Spindles and tool holders are in a constant battle with the forces of nature, with this battle becoming more and more difficult with heavier cuts and longer projections. Chattering and deflection have always been the bane of machinists’ existence, so much so that the sight of a long and slender toolholder will immediately cause goosebumps.

If you understand why a long tool holder behaves the way it does, you’ll know that there are ways to fight back against this bending. Every machinist knows that short and stubby holders are more resistant to deflection than long and slender holders. You’ve also probably heard that, if possible, you’ll want most of your cutting forces to be axial rather than radial.

Not only does this fight chatter in operations like boring, but your spindle also is better equipped to handle loads in this axis. However, these options aren’t always going to be on the table, especially in unavoidable long-reach situations and many milling operations.

In this constant battle with tool deflection, much time and effort has been spent designing shorter holders, stiffer tools, and clever anti-vibration geometry and materials. But oftentimes, the body diameter(s) of the holder can be overlooked as a means of increasing rigidity, especially in situations where it is all you have to work with. This is a serious shame, as you’ll soon discover.

The concept of dual-contact technology has been around for years, existing in many different forms but always with the same goal of capitalizing on this untapped potential of rigidity. For those who don’t know, dual contact refers to the shank contacting the spindle taper and the spindle face simultaneously.

Oftentimes, the solution involved ex post facto alterations to the spindle or tool holder, such as using ground spacers or shims to close the gap, for example. In other words, there was no standard solution, and if you wanted dual contact, you would have to be prepared to spend time and money either buying modified tool holders or modifying them yourself to adapt them to your spindle.

BIG-PLUS emerged as a solution to this issue. Essentially, both the spindle and tool holder were ground to precise specifications so that they closed the gap between spindle face and flange in unison (while depending on very small elastic deformation in the spindle). What this meant is that operators were able to confidently switch BIG-PLUS tooling in and out of a BIG-PLUS spindle and achieve guaranteed dual contact.

Not only that, but standard tooling could still be used in a BIG-PLUS spindle if necessary, and vice versa.

Though not technically an international standard, it’s been adopted by many machine tool builders because of the clear performance improvements and simplicity. In fact, BIG-PLUS spindles come standard on more machines than you would think. We often come across operators that have machines with BIG-PLUS spindles and don’t even realize it.

How exactly does dual contact help with tool rigidity? The torque (or moment) exerted by the cutting forces is maximized at the point where the holder and spindle meet, the base of the tool holder. With standard CAT40 tool holders, this would be the gage line diameter. When the holder contacts the spindle face via BIG-PLUS, the effective diameter would be the larger diameter of the v-flange, since this is the new anchoring point of the holder and spindle. So, you are beefing up the diameter at the point where the reactionary force is greatest.

It’s not too much of a leap to conclude that a larger effective diameter will give you more rigidity. That being said, you may still be asking yourself: does such a seemingly small increase in diameter really make a difference? To understand the effect of BIG-PLUS, you must understand the physics behind it.

Imagine a simple scenario in which a tool holder is represented by a cylindrical bar that is fixed at one end and free-floating at the other. In other words, a cantilever beam. If you think about it, this is essentially what a tool holder becomes once it’s secure in the spindle. Now, let’s introduce a radial force F that acts downward at the suspended end of the bar, which represents a cutting force you would encounter when milling or boring, for example. The bar, as you might expect, will want to bend downward. It’s similar to how a diving board bends when someone stands at the end, though less exaggerated.

It’s possible to predict the amount of deflection (or inversely, bending stiffness) at the end of this hypothetical bar if you know its length, diameter and material. The expression below represents the stiffness k at the end of the bar where d=diameter, L=Length and E=Modulus of Elasticity

I won’t ask you to do any math here, I just want you to look at the equation. We can see that increasing d will increase the value of k, while increasing L will decrease the value of k, since it’s in the denominator of the equation. This certainly makes sense if you think about it: a short and squat bar (large d, small L) will be more rigid than a long and slender bar (small d, large L). 

Something interesting to note is that d is raised to the 4th power, while L is only raised to the 3rd power. Diameter affects rigidity an entire order of magnitude more than the length does. This is where the power of BIG-PLUS comes from and is why a small increase in diameter can have such a powerful effect on performance.

For a CAT40 tool holder, the gage line diameter is Ø44.45 mm and the flange diameter is Ø63.5 mm. Let’s imagine two bars of identical length and material, so L and E remain unchanged. One bar has a diameter of Ø44.45 mm (standard CAT40) and the other has Ø63.5 mm (BIG-PLUS CAT40).

