Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Articles
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Dental-CAM
Best mill for small lab
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="brayks" data-source="post: 236927" data-attributes="member: 11275"><p>Thanks Zero. I agree with you, there is absolutely nothing wrong with trunnions. In the industrial side of our business they represent by far the largest portion of our multi-axis milling applications - far more than nutating or rotary head machines. The issue for the dental market is stack-tolerance.</p><p></p><p>We've been serving the industrial market and partnering with Haas providing CAD/CAM solutions for over 20 years.for just about any application you can think of. We know quite a bit about their machines. The biggest problem I see with them in terms of rotary function is size, weight, fixturing and stacking of axes/ and axes tolerances. I have yet to see an out-of-the-box configuration with fixture for the dental market that I would want to distribute and support. </p><p></p><p>Take a look at the image below. It shows just one example of the overly-stacked configurations that are out there with different rotational vectors and centers (what a mess) as compared to our zero-stack trunnion and fixture implementation. In this case weight is more a problem, calibration problematic and overall machining speed reduced due to large circumferential diameter limiting overall machining feed rate.</p><p></p><p>What I have seen are basically home-grown solutions developed by clever users/shops with CNC and manufacturing experience- which is just fine... for them. I have no doubt that you have engineered a good solution to meet your needs. Heck well before our versamill I looked pretty deeply at partnering with our local Haas distributor and Haas Automation to develop a solution before determining it was not a good way to go for us.</p><p></p><p>I have to say as well that I can see how the Haas could out-perform the majority of the current dental machining centers out there today. However our machines are very different than these machines. We have actually been bench-marked against them and in terms of speed and quality, our 5X200 has proven to out-perform these Haas machines in machining dental restorations of titanium and cobalt chrome.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brayks, post: 236927, member: 11275"] Thanks Zero. I agree with you, there is absolutely nothing wrong with trunnions. In the industrial side of our business they represent by far the largest portion of our multi-axis milling applications - far more than nutating or rotary head machines. The issue for the dental market is stack-tolerance. We've been serving the industrial market and partnering with Haas providing CAD/CAM solutions for over 20 years.for just about any application you can think of. We know quite a bit about their machines. The biggest problem I see with them in terms of rotary function is size, weight, fixturing and stacking of axes/ and axes tolerances. I have yet to see an out-of-the-box configuration with fixture for the dental market that I would want to distribute and support. Take a look at the image below. It shows just one example of the overly-stacked configurations that are out there with different rotational vectors and centers (what a mess) as compared to our zero-stack trunnion and fixture implementation. In this case weight is more a problem, calibration problematic and overall machining speed reduced due to large circumferential diameter limiting overall machining feed rate. What I have seen are basically home-grown solutions developed by clever users/shops with CNC and manufacturing experience- which is just fine... for them. I have no doubt that you have engineered a good solution to meet your needs. Heck well before our versamill I looked pretty deeply at partnering with our local Haas distributor and Haas Automation to develop a solution before determining it was not a good way to go for us. I have to say as well that I can see how the Haas could out-perform the majority of the current dental machining centers out there today. However our machines are very different than these machines. We have actually been bench-marked against them and in terms of speed and quality, our 5X200 has proven to out-perform these Haas machines in machining dental restorations of titanium and cobalt chrome. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who do we work for?
Post reply
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Dental-CAM
Best mill for small lab
Top
Bottom