When it comes to interchangeability and form/fit/function thereal serial designer is on the button. Anything else can be left to hordes of batchelors🤣🥂

Except where compactness, strength, or weight are important. Adjustability compromises a lot.

@@appa609 which turns out to be in far fewer places then you'd think.

In an aircraft, weight is ALWAYS important. Every milligram matters.

Adjustability adds weight and complexity. Neither is desirable when it can be omitted by design.

Do you have experience machining inconel 718

@@eatablellama6581 Grinding, yes. Down to a couple of tenths. Pretty much the only material we used (gas turbines). Not a big deal for someone that knows their way around a finish grinder. Ran a multi-axis CNC Bryant, Brown & Sharp, I.D, O.D, you name it. Fun times at Pratt & Whitney, Lycoming, Sikorsky Aircraft and Honeywell. I miss it :-(

If you just made all that up then that was brilliant because i believed every word

@@brianbailey462 Nope, not made up... just speaking from experience!

@@nerfburger1511 well just know some folks in this world, like me for example, really appreciate what people like you do. Innovators, inventors, and people who make things.

You are absolutely correct sir whatmost design engineers understand about making what they design you could fit in a thimble. I worked with a guy that had a story about this young collage grad Engineer applying for a job at Kearney & Trecker Manufacturing in Milwaukee, they made machine tools, back in the early 60's. Old man Trecker was showing the young kid through the shop, from one end to the other. When they were done my buddy heard Old man Trecker (as he referred to him) tell the young kid you can start tomorrow at 7am. we work 10 hour shifts to 5:30pm. OH and bring a pair of coveralls. Coveralls said the kid inquisitively. Yes son said Mr Trecker you going to know every phase of maturing and why every hole Nube or flat is in every casting in every machine we make before you put a pencil to a piece of paper.

They always think if it works on Paper it has to work on a Machine. I have seen some Cocky Engineers get really humbled by Peasant Machinist.

I’m the lead designer for my high school robotics team and my number one problem with my team is that they don’t understand DFM.

I've found it's pretty easy to tell within a short time of looking at a blueprint, whether or not the engineer has any manufacturing experience. Unfortunately, the answer is usually NO. One particular part that I'll never forget was a hinge, machined out of billet aluminum...for the 'galley' door on a large commercial aircraft. Yes, the galley, where the flight attendants keep the snacks, etc. This included drilling the hinge pin hole (about .125" diameter) something like 4" deep! The hinge was nothing special, looked like any other door hinge you'd get at Home Depot, but was machined out of aluminum. Another part was the latch striker for the door, which had some ridiculous tolerance on the square shape on each end...+/- .0002" if I remember correctly! The part was probably 1.25" long, .375" diameter with a square cut on each end. The engineer had even dimensioned the points of the square with a tight tolerance (tight for what it is, maybe .005" total). My first thought is that the design group should have sought out an existing hinge manufacturer to try to find standardized parts already in production, or at a minimum, have that manufacturer produce the hinge to the required criteria...which should have been reviewed by someone with actual manufacturing experience, to question the tight tolerances and explain how this would significantly increase the cost of the part. And don't even get me started on the use of GD&T! I can't tell you how many times I've seen things like the flange face of a bushing called out to the bore with 'true position,' etc. The only conclusion I can make is that 'engineering' programs seem to be leaving out crucial parts of the process. A friend's brother was in college to become an engineer a few years ago, and I asked him if they ever mentioned 'design for manufacturing,' and he said, "No....what's that?"

As a mechanical engineer, I can understand why new engineers generally do not have a grasp on machining. The main focus in college is math, statics, dynamics and other engineering theories. We would be lucky to even have a few college courses on drawings, modelling, dimensioning, geometric tolerancing, and many other important subjects to creating a working drawing. As a result, most new engineers has never been exposed to design for manufacturability and not prepared for the real world when we work our first engineering job. I'm lucky that I went to aviation school and got my A&P license, so I have been exposed to the practical side of engineering. I also converted my personal end mill to a CNC machine, so I have exposure to working with metal fabrication. If you work in a larger company, there are other people available to show the new engineers the ropes. On the other hand, smaller companies do not have that option and the person has to learn on their own. Generally, this is where most of the problems occur. Without a good background in design and machining, most new engineers lack the understanding to create good design and drawings with the proper tolerancing. I often see or hear machinists belittle engineers. The fact is, its not an easy job when you are only provided specs and have to design a part or complex series of part to perform a function. There are many ways to make the parts to meet the design spec. An experienced designer would know what parts need to be done based on previous designs or knowledge from years of designing. New engineers may have no idea what to even do and create parts that can't be manufactured. In our company, we not only focus on DFM, but also for testing. The part not only has to be machinable, but it has to be done so that it can be tested properly. We even do tolerance stackup studies on parts bolted together to make sure all the parts will fit or align properly. Smaller companies may not have that level of process control so the drawings are less than satisfactory. Nobody is perfect. You have to ask yourself: if the shoe is on the other foot, would I be able to do the job? Are you able to complete the advanced science, engineering and mathematic course to earn an engineering degree? Can you design a product with only specs, model the parts, create the drawings, perform stress/thermal analysis and test the parts to make sure it meets the specs? Most people can't. If you add in a short development cycle, its not an easy task. From start to finish, some projects are less than a few months for developing an entire system. In some fields, you have to take an engineering test (EIT) and get a professional license after a few years in order to be certified to do the job. If its easy, everybody would be doing it. I've seen my share of new cocky engineers. Usually, they get a dose of reality when we do a design review before drawings are released. The senior engineers do a good job at slapping them down and making them humbled in front of their bosses. The ones who are not cocky and willing to learn, we teach them the right way from the start so they have a better understanding. I prefer to have the new engineers do drawing revisions or tooling first to get an understanding, but in today's world, they are thrown into the fire right away. As a result, the drawings and designs are less than ideal, but we live in different times. In the old days, engineers do the engineering only. We had draftsmen to do the model or drawings. Now, engineers are expected to do everything from the design, CAD modelling, drawing creation and also thermal/structural finite element analysis. Its quite a task to do it in a few short months. The worse part in today's world is if a new engineer is good, as soon as they get experience, they move to a new job with higher pay. We are left to train another new engineer over and over again. I can't wait to retire.

