Posted by Ian P on 23/02/2020 13:52:23:
Posted by Douglas Johnston on 23/02/2020 13:49:31:
The other thing that is also often mentioned is the need for high speed. While this can be true for a lot of carbide tooling it is not needed for the sharp polished inserts. I use this type of insert most of the time on a lightweight machine and they cut well at a wide range of speeds.
Doug
Plus 1 to that too.
Ian P
+1, except I recommend experimenting as well.
I've found getting the best from carbide inserts needs more care and attention than HSS, and put this partly down to their tip shapes being highly engineered to perform best in particular circumstances. Production work often means powerful machines driving harder and faster than most of can manage or want, with inserts lasting hours or minutes of rapid metal removal rather than days of pootling.
My HSS experience suggests chatter and poor finish are best managed by slowing down and taking lighter cuts. Counter-intuitively, carbide wants the opposite – some combination of more speed and/or deeper cuts. I initially failed to push carbide hard enough – it felt wrong – until advised to go for it by Andrew Johnson. Perhaps I should have taken more note of the fact that carbide is typically worked 5 to 20 times harder by industry than they push HSS!
Although it's true that sharper carbide inserts do well at HSS speed and DOC, I believe these also do better when pushed rather than mollycoddled. Not enough data to confirm, but it seems to work.
Be good if someone tried all the combinations of inserts at hobby speeds and powers and wrote the results up for common metals. HSS as used by professionals and amateurs followed much the same rules and the resulting advice is consistent. Not so with carbide inserts. Today there's a much bigger gap between amateur and professional practice, and most carbide research I've seen is squarely aimed at the pros. Inserts are complicated – there are far more carbide insert tip profiles available than Sparey ever described!
Dave