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

Using Chucking Reamers

Expand Messages
  • Curt Blank
    When using a chucking reamer in the 1/2 range, how much material should be left for the reamer to remove? And typically do you run these at a slow spindle RPM
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      When using a chucking reamer in the 1/2" range, how much material should
      be left for the reamer to remove? And typically do you run these at a slow
      spindle RPM or fast?
    • Jerry Kimberlin
      ... It is very much material dependent. Assuming steel, I use 1/64 for all reamers of about 5/8 and smaller, while I use a boring head for all holes larger
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Curt Blank wrote:

        >When using a chucking reamer in the 1/2" range, how much material should
        >be left for the reamer to remove? And typically do you run these at a slow
        >spindle RPM or fast?
        >
        It is very much material dependent. Assuming steel, I use 1/64" for all
        reamers of about 5/8" and smaller, while I use a boring head for all
        holes larger than about 5/8" . If you are doing aluminum bronze, I
        would use 1/16" and then there is only one chance to get it right as the
        stuff doesn't ream worth a whit. Some materials are gummy and don't
        ream well, others do just fine. I like cast iron as it reams well with
        1/64" as does common brass, but bronzes are a bit different.

        I run reamers much slower than drills and with plenty of lube. This is
        a function of 2-flutes vs 8 or so on a reamer. Be sure to clean out the
        hole first too. No sense in pushing chips.....

        JerryK
      • Curt Blank
        Thanks that helps. Should of mentioned the material, oversight on my part, most likely stainless steel for this project. Which if I remember correctly from my
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks that helps. Should of mentioned the material, oversight on my part,
          most likely stainless steel for this project. Which if I remember
          correctly from my machining days some 25 years ago is gummy. I've never
          reamed SS, so how does it turn out? And is 1/64" what I would want to use?
          Proabably be 303 or 304 SS.

          -Curt

          On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Jerry Kimberlin wrote:

          >
          > Curt Blank wrote:
          >
          > >When using a chucking reamer in the 1/2" range, how much material should
          > >be left for the reamer to remove? And typically do you run these at a slow
          > >spindle RPM or fast?
          > >
          > It is very much material dependent. Assuming steel, I use 1/64" for all
          > reamers of about 5/8" and smaller, while I use a boring head for all
          > holes larger than about 5/8" . If you are doing aluminum bronze, I
          > would use 1/16" and then there is only one chance to get it right as the
          > stuff doesn't ream worth a whit. Some materials are gummy and don't
          > ream well, others do just fine. I like cast iron as it reams well with
          > 1/64" as does common brass, but bronzes are a bit different.
          >
          > I run reamers much slower than drills and with plenty of lube. This is
          > a function of 2-flutes vs 8 or so on a reamer. Be sure to clean out the
          > hole first too. No sense in pushing chips.....
          >
          > JerryK
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Jerry Kimberlin
          ... I have to admit that I seldom use stainless and I ve never reamed it. But looking up the problem in the Metals Handbook shows that reaming problems can
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Curt Blank wrote:

            >Thanks that helps. Should of mentioned the material, oversight on my part,
            >most likely stainless steel for this project. Which if I remember
            >correctly from my machining days some 25 years ago is gummy. I've never
            >reamed SS, so how does it turn out? And is 1/64" what I would want to use?
            >Proabably be 303 or 304 SS.
            >
            I have to admit that I seldom use stainless and I've never reamed it.

            But looking up the problem in the "Metals Handbook" shows that reaming
            problems can occur from previous operations. That is the 303, 304, 309,
            316, stainless steels will surface work harden if the feed rate for
            drilling is not quick enough. In the 1/2" hole size, the drill should
            move at about 45-50 sfm and a feed of 0.005/rev using HSS drills.
            Reaming using HSS 6 flute reamers should be about 35 sfm and the feed
            should be 0.010"/rev. So, slower rpm but heavier feed rate. They also
            say to use soluble oil lube for shorter holes and sulfochlorinated oil
            for very long one.

