CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish

Posted by Marcus & Eva
on 2000-12-29 20:08:59 UTC
Hi All:
Have you looked at Garr carbide cutters?
They are almost the same price as Niagara HSS cutters in sizes up to 1/4"
dia.
By the way, a .020"x .625 pass is not a big strain on a 1/2 " HSS cutter,
and I doubt that cutter flex is your problem.
I have found that finish problems are most often due to cutter runout or
poorly ground cutters.
If you use shitty quality import cutters you will often find that they cut
only on one flute, even when the shanks are running pretty concentric.
Another big problem is the use of endmill holders together with undersize
shank cutters.
Clarkson cutters were often 0.001" undersize, about 10 years ago, and ran
out horribly in endmill holders with nominal or +0.0002 bores.
They could only be run successfully in collet chucks.
I have come across Polish cutters that had so little flute relief that they
were unuseable without a regrind.
I won't even talk about some of the Pakistani cutters I have seen!!
I now use only 2 brands of cutters: Niagara for HSS, and Garr for carbide.
Both are excellent quality material, and stand up well enough to justify the
difference in price, and they have consistent shanks ( good for endmill
holders) and nice flute geometry. They cut beautifully!!

Cheers

Marcus


>> The pocket I refered to was done 7 passes at .100" each leaving .020"
on the walls. One finish pass at full depth climb cutting

>import stuff runs around $8 for a 1/4" and maybe $6-8 for a 1/2". This
>makes it far more affordable, and the results are really a lot better.
>I have pretty much stopped buying plain HSS, and converted almost
>completely to M-42 and similar cobalt tooling for general work, and
>use the carbide some for tricky situations. The carbide keeps its
>edge for a LONG time, and the difference between M-42 and HSS
>is at least 2:1 longer life.
>
>Jon

Discussion Thread

Joe Vicars 2000-12-29 05:36:18 UTC Resolution and surface finish Terry Toddy 2000-12-29 06:22:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Tim Goldstein 2000-12-29 06:36:16 UTC RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Joe Vicars 2000-12-29 08:28:34 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Fred Smith 2000-12-29 09:11:55 UTC Re: Resolution and surface finish Jon Elson 2000-12-29 12:12:29 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Jon Elson 2000-12-29 12:17:48 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Resolution and surface finish Joe Vicars 2000-12-29 12:40:14 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Fred Smith 2000-12-29 14:26:07 UTC Re: Re: Resolution and surface finish ballendo@y... 2000-12-29 15:11:55 UTC Re: Re: Resolution and surface finish Jon Elson 2000-12-29 16:23:32 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish Jon Elson 2000-12-29 16:38:47 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re: Resolution and surface finish Marcus & Eva 2000-12-29 20:08:59 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Resolution and surface finish ballendo@y... 2000-12-29 20:49:27 UTC Re: Resolution and surface finish Fred Smith 2000-12-29 21:39:28 UTC Re: Resolution and surface finish wanliker@a... 2000-12-30 11:07:20 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Resolution and surface finish Carlos Guillermo 2000-12-30 15:15:02 UTC machine accuracy (was Resolution and surface finish) Smoke 2000-12-30 15:44:53 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] machine accuracy (was Resolution and surface finish)