Corner Engagement: How to Machine Corners

Understanding Corner Engagement

During the milling process, and especially during corner engagement, tools undergo significant variations in cutting forces. One common and difficult situation is when a cutting tool experiences an “inside corner” condition. This is where the tool’s engagement angle significantly increases, potentially resulting in poor performance.

Challenges of Corner Engagement

Engaging corners improperly can lead to various issues, affecting both performance and quality. Some common challenges include:

  • Chatter:  – visible imperfections in corner finishes
  • Deflection – detected by unwanted wall taper measurements
  • Strange cutting sound – tool squawking or chirping in the corners
  • Tool breakage/failure or chipping – resulting from excessive stress or improper handling

Least Effective Approach (Figure 1)

Generating an inside part radius that matches the radius of the tool at a 90° direction range is not a desirable approach to machining a corner. In this approach, the tool experiences extra material to cut (dark gray), an increased engagement angle, and a direction change. As a result, issues including chatter, tool deflection/ breakage, and poor surface finish may occur.

Feed rate may need to be lessened depending on the “tool radius-to-part radius ratio.”

90 degree end mill corner engagement

More Effective Approach (Figure 2)

Generating an inside part radius that matches the radius of the tool with a sweeping direction change is a more desirable approach for corner engagement. The smaller radial depths of cut (RDOC) in this example help to manage the angle of engagement, but at the final pass, the tool will still experience a very high engagement angle.  Common results of this approach will be chatter, tool deflection/breakage and poor surface finish.

Feed rate may need to be reduced by 30-50% depending on the “tool radius-to-part radius ratio.”

corner engagement effective approach with multiple rdocs at 90 degrees

Most Effective Approach For Corner Engagement (Figure 3)

Generating an inside part radius with a smaller tool and a sweeping action creates a much more desirable machining approach. The manageable RDOC and smaller tool diameter allow for management of the tool engagement angle, higher feed rates and better surface finishes. As the cutter reaches full radial depth, its engagement angle will increase, but the feed reduction should be much less than in the previous approaches.

Feed rate may need to be heightened depending on the “tool-to-part ratio.” Utilize tools that are smaller than the corner you are machining.

most effective corner engagement of multiple passes into corner

Corner engagement is a critical aspect of machining that demands attention to detail and strategic planning. By implementing effective techniques and leveraging appropriate tools, manufacturers can overcome challenges associated with corner machining and achieve superior results.

Ramping to Success

Poor tool life and premature tool failure are concerns in every machining application. Something as simple as tool path selection – and how a tool first enters a part – can make all the difference. Tool entry has a great deal of influence on its overall success, as it’s one of the most punishing operations for a cutter. Ramping into a part, via a circular or linear toolpath, is one of the most popular and oftentimes the most successful methods (Figure 1). Below, learn what ramping is, its benefits, and in which situations it can be used.

illustrated end mill ramping into part

Check Out Our Micromachining Webinar to Get More Life Out of Your Miniature Cutting Tools

What is Ramping?

Ramping refers to simultaneous radial and axial motion of a cutting tool, making an angular tool path. Oftentimes, this method is used to approach a part when there is a need to create closed forms such as pockets, cavities, engravings, and holes. In doing so, the need to plunge with an end mill or drill to create a starting point is eliminated. Ramping is particularly important in micromachining where even the slightest imbalance in cutting forces can cause tool failure.

There are two types of ramping toolpaths: Linear and Circular (Figure 2 ).

circular and linear ramping

Linear Ramping involves moving a cutting tool along two axes (the z-axis and one of the x, y axes). This method has significant more radial engagement with complementary increased cutting forces distributed across only two axes.

Circular Ramping (Helical Interpolation) has a spiral motion of the cutting tool that engages all three axes (x, y, and z axes). This method typically has less radial engagement on the cutting tool, with the cutting forces distributed across the three different axes. This is the recommended method, as it ensures the longest tool life.

Suggested Starting Ramp Angles:

Soft/Non-Ferrous Materials: 3° – 10°

Hard/Ferrous Materials 1° – 3°

Benefits of Ramping

When a tool enters the part via a Ramping method, it gradually increases in depth, preventing any shock loading on end mills. This reduces costs resulting from unnecessary tool breakage. Ramping produces smaller chips when compared to plunging, which makes chip evacuation faster and easier. As a result, cycle time can be decreased by running the end mill at faster parameters. Ramping also creates an extra space in the tool changer that would otherwise be occupied by a drill purposed with machining a starter hole.