If you were to plug these values into the above equation for comparison, you would find that the BIG-PLUS holder results in a k value that is around 4 times greater than the standard bar. Based on this comparison, you could say that a BIG-PLUS holder is 4 times as rigid as an identical standard CAT40 holder, because it is 4 times as resistant to deflection.

Think of the tool life and surface finish improvements you would see with a tool that is 4 times more rigid, not to mention the reduction in fretting and potential for reduced cycle time. You would get similar results if you were to make the same comparison for CAT50, BT40, BT30, etc.

If you’re still not convinced, we can also compare the rigidity in this way: Let’s say there is a Ø63.5 mm BIG-PLUS CAT40 bar of some arbitrary length. One of our more common gage lengths is 105 mm, or just over 4 inches, so let’s use it as an example. 

You’re probably wondering, at what length would a comparable standard CAT40 holder have an equal stiffness? If we take our stiffness expression and set it equal to itself (one side representing BIG-PLUS, the other non BIG-PLUS), we can plug in this BIG-PLUS holder length and our known diameters to find our unknown non-BIG PLUS length:

What does this mean? A BIG-PLUS holder of around 4 inches or 105 mm in length will have equal rigidity to a standard CAT40 holder of around 2.5 inches or 65 mm in length. Any experienced machinist will know quite well the difference in rigidity between a 4-inch long holder and a 2.5-inch long holder.

If this is true, we can say that implementing BIG-PLUS is equivalent to a 40% reduction in length in terms of rigidity. Theoretically, a BIG-PLUS tool holder will behave like a standard tool holder that is nearly half of its length! 

Obviously, we’ve used simple and idealized cases here to represent the complicated and dynamic world of metal cutting. Tool holders, of course, don’t have uniform body diameters or materials and the cutting forces usually aren’t acting in one direction in a constant and predictable way. If our holder necks up and down to different body diameters along its length, which is realistically what happens, each of these sections would be its own microcosm of “beam” that would influence the overall behavior (at that point, finite element analysis on a computer becomes the only practical way to predict behavior). 

So, will the advantage of BIG-PLUS really be as dramatic as our hand-calculated classical beam theory suggests? Probably not, but it depends on the tool holder/tool. Most cases will follow our simple model quite closely in practice; others not so much. If nothing else, we’ve demonstrated how dramatically the flange contact of BIG-PLUS can influence rigidity, at least in a purely mathematical sense. 

As if you needed any more reasons to be on the BIG-PLUS bandwagon besides increased rigidity, you will also eliminate Z-axis movement at high speeds, improve ATC repeatability and decrease fretting. This means that you will take heavier cuts, scrap less parts, and increase tool and spindle life.
BIG-PLUS isn’t a new idea by any means, but with a proven track record of tackling tough jobs, it’s hard to imagine working in a modern machine shop and not taking advantage of what it has to offer.

If you’re still not convinced, we can also compare the rigidity in this way: Let’s say there is a Ø63.5 mm BIG-PLUS CAT40 bar of some arbitrary length. One of our more common gage lengths is 105 mm, or just over 4 inches, so let’s use it as an example. 

You’re probably wondering, at what length would a comparable standard CAT40 holder have an equal stiffness? If we take our stiffness expression and set it equal to itself (one side representing BIG-PLUS, the other non BIG-PLUS), we can plug in this BIG-PLUS holder length and our known diameters to find our unknown non-BIG PLUS length:

by Alan Miller  
Originally published in Fabricating & Metalworking  Oct 24, 2018

Shrink-fit and hydraulic holders are especially useful in low clearance, tight work envelopes because of their relatively slim design. This has made them effective in moldmaking applications and more coveted since the widespread adoption of multi-axis machinery. Hydraulic and shrink-fit holders also share a middle-of-the-road gripping strength: about half that of a milling chuck and about double that of collet chucks.

These similarities are why we’re taking the time to compare the two. When it comes to deciding between one or the other, it’s the differences that will guide the choice. So let’s dig into some of the fundamental contrasts that may help you decide which holder type is best for you and your work.

When it comes to the holders themselves, shrink-fit is generally a slightly lower cost. The delicate hydraulic clamping systems built into the holders add cost when compared to the simple and solid bodies of shrink-fit holders. Where the major difference lies is in the equipment needed to heat the shrink-fit holders.

When heated to the proper temperature, the resulting growth of the ID allows the tool to be slipped into the bore. Once cooled, the holder expands, gripping the tool. This process, especially the induction heating, involves cost. Shrink-fit heating systems start at around $5,000 and go up from there. They also require fairly significant power, adding a slight ongoing expense.

