Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mini Review - Accusize 1.25" end mill with R8 shank

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BCRider
    replied
    Originally posted by old mart View Post
    I have up to 80mm 6 insert APKT shell mills, but only having 1hp on one and 1.5hp on the other mill, the feeds and speeds have to be less than optimum. Still they are not being used to make money, so speed is not essential. I have occasionally thought about getting a bigger one, say 125mm and using it with just 2 inserts in a similar manner to a flycutter.
    My mill came with a 70mm diameter four tooth setup with the brazed carbide tool bits. It's way too much of a bite even at low RPM for my mini knee mill. Just not enough mass to absorb the pounding if I try to do more than take a light skim cut. It sits unused at this point.

    I thought about buying a smaller index shell mill to use with the arbor it comes with. But that would result in a roughly 3 inch overhang to the cutting edges of the inserts. And on this mill minimizing the overhang of the cutters seems to be paramount. I tried using it with an end mill holder one time for access to a part and I could only use lighter cuts with the size of end mill. So for this design of mill clearly to me it needs to keep the cutting loads closer in to the lower spindle bearing to control the chatter.

    Leave a comment:


  • old mart
    replied
    I have up to 80mm 6 insert APKT shell mills, but only having 1hp on one and 1.5hp on the other mill, the feeds and speeds have to be less than optimum. Still they are not being used to make money, so speed is not essential. I have occasionally thought about getting a bigger one, say 125mm and using it with just 2 inserts in a similar manner to a flycutter.
    Last edited by old mart; 05-17-2022, 04:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BCRider
    replied
    I'm happy that you're happy . Your findings mirror my own from doing that test on my sample of CI.

    Dan, please do post back. Options that also prove excellent are always good.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan Dubeau
    replied
    I just received my $40 2" apkt facemill with R8 adapter last night, and to my surprise the machining/grinding on it looks pretty good. Not all of it, there are a few non critical features that could be done much better, and I haven't quantified anything with indicators yet, but overall it "looks" decent. I will machine a TTS adapter for it, so I can swap it back and forth between the r8 holder for the manual mill, and the cnc. It will probably have to wait a few weeks as I'm up to my eyeballs in other projects right now, but I'll post on it when I get around to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cuttings
    replied
    I just received one of the Accu-size end mills yesterday. Gave it a try on a piece of 3" Durabar that I am squaring up. The mill barely grunts on .050" pass and it leaves a nice finish using the power feed. I was originally figuring that I would do the finish pass with the flycutter but this is leaving such a nice finish I don't think I will have to. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

    Leave a comment:


  • old mart
    replied
    That Accusize 4" shell mill with the APKT inserts laying sideways is interesting, too expensive for me, and maybe a bit too big, my max size for shell mills is 80mm so far.

    Leave a comment:


  • mochinist
    replied
    Originally posted by RB211 View Post
    Re-reading the earlier posts, I have to agree with Doozer on the center cutting endmills vs facing mills. Side cutting is a poor argument as a face mill has to side cut to even function as a face mill.
    To throw more gasoline into the debate, with CNC, theoretically could you circle interpolate a plunge with a non center cutting endmill if the radial step over is set correctly? And if so, is that why industry doesn’t seem too concerned about terminology in regards to this debate?
    The only time we plunge any style endmill/facemill is when we’ve drilled an equal sized clearance hole. We helical ramp or just ramp it back and forth if no room to helical. CAM makes it easy, set the plunge point, plunge angle and style, done. I dont think the industry is too concerned with the terminology because we know what to do with what tool and true non center cutting endmills(like shown in post 7 on the right)themselves are basically third world type tooling at this point. I still have some in drawers that rarely get opened and haven't bought one new in probably twenty years. Thinking out loud if I was in the shop and asked someone to hand me the tool being reviewed by BCRIDER, I would probably say hand me that facemill or insert cutter, idk though, we really dont argue about this kind of stuff in the shop…

    Leave a comment:


  • BCRider
    replied
    That's the one that uses the square inserts with the flat beveled corners? I've seen those inserts on face mills too. In fact... .Just FOUND ONE . Looks like the magic ingredient are the SEHT shaped inserts set up so the flat corners sweep the surface with a wider sort of skimming cut.

