Low Runout CAT40 Toolholders

[VPM]

I have a Haimer ER32 Power Collet Chuck.. Runout is terrible, about .001" at best checking the internal taper with a .0001" indicator.
Thought it could be the spindle, tested it, was les than .0001". Checked an old and beatup Valenite ER32 chuck in the same spindle.. Less than .0002" runout.
I bought this chuck thinking I was going to get high accuracy.. Only use it for larger tools and roughing operations now. Very dissapoined with Haimer, definitly will not buy again. On a side note, I pulled off the collet nut and lifted it and the collet off. To my suprise the collet dropped out of the nit and fell to the floor.. never had that happen before. Very dissapointed with their quality, especially since the claims of precision that they make and the price that they charge. Definitly will consider their products a grade below the cheap chinese stuff in the future.

 

[gregormarwick]

Don't listen to this guy saying "shrink fit is way more complex than a set screw holder"...if anything a shrink fit toolholder is LESS complex than a side lock toolholder lol. First off there are no moving parts. Second you get exceptional runout, I would say hydraulic maybe is the only one better. Clamping force on shrink is highest.

Basically shrink fit is awesome. I use them on about 50% of my toolholders. A shrink machine isn't that expensive and you technically don't need a machine to run shrink fit.

Another benefit, shrink fit is going to be cheaper on a per holder basis than nearly every other system out there - collet, side lock (ok maybe not this one), hydraulic, power chuck.

They last forever if you use them correctly.

I could go on and on.

But OP wanted runout and shrink fit has crazy good runout. I run 6" and longer gauge length holders on TINY tools and the runout hasn't caused any issues even at that length. It is solid.
Also for clearance issues, shrink fit simply cannot be beat.

I could go on all day....

Back when shrink holders were "new" technology, the holders were cheap. There is less making in a shrink holder than in any other system, including sidelocks, and it used to be that their price reflected that.

Latterly the cost of shrink holders has been climbing disproportionately compared to holders generally. Manufacturers realise they are popular and they can charge more for them. Unfortunately, it's not true anymore that the cost of using shrink fit is lower.

Sidelock and ER are by far the lowest cost tooling now.

 

[fmari --MariTool-]

Back when shrink holders were "new" technology, the holders were cheap. There is less making in a shrink holder than in any other system, including sidelocks, and it used to be that their price reflected that.

Latterly the cost of shrink holders has been climbing disproportionately compared to holders generally. Manufacturers realise they are popular and they can charge more for them. Unfortunately, it's not true anymore that the cost of using shrink fit is lower.

Sidelock and ER are by far the lowest cost tooling now.

Not sure what manufacturers you are talking about but other than not having to drill and tap a side hole shrink holders are certainly not easier to make. Shrink holders are made from a tool steel, H-13 most of the time. The material is double or triple in price. Chip control is worse, tool life is much worse, and sales are typically lower than collet chucks or standard endmill holders. So you sit on the stock longer.

 

[gregormarwick]

Not sure what manufacturers you are talking about but other than not having to drill and tap a side hole shrink holders are certainly not easier to make. Shrink holders are made from a tool steel, H-13 most of the time. The material is double or triple in price. Chip control is worse, tool life is much worse, and sales are typically lower than collet chucks or standard endmill holders. So you sit on the stock longer.

Fair points that I hadn't considered.

 

[mottrhed]

Shrink fit and hydraulic essentially accomplish the same thing, holding the end mill on center. Obviously the hydraulic is more complex, but easier to change. Collet adds quite a few variables that potentially turns into runout, and by design anything set screwed from one side will not run as true.

The problem I see is people measuring runout at the cutting tooling, and assuming thats where the runout is being created. The actual tir that far down the line has a lot of tolerance stack up that come into play. Is the other side of the holder (taper-pilot-etc) perfect? Spindle taper perfect (runout-angle-contact)? Spindle bearings perfect? Is the drawbar influencing runout? The answer is simple, there is no such thing as perfect, so every part of the system is generating some amount of runout that will potentially be realized at the cutting surface.

You can chase the runout down somewhat (test bar, air gauging etc), but once youre inside a tenth on a (especially on a haas) at the end mill you would probably be wasting your time.

Now, none of this means you will be making parts within a particular tolerance. All we are talking about is static runout. Once the spindle is spinning 3k, 30k or 300k, lots of things change with the forces at play. I have seen plenty of spindles that runout inside a micron at the taper, but at 18k have non-repetitive runout well over 10x the static readings. Anyway, Im way off topic now lol.

 

[eon87]

Check out NT USA holders . They have runout adjustment collet holders for a couple different collet types and mill chucks. They are quality tools and much cheaper than Nikken.

 

[hi-fly-cnc]

I'm a BT30 owner, but recently become a huge fan of shrink fit holders. My issue was buying the first one... I'm not a big shop and there was zero chance of me buying a relatively expensive shrink machine just to try out the technology. So I bought one of those little induction heaters that are sold to garages for removing stuck bolts. It's basically the same thing as the "proper device", just lower power and without the safety stuff around it. I pop the tool in the tightening fixture and it takes about 30 secs to heat a BT30 sized holder and pop in the tool.

Fun attempt to record the process with a Flir camera here:
- https://www.instagram.com/p/CyYAHdko2Sm/

Sure, I don't think this will suit anyone who needs to comply with strict health and safety regs, nor would I want to do more than 1-2 holders at a time with this method. Cooling them down takes 5+ minutes, etc. However, if you were on the fence about trying shrink, then I think most people have a few tools that they use for roughing and don't change out frequently, for which this would be a perfect trial (or same for finishing tool). Costs were low and the holders (I'm in the UK) work out about the same to cheaper than dual contact ER holders. Runout is as close as you like to zero. Tool changeout takes a couple of minutes longer. I'm thrilled with them!

I think there are a bunch of ways to get on the ladder and give the technology a try without spending a bunch of money. Would recommend