If you want to see a full return on your shrink-fit investment and then some, maintenance is critical. When dealing with temperatures that can approach 600 deg F, the stakes are heightened.

This is why we recommend using dry cutting tools without oil on them. From there, diligent attention must be paid to the cleanliness of holder bores and tool shanks. Any contamination will be baked onto the metal and progressively deteriorate performance.

When it comes to hydraulic chucks, maintenance is straightforward as long as the hydraulic chamber stays sealed. To ensure the hydraulic system performs consistently, we recommend using test pins to gauge its force over time.

Hydraulic chucks are infinitely simple. A turn of a wrench locks the tool in place. When it comes to shrink-fit systems, there are a few more factors to consider when getting the team up to speed, including safety considerations. Aside from the operators who handle the tooling and heating system directly, others on the floor need to be made aware of the risk of burns.

Heating stations are usually benchtop arrangements because of the power requirements. This means hot metal will need to be transported across the floor in one form or another. Another training consideration is that tools can be overcooked, so to speak. This will cause permanent damage that harms performance. Operators must understand, know how to prevent and diagnose this.

As mentioned earlier, hydraulic chucks use a simple wrench to lock in the tool. Tools can also be swapped at the machine or offline. When it comes to shrink-fit setups, they must be done exclusively offline where the heating and cooling can be powered. Most heating cycles can be as fast as 15 seconds.

Cooling can take several minutes, even with assistance like air. Having extra compatible holders is a viable solution to speed concerns, if you’re comfortable with the additional investment. All that being said, there are significant time-saving opportunities to be found setting up tools offline. We believe strongly in tool measuring systems and recommend offline setup when and where applicable.

Hydraulic chucks have two specific advantages in terms of vibration and accuracy. The first is that shrink-fit tools and holders are dependent on the heating and cooling processes being consistent. This brings us back to the maintenance section above; the slightest imperfection in the holder bore, not to mention the natural inconsistencies in the heating and cooling processes, can be multiplied at the cutting edge in the form of vibration or runout.

There is also the chance of some variation from operator to operator. Hydraulic chucks are less reliant on these variables and their production is imminently consistent. Once a master bore is established during manufacturing and assembly, it’s a repeatable process over thousands of cycles.

This translates to consistent clamping tolerances and forces over the life of the holder. The second advantage is the natural damping characteristics that hydraulics provide. That’s not to say shrink-fit holders are ineffective in terms of vibration management. Their runout is five times better than side-lock holders.

That brings us to some application talk. While they may not be as precise, shrink-fit holders’ rigidity makes them effective in moderate to heavy milling work where clearance is an issue, and in many high speed scenarios. The superior vibration control of hydraulic chucks makes them good choices for finish milling, reaming and drilling work.

Up to this point, you may think I’m an advocate of hydraulic chucks over shrink-fit holders, but that’s not the case. We offer both products. In fact, shrink-fit holders are fundamentally the perfect tool holder. From an engineering perspective, there are no moving parts, no additional components, they use the properties of the holder itself to grip the tool and they’re symmetrically round. But as we all know, a manufacturing floor is not a perfect environment. Variables must be considered when choosing equipment.

Should the choice between hydraulic chucks and shrink-fit holders come up, the factors discussed here will help guide your choice.

Author Kip Hanson, Contributing Editor, Cutting Tool Engineering
(520) 548-7328
khanson@jwr.com
Kip Hanson is a contributing editor for Cutting Tool Engineering magazine. Originally Published: September 12, 2017 - 3:00pm

Shopping for a machining center was simpler when buyers had only two basic spindle choices: CAT or BT. Both of these “steep tapers” have an angle of 3.5 in./ft., or 7" in 24" (7/24), and are based on the 1927 patent by Kearney & Trecker Corp., Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Co. and Cincinnati Milling Machine Co. 
​
With the development of automatic toolchangers in the late 1960s, machine tool builders in Japan modified the patented design and invented the BT standard. In the 1970s, tractor manufacturer Caterpillar Inc., Peoria, Ill., changed things again with a flange design now known as CAT, or V-flange.

During the late ’80s, machine tool builders began offering vertical and horizontal CNC mills with spindle speeds higher than the 6,000 to 8,000 rpm common at the time. As rpm increased, so did problems with steep-taper toolholders.

​Chief among them is the tendency for the mating spindle and toolholder tapers to stick together. This is caused by the expansion of the spindle housing at high speeds, which allows the toolholder to be pulled upward into the spindle taper, jamming it in place.

HSK spindles, like the one shown in the illustration below, offer advantages steep-taper styles can't.  