            They also say that if you can get some free machining stainless
            (stainless with sulfur in it), the sfm needs to be reduced somewhat and
            maybe as much as 50% from that used on regular stainless. On regular
            stainless the margin should be 0.002 to 0.005" while on the free
            machining type 0.005 to 0.010" should be used. So they don't recommend
            taking out very much material on a ream. I don't know what you would
            use to get the hole to within 0.005" for reaming unless you could bore
            it instead of drilling it. In most of my tasks, 0.005 is accurate
            enough for the finished product :-).

            To me the above sort of machining is way out of my league in the hobby
            situation. It does give us some ideas.

            JerryK
          • Curt Blank
            Thanks once again! That is a wealth of information. I made charts for sfm verses RPM/Diameter so I ll easily be able to determine the RPM to use and the fact
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks once again! That is a wealth of information. I made charts for
              sfm verses RPM/Diameter so I'll easily be able to determine the RPM to use
              and the fact that the surface can work harden from to SLOW of cut, I would
              not have known that.

              I'm in the prep stage for this project that's why the questions. Reamers
              are on the way but I haven't ordered and picked up the SS, need to
              determine final rough size to order yet.

              Thanks again,

              -Curt

              On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Jerry Kimberlin wrote:

              >
              > Curt Blank wrote:
              >
              > >Thanks that helps. Should of mentioned the material, oversight on my part,
              > >most likely stainless steel for this project. Which if I remember
              > >correctly from my machining days some 25 years ago is gummy. I've never
              > >reamed SS, so how does it turn out? And is 1/64" what I would want to use?
              > >Proabably be 303 or 304 SS.
              > >
              > I have to admit that I seldom use stainless and I've never reamed it.
              >
              > But looking up the problem in the "Metals Handbook" shows that reaming
              > problems can occur from previous operations. That is the 303, 304, 309,
              > 316, stainless steels will surface work harden if the feed rate for
              > drilling is not quick enough. In the 1/2" hole size, the drill should
              > move at about 45-50 sfm and a feed of 0.005/rev using HSS drills.
              > Reaming using HSS 6 flute reamers should be about 35 sfm and the feed
              > should be 0.010"/rev. So, slower rpm but heavier feed rate. They also
              > say to use soluble oil lube for shorter holes and sulfochlorinated oil
              > for very long one.
              >
              > They also say that if you can get some free machining stainless
              > (stainless with sulfur in it), the sfm needs to be reduced somewhat and
              > maybe as much as 50% from that used on regular stainless. On regular
              > stainless the margin should be 0.002 to 0.005" while on the free
              > machining type 0.005 to 0.010" should be used. So they don't recommend
              > taking out very much material on a ream. I don't know what you would
              > use to get the hole to within 0.005" for reaming unless you could bore
              > it instead of drilling it. In most of my tasks, 0.005 is accurate
              > enough for the finished product :-).
              >
              > To me the above sort of machining is way out of my league in the hobby
              > situation. It does give us some ideas.
              >
              > JerryK
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Jerry Kimberlin
              ... Right, you usually have a little lattitude for the RPM, but you have to keep that chip curling out or it will heat up the surface will get hot and work
              Message 6 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Curt Blank wrote:

                >Thanks once again! That is a wealth of information. I made charts for
                >sfm verses RPM/Diameter so I'll easily be able to determine the RPM to use
                >and the fact that the surface can work harden from to SLOW of cut, I would
                >not have known that.
                >
                Right, you usually have a little lattitude for the RPM, but you have to
                keep that chip curling out or it will heat up the surface will get hot
                and work harden the SS.

                >I'm in the prep stage for this project that's why the questions. Reamers
                >are on the way but I haven't ordered and picked up the SS, need to
                >determine final rough size to order yet.
                >
                If you are going to make a number of parts all the same, it will pay to
                make a scrap one to start with to get the feel for the particular metal
                batch you end up with. The book notes that there is some variation
                between batches that can play games with your setup. So it is best to
                use the numbers as starting points then fine tune.

