Parting out an FP4-60; a fun day getting grimy

[Martin P]

Very near me an FP4-60 was up to get scrapped after long storage and I made an offer for on-site parts removal.
The deal was that I could remove all I wanted and afterwards the seller would give the rest to the scrapper.
This machine weighs 4 tons.

In principle the FP4-60 seems based on the design of the FP5NC, meaning the table slides on a stationary x knee.
It has a Dialog 12 control, in this case with the digitilization option (special NRP card: NRP04D).
It has a full enclosure with closed ceiling to allow for flood coolant.
Depending on option it could come with flip head or sliding head and with or without toolchanger.
This was the simple version without, but this does not make it smaller, it just created a lot of empty space.
This machine has the univeral table, identical to the FP5NC.

I was in it for some cards of the D12 control and the control console with TFT. Hope to resell other stuff to break even.

The machine came out of AMG some years ago (the Mercedes AMG) and they must have painted it, BADLY. So it looked like it was in a fire.

The universal table has a terrible top, bad marks in it.
A lista tool cart came with it, including a Röhm vise, rather abused looking but working, 25 tool holders and including a 3D Taster that does not return to zero.
After removing the way covers it became clear that the machine was shot, bad rust on the ways.

So in 7 hours with 2 people I took everything inside the electrical cabinet (my buddy went a little overboard), the head with slide, the servos, the scales, the control and its panel, central lube, gear lube system, hydraulic system, table, Bosch drive parts, odd ends.
I did not take the gearbox parts and ball spindles and the spindle motor.
The machine was covered with rust protection oil, which was all stuck to me afterwards. Unfortunately none of this was sprayed under the way covers, where it would have been most needed.

It was a fun day and now I have to check in how far the control and the screen will work.
It did come with full documentation (except parts list) and parameter listing, so it is interesting.

 

[Martin P]

2 before pictures

 

[DeadMahoDude]

So basically if you take the plasma torch to it, you can make them about the same size as a D11 FP4NC, without all that unnecessary sheet metal.
Kinda sad to see them in that bad condition, really nice machines, want one!

That table on rails design is so much better than the rocking wiggle table on FP-NCs.
Big facemill over longer distances gives shit finish on FP2NC, as the table rocks and the vertical spindle gets out of tram.
Same procedure on Maho 700P, same finish over all 600mm of travel along the X-rails.

 

[AlfaGTA]

Table rock comes from the needed clearance on the vertical slide.
Both style of machines (Maho/Deckel) have that to account for.
There is weight shift to both designs and the support and resistance to that rock is only as good as the narrowest support member, that being the vertical ways.
Cheers Ross

 

[rimcanyon]

Does locking the Z Axis while cutting help prevent the rock?

 

[AlfaGTA]

Might help on a manual machine, but with the CNC the lock only ties up the servo ,no physical clamp to the slide.
Cheers Ross

 

[AlfaGTA]

All machines have compromises dealing with geometry.
Experienced hands find ways to augment
those issues or reduce their effect to stay within the job needs.

Faced with problems created by axis droop on long travels I opt to run the part in the horizontal, which eliminates or lessens the effect of any axis shift from the effect of gravity.

Cheers Ross

 

[Martin P]

I hoped to get away without removing a lot of sheetmetal, because there was no clear way to remove it. Everything interlocked with each other, a total rediculous nightmare. But in the end I still wanted the x-axis scale and servo.
The scale is below the stainless cover on top of the x axis. To get to this one thing led to another, including violence.
Since this machine has no toolchanger there is a lot of space on the right side. This really is the 5 square meter hobo hut, even with a nice door on the right side. Here would sit either a vertical only or a universal tool changer if so ordered.
I do not understand the Deckel line-up here. The CC series had the TC on the left. Why did they come up with the FP3-50, FP4-60, FP5-80, FP6-100 series? Cheaper?
It is noticable that they went from a Vogel lube system to a Tecalemit and from Heidenhain scales to RSF. Cheapening out?
I was impressed by how streamline the electrics are. Very few relays overall. My little FP2NC has 3 times the number of relays.
The electrics manual of the FP4-60 is no longer orange, but about 300 pages, since it includes all options and versions. Its interesting.
The most off-putting of the machine is the sheet metal orgy and the bad access front doors. But it is possible to place the machine up against a wall, since there is no back access needed.
These machines will never much make it to private hobby shops, just too big. I would not even know how to move one with all that sheet metal around it. Would need to rent a crane, which is how they are meant to be moved.