​One way to eliminate this problem is by extending the toolholder flange upward, thus creating a hard stop against the spindle face and preventing further Z-axis movement. ​

This is the approach taken by BIG KAISER Precision Tooling Inc., Hoffman Estates, Ill. Jack Burley, vice president of sales and engineering, said the BIG-PLUS system—developed in 1992 by BIG Daishowa Seiki Co. Ltd., Osaka, Japan—relies on a bit of elastic deformation in the spindle to provide dual points of toolholder contact at its face and taper, eliminating upward holder movement as the spindle expands.

He said it’s also more rigid, with tests showing that the deflection on a CV40 BIG-PLUS toolholder measured at 70mm (2.755") from the spindle face is only 60µm (0.002") when subjected to 500kg (1,102 lbs.) of radial force, roughly half that of a traditional V-flange toolholder.

Burley does not recommend BIG-PLUS for older machines that have never seen these toolholders, because CAT and BT taper-only contact holders tend to bellmouth the spindle over time, leading to undesirable results.

BIG-PLUS, like any dual-contact toolholder, requires particular attention to cleanliness, as chips caught between the spindle face and the toolholder can cause serious problems.

​He also recommends staying below 30,000 rpm when using 40-taper holders, noting that higher speeds are better handled by HSK spindles and holders.

Bill Popoli, president of IBAG North America, North Haven, Conn., said the company started building steep-taper spindles in the late ’80s, but 95 percent of its work has since transitioned to HSK spindles. As mentioned earlier, the extreme accuracy needed to guarantee near-simultaneous contact between the spindle face and taper is challenging, requiring micron-level tolerances in toolholder and spindle alike.
​
These requirements were impossible to meet when steep taper was first developed, Popoli said, resulting in looser standards overall for CAT and BT spindles than the ones applied to HSK spindles and toolholders. Because of this, purchasing an HSK or equivalent toolholder automatically makes one “part of the club” when it comes to balance, accuracy, repeatability and tool life.

That’s not to say, however, that shops firmly married to steep tapers should settle for less. Popoli recommends purchasing the highest-quality tooling possible and paying close attention to the stated tolerance.

Always stay below 20,000 rpm with 40-taper holders, and reach no more than 30,000 rpm with 30-taper ones. Use balanced holders and high-quality retention knobs that have been properly torqued—otherwise distortion at the small end of the taper may occur. And whatever the taper type, keep the spindle and toolholder clean at all times.

Bob Freitag agreed. The manager of application engineering at Minneapolis-based metalworking products and services provider Productivity Inc. said the lines are evenly split between traditional 40- and 50-taper CAT or BT tooling (much of which is BIG-PLUS) and HSK. 

“It really depends on the application,” Freitag said. “Most of our die and mold machines in the 20,000- to 30,000-rpm range will have an HSK63A or HSK63F. When you get up around 45,000 rpm, you’re probably looking at an HSK32. But in horizontal machining centers and lower-rpm, high-torque verticals, you’ll see mostly steep tapers, as this is generally preferred for deep depths of cut and lower feed rates, where you’re removing a lot of material at once.”

For shops that want to make the leap to an HSK machine but are leery of investing in new toolholders, Freitag advised:

​“Anytime you buy a new machine, you should buy new toolholders to go with it. If not, the imperfections of the old toolholders will soon transfer themselves to the spindle on the new machine.”

Remember to replace your spindle cleaners on a regular basis so that you aren't using worn out cleaners. What you think is helping to preserve your valuable Machine Tool/Presetter might actually be hurting it.

​When replaced regularly, spindle cleaners can prolong the life of your machine, tools & holders, and tool cleaners enhance the repeatability to the machine spindle. This is a perfect example of how a small investment can make a big impact.

We are very excited to announce that we are now able to offer on-site technical training to YOUR machinists at YOUR location!  This is offered at no charge  to customers who use any of the manufacturer's whom we represent in California and Nevada.  

However, just because you don't purchase things from us, don't feel left out! We also offer on-site topic specter training on any of the following topics for $150/hour.  

Each presentation lasts about 2 hours.  The presentations last approximately 45-60 minutes with the remaining time for Q&A and discussion about unique applications in your facility.

To get the maximize life our of your Steep taper rotary toolholders in your CNC milling machines here are some of the best practices you can implement in your shop.  Perhaps not all of them can be implemented every day or every time but it's well worth being aware of how to best protect your investment.

• Take the toolholder form the Spindle after each usage
  
• Clean the taper and the holder with a an air blast to remove any fine chips or dirt that may be adhering to the holder
  
• Wipe the holder with a clean shop rag
  
• Spray the holder down with anti-rust lublcricant
  
• Put the holder in an antitrust bag 
  
• Place the holder in the proper storage rack for that type of holder. 
  
