Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Chamfer vs fillet cost 4
- Thread starter dejan95
- Start date
Chamfering mills are generally a bit cheaper than similar-sized roundovers, but not enough to have a significant cost impact unless you're running many thousands. Unless specific chamfers or radii are required the best choice as mentioned above is a simple edge-break.
Agree, but:
-you can cut external chamfers without a chamfering tool if needed, which can save one (or more) tool changes. Less tool changes means cheaper parts; obviously this has more impact the larger/more complicated a part is
-Countersinks are extremely common, because drilled holes are typically going to have a chamfer or edge break. Every automated tool changer magazine is pretty much guaranteed to have a countersink tool in it - meaning you don't necessarily have to consume tool changer space to cut chamfers.
-A single countersink (or chamfer mill) can cut its nominal size chamfer, and every smaller external size chamfer down to zero. A roundover tool can only cut a single roundover radius. As a machinist, you don't just need one roundover tool - you potentially need a giant library of them.
-you can cut external chamfers without a chamfering tool if needed, which can save one (or more) tool changes. Less tool changes means cheaper parts; obviously this has more impact the larger/more complicated a part is
-Countersinks are extremely common, because drilled holes are typically going to have a chamfer or edge break. Every automated tool changer magazine is pretty much guaranteed to have a countersink tool in it - meaning you don't necessarily have to consume tool changer space to cut chamfers.
-A single countersink (or chamfer mill) can cut its nominal size chamfer, and every smaller external size chamfer down to zero. A roundover tool can only cut a single roundover radius. As a machinist, you don't just need one roundover tool - you potentially need a giant library of them.
Orange_kun
Mechanical
I agree with SwinnyGG. Every machinist I have dealt with prefers convex/exterior edges/corners to have chamfers vs fillets.
Conversely, concave/interior edges/corners are usually easier to make with either feature. Turned parts get free radii, and milled features are usually possible with a common ball-nose endmill.
I like to work with the tooling the shop has and is familiar with. If they can make my limited run (1s, 2s) of parts with existing tooling in the machine... everybody wins. Always try to find out what the shop has available, and be flexible on what you will accept. It should be a point of pride to make the tolerances as wide as possible and still get good parts. Be nice to your machinists!
Conversely, concave/interior edges/corners are usually easier to make with either feature. Turned parts get free radii, and milled features are usually possible with a common ball-nose endmill.
I like to work with the tooling the shop has and is familiar with. If they can make my limited run (1s, 2s) of parts with existing tooling in the machine... everybody wins. Always try to find out what the shop has available, and be flexible on what you will accept. It should be a point of pride to make the tolerances as wide as possible and still get good parts. Be nice to your machinists!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