Arcing

Similar to ramping in both method and benefit, arcing is another technique of approaching a workpiece (See Figure 3).

illustration of end mill arcing tool entry

While ramping enters the part from the top, arcing enters from the side. The end mill follows a curved tool path (or arc) when milling, thus gradually increasing the load on the tool as the tool enters the part, as well as gradually decreasing the load as the tool exits the part. In this way, shock loading and possible tool breakage are avoided.

For more information on ramping, arcing, and other tool entry methods, please see Helical Solutions’ “Types of Tool Entry.” 

Climb Milling vs. Conventional Milling

There are two distinct ways to cut materials when CNC milling: Conventional Milling (Up) and Climb Milling (Down). The difference between these two techniques is the relationship of the rotation of the cutter to the direction of feed. In Conventional Milling, the cutter rotates against the direction of the feed. During Climb Milling, the cutter rotates with the feed.

Conventional Milling is the traditional approach when cutting because the backlash, or the play between the lead screw and the nut in the machine table, is eliminated as seen in Figure 1 below. Recently, however, Climb Milling has been recognized as the preferred way to approach a workpiece since most machines today compensate for backlash or have a backlash eliminator.

infographic showcasing conventional milling with backlash elimination


Key Conventional and Climb Milling Properties:

Conventional Milling (Figure 2)

As previously stated, traditionally conventional milling has been the common choice for most machinists. This is where the cutting edge of the tool is actually rotating away from the direction of the feed. An example of this is seen in Figure 2 below. Until recently, this has been the common choice due to backlash however, the rise of climb milling has caused machinists or machines to adapt and compensate for this issue.

That is not to say there aren’t benefits to climb milling. For example, this strategy offers a machinist more control and less vibration than its climb milling counterpart. Similarly, for materials that traditionally chatter or tear, conventional milling would be the proper strategy to choose. On the other hand, here are some reasons why it might be most beneficial to adopt a climb milling strategy:

  • Chip width starts from zero and increases which causes more heat to diffuse into the workpiece and produces work hardening
  • Tool rubs more at the beginning of the cut causing faster tool wear and decreases tool life
  • Chips are carried upward by the tooth and fall in front of cutter creating a marred finish and re-cutting of chips
  • Upwards forces created in horizontal milling* tend to lift the workpiece, more intricate and expansive work holdings are needed to lessen the lift created*

infographic of conventional milling and its feed and rotation paths

Climb Milling (Figure 3)

As machinists are always trying to find ways to increase efficiency and tool life, climb milling has gotten a lot of recent traction in the space. Less heat is generated within the tool, and friction is more easily mitigated. These two alone lead to longer tool life, allowing for more parts completed per tool, lowering a shops bottom line. Also, climb milling can lead to a better surface finish due to how the chips are formed at the cutting edge.

With more modern machines now compensating for backlash or utilize backlash eliminators, it has become a much easier strategy to adopt within shops. While we went over some reasons why climb milling is not an effective strategy above, here are some reasons why a machinist may want to explore climb milling:

  • Chip width starts from maximum and decreases so heat generated will more likely transfer to the chip
  • Creates cleaner shear plane which causes the tool to rub less and increases tool life
  • Chips are removed behind the cutter which reduces the chance of chip recutting
  • Downwards forces in horizontal milling is created that helps hold the workpiece down, less complex work holdings are need when coupled with these forces
  • Horizontal milling is when the center line of the tool is parallel to the work piece

infographic of climb milling and its rotation and feed comparisons


When to Choose Conventional or Climb Milling

Climb Milling is generally the best way to machine parts today since it reduces the load from the cutting edge, leaves a better surface finish, and improves tool life. During Conventional Milling, the cutter tends to dig into the workpiece and may cause the part to be cut out of tolerance.

However, though Climb Milling is often the current preferred way to machine parts, there are times when Conventional Milling is the necessary milling style. One such example is if your machine does not counteract backlash. In this case, Conventional Milling should be implemented. Without accounting for backlash, breakage can occur due to the forces within the machine during tool engagement.

In addition, conventional milling should also be utilized on casting, forgings or when the part is case hardened. This is due to the cut beginning under the surface of the material, where it will gradually build a chip. Climb milling into these materials will see maximum chip thickness on engagement, which could lead to premature failure of the cutting edge due to the forces generated.

