I have an Atlas 7" shaper -- far superior to my 10" lathe. It's almost exclusively made of cast iron, and quite sturdy. I enjoy using it to square up workpieces as it is easy to use and sometimes programming MDI codes in the mill just isn't worth the trouble for odd jobs. I have been working on some iron castings, and they have a tough outer skin. The flycutter was driving me mad, so I switched to the shaper. Much easier!
As an aside, the viscosity of the Vactra #2 doesn't allow the clapper to move perceptibly on all but the longest of strokes, especially in low speed. Low is WAY faster on mine than the one in the video. I don't know about his claim of slower feed for better surface finish, my experience is that tool geometry has more to do with it than speed, but then again I have fairly limited adjustments on that score! One of the key features of a shaper is its ability, with the right attachments, to cut true generated involute profiles for gears. This is possible with a mechanism, but is better accomplished with a CNC controlled rotary axis. It offers the advantages of hobbing with a single point tool instead. Entirely possible to make a gear of ANY number of teeth assuming your single point tool has the correct pressure angle and tip radius for the module/diametral pitch you are using. The tool is then a simple triangular tool with radius, rather than an involute profile. Much easier to grind, and could even be done on the bench grinder with a gauge of the proper angle, just like threading tools! Great flexibility in prototyping gears, but with the downside that generating the gears takes FAR longer than hobbing. As I see it, the shaper offers several advantages. 1) Ability to use HSS tool bits to perform a wide range of jobs that milling machines could only do with specialized tooling. I.e. dovetails, T-slots, and many others I can't think of off hand. 2) Internal keyways/splines/etc, which mills are basically unable to do without a 'shaper' attachment. 3) Generated profiles can be readily obtained (i.e. gears, as mentioned previously) with simple attachments. 4) As mentioned, surface finish is excellent. I haven't perfected some of the tool geometries, but it can be nearly mirror without much effort. Disadvantages are 1) Can't shape a blind slot unless you drill out the end of it first, 2) can't shape a pocket, at least not easily, 3) time. The saying goes "you can make anything with a shaper but money." I would like to (someday) build a CNC shaper w/ rotary axis on the table specifically for shaping prototype gears, splines, etc. I wonder, though, whether the idea of a rotary axis on the ram would be worthwhile. If you define the tool's geometry and have a rotary axis on the table, would you really need the CNC control of the top slide angle? The only problem with a CNC shaper is that it requires a lot of adjustments (stroke length, stroke position, top slide travel - if you have one, knee travel, cross travel, and possibly rotary axis). If you can bear to automate them all, then writing the code may be a bit tricky. If you can't, then you'd have make adjustments between program segments. Not dissimilar from tool changes, I suppose. Matt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