 

[jz79]

Table rock comes from the needed clearance on the vertical slide.
Both style of machines (Maho/Deckel) have that to account for.
There is weight shift to both designs and the support and resistance to that rock is only as good as the narrowest support member, that being the vertical ways.
Cheers Ross

I don't agree, with the "wide" X axis, the table is always 100% equally loaded wherever it is on the X slide, the only rocking possible is on the Y slide

but looking at the "narrow" design, the possibility of rocking on the Y is the same, but there is also levering action going on on the X slide as well when the table is moved to either extremes

 

[Kees]

This machine looks very much like the later DMU60-80 T and E models. These where build from 1996 to 2000 I think.

 

[Martin P]

I could not resist plugging the control together to see how well I spent my money (though I should do other stuff).
So I connected the 7 meter long harness from the console to the control, plugged in the monitor and an external power supply and pushed a power button. First there were 2 red LEDs and then on the second attempt it booted up without card errors and the screen also worked!
Of course it shows a ton of error messages like lube oil low, no table selected aso.
Strangely the 00 display does not show the dot to indicate lost parameters (it should be 0.0).
So I checked the parameters in the service menu (KD) and they are of course all zero.
So anyway, this is a best case scenario on the control side.







Note that the parameters exist for the gear shift spindles. THe D12 was never used with these.
I wonder if the D12 could be used on a D11 machine by just selecting parameters. Seems unlikely.
Also, what needs to be done to "turn on" the machine in this test set-up, basically simulating a machine to gain access to all the menues and functions that only come up with a running machine.

 

[AlfaGTA]

I don't agree, with the "wide" X axis, the table is always 100% equally loaded wherever it is on the X slide, the only rocking possible is on the Y slide

but looking at the "narrow" design, the possibility of rocking on the Y is the same, but there is also levering action going on on the X slide as well when the table is moved to either extremes

Think we have our terms confused.. In Deckel speak the vertical is labeled "Z". (in Maho land its "Y") That machine uses the "Z" ways to carry the entire "X" axis assembly, and must have clearance to allow vertical movement.. That clearance on the slides of the vertical will allow the "X" to rock as the table moves from center toward each side (weight shift).
The "X" is fully supported,yes, but the vertical (Z) is not any better or more rigid than the earlier FP-NC's . The stability here (or lac of) is a function of the width of the "Z" ways.

Cheers Ross

 

[jz79]

my mistake about the Y/Z, yes, I mean both designs share the same chance of rocking on the vertical - Z axis, but the difference is the X slide

for "narrow" design, if you move table from -X to +X, then at the middle the X slide is in balance, but because there is some clearance in the ways/saddle for them to be able to slide, once the mass is moved far enough from the center (or more precisely - hanging out from the X saddle), the possibility of rocking increases, of course it won't immediately start to rock when 50mm off center, but once the table is far enough out from the saddle side (hinge point), then the chance of rocking becomes higher and higher

for the "wide" design this just doesn't happen, there is no extra force trying to sway the X saddle/table if it is at either travel end or anywhere in between, the only place where it can rock is on the vertical slide

I think the benefit of the "wide" design is pretty clear, does it matter today for the people who use the "narrow" machines, probably not

I'm now starting to wonder what is the ratio of the saddle width (width of contact area on the X slide) vs travel on FP 1/2/3/4, I have the soviet FP1 clone (Stanko 675), haven't ran it for few years, but it certainly was possible to rock it, scared me quite a bit first time it happened, then I learned to take it a bit easier with it

 

[AlfaGTA]

Think the “rock” of the X assembly is most affected by the geometry of the “Z” slide.
Believe much less is effected by the “X” slide be it full support(Maho) or not.
Down side of the Maho style setup is the increased mass of the slide. Becomes a wear issue, say peck drilling.
It’s all a compromise. I get good parts from my FP4NC running long moves, but that machine is in good mechanical fetter.
Cheers Ross