Dodging Dovetail Headaches: 7 Common Dovetail Mistakes

Cutting With Dovetails

While they are specialty tools, dovetail style cutters have a broad range of applications. Dovetails are typically used to cut O-ring grooves in fluid and pressure devices, industrial slides and detailed undercutting work. Dovetail cutters have a trapezoidal shape—like the shape of a dove’s tail. General purpose dovetails are used to undercut or deburr features in a workpiece. O-ring dovetail cutters are held to specific standards to cut a groove that is wider at the bottom than the top. This trapezoidal groove shape is designed to hold the O-ring and keep it from being displaced.

Check our Harvey Tool’s Comprehensive Selection of Dovetail Cutters that Ship to You Today.

Avoiding Tool Failure

The dovetail cutter’s design makes it fragile, finicky, and highly susceptible to failure. In calculating job specifications, machinists frequently treat dovetail cutters as larger than they really are because of their design, leading to unnecessary tool breakage. They mistake the tool’s larger end diameter as the critical dimension when in fact the smaller neck diameter is more important in making machining calculations.

As the tools are downsized for micro-applications, their unique shape requires special considerations. When machinists understand the true size of the tool, however, they can minimize breakage and optimize cycle time.

Miniature Matters – Micro Dovetailing

As the trend towards miniaturization continues, more dovetailing applications arise along with the need for applying the proper technique when dovetailing microscale parts and features. However, there are several common misunderstandings about the proper use of dovetails, which can lead to increased tool breakage and less-than-optimal cycle times.

There are seven common mistakes made when dovetailing and several strategies for avoiding them:

1. Not Taking Advantage of Drop Holes

Many O-ring applications allow for a drop hole to insert the cutter into the groove. Take advantage of a drop hole if the part design allows it, as it will permit usage of the largest, most rigid tool possible, minimizing the chance of breakage (Figure 1).

infographic examining drop hole allowance parameters with dovetails
Figure 1. These pictured tools are designed to mill a groove for a Parker Hannifin O-ring groove No. AS568A-102 (left). These O-rings have cross sections of 0.103″. There is a large variation in the tools’ neck diameters. The tool at right, with a neck diameter of 0.024″, is for applications without a drop hole, while the other tool, with a neck diameter of 0.088″, is for drop-hole applications. The drop-hole allowance allows application of the more rigid tool.

2. Misunderstanding a Dovetail’s True Neck Diameter.

The dovetail’s profile includes a small neck diameter behind a larger end-cutting diameter. In addition, the flute runs through the neck, further reducing the tool’s core diameter. (In the example shown in Figure 2, this factor produces a core diameter of just 0.014″.) The net result is that an otherwise larger tool becomes more of a microtool. The torque generated by the larger diameter is, in effect, multiplied as it moves to the narrower neck diameter. You must remember that excess stress may be placed on the tool, leading to breakage. Furthermore, as the included angle of a dovetail increases, the neck diameter and core diameter are further reduced. O-ring dovetail cutters have an included angle of 48°. Another common included angle for general purpose dovetails is 90°. Figure 3 illustrates how two 0.100″-dia. dovetail tools have different neck diameters of 0.070″ vs. 0.034″ and different included angles of 48° vs. 90°.

nondrop-hole dovetail cutters
Figure 2. The dovetail tool pictured is the nondrop-hole example from Figure 1. The cross section illustrates the relationship between the end diameter of the tool (0.083″) and the significantly smaller core diameter (0.014″). Understanding this relationship and the effect of torque on a small core diameter is critical to developing appropriate dovetailing operating parameters.
dovetail cutters with different neck diameters
Figure 3: These dovetail tools have the same end diameter but different neck diameters (0.070″ vs. 0.034″) and different included angles (48° vs. 90°).

3. Calculating Speeds and Feeds from the Wrong Diameter.

Machinists frequently use the wrong tool diameter to calculate feed rates for dovetail cutters, increasing breakage. In micromachining applications where the margin for error is significantly reduced, calculating the feed on the wrong diameter can cause instantaneous tool failure. Due to the angular slope of a dovetail cutter’s profile, the tool has a variable diameter. While the larger end diameter is used for speed calculations, the smaller neck diameter should be used for feed calculations. This yields a smaller chip load per tooth. For example, a 0.083″-dia. tool cutting aluminum might have a chip load of approximately 0.00065 IPT, while a 0.024″-dia. mill cutting the same material might have a 0.0002-ipt chip load. This means the smaller tool has a chip load three times smaller than the larger tool, which requires a significantly different feed calculation.

