Talon Grip Update

To All:
    Here are some excerpts from a Modern Machine Shop article last month that shows how one shop improved their productivity by using the Talon
Grip vise jaw system:
================================================================http://tinyurl.com/4lv5yn
    Phoenix Machine was founded 1987 in Gresham, Oregon as a one-man shop with a couple of Bridgeport mills and digital readouts. Since then, the company has grown considerably. Today, its nearly 12,000-square-foot facility houses 20 full- and part-time employees, nine VMCs and two HMCs. Specializing in close-tolerance machining on three- and four-axis CNC milling machines, the company manufactures products ranging from aerospace components to recreational items for its diverse customer base. Material applications include aluminum, stainless steel, copper and high-temperature alloys, as well as tool steel and various composites and plastics.
    Project Manager Jim Meador suggested implementing vise jaws designed by Talon Grip Systems that could improve the shopís use of a technique known as "carrier" workholding.
    Carrier workholding uses a thin layer of extra material (the carrier) on one side of the workpiece for clamping in a vise. Clamping the carrier allows easy access for machining five or more sides of the workpiece in a single setup. Typically, the part is then held by the side, top or other recently machined surface so that the carrier material can be milled off. Additional features can then be machined into the side of the part that held the carrier material.
    This method can reduce cycle times because it requires less part handling and fewer machining operations. However, the carrier itself represents extra workpiece materialómaterial that both costs money and takes time to remove. Also, depending on the application, a carrier made up of anything less than 10 to 30 percent of extra material thickness would require the operator to reduce feeds and speeds to provide the proper margin of clamping safety.
    Talon Grip Systemsí vise jaws are designed to eliminate these disadvantages of carrier workholding. According to the company, they are a suitable alternative to the standard hardened jaws supplied with most 4- and 6-inch precision machining vises. The jaws can effectively clamp as little as 0.060 inch of material. Hardened tool steel "grippers" actually penetrate into carrier material as hard as 38 HRc, providing a strong holding force to allow aggressive machining without workpiece movement. The grippersí positions are adjustable along the length of the jaws for different part configurations. Additionally, the jaws have a built-in work support surface that eliminates the need for parallels, and they incorporate an adjustable work stop below the cutting plane.
    Phoenix Machine tested the vise jaws on a part made from a piece of 6061-T6 barstock that measured 1.75 inches thick, 5 inches wide and 5.06 inches long. Previously, this part was clamped in standard 6-inch steel vise jaws that gripped 0.187 inch of material. The original program used a three-flute, 3/4-inch-diameter carbide end mill at 12,000 rpm, 100 ipm and a 0.24-inch depth of cut. With the Talon Grip jaws, however, the shop increased the feed to 225 ipm and depth of cut to 0.74 inch, all while gripping only 0.06 inch of carrier material at the same spindle speed with no part movement. Phoenix determined that 1.5-inch barstock could be used for future runs, saving an estimated 14 percent in material costs. "You canít believe how well the jaws hold until you see them in action," Mr. Meador says.
    Phoenix Machine has now incorporated the vise jaws into the majority of their partsí first operations. The jaws have provided an average productivity increase of 15 percent, although the shop has realized improvements of as much as 200 percent on some individual parts. Material costs also have been reduced by 10 percent. The jaws have also helped enable the company to add new customers and win back lost jobs by re-quoting at more competitive rates. ===============================================================
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
We now have three sets and will be ordering more.
Unlike your shop we still have not purchased any Chinese Kurt knock off vises.
Jon Banquer San Diego, CA http://jonbanquer.blogspot.com /
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have used this method of machining for many years, but was unaware that someone makes a jaw for this purpose. I see two problems. First, if you are holding so little material, you can end up "bowing" the part during the machining process. Second, if you are doing pockets with thin wall bottoms you can force the downward indenting the bottom of the pocket.
Otherwise, looks like a good idea for the right kind of job.
Jim

Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jimz wrote:

Jim:
    You mean you missed the first "Talon Grip" thread a couple of months ago? In that thread I mentioned that we use hardened serrated vise jaw sets that were made in-house years ago. In my estimation it's a better system as you can hold small parts by about .040 or use the full 1.800" face for large bandsawn parts, or anything in between.
    And this "carrier" type machining has probably been done shortly after the first vise was put on a milling machine.     

    Well, that's definitely a concern on some parts. What we do to try to minimize bowing is clamp the part snugly to "indent" the part edge with the serrations, back off the vise, and then barely tighten it so the part is being gripped primarily by the serrations alone with minimal bowing pressure.     

    That can be a problem as well. Obviously not all parts are going lend themselves to holding on by just .040-.060.

    It's just another setup "tool" in your procedural "toolbox", and as everyone knows, you can never have TOO MANY tools.
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:

Should be trivial to make a wide parallel at the same height as the reference surface on the Talon jaws to support the material in the center if bowing does show up.
Jon
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Another trick is to leave material on the ends of the part to support the center... Think of it as leaving a truss support to support you thin center section. Once the center is done, machine off the "trusses" on the ends, The center thin floor is done/safe.
Good ideas to share here. Shouldn't they be in a binder someplace?
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Another trick is to leave material on the ends of the part to support the center... Think of it as leaving a truss support to support you thin center section. Once the center is done, machine off the "trusses" on the ends, The center thin floor is done/safe.
Good ideas to share here. Shouldn't they be in a binder someplace? ======================================Aren't they already in jb's 3-ring binders?
-- PV'd
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jon Anderson wrote:

Jon:
    That would help is your part is bowing in a downward direction. But wouldn't do much if the part is bowed UP in the middle.
--
BottleBob
http://home.earthlink.net/~bottlbob
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"> That would help is your part is bowing in a downward direction. But

Just what I was thinking. But you beat me to it.
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BottleBob wrote:

Quite true, and I assume that must happen or you wouldn't mention it. I've never had parts bow up before, so didn't think about it.
Jon
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, if the part doesn't bow up immediately upon tightening the vise, most machining processes will invariably make it bow downwards, if it is going to bow.
The truss idea is good, but could prove dicey as the truss itself is removed, at least for the width of the truss.
But, you can mebbe have yer cake and eat it too: A talon-type jaw, but with a really deep step in Y, so that the material has a substantial support beneath it -- doing the job of the parallel mentioned.
Now, however, the part will have a tendency to bow up, and hopefully that force will not be enough to affect the cut in Z too much.
Sumpn I shoulda done for my current (and very rare) job. Next time....
--
PV'd



>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
‚úĖ
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.