    Adding to the confusion is thisTHIS OTHER FACE MILL that is using the APKT inserts but uses the other obtuse corners. I didn't even realize that those have a cutting geometry as well. I have to buy some APKT inserts anyway for use with aluminium and eventual switching out the ones for steel. I might just try one of them on a flycutter bar that uses the other corners.
    Last edited by BCRider; 05-10-2022, 07:10 PM. Reason: Fixed link

    Leave a comment:


  • Cuttings
    replied
    Thanks BC Rider, I think I will get one and try it on the Dur-bar. I have a fly cutter from Tormach that leaves a beautiful finish on both steel and aluminum. I could do a finish pass with that if need be. The Tormach cutter on aluminum leaves a mirror finish and can be run at fairly high speed providing you can tolerate the mess it leaves in the shop.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tundra Twin Track
    replied
    Accusize,Ingersoll,Widia,Kennametal list the above mentioned cutters as Endmills,some one should contact them about errors listed in there Catalogue's.

    Leave a comment:


  • BCRider
    replied
    Larry, here's a shot of some cast iron I tried today. It's a cutting of a mounting lug off some old casting from when I modified my old bandsaw to take better blade guards.

    At the same 745RPM it cut easily. I actually took off a .06'ish roughing cut with very little roughness at around 2 inches per minute feed rate. Not sure what the actual chip load is for that but the machine didn't shake, rattle or roll.... The surface from the roughing pass is the bit on the right side of the picture. I then did a .010 finish pass at around 1.5 inches per minute. That's what you see on the left of the red line.

    Both sides feel smooth to a fingernail dragged over them. A scriber slightly catches on the rough cut texture but skates easily over the left side surface. Neither is a mirror finish though. The roughed feed rate with the very slight extra texture would likely be pretty good for a sliding surface as it would hold a little oil. And the finish cut side would likely polish up with very little effort if desired.

    The spots you see were catching at the scriber. I had to get out the high power magnifier to see that they are cast in bubbles. And that is what was grabbing at the tip of the scriber. The width of this cut surface is about 1/2 inch for scale. I've left the size of the full size pic at 900K so you can expand it.

    On the part on the left you can see where the inserts leave burnished spots on the back passes that somewhat look like scraper flaking.



    Click image for larger version  Name:	P1040645.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.08 MB ID:	2000191
    Last edited by BCRider; 05-10-2022, 04:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BCRider
    replied
    Originally posted by RB211 View Post
    Re-reading the earlier posts, I have to agree with Doozer on the center cutting endmills vs facing mills. Side cutting is a poor argument as a face mill has to side cut to even function as a face mill.
    To throw more gasoline into the debate, with CNC, theoretically could you circle interpolate a plunge with a non center cutting endmill if the radial step over is set correctly? And if so, is that why industry doesn’t seem too concerned about terminology in regards to this debate?
    I've traversed while plunging a non center cut four flute on occasion to get around the issue as well. It was a special size that I only had in four flute at the time. It worked fine. But it's still an "end mill". By the same thought the mill that is the original topic of this thread could similarly be plunged if rotated or traversed enough to cut away the center area.

    I would still suggest that the differentiation is related to the nature of the vertical side cut elements. A lot of face mills use cutters held in a manner that they would not easily cut a vertical surface. So that's my favorite factor that separates "end mills" from "face mills". The fact that my machine isn't stiff or heavy enough to use this particular cutter for side milling doesn't alter the idea that a bigger and heavier machine could use it in that manner with ease.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doozer
    replied
    I forget who posted the catalogue ad above,
    but sometimes marketing makes up stuff
    and calls items the wrong thing. Sooo just
    because you see something on a web page
    is not reality. Even if it supports your position.
    (like politics arguments people ! ! ! )

    -D

    Leave a comment:


  • George Bulliss
    replied
    Originally posted by RB211 View Post
    To throw more gasoline into the debate, with CNC, theoretically could you circle interpolate a plunge with a non center cutting endmill if the radial step over is set correctly? And if so, is that why industry doesn’t seem too concerned about terminology in regards to this debate?
    Yes, I used similar cutters all the time to rough profile and pocket. Shallow depths of cuts (.010" - .030") and extremely fast feeds were used. Step downs were ramped at an angle shallow enough that the body of the mill wouldn't hit.

    They were always called end mills in the shops I worked in. However, I worked at enough shops in enough different areas to know that terminology varies. Every shop seems to have their own terms for some things and every shop has those who think that's the only way it can be. I never got too hung up on it, just called things by the name my current shop was using.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tundra Twin Track
    replied
    Originally posted by old mart View Post

    I have tried and failed to find any information on that Wadkin, it stood 18 feet high and had a bed about 5 by 9, feet that is. It was used mostly for roughing large billets to save time when they went onto the cnc mills.
    At that SIZE it might fit in my Shop with 18’ ceiling but don’t think the 7-1/2” of reinforced concrete would hold it,probably 3 to 5 HP lol!🤓

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X