• If you are not going to be original shipping container using it again for some time, store it in the original shipping container
  

As the CNC manufacturing industry continues to grow we're meeting more and more new people coming into our industry.  Although many experienced machinists have lots of knowledge, we're finding that the new people are asking questions about some things that may be common knowledge to the old hands. One of the questions relates to "Why the heck is the cone on the toolholder the angle that it is?" We're here to help answer that....
By now, many have undoubtedly heard that most steep taper (CAT, BT) Toolholders hold an AT3 taper tolerance or better. So what exactly is AT3?

Steep Taper, Fast Tapers & Locking Tapers
Before we get into the tolerance and specs it's important to understand that there are basically two classes of tapers: 

• Locking tapers - These can be at any angle less than 7° per side (14° included). The shallower the angle the better the holding. 

• Self Releasing or "Steep Tapers" - These tapers are typically made with short shanks and with an included taper angle of 16° or 3.5" (88.9 mm) per foot.   These are also sometimes called "Fast Tapers"

• Toolholders are 'case hardened"

• Taper fit to spindle is critical

Since Toolholders have to be automatically changed in the CNC machine you want them to be as close to a locking taper as possible (8°/side) without, well, 'locking' in place (7°/side)!  This is also the reason the ER/DR style collets also are made to an 8°/side angle as well by-the-way.

What is AT3?
That brings us to the "AT" standard for steep tapers. "AT" is an ANSI/ASME (ASME B5.50-1994) and ISO Standard (ISO 1947 ) that runs from AT1 to AT11. Since the AT tolerance is essentially logarithmic, the lower the number the tighter the tolerance (and harder it is to 'hit' in manufacturing). In other words the difference between AT 3 and AT4 is NOT the same increase in tolerance as between AT3 and AT2. AT3 is harder to attain than AT4 and AT 2 is substantially harder to reach than the jump from AT 4 to AT3. Again, the lower the number, the tighter the 'self releasing' tolerance.

Most CNC Machines steep taper spindles are made to an AT2 Specification. In order to stay competitive most all toolholder manufacturers are holding an AT3 tolerance (or better). Because there are much fewer spindles made than rotary toolholders this makes manufacturing sense.  The key words here to pay attention to is "or better"  Just like when you make parts in your shop to a tolerance, that doesn't mean that every part is exactly the same. The parts are within a tolerance band. That's what the "AT" defines!  So when a toolholder manufacturer says "AT3 or better" that can mean that some of the holders are actually holding an AT2 tolerance... and this is sometimes the cause of the tolholders 'sticking' in the spindle:Not because they are out of tolerance, but because they are actually holding a closer tolerance! (...nearer a locking taper)

By-the-way, most all steep taper toolholders are made from some derivative of 8620 steel and then case hardened.

Food for thought
So although most people think that the drive dogs on the spindle are doing the 'driving' of the rotation of the toolholder, it's actually the taper connection that is driving the rotation of the tool. If that wasn't the case, then you would see the drive dog notches in the toolholder start to show signs of wear when the spindle impacted them all the time. Afterall, the 8620 is only case hardened.

There are a couple of last things to make note of and think about:
So if you over tighten your retention knob (pull stud) it can expand the smaller part of the taper.

Collet Chuck Size
We often get asked to spec out tooling packages for new CNC mills and one of the questions we encounter most, or should, is how do you select the right toolholder collet size for your companies applications?  The real choice is in the size of the collet chuck itself. So several considerations should be reviewed...

What size are your tools?
Your first consideration should be the size of end mills or drills you will be using most often. If you are doing smaller work you would require smaller diameter range collets. Generally you may prefer the ER16 and ER32 sizes. If the bulk of your tool requirements are in the mid range you can also use the ER20. The following is a list of tool diameters that can be used with each size collet chuck. Essentially, the most popular, and again, readily available from a number of sources, are the ER 16, ER20, and ER32... in no particular order.

How far do you need to reach?
A second consideration is the actual reach of the tool. Not projection reach, also know as “gage length” "l1" but projection diameter “D”.  Obviously, stubbier is better for projection reach "L1". But, you also need to review the families of parts that you intend to run on the machine. If you intend to use the holder to "reach" into a tight fit then the OD of the projection "D" of the toolholder needs to be considered. Many shops don't always consider this and end up using much longer carbide shanked end mills to get into deep pockets when getting a smaller diameter ER collet and collet chuck would be much less expensive over the life of the job.

Sometimes there is just no getting around having a custom tool made. Give us a call at 916.765.4227 or email us if you just can't seem to reach into the part with your toolholder.