Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Digest Number 685

Expand Messages
  • Adrian Kole
    Hi Don, ... and the ... Fortunately, in case Joe is unaware, these are readily available for the Sherline mills. ... the 1 ... table, you ... Yes, this could
    Message 1 of 8 , May 11, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Don,

      > A high speed spindle is required, however, do to the small size's
      and the
      > material being cut, a large mill just isn't needed.

      Fortunately, in case Joe is unaware, these are readily available for
      the Sherline mills.

      > Even with a Sherline
      > or Taig, you will find that almost all of the work is being cut in
      the 1"
      > of movement needed, and unless the setup is moved around the
      table, you
      > will end up with a wear area, especially on the lead screws.

      Yes, this could be a problem--depending on how much volume we're
      talking about. A small ma and pa shop might not need very many
      rings made. Fortunately too, the leadscrew is like all of a
      whopping $14 and all of the other parts that come in contact are
      also extremely inexpensive should they need periodic replacement.
      Backlash can also be adjusted over time to help compensate (though
      if the wear is occurring in one area, obviously that might
      necessitate replacement).

      > Now, the ideal solution is not a mill, but a 3d Printer. You can
      get
      > detail that is all but impossible to do with a mill.

      I researched these for a project and thought this might be a
      solution. Unfortunately, 3D printers are not appropriate for this
      sort of work--yet anyway. The resolution commercially available is
      only around 0.010" and other machinery I've seen (which you may not
      even be able to access) only go down to 0.005". This clearly is not
      detailed enough.

      Cheers,
      Adrian
    • jfinkels48
      Hi All, Well, Many of you have posted to my call for help and let me start by saying thank you to all for your input. Lots of good advice and several qeustions
      Message 2 of 8 , May 11, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi All,
        Well, Many of you have posted to my call for help and let me start by
        saying thank you to all for your input. Lots of good advice and
        several qeustions were asked my way, so let me answer/respond some of
        them asked to me in order of my faulty memory

        1) CNC vs. Hand carving wax
        The jewelry shop I am helping is owned by two long time hand carving
        jewlers who hold no false expectations about how long it will take
        them to make a CNC wax vs. hand - For a job they could do by hand
        carving, we all came to the conclusion it would be anywhere from 50-
        75% faster to do it by hand, and that is after they are good Rhino
        users. They are not looking to speed up what they can do by hand. What
        they are looking to do is to take on work they now pass up because it
        is not feasible or profitable to make by hand. Take a ring where a
        customer wants special lettering on it. The effort to make the
        lettering correct in size, symetry, etc. is significant and they turn
        most of this away - a trivial example, but they are turning away many
        jobs because they know they can't do these by hand. This is from two
        guys who have won national awards for thier work and have 40+ years
        carving wax by hand - These guys know well what they can and can't do,
        and they have seen many examples of what CNC can do from thier
        assocaites - I think they have resonable expectations here

        2) Making Wax castings vs. direct milling of metal.
        I would agree with the people who posted what is needed for milling
        precious metals directly, as my experience in CNC is along the lines
        of cutting tool steel - the Sherline is way to low on horsepower and
        spindle speed for this. My friends are looking to only do wax on the
        Mill. They have been casting forever and like the process very well.
        For example, they are one of the few shops around that can actually
        cast Platinum. They and I have discussed that the lower cost Mill
        soultion is not feasible to cut metals directly.

        3) Volume
        This is a local jewelry shop that does considerable benchwork and
        sells their own designs. They are not looking for high volume work
        here and I would expect that the numberof wax castings would be 1-2 a
        day max unless they decide to make effort to expand. They are busy as
        hell with the work they have, so I don't think they would be looking
        to make volumes much higher

        4) Budget.
        These guys are able and willing to spend what is necessary to get
        equipment they need. For example, they bought the coolest laser welder
        about 1 year ago to help with stone setting and repair. This thing has
        a small work envelope that you hold a piece with by hand, look into
        with a microscope dual eyepiece, aim the laser with a cross-hair and
        make a small weld with a foot pedal. For practice, I welded to nickels
        together along thier seam - it was a blast until I zapped my thumb -
        Anyway, it cost $30,000 for this beast - they use it everyday and they
        would spend the same for a CNC setup if they beleive it is necessary.
        Like me, they are not yet convinced that this is necessary to spend
        $30K on a high end Mill to be used 99% for wax - Ultimately, they may
        go this route.

