Easy John,.... easy....

quote: Some of the pre-drill holes are as much as 2.125" deep. I don't think anybody makes a .02 drill to go that deep to finish. You'd have to have one custom built. Even a carbide micro drill would have some trouble. Are the holes thru holes? Can you flip it over and drill from the other side? If not, you could give these a shot too... Whitney Mini Drill extensions. These run pretty true and are only 1/8 OD shank.

Walt, ... I think I use a slightly modified, generic Fanuc post or Mazak post from the V8 or V9 CD to post the code for this. Just FYI....

Haven't done this in X yet but on V9 I do it like this.... Draw the part like it is in view relative to the top construction plane. Draw the spotface (in it's proper location) in the side place (or view 5) relative to the top plane (or the 16.96 diameter). When toolpathing, have the WCS set for top plane EXCEPT for the tool/construction plane. This will use side plane (#5). If your post supports G18/G19 and alternate T/C planes, the code will come out using Y/Z motions with X for depth. Alot of times I'll use incremental programming for this stuff, but it largely depends on how you set your tool/angle head for offsets. With an incremental program, you can just draw the feature on its side (same in view when part is loaded) except the feature on CAD is at X0. If you draw it in position relative to the diameter, then you'll need to be sure that the tool is set appropriately. This method works for me,... I'm sure others have other ways.....

Check this...... Haas

Yeah, been having some problems with Destiny here as well. Poor delivery and high pricing. They still make a great tool (when they get to work). Seems like they like the "long lunch breaks" and the "banker's hours". Chris (and others here as well). I got hooked onto a company called NewTech. I haven't tried all their stuff across the board, but their Swift-Carb has been pretty impressive. I've sent a lot of customs their way as well with super quick turn arounds. Another company is GW Schultz . Their MSA series are really nice tools. ( The online catalog isn't working though ). Anyway, just FYI...

Sandvik R790 cutters with the Capto extension system.... Although I also use the others that are mentioned here as well. All are good stuff...

I'm near MCPGMR here... I'm at 530 rpm and 10 ipm.

Years ago, I did some beta testing with Dataflute and (later) SGS for endmills with coolant holes. The initial results were promising, BUT.... the end result was that it only worked to a certain degree. The problem became apparent (in a hurry) that the oil hole or holes, comprimised the shank and flute integrity too much. In HSM applications, the tools couldn't take the chip load and cutting forces anymore. And by the time you compensated it (in axial and radial DOC), then were able to kick up the feed to match the MRR, the feed rates became extremely high to a point that most machines on the market couldn't attain. IMHO, to date, the best method for getting coolant to the tool end is simply just flooding it. Use holders with the coolant thru capacity. Techniks, Richmill (out of business), Lyndex/Nikken all have holders available with coolant grooves cut into them. A couple other ways to handle this is to actually groove the shank of the cutter itself. Some places make endmills with this feature built in or as an add on. Another is to use collet holders to allow the "slits" in the the collet to act as a coolant guide. And hi-pressure coolant is a big plus. I've found that sometimes, just a standard, low pressure thru the tool coolant pump (say 150-300 psi) isn't enough volume and pressure to get the coolant to reach its target at rpm. And, more often than not, with extended tools or Hi-helix stuff, the coolant doesn't get there anyway regardless of pressure because the flutes just bat it away. However, the extra volume in the cutting area because of the added coolant function does wonders for tool life and cutting speeds.

I don't have a post to give you here but if you upgraded the machine to EIA, you should have also received an EIA programming manual (if it didn't already come with the original machine books). In it has all of the G and M codes valid for the machine as well as the programming format.

I created mine using the generic definition that came with MCX. Its Mill4axis HMC.MMD or something like that. Will that not work for you?

Brian, you don't have feed type control for taps in Mazatrol since the tap is identified in tool data with the pitch. The parameter is only for EIA programming. On a Mazak, G95 is for FPR feed. If your parameter is already set for "Feed per Rev", then you won't need to use it.