4. Errors in Considering Depth of Cut.

In micromachining applications, machinists must choose a depth of cut (DOC) that does not exceed the limits of the fragile tool. Typically, a square end mill roughs a slot and the dovetail cutter then removes the remaining triangular-shaped portion. As the dovetail is stepped over with each subsequent radial cut, the cutter’s engagement increases with each pass. A standard end mill allows for multiple passes by varying the axial DOC. However, a dovetail cutter has a fixed axial DOC, which allows changes to be made only to the radial DOC. Therefore, the size of each successive step-over must decrease to maintain a more consistent tool load and avoid tool breakage (Figure 4).

microdovetailing with dovetail cutter
Figure 4: In microdovetailing operations, increased contact requires diminishing stepover to maintain constant tool load.

5. Failing to Climb Mill.

Although conventional milling has the benefit of gradually loading the tool, in low-chip load applications (as dictated by a dovetail cutter’s small neck diameter) the tool has a tendency to rub or push the workpiece as it enters the cut, creating chatter, deflection and premature cutting edge failure. The dovetail has a long cutting surface and tooth pressure becomes increasingly critical with each pass. Due to the low chip loads encountered in micromachining, this approach is even more critical to avoid rubbing. Although climb milling loads the tool faster than conventional milling, it allows the tool to cut more freely, providing less deflection, finer finish and longer cutting-edge life. As a result, climb milling is recommended when dovetailing.

6. Improper Chip Flushing.

Because dovetail cuts are typically made in a semi-enclosed profile, it is critical to flush chips from the cavity. In micro-dovetailing applications, chip packing and recutting due to poorly evacuated chips from a semi-enclosed profile will dull the cutter and lead to premature tool failure. In addition to cooling and lubricating, a high-pressure coolant effectively evacuates chips. However, excessive coolant pressure placed directly on the tool can cause tool vibration and deflection and even break a microtool before it touches the workpiece. Take care to provide adequate pressure to remove chips without putting undue pressure on the tool itself. Specific coolant pressure settings will depend upon the size of the groove, the tool size and the workpiece material. Also, a coolant nozzle on either side of the cutter cleans out the groove ahead of and behind the cutter. An air blast or vacuum hose could also effectively remove chips.

7. Giving the Job Away.

As discussed in item number 3, lower chip loads result in significantly lower material-removal rates, which ultimately increase cycle time. In the previous example, the chip load was three times smaller, which would increase cycle time by the same amount. Cycle time must be factored into your quote to ensure a profitable margin on the job. In addition to the important micro-dovetailing considerations discussed here, don’t forget to apply the basics critical to all tools. These include keeping runout low, using tools with application-specific coatings and ensuring setups are rigid. All of these considerations become more important in micro-applications because as tools get smaller, they become increasingly fragile, decreasing the margin of error. Understanding a dovetail cutter’s profile and calculating job specifications accordingly is critical to a successful operation. Doing so will help you reach your ultimate goal: bidding the job properly and optimizing cycle time without unnecessary breakage.

This article was written by Peter P. Jenkins of Harvey Tool Company, and it originally appeared in MicroManufacturing Magazine.

How to Avoid Common Part Finish Problems

Part Finish Reference Guide

Finishing cuts are used to complete a part, achieving its final dimensions within tolerance and its required surface finish. Most often an aesthetic demand and frequently a print specification, surface finish can lead to a scrapped part if requirements are not met. Meeting finish requirements in-machine has become a major point of improvement in manufacturing, as avoiding hand-finishing can significantly reduce costs and cycle times.

Common Finishing Problems

  • Burrs
  • Scallop marks
  • Chatter Marks

Factors That Influence Part Finish

  • Specific material and hardness
  • Cutting tool speeds & feeds
  • Tool design and deployment
  • Tool projection and deflection
  • Tool-to-workpiece orientation
  • Rigidity of workholding
  • Coolant and lubricity
  • Final-pass depth of cut

Finishing Problem Solutions

  • Tools with high helix angles and flute counts work best for finishing operations. Softer materials show great results with higher helices, while harder materials can benefit greatly from increased flute counts.
  • Increase your RPM and lower your IPT (Figure 2).
  • Ensure that tool runout is extremely minimal.
  • Use precision tool holders that are in good condition, are undamaged, and run true.
  • Opt for a climb milling machining method.
  • Use tooling with Variable Pitch geometry to help reduce chatter.
  • A proper radial depth of cut (RDOC) should be used. For finishing operations, the RDOC should be between 2 and 5 percent of the tool’s Cutter Diameter.
  • For long reach walls, use reduced neck tooling which help to minimize deflection (Figure 3).
  • Extreme contact finishing (3x cutter diameter), may require a 50% feed rate reduction.

