, non-repeat shop, this wouldn't matter to me as much as the non-productive time.

The only time I hammer something into the control is if it would actually take me longer to walk back to my office, program it, and walk back to the machine. More comfortable on my a$$ anyway

C

Scott, perhaps a variable-based program would be best for you guys. Input a few values in the program header and BAM, new part; good way to quickly change from part A to part B without editing the actual program.

C

 

 

i would think a complex part with radii and angles would be very tough to program on the controller without using tnr comp

We don't program on the control. Machine tools are for making parts, computers are for making programs.

 

i highly disagree with this.

we used to turn lots of tiny gear blanks and similar parts.the tool nose rad was always very small on the insert.we had to leave .005 for grinding and the finish rad on the shoulders was usually no more than +-.002 .your way we would have to change inserts constantly.tnr was easy to control using wear on the controller

We do very fussy work, all day long; have to agree to disagree on this one.

C

Since nobody asked, I think TNR comp sucks, and none of the (literally) thousands of turning programs we have use control comp; we didn't use it when we programmed with a calculator and we sure as hell aren't using it with CAM software. Tell the operator what tool goes in the machine, and program for that tool. TNR comp is just one more opportunity for an operator to screw up during setup or operation. This is my take on that subject.

We use canned roughing all of the time with no problems.

C

We turn thousands and thousands of parts per year, and we have never used a canned finish toolpath. Pilot Plant's answer is correct, but I would suggest using a 'regular' Finish toolpath anyway.

C

You really need a laser, IMO, to get the pitch error comp correct. Your machine tool distributor will, perhaps, have a service tech that is trained in this; if not, most industrial areas have 3rd party companies that specialize in laser calibration.

C

Somewhere, somebody ALWAYS has inventory; you just don't want it to be you.

C

We use Vardex threadmills, and I like them a lot, but their pricing is stiff

MSC is great for a onesie tool I need tomorrow, because they stock everything on Earth; otherwise, they suck.

C

That is correct, sir, the answer is rarely simple; you have to build your own framework of what is reasonable, and what isn't.

C

 

 

It wasn't till the co-worker compared doing yard work and by using that as an example:  "Say you have 4 sides: front, back and sides of the yard;  do you mow the front yard, stop grab another tool to do trim work then cleanup and some other thing then move onto the next side and so fourth or do you mow the entire lawn then do trim and followed by cleanup?"

I guess I am dense, but I don't understand the point of this analogy. I don't think anyone is advocating bailing on a job that is 1/4 done.

C

As long as your spindle taper is good and the tools are clean, I think the Romi heads will do fine; bored thousands of pieces with .0004 or .0005 tolerance with those.

I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that you can bore the same size with the same head in two different materials, though.

C

 

 

LEAN is a DIRECT outgrowth of the Toyota Production System created by Westerners.

Agree with this statement entirely

 

 

Every so-called unique component of LEAN has it's origins in TPS

Agree with this statement substantially

Lean is just a fancy term for Kaizen or 'Continuous Improvement'.

Disagree with this statement

Let's not hijack this guy's thread with a semantic pi$$ing war

C

 

 

Lean is just a fancy term for Kaizen or 'Continuous Improvement'.

This is not accurate; Lean Manufacturing incorporates components of many other philosophies (as do all management techniques), but all [3] stand on their own.

Why would I run a piece I don't need until next week, when I have a different job that I DO need waiting for machine time? If you ignore setup, this is unthinkable. The key to the whole deal is to drive your business to the point where you CAN ignore setup, and that is the fundamental underpinning of most of these management systems. If you could ignore material availability, and ignore changeover time, you would process each job in the order it was required ALL of the time; working to achieve this condition is our goal in this business.

We run to-order, in order quantities (no extra pieces), set up and break down the same jobs maybe once a week, maybe more at times. 

If you aren't forced to make the first one right, you'll never improve your processes to make the first one right, and you'll always junk it because it is a "setup piece."

If you aren't forced to tear down and set up all of the time, you'll never work to improve your setup techniques.

This being said, the management of the company must realize that speed costs money; if they don't give you the techniques and the tools and the capital, simply yelling out "Kaizen" every once in awhile will not be effective.

 

 

We make several different assemblies that are part of a weapon system.  Currently we are slow and one of my VMC's is setting idle for at least a week or two.  We had leftover material from the last components I machined, so I just decided to start running some more parts.

Your initiative is great, but untraceable material used for a "weapon system" is a really bad idea

No problemo

CAT, BT, 40, 50?

Our CAT40 SV-403 uses a 90deg (flat under the head) stud; TJ Davies PS-532X90

It should be in the book, and most likely on a sticker on the machine; I would suggest calling the local Mori store with a S/N (or asking the guys he bought it from), as the wrong retention knob can lead to bad things

C

So, you want a rigid, powerful, fast, accurate, durable machine...cheap

Lotsa luck with that

I was a touch confused about the point of that post myself

Pretty sure our OP was looking for a budget machine; where is the Hermle price-wise?

Carmen, he wants to turn the undercuts with the VNMG, but the tool tries to plunge into the groove, which he doesn't want; the only way I know to prevent this is to create a "no groove" chain for the turning tool.

C

Took me a minute, Jeff, but that's pretty good

I have never understood why foreign manufacturers do not, at least, ask a native of their target market to review their literature before publishing. Granted, Heidenhain should be spelled the same in every language, but their site has other clunky language that simply makes them look like a joke. Machine tools are not something you start making without some serious investment and some brain power; why look like an xxxx when you don't need to.

C