# My cheap solution to faster tool changing... (video added)



## mdocod (Apr 5, 2009)

Just wanted to share ...

I had to get something setup right quick here to be able to do tool changing faster. I think this will work nicely:







10 collet holders and a total of 46 collets. Delivered in about 1 week from Hong Kong. Not bad for under $300. 

Decided on ER25 after really going back and forth on options for awhile there. Found the collet holders for this system for cheaper than alternatives, and looked at my tool holding needs as far as diameter ranges and the ER25 system really covers what I need at this time very well. 

As you can see, I have cut down the shanks on most of the tool-holders, leaving a few long to see if any other needs in shank length come up in time. At this time I'll use this setup as is because I need to put it to work quick. but eventually I'll probably add a flange around the shanks with a cutout for the head of the R8 collet, replicating the tormach quick-change system with repeatable z-axis tool position via spindle face contact. 



-Eric

[edit in]

Video of some milling/drilling with the new "quick change" setup:
part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIAMlbkqfbg
part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf8WrKtpRck


----------



## Sabrewolf (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

Looks good to me 
An organized shopp is a productive one...


----------



## Mirage_Man (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

Looks good, though I'm a little confused. Are you using an R8 collet to hold an ER25 collet chuck? :thinking:


----------



## StrikerDown (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*



Mirage_Man said:


> Looks good, though I'm a little confused. Are you using an R8 collet to hold an ER25 collet chuck? :thinking:



I was wondering that too. Maybe he's doing that for longer or shorter reach instead of fixed length you get with the chuck directly on an R8. Guess that would be okay but it seems like run out would suffer wouldn't it? Even more so the longer the chuck arbor?


----------



## modamag (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

I think mdocod is trying to simulate a Tormach system.

This is basically toolholder with a 3/4" straight shank going into an R8 collet holder.

Royal also provide a similar produce @ slightly higher cost.
There is a system available on fleabay -> here

Great job mdocod, @ $300 you've halves the cost of that system.
The day I start doing more production work I'll definitely head this way.


----------



## precisionworks (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*



> seems like run out would suffer wouldn't it?


The total runout at the tool will be the sum of the runout at the primary toolholder (R8 collet?) plus the runout of the ER25 shank to bore, plus the runout of the collet bore to the outside collet surface.

The Universal Engineering Kwik-Switch, Erickson Quick Change, Royal, Tormach, etc., use a dedicated spindle insert that locks onto fitted toolholders. Royal guarantees TIR at less than .0005", about what I've measured on the Erickson & the Kwik-Switch.


----------



## mdocod (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

Runout will suffer...

It's a 1/2" R8 collet holding a 1/2" straight shank ER25 collet holder, so as precicisionworks says, the potential for run-out is the combined run-out of all contributing factors. Run-out at just below the face of the collet-holder on a good straight shank is probably approaching 0.0015 when everything is lined up at it's worst possible position, which can be amplified to several thousands at the end of a tool just depending on the luck of the offset. My experience thus far is that most tools are running plenty true for my needs, but sometimes when I load a tool, I think the ER collet lands a funny angle and produces a lot more runout (visual), this can be corrected by usually rotating the collet or swapping to a different collet in my large collection (part of the reason I bought plenty of collets).

This is a known tradeoff that I had to make in order to get to faster tool changes with less Z-axis variation from one tool to the next at a price I can afford. Cutting mostly plastics means I can get away with more run-out. Moving the head up and down to go from a wire or letter size drill in a chuck to an end-mill in an R8 was just totally killing me time wise as it takes 20 cranks of a hand-wheel to raise the head 1 inch, and the chuck adds around 3 inches of Z-axis consumption. 

I worked with this system all night last night and cut down another shank on a tool holder and am really liking what I have setup here. I'm changing tools (from drills to mills and back) in seconds now rather than minutes. 

I've been moving towards all screw machine length drills, combine that with these tool holders, and most of my tooling length is now within ~1/2" length variation when loaded up. (I load longer tooling down deeper in the ER collet, and shorter tooling into ~70% of the collet to offset even more of the difference.) This means that the head of the machine can stay put through all operations that I do frequently on a part. The Short tool length that I am using for most stuff helps minimize the amplification of run-out. 

-Eric


----------



## StrikerDown (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

Eric, 

That is what I thought you were doing, Longer reach for the shorter tooling or taller work, etc. Good thinking on your part. 

I know what you mean about cranking the handle... I'm toying with the idea of a power feed on the X axis on my mill. Just indicating the vise runs my battery down:sick2:! (I need to be more proficient at it) Plus I would get more consistent feed speed on the longer passes.

Nice looking set up. :twothumbs


----------



## precisionworks (Apr 6, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*



> I'm changing tools (from drills to mills and back) in seconds now rather than minutes.


What you're doing makes a lot of sense, and should work well in softer materials like plastic or aluminum. It wouldn't work as well with solid carbide tooling in harder materials, but I expect to see you using a CNC machine by that time




> I'm toying with the idea of a power feed on the X axis on my mill.


It's a handy thing to have, especially when trying to run a consistent feed that's set really slow ... something like 4 inches per minute. Hard to do that for long when you're hand cranking the wheel.

I've thought about adding power Z to my mill. The Morse MorSpeed radial drills have that feature, which is necessary because of the 5000# weight of the head, but it could be adapted to a mill-drill. I currently lock & unlock the head with a 1/2" air impact wrench, which is many times faster than the wrench supplied with the mill.


----------



## mdocod (Apr 8, 2009)

*Re: My cheap solution to faster tool changing...*

Links to some video clips in action in the OP


----------



## wquiles (Apr 8, 2009)

Eric - the videos are awesome !!!

:thumbsup:

Will


----------



## mdocod (Apr 18, 2009)

Just had to throw in some feedback having used this setup now quite a bit:

I've probably logged a good 6-8 hours of actual solid cranking out parts with this new setup. I'm convinced now that this really was the best $300 I could have spent at this point (actually I think it was $274 IIRC, ehhe)... When I really get motivated and push it I am doing tool changes in literally 4-8 seconds.

I just ordered a spindle speed upgrade pulley and belt a few days ago. That should make things even better...

Just need to figure out some way to tweak the dang speed controller for this variable speed motor to ramp RPMs up faster. I think it purposely runs a slow-ramp-up algorithm of sorts to reduce wear and tear or something.

-Eric


----------