        5) Rapid prototype ( additive ) machines
        I am familliar with this technology and agree with another poster
        that the resoultion of these machines is not up to the deatil level of
        a good mill. Furthermore the material cost for these is quite high and
        does not lend itself well in most cases to the existing equipment used
        for jewelry lost-wax casting - the burn out temps of many of these
        rapid protoype waxes are much different than the waxes and require
        higher oxegen content in the burn out process - the net for this is
        that considerable process changes, including new burnout firnaces
        would be necessary to use additive rapid protoype - all this for a
        process that most vendors say is only good for +- .005" - As an
        interesting side note, I was at the Rapid Prototpye confernce hosted
        by Society of Automotive (SME) engineers in Dearborn, MI. yesterday
        and Roland and Light machins were the only ones showing CNC mills.
        Instead of calling them CNC mills at this show, they called them SRP
        machines, for subtractive rapid prototypes - I was quite amused by
        this - but I understood why - the show floor had many additive rapid
        prototype machines, the most interesting were the laser sinter ones -
        these machines would use a very high power laser to sinter a metal
        powder one layer at a time - most cool!

        Anyway, sorry about rambling on and thanks again for all the
        suggestions - I must confess, I am still leaning towards giving the
        lower cost Mill a try at the moment - but I am still researching


        Joe Finkelstine
      • Adrian Kole
        Hi Joe, This is all very interesting to me as I might do something with wax in the future. You ve confirmed things that I have found too from my research and
        Message 3 of 8 , May 11, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Joe,

          This is all very interesting to me as I might do something with wax in
          the future. You've confirmed things that I have found too from my
          research and experience.

          > Anyway, sorry about rambling on and thanks again for all the
          > suggestions - I must confess, I am still leaning towards giving the
          > lower cost Mill a try at the moment - but I am still researching

          I didn't think you were simply rambling and really enjoy reading the
          details of experiences such as this.

          You could always try the Sherline out on a particularly demanding
          project and just see what it takes. I'd be especially interested in
          seeing the results. Even if it didn't work out, you've got a nice
          paper weight! ;)

          Cheers,
          Adrian
        • Carol & Jerry Jankura
          ... One other thing to consider - CNC requires a fair amount of self education. Everything from computers to software to the mill itself will probably be new
          Message 4 of 8 , May 12, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi, Joe:

            > Anyway, sorry about rambling on and thanks again for all the
            > suggestions - I must confess, I am still leaning towards
            > giving the lower cost Mill a try at the moment - but I am
            > still researching

            One other thing to consider - CNC requires a fair amount of self education.
            Everything from computers to software to the mill itself will probably be
            new for these guys; at least that's the tone I get from your notes. You
            could use the Sherline tools both to learn with and make any initial
            production. If it turns out along the way that the Sherline isn't capable of
            holding the tolerances that these folks require, they'll at least be better
            prepared to specify what their needs actually are. And, they will have
            learned to use CNC along the way.

            -- Jerry
          • Marcus and Eva
            Hi Joe: If I was in your shoes and being asked to make a recommendation, I d be looking seriously at two machines: the Light Machines Benchman, and the new
            Message 5 of 8 , May 12, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Joe:
              If I was in your shoes and being asked to make a recommendation, I'd be
              looking seriously at two machines:
              the Light Machines Benchman, and the new Haas OM1 Office Mill.
              Neither is cheap, but both are decent quality machines that you can rely on
              in a production environment.
              If these guys can justify 30 K for a laser welder, and have the kind of time
              constraints you're talking about, farting around with a Sherline or a
              converted Chinese mill drill is a total non-starter as far as I'm concerned.
              The money they spend will be nothing compared to the hassles they'll save
              and the quality they'll get.
              Both are good machines: dirt simple to run and solidly built.
              My two cents' worth.
              Cheers

              Marcus

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "jfinkels48" <jfinkels48@...>
              To: <SherlineCNC@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:02 PM
              Subject: [SherlineCNC] Re: Digest Number 685