part finish guide

length of cut

Common Surface Finish Nomenclature

Ra = Roughness average
Rq = RMS (Root Mean Square) = Ra x 1.1
Rz = Ra x 3.1

part finish guide

Overcoming Composite Holemaking Challenges

Harvey Tool’s Miniature High Performance Composite Drills are specifically designed with point geometry optimized for the unique properties of composite materials. Our Double Angle style is engineered to overcome common problems in layered composites and our Brad Point style is built to avoid the issues frequently experienced in fibrous composites.

Circular Interpolation: Machining Circular Tool Paths

When machining, proper speeds and feeds are very important to avoid breakage and maximize performance. Traditional end milling formulas use Surface Footage (SFM) and Chip Load (IPT) to calculate Speed (RPM) and Feed (IPM) rates. These formulas dictate the correct machining parameters for use in a linear path in which the end mill’s centerline is travelling in a straight line. Since not all parts are made of flat surfaces, end mills will invariably need to move in a non-linear path. In the case of machining circular tool paths, the path of the end mill’s centerline is circular. Not surprisingly, this is referred to as Circular Interpolation.

Decrease Cycle Times and Increase Shop Efficiency. Download Our HEM Guidebook.

Cutting Circular Tool Paths

All rotating end mills have their own angular velocity at the outside diameter. But when the tool path is circular, there is an additional component that is introduced, resulting in a compound angular velocity. Basically, this means the velocity of the outside diameter is travelling at a substantially different velocity than originally expected. The cause of the compound angular velocity is seen in the disparity between the tool path lengths.

Internal Circular Tool Paths

Figure A shows the cross section of a cutting tool on a linear path, with the teeth having angular velocity due to tool rotation, and the center of the tool having a linear feed. Note that the tool path length will always be equal to the length of the machined edge. Figure B shows the same cutting tool on an internal circular path, as done when machining a hole. In this case, the angular velocity of the teeth is changed as a result of an additional component from the circular path of the tool’s center. The diameter of the tool path is smaller than that of the major diameter being cut. Or, in other words, the tool path length is shorter than the machined edge length, increasing the angular velocity of the teeth. To prevent overfeeding and the possibility of tool breakage, the increased angular velocity of the teeth must be made the same as in the linear case in Figure A. The formula below can be used to properly lower the feed rate for internal machining:

Internal Adjusted Feed = (Major Diameter-Cutter Diameter) / (Major Diameter) × Linear Feed

Infographic showcasing 3 different cnc Circular Tool Paths

External Circular Tool Paths

Figure C shows the same cutting tool on an external circular path, as done when machining a post. In this case, the diameter of the tool path is larger than the major diameter being cut. This means that the tool path length is longer than the machined edge length, resulting in a decreased angular velocity. To prevent premature dulling and poor tool life due to over-speeding, use the formula below to properly raise the feed rate for external machining. In this way, the decreased angular velocity of the teeth is made the same as in the linear case in Figure A.

External Adjusted Feed = (Major Diameter+Cutter Diameter) / (Major Diameter) × Linear Feed

Optimize Your Performance

By adjusting the feed in the manner provided, internal applications can avoid tool breakage and costly down time. Further, external applications can enjoy optimized performance and shorter cycle times. It should also be noted that this approach can be applied to parts with radiused corners, elliptical features and when helical interpolation is required.

 

Selecting the Right Plastic Cutting End Mill

Many challenges can arise when machining different types of plastics. In the ever changing plastics industry, considerations for workholding, the melting point of your material, and any burrs that may potentially be created on the piece need to be examined prior to selecting a tool. Choosing the correct tool for your job and material is pivotal to avoid wasting time and money. Harvey Tool offers One, Two, and Three Flute Plastic Cutting End Mills with Upcut and Downcut Geometries. The following guide is intended to aid in the tool selection process to avoid common plastic cutting mistakes.

three Harvey tool plastic cutting end mills

Choose Workholding Method

When it comes to workholding, not all plastic parts can be secured by clamps or vices. Depending on the material’s properties, these workholding options may damage or deform the part. To circumnavigate this, vacuum tables or other weaker holding forces, such as double sided tape, are frequently used. Since these workholdings do not secure the part as tightly, lifting can become a problem if the wrong tool is used.