What John said...... About the machine though. Did it used to tap in feed? and now it doesn't? Or is this a machine that your shop just aquired? On Mazaks, mazatrol will always tap in pitch. In EIA though, theres a few different ways to tap. If you're using a "G84", then there is a parameter that controls whether to feed in IPM or IPR by default. And in either case, you can also change this momentarily with a G code like you would on a Fanuc control. If you're using "G84.2", then you'll feed in pitch. For a '94 machine, you could be either on a M+ or Fusion control. Which one do you have?

Haven't programmed Cinncinati's in many moons.... Can't even recall it... must be a mental block All kidding aside... Looks as if the controler calculates the feed based upon the pitch you're giving it. F1/20 is the same as F.05 . It's probably related to the use of macro calculations. I'm betting if you tap an 8-32, you're "F" would be F1/32 ... in other words a feed of .03125 . You're "canned cycle" is probably inputting a value into variable "F" in which the machine is picking up as a feed rate.

IPR is my favorite too. I'm at the opposite of John though,... in most of my years I've seen tap cycles programmed in IPR. Different strokes for different folks..... Add to that, I'm also lazy. In IPR mode, when I change the RPM of the tap, I don't have to recalculate the feed since its constant....

Maybe,... maybe not.... Say you could feed at 2mm per edge in AL, but not restricted to the low surface speed of steel and it worked at normal or above normal speeds. Now calculate the MRR at that spindle speed and chip load. You're moving some serious material. But, as I mentioned before, why bother? You don't need a "specialized" tool to machine like that. CMR, I just got 2 replacements last week (maybe the week before). Maybe it's a buddy system. We use the snot out of indexable tooling from many brands....

Thad, high feed ,... feed mills, ... principles are the same. I've ran Mitsubishi's upwards of .09 per tooth. Iscar's feed mills have higher chip loads for start points. I get better life out of the AJX though and if you blow one up, Mitsubishi replaces the body for free. I have tried to bring feeds up and down to try and run "balanced", toe to toe testing between the two. But for me, the Mitsubishi ends up ahead. I do have friends that have better luck with the Iscar though. I think its definately stuff you gotta play with to see what works the best for you. I'll see if I can dig up an Iscar demo for you...

Hey Thad..... here's some video for Mitsubishi AJX high feed cutters... click on the AJX button.

Brian, what machine, age and controller are on? You can't just arbitrairily (sp?) go 750ipm. Also need to consider rigidity of setup, tool holding, taper size, HP, etc.

.... add to that, you can also use "Ref point..." to control where your tool starts or ends up at before/after the cut in X, Y and/or Z.

quote: I would agree on using a tool designed for Ally Numium Ditto, ditto and ditto for all others along this line. HF cutters are for steel and such. I as well just use Iscar Heli, Sandvik (R790), Ingersol (Routermill), carbide endmills, AB Tools, etc, etc. Hitting feeds of 700, 800... 1000+ ipm. Basically, these are the "High Feed" cutters when dealing with "Ally Numium"......

I've done it a few times and it works good. Not totally sure if its 100% the "correct" way though, but the code is proper so it must be somewhat right. Basically, I always just change the tool plane relation to the construction plane. I'm sure other guys here may have other methods though.

3-3/8 long (4-7/8 overall including c'bore), 5/8 thread in A36??!!!??? I wouldn't even bother trying to threadmill it even if you had a solid carbide one built. It would be hell in trying to keep from deflection. I'm with Martin here ( and James )... get a pulley tap built for it and peck tap it...

Do you really need a custom cycle for rigid tapping? Because you could just add the G93 to be output with the existing tap cycle in the post.... Or are you trying to control the feedrate output by giving an option of G93 or G94?

What machine are you on? how much power? what taper? Are you doing this on a router? Why not go to a larger, indexable style cutter. Say 3", 4" or 5"?