              > Hi All,
              > Well, Many of you have posted to my call for help and let me start by
              > saying thank you to all for your input. Lots of good advice and
              > several qeustions were asked my way, so let me answer/respond some of
              > them asked to me in order of my faulty memory
              >
              > 1) CNC vs. Hand carving wax
              > The jewelry shop I am helping is owned by two long time hand carving
              > jewlers who hold no false expectations about how long it will take
              > them to make a CNC wax vs. hand - For a job they could do by hand
              > carving, we all came to the conclusion it would be anywhere from 50-
              > 75% faster to do it by hand, and that is after they are good Rhino
              > users. They are not looking to speed up what they can do by hand. What
              > they are looking to do is to take on work they now pass up because it
              > is not feasible or profitable to make by hand. Take a ring where a
              > customer wants special lettering on it. The effort to make the
              > lettering correct in size, symetry, etc. is significant and they turn
              > most of this away - a trivial example, but they are turning away many
              > jobs because they know they can't do these by hand. This is from two
              > guys who have won national awards for thier work and have 40+ years
              > carving wax by hand - These guys know well what they can and can't do,
              > and they have seen many examples of what CNC can do from thier
              > assocaites - I think they have resonable expectations here
              >
              > 2) Making Wax castings vs. direct milling of metal.
              > I would agree with the people who posted what is needed for milling
              > precious metals directly, as my experience in CNC is along the lines
              > of cutting tool steel - the Sherline is way to low on horsepower and
              > spindle speed for this. My friends are looking to only do wax on the
              > Mill. They have been casting forever and like the process very well.
              > For example, they are one of the few shops around that can actually
              > cast Platinum. They and I have discussed that the lower cost Mill
              > soultion is not feasible to cut metals directly.
              >
              > 3) Volume
              > This is a local jewelry shop that does considerable benchwork and
              > sells their own designs. They are not looking for high volume work
              > here and I would expect that the numberof wax castings would be 1-2 a
              > day max unless they decide to make effort to expand. They are busy as
              > hell with the work they have, so I don't think they would be looking
              > to make volumes much higher
              >
              > 4) Budget.
              > These guys are able and willing to spend what is necessary to get
              > equipment they need. For example, they bought the coolest laser welder
              > about 1 year ago to help with stone setting and repair. This thing has
              > a small work envelope that you hold a piece with by hand, look into
              > with a microscope dual eyepiece, aim the laser with a cross-hair and
              > make a small weld with a foot pedal. For practice, I welded to nickels
              > together along thier seam - it was a blast until I zapped my thumb -
              > Anyway, it cost $30,000 for this beast - they use it everyday and they
              > would spend the same for a CNC setup if they beleive it is necessary.
              > Like me, they are not yet convinced that this is necessary to spend
              > $30K on a high end Mill to be used 99% for wax - Ultimately, they may
              > go this route.
              >
              > 5) Rapid prototype ( additive ) machines
              > I am familliar with this technology and agree with another poster
              > that the resoultion of these machines is not up to the deatil level of
              > a good mill. Furthermore the material cost for these is quite high and
              > does not lend itself well in most cases to the existing equipment used
              > for jewelry lost-wax casting - the burn out temps of many of these
              > rapid protoype waxes are much different than the waxes and require
              > higher oxegen content in the burn out process - the net for this is
              > that considerable process changes, including new burnout firnaces
              > would be necessary to use additive rapid protoype - all this for a
              > process that most vendors say is only good for +- .005" - As an
              > interesting side note, I was at the Rapid Prototpye confernce hosted
              > by Society of Automotive (SME) engineers in Dearborn, MI. yesterday
              > and Roland and Light machins were the only ones showing CNC mills.
              > Instead of calling them CNC mills at this show, they called them SRP
              > machines, for subtractive rapid prototypes - I was quite amused by
              > this - but I understood why - the show floor had many additive rapid
              > prototype machines, the most interesting were the laser sinter ones -
              > these machines would use a very high power laser to sinter a metal
              > powder one layer at a time - most cool!
              >
              > Anyway, sorry about rambling on and thanks again for all the
              > suggestions - I must confess, I am still leaning towards giving the
              > lower cost Mill a try at the moment - but I am still researching
              >
              >
              > Joe Finkelstine
            • Adrian Kole
              ... Mill? ... http://www.haascnc.com/display.asp?ID=65#newmach Cheers, Adrian
              Message 6 of 8 , May 12, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                > Do you have any links or other information on the Haas OM1 Office
                Mill?
                >
                > Regards,
                >
                > Dave

                http://www.haascnc.com/display.asp?ID=65#newmach

                Cheers,
                Adrian
              • Dave Budreaux
                Marcus,
                Message 7 of 8 , May 12, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Marcus,

                  <snip>
                  < Hi Joe:
                  < If I was in your shoes and being asked to make a recommendation, I'd be
                  <looking seriously at two machines:
                  <the Light Machines Benchman, and the new Haas OM1 Office Mill.

                  Do you have any links or other information on the Haas OM1 Office Mill?

                  Regards,

                  Dave
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.