Downcut Plastic Cutting End Mills — tools with a left hand spiral, right hand cut — have downward axial forces that push chips down, preventing lifting and delamination. If an Upcut Plastic Cutting End Mill is required, then a tool with minimal upward forces should be chosen. The slower the cutter’s helix, the less upward forces it will generate on the workpiece.

Chart of workholding parameters and their preferred selection to upcut or downcut as a result

Determine Heat Tolerance

The amount of heat generated should always be considered prior to any machining processes, but this is especially the case while working in plastics. While machining plastics, heat must be removed from the contact area between the tool and the workpiece quickly and efficiently to avoid melting and chip welding.

If your plastic has a low melting point, a Single Flute Plastic Cutting End Mill is a good option. This tool has a larger flute valley than its two flute counterpart which allows for bigger chips. With a larger chip, more heat can be transferred away from the material without it melting.

For plastics with a higher heat tolerance, a Two or Three Flute Plastic Cutting End Mill can be utilized. Because it has more cutting edges and allows for higher removal rates, its tool life is extended.

Chart of end mill flute count and their respective workpiece heat tolerance levels

Consider Finish Quality & Deburring

The polymer arrangement in plastics can cause many burrs if the proper tool is not selected. Parts that require hand-deburring offline after the machining process can drain shop resources. A sharp cutting edge is needed to ensure that the plastic is sheared cleanly, reducing the occurrence of burrs. Three Flute Plastic Cutting End Mills can reduce or eliminate the need to hand-deburr a part. These tools employ an improved cutting action and rigidity due to the higher flute count. Their specialized end geometry reduces the circular end marks that are left behind from traditional metal cutting end mills, leaving a cleaner finish with minimal burrs.

Shop Harvey Tool Plastic Cutting End Mills Today

Flute Count Case Study

2 FLUTE PLASTIC CUTTER: A facing operation was performed in acrylic with a standard 2 Flute Plastic Cutting End Mill. The high rake, high relief design of the 2 flute tool increased chip removal rate, but also left distinct swirling patterns on the top of the workpiece.

3 FLUTE PLASTIC FINISHER: A facing operation was performed on a separate acrylic piece with a specialized 3 Flute Plastic Finisher End Mill. The specialized cutting end left minimal swirling marks and resulted in a smoother finish.

Image of facing operation patterns from a standard 2 flute plastic cutter beside another image from a specialized 3 flute plastic finisher

Identifying the potential problems of cutting a specific plastic is an important first step when choosing an appropriate plastic cutter. Deciding on the right tool can mean the difference between an excellent final product and a scrapped job. Harvey Tool’s team of technical engineers is available to help answer any questions you might have about selecting the appropriate Plastic Cutting End Mill.

Chart of plastic cutting end mills vs metal cutting end mills that compares values on their features

Your Guide to Thin Wall Milling

Milling part features with thin wall characteristics, while also maintaining dimensional accuracy and straightness, can be difficult at best. Although multiple factors contribute, some key components are discussed below and can help to increase your thin wall milling accuracy.

Use Proper Tooling

Necked Tooling

Long length tooling with a long length of cut can spell trouble in thin wall milling situations due to deflection, chatter and breakage. It is essential to keep your tool as strong as possible while maintaining the ability to reach to the desired depth. Necked-down tooling provides added tool strength while also helping you to reach greater than 3x Diameter depths.

image comparing end mills with and without a reduced neck

The total extension of an end mill, referred to as length below shank (LBS), represents the dimension that characterizes the necked length of the tool in use. This measurement is taken from the beginning of the necked section to the bottom of the cutting end of the tool. The neck relief serves the purpose of creating room for chip removal and preventing the shank from friction in deep-pocket milling scenarios.

Depth of Cut Selection

Axial Depth of Cut (ADOC)

To support the walls during thin wall machining, keep a wide-cross section behind it. We recommend utilizing a “stepped down” approach, which divides the total wall height to manageable depths while working each side of the wall. The Axial Depth of Cut (ADOC) dimension will vary depending on the material (and its hardness) being cut.

Chart of proper ADOC in thin wall milling

Radial Depth of Cut (RDOC)

A progressive Radial Depth Of Cut (RDOC) strategy is also important as the thin wall height is increasing. Reducing tool pressure while support stock is disappearing is equally important to keep the thin wall stable.

