Need Opinions: Academic Lab machine tool choices 7

[tygerdawg]

I come once again to tap into the wonderful expertise & opinions of Eng-Tips family.

Am helping specify lab equipment for a University shop facility. This facility supports the academic mission of teaching MechE, MfgE, MechEngrTech, & MfgEngrTech courses in Manufacturing Processes. We currently have a few each of Haas CNC mills & lathes of various flavors & vintages. Three manual knee mills & a couple of manual lathes. We struggle to teach Manufacturing Processes courses effectively with the current equipment & quantities. We have an opportunity to change / upgrade / replace / expand as needed to support the "Academic Mission."

I learned how to turn cranks back in the 70's with a big shop full of War Surplus worn-out machine tools. I'm not much of a machinist, but I know how not to embarrass myself (well...not too much, anyway) in the presence of a qualified tool maker. Rightly or wrongly, I believe the Academic Mission is summarized by We are not training machinists. We are training future TECH/ENGR grads what machinists DO. If the student wants to be a machinist, then they can learn it here but there are better venues for more intense training.

Our debate is about what best supports the Mission.
[ul]
[li]Re-stock the lab with more smaller manual tools (maybe SMITHY combo-type?) to focus on metal working fundamentals. Retain some CNC to provide exposure to CNC in later semesters. [/li]
[li]De-emphasize manual tools and focus more on CNC?[/li]
[/ul]

Would very much welcome opinions.

TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering

http://www.bluetechnik.com

 

[racookpe1978]

No. Use the more, smaller (less expensive, hand-turned) machines to make a few small parts BY HAND to Re-emphasize the metallurgy and heat transfer and physics of the cutting surfaces the cutting tips and the problems and the relief requirements and the pressures and vibrations and mechanics of the "process".

Yes, two CNC machines that they program to "see how it is done."

They will learn far more with just a few hours turning several small parts on a manual lathe and small milling machine than by producing a semester-long "grand gadget" on a shiny new large CNC machine - that they STILL will never actaully program in their future career!

These kids are coming in without ever drilling a hole, tapping that hole, and tightening a stud into the threads. They have NEVER made a "flat" surface. Most nowdays, have never even taken apart a bicycle, much less changed a tire or upgraded a full car engine or rebuilt a transmission. They have not "bent steel" nor welded nor used a chainfall or a hydraulic jack.

They don't know how to use their hands - only "run a program" (er, play games on the laptop)

 

[desertfox]

Hi

I would be in favour of the small manual machines and let the students get their hands dirty.
The principles of setting a tool to the centerline of the workpiece is the same whether manual or CNC machines are used, they will learn the basics of feedrate, turning speed etc far better with the manual machines.

That said some of the decisions on the type of machines will depend on the curriculum that you have to teach and whether it mentions programming of machine tools.

“Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater.” Albert Einstein

 

[KENAT]

As above, a mixture of manual & CNC to cover both fundamentals and then 'this is probably how you'll see it done in production'.

Not necessarily in scope but I'd also consider if there's any way to have some sheet metal work, a casting or plastics molding set up, plastics forming (e.g. vac form) and 3D printing.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[KENAT]

Oh, and maybe touch on inspection and hand tools too.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[berkshire]

I am biased on this, because I started life as a Tinbasher. Non the less a small hand brake, and shear. Maybe a small press brake of the Diacro type and a surface plate, angle square, and a digital height gage. It sounds like you already have a good selection of CNC mills and lathes. Stay away from the Shopsmith type tools, they do not do anything well, and the Jet type, combination shear, press brake, roller tools, they work , but again they do not do anything particularly well , and students will not encounter those in anything but a small home workshop.
Small CNC lathes and mills by Sherline are useful they teach basic CNC programming , however they do not have much capacity .
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.

 

[JNieman]

The crappier or more 'compromise' tools you buy (combo tools) the worse your lessons will be. The students will never know what is actually a problem with processes/tooling/metallurgy, and what is just the nature of a shitty machine. They need to know what professional grade machinery can do, which will never be imparted upon them if they use hobby grade machines.

Otherwise, I agree with the previous posters regarding small parts on manual machines. Having a Haas mill and/or lathe around for an overview of CNC programming and machining will be valuable, as well, I believe. Part of teaching them what machinists do is also dispelling myths. Learning what's involved in setting up and running a part will quickly educate them past the "make 3d model, push button on See-n-see machine, receive part" mentality.

This will put a lasting concept in their minds when it comes to DesignFor(x) and help them understand costs of processes.

I like the idea of adding some basic metal fab equipment, too, if it's in the budget.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Another star for racookpe, and a star for berkshire.

Dump most of the CNC stuff.
Keep the knee mills.
Get a shaper and a big vertical metalcutting bandsaw.
Get a shear, a box & pan brake, and a punch, all manually operated.
Maybe a slip roll, but it must be manually operated; powered ones are arm-eaters.

Teach them to use a drill, a hacksaw, and a file.
Teach them how to make a sheet metal box with a punch and a brake.

Forget the tiny desktop tools; they can't do anything useful,
will be broken immediately, and you can't get parts to fix them.

Forget the combo tools; as mentioned, they don't do anything well.
They are good at teaching how to organize your process,
but the lessons are hard; ask any ShopSmith owner.






Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[berkshire]

Tygerdawg
You know an item not mentioned here is welding equipment. It would be good to get engineering students exposed to at least basic welding techniques.
The number of times I have been given a drawing to fabricate a part, where it is obvious that the Engineer who designed it did not have a clue how the part was going together, is without number.
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.

 

[tygerdawg]

Excellent input. I knew I would not be disappointed.

For the record, we are well set up for hand tools, hand power tools, measuring, brake & shear, sawing, heat treat, welding. We have two small IMMs, extruder, & polymer testing equipment, plus significant wood working. Robots, PLCs, and Instrumentation stuff. Quite an Engineer's playpen. Heck, we even have a 5-axis waterjet machine. What we don't have is fundamentals-focused equipment for the newbies right off the farm.

Many thanks for the recommendations & brand names. I'll look into it.

TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering

http://www.bluetechnik.com

 

[mfgenggear]

I am sorry but I am going to get all the old timers fired up here. but I disagree with the manual machines. unless they will be working in a model shop. even then it's all CNC mills and lathes. and even more dual head stocks with live tools. the smithses small manual machines are a waste of money and time. get them up to date machines with real world training.

yes it is important to learn the basics. but employers want guys and gals with up to date training with today's technology.
most shops use cnc controls. have a couple of full size conventional mills, and a full size manual lathe. teach them the basics. then progress to CNC Controls. it takes a person a minimum of 5 years day in and out to learn it well.

and what is also important more than any thing learn to read precision inspection tools.

 

[drawoh]

tygerdawg,

I took a CNC course back in college. I still have the punched paper tapes for my big project. I was told that CNC was feasible for runs of ten to a hundred parts.

How stable is CNC technology nowadays? If it keeps changing, your students need to know CNC is out there, and that they must be open minded when the encounter the technology. If they any kind of seniority, it will have changed significantly.

This point is very much more true with rapid prototyping. Who knows what they will be doing five years from now.

I would stick with the fundamentals, and stay away from the bleeding edge technology.

Back in college, a partner and I did an exercise where we drilled holes in two pieces using a drill press and a vertical milling machine. He was an experienced machinist, and he insisted on doing the work. The scribe, centrepunch and drill press proved to be more accurate than the WWII surplus milling machine. In retrospect, it is too bad we did not repeat the experiment with me doing the work.

--
JHG

 

[berkshire]

Drawoh, Tygerdawg.
CNC is an ever shifting target, Not so much the basic M codes N codes and G codes, but the way you get the info in and out of the machine. Drawoh just mentioned paper tape technology , when I first started doing NC (Moog Hydrapoint), not CNC, that came later, the statement about getting maybe 100 parts was true, the tape had to run through the machine with every part, and the sprocket holes wore. CNC improved that by enabling the part to be downloaded into the memory of the machine, saving the wear and tear on the tape. There was also the problem of having to hand code all of the inputs, This is something students should be forced to do, so they can tell an error in a code when they see it. Later machines can generate code automatically by using the print codes generated by the Drafting program. The big changes now are the way information is fed to the said machines, and this is literally changing week by week. Jump drives seem to be the favored method, however I have one customer who still requests 5" floppies.
So a basic course in G code is still useful.
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.

 

[JNieman]

I feel like the CNC topic is straying a bit toward focusing their time on making them into machinists/programmers. That seems to be opposite of the OP request. Teaching them what machinists do. Not teaching them to be one. That's a horse of a different color.

 

[ornerynorsk]

No offense taken mfgenggear, but you simply cannot, cannot go wrong in learning the basic fundamentals on manual machines. CNC is very prevalent, and here to stay, but unless you work for Mega Corp Very Large Manufacturing Inc, you will likely encounter far more manual than CNC. Engineers most definitely do not need to be machinists, but a good, foundational cross section of understanding of the methods and processes is invaluable.

Sorry Mike Halloran, shapers became boat anchors decades ago. You will find the odd one here and there, but I'd bet a round of beers that not many people are still out there that can set up and run one. Last time I touched a shaper was in 1983, if memory serves.

Agree on the shopsmith and universal machines. They are generally garbage and a complete waste of money.

It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Agreed, a shaper is not a productive machine. ... but I think it can be a good vehicle for teaching the basics of machining, right out where you can see the chips curl up and fly.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[mfgenggear]

hahahahahahahaha good discussion. remember the the trade school apprenticeships. I went thru that. there needs to be more of that. you take turn in every dept. inspection, shop, engineering, and production control.

 

[MikeHalloran]

At my first engineering job, I worked with a bunch of old timers who were graduates of Henry Ford's in-house trade school.

Their first assignment was to make a 'perfect' ball from a brass cube,
using nothing but a file and a micrometer.
Their grade was based on the size of the resulting ball.

Their second assignment was to do the same thing, starting with a steel cube.

Those guys knew their cutting tools.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[SwinnyGG]

One more e-pinion for manual machines.

The goal in engineering school (as the OP stated) isn't to learn how to make a HAAS CNC crank out parts- the goal is to learn the theory of machining. It's extremely easy, in 2016, to use solidworks to create a part, dump it into code, clamp a block and go- but that teaches you nothing about climb vs. conventional milling, or the importance of fixture design, or cutting surface geometry, or the variables that effect surface finish, or any of the 10,000 other things that a good teacher can teach a willing student in a semester spent in front of a Bridgeport.

Manual all the way.

 

[berkshire]

One thing I learned many years ago after messing up a very expensive cutter, was to check the back lash on a Bridgeport before climb milling.
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.