                If anything else comes up that you think the book might have an opinion
                on, just ask.

                JerryK
              • Curt Blank
                This is a one piece project but in view of it not becomming a two piece project (i.e. screw up the first one and start over), after reading your info I pretty
                Message 7 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  This is a one piece project but in view of it not becomming a two piece
                  project (i.e. screw up the first one and start over), after reading your
                  info I pretty much decided I will be doing some test hole making in some
                  surplus material.

                  Is "Metals Handbook" the actual name of the book? I think I should get me
                  one of 'dem 'der 'dose.

                  When you/they say .005" to 0.010" is that the chip load or the diameter
                  size? I'm assuming chip load, but, well that's why I'm asking. So if it's
                  chip load for a 0.500" hole the hole would be 0.480" to 0.490" to start
                  with?

                  -Curt

                  On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Jerry Kimberlin wrote:

                  >
                  > Curt Blank wrote:
                  >
                  > >Thanks once again! That is a wealth of information. I made charts for
                  > >sfm verses RPM/Diameter so I'll easily be able to determine the RPM to use
                  > >and the fact that the surface can work harden from to SLOW of cut, I would
                  > >not have known that.
                  > >
                  > Right, you usually have a little lattitude for the RPM, but you have to
                  > keep that chip curling out or it will heat up the surface will get hot
                  > and work harden the SS.
                  >
                  > >I'm in the prep stage for this project that's why the questions. Reamers
                  > >are on the way but I haven't ordered and picked up the SS, need to
                  > >determine final rough size to order yet.
                  > >
                  > If you are going to make a number of parts all the same, it will pay to
                  > make a scrap one to start with to get the feel for the particular metal
                  > batch you end up with. The book notes that there is some variation
                  > between batches that can play games with your setup. So it is best to
                  > use the numbers as starting points then fine tune.
                  >
                  > If anything else comes up that you think the book might have an opinion
                  > on, just ask.
                  >
                  > JerryK
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Jerry Kimberlin
                  ... The need for a test piece grows as the complexity of the part. You don t want to work hours then mess up on some critical area that can t be controlled
                  Message 8 of 8 , Oct 5, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Curt Blank wrote:

                    >This is a one piece project but in view of it not becomming a two piece
                    >project (i.e. screw up the first one and start over), after reading your
                    >info I pretty much decided I will be doing some test hole making in some
                    >surplus material.
                    >
                    The need for a test piece grows as the complexity of the part. You
                    don't want to work hours then mess up on some critical area that can't
                    be controlled for damage.

                    >Is "Metals Handbook" the actual name of the book? I think I should get me
                    >one of 'dem 'der 'dose.
                    >
                    The "Metals Handbook" is a series of books in several volumes. I was
                    lucky to get 3 of them free, but looked on 'abebooks' to get a few of
                    the remaining ones. The one I was just looking in is about "Machining"
                    but there are others on Welding, Forging, Materials, etc. They come out
                    every 5 years or so as a set and are very, very expensive. I think mine
                    are 20 years old. The information never goes out of date but changes
                    due to new materials, ideas, machines, etc.

                    >When you/they say .005" to 0.010" is that the chip load or the diameter
                    >size? I'm assuming chip load, but, well that's why I'm asking. So if it's
                    >chip load for a 0.500" hole the hole would be 0.480" to 0.490" to start
                    >with?
                    >
                    The 0.005 to 0.010" is the amount underside the hole needs to be before
                    reaming. Called the 'margin.' I get the idea that it is on the
                    diameter. So if you are going to ream a 0.500" hole in 303 stainless,
                    you want to start with a hole of 0.498" to 0.495". If you get the free
                    cutting 303 stainless - the stuff with sulfur in it - you would start
                    with a hole 0.495" or 0.490", somewhere within that range. Then you
                    need to consider the speed of downfeed so you can get the downfeed rate
                    proper for the sfm/rpm.

                    As I said, this is way beyond the usual stuff we do for hobby
                    activities, but, still, good to know and consider.

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