  • Detail A represents a 5-step progressive radial approach. The number of passes will depend upon your particular application, material hardness and final wall dimensions.
  • This approach helps to keep the pressure off the wall as you make your way towards it. Additionally, it is recommended to alternate sides when using this RDOC strategy.
  • The final RDOC passes should be very light to keep wall vibration to a minimum while maximizing your part finish.

RDOC steps in thin wall milling

Additional Thin Wall Milling Accuracy Tips:

Climb Milling

Climb milling, gaining popularity among machinists seeking efficiency and extended tool life, minimizes heat generation and friction. Chips are ejected behind the cutter, reducing the likelihood of chip recutting. The chip initiates at its widest point and diminishes, leading to the transfer of generated heat into the chip rather than the tool or workpiece. This results in longer tool lifespan, enabling more parts per tool and lessened costs. Additionally, it contributes to a superior part finish by optimizing chip formation at the cutting edge.

drawing demonstrating the difference between conventional and climb milling with the direction of an end mill

Wall Stabilization

Manual vibration dampening and wall stabilization can be achieved by using thermoplastic compounds, or wax, which can be thermally removed.

HEM Toolpaths

The use of HEM toolpaths can optimize tool performance. It is an advanced machining approach which involves combining a low RDOC (Radial Depth of Cut) with a high ADOC (Axial Depth of Cut), along with elevated feed rates. This combination aims to enhance material removal rates and reduce tool wear.

High Efficiency Milling (HEM) varies from conventional milling, where a higher RDOC and lower ADOC are usually recommended. Conventional milling tends to generate concentrated heat in a specific area of the cutting tool, expediting tool wear. Additionally, while conventional milling requires more axial passes, HEM toolpaths involve more radial passes.

How to Tackle Deep Cavity Milling the Right Way

Deep cavity milling is a common yet demanding milling operation. In this style, the tool has a large amount of overhang – or how far a cutting tool is sticking out from its tool holder. The most common challenges of deep cavity milling include tool deflection, chip evacuation, and tool reach.

Three Harvey tool extended reach tool holders in 3, 5, and 6 inch lengths

Avoid Tool Deflection

Excess overhang is the leading cause of tool deflection, due to a lack of rigidity. Besides immediate tool breakage and potential part scrapping, excessive overhang can compromise dimensional accuracy and prevent a desirable finish.

Tool deflection causes wall taper to occur (Figure 1), resulting in unintended dimensions and, most likely, an unusable part. By using the largest possible diameter, necked tooling, and progressively stepping down with lighter Axial Depths Of Cut (ADOC), wall taper is greatly reduced (Figure 2).

Infographic showing result of tool deflection and excess overhang on a part's finish
Infographic showing progressive step drilling procedures and depths of cut with varied length of tools

Achieve Optimal Finish

Although increasing your step-downs and decreasing your ADOC are ideal for roughing in deep cavities, this process oftentimes leaves witness marks at each step down. In order to achieve a quality finish, Long Reach, Long Flute Finishing End Mills (coupled with a light Radial Depth of Cut) are required (Figure 3).

Inforgraphic showing Deep Cavity Milling and witness marks from multiple step downs

Mill to the Required Depth

Avoiding tool deflection and achieving an acceptable finish are challenges that need to be acknowledged, but what if you can’t even reach your required depth? Inability to reach the required depth can be a result of the wrong tool holder or simply a problem of not having access to long enough tooling.

Fortunately, your tool holder’s effective reach can be easily increased with Harvey Tool’s Extended Reach Tool Holder, which allows you to reach up to 6 inches deeper.

Confidently Machine Deeper With Harvey Tool’s Extended Reach Tool Holders

Evacuate Chips Effectively

Many machining operations are challenged by chip evacuation, but none more so than Deep Cavity Milling. With a deep cavity, chips face more obstruction, making it more difficult to evacuate them. This frequently results in greater tool wear from chip cutting and halted production from clogged flute valleys.

High pressure coolant, especially through the spindle, aids in the chip evacuation process. However, air coolant is a better option if heat and lubricity are not concerns, since coolant-chip mixtures can form a “slurry” at the bottom of deep cavities (Figure 4). When machining hardened alloys, where smaller, powder-like chips are created, slurry’s are a commonality
that must be avoided.

Deep Cavity Milling image showing result of failed chip evacuation when milling