Yes. Building things on your own is the best option and Something everyone should do and try

You didn't get this randomly. KZfaq controls your mind/

Judging by this video, it'll be cheaper to buy one's own CNC machine for just a small project, than outsource.

Not since biden was elected steel went up 40 percent over night

@@GenghisKhan311 Source?

JR, so happy to hear that! Thank you for following along! 🚀✅

Nice nice.. I am a human who works a job, no collage experience other than signing papers and bailing, but i like aviation & looking to be a pilot, and also i'm a maker enthusiast. i just like making everything. I built a CNC router but i need to get a CNC mill if i want to do anything serious. i had a cnc machinist job but my boss was a dangerous erratic fool. Anyway im interested because id like to open a shop and make stuff. building a plane is on the list of things to do.

@@darkshadowsx5949 There's a book called Flying on Your Own Wings. It would probably interest you. Amazon ~$25

I am also an 8yr Navy vet (Subs) and engineering student about to graduate this spring, what program are you in?

@@fisherholmsfly I always thought subs were cool. Air side though...not too many tow tractors on a sub haha. Mech ENG atm. You?

I'm surprised he did that. You never finish a hole from both sides. Even if the hole is split due to a slot, like the smaller hole there. For the best accuracy, must always finish a hole all the way through in one shot.

@@gredangeo well to be honest. These guys are soooo new. Shouldnt even put up videos. It shows people how little they know about precision machining. Hey they are really nice guys no doubt and im an asshole for saying anything. They'll do fine. Slow, but fine. Or not :) i want them to make bux. Its a great profession. I now have vf3 in my home art studio. After a few decades of operating programing designing and engineering.

@@nobody617 Makes me wonder what they consider a "high level of precision". To me that's .00005"

@@logannewman4532 normally maybe .0005 would be tight for me. Rarely do I have to go that tight. The tightest ive had to hit was .0002. kinda rediciulous but no big deal with good measuring device. St that tolerance temperature changes that pretty easily. I'm thinking those were for a press fit. Freezing the part to be inserted. This type tolerance is probably meant to add as little stress to the part after insertion. It's been so long I haven't thought bout it at all. Usually .001 is adequate. But you do want to do your bores and whatever else lines up all in one setup. I suppose if that hire these guys were doing isn't all that important, the way they did it must have been adequate, I just always use boring bar from one side of course. I can't remember if they mentioned any tolerances. I'm just use to making parts and assemblies that weigh 300+ pounds and spin 3600 rpm :) what I've done is nothing compared to what's done out there in the world. Amazing engineering and machining is done daily like it's nothing. I am nothing. I'm aware. :)

@@nobody617 One more zero. I occasionally have to hold half a tenth.

Ditto. Subbed

@@dirtboy896 Double ditto. Subbed hard.

Me too

I dont know if its possible for aluminium, but I saw parts like this weld together from pipe with laser cut and bent plate. If you need tolerances you still have some materiał left for machining.

Exactly, TIG weld two aluminum tabs onto section of ally tubing, but might only be able to get beads on the outsides of the part... then there are the dimensional tolerances. Could still be possible, but might need to fabricate a jig to position and hold everything to specs during welding.

@@oceanic8424 how do you do if the I.D. of the pipe is not available at the right size? Remember, the tolerance was 0.001 inch, I think.

@@jtcmlt1 Bore it in a lathe

@@noahhastings6145 Okay. I have the tendency to think CNC every time that I hear lathe or mill, vertical or horizontal. I forget that they can also be manually operated.

It is just a clevis, could have left it square.

The part usually needs to be designed by you regardless whether you do it in house or at a shop

If you're supplying all the CAD files ready-to-go to the CNC mfr/shop, why should there be any additional "design" costs?

@@oceanic8424 For when the designer, who's never run a mill before, doesn't think about fixturing.

@@oceanic8424 they are ready to go when they have the path files not only cad files

@@oceanic8424 Because sadly the computer nerds virtual world doesnt translate into the real world of machining. You can give me a print of what you want me to make but I have to design and build fixturing for it which costs time and money.

You absolutely right. Just because they can set up a part on cnc and push the button to make it go they think they're a machinist. The programmer is the one that says what tools to put in and programs speeds and feeds in the program. Unfortunately back around 2000 they dropped tariffs on stuff coming from China. The results were 3/4 of small machine shops went out of business. And no one persude or trained to machine because there were no jobs. I know of 2 machine shops now that are looking for workers and there isn't any.

Its funny, because I asked a guy to do a simple part that would have taken 10 minutes on any number of cnc machines in our facility and he spend half a day on it because he was too busy worrying about using manual machines for clout. Stop with your nonsense.

Meanwhile Vietnamese and Mexicans taking the few jobs left here

@@JuanHernandez-ub3ez No.

Azzam, thank you and thank you for watching!

Well honestly this Tormach is a toy when speaking of mass production Machines.

I would machine it on 5 axis mill. All in one setup. From my experience I would say cycle time would be around 7 mins. If you would charge lets say £50 per hour of machining then it would give you ~£6 per part

@@Ddk90 The problem with a 5 axis is that you may not be able to put 3 vises side by side in a 5 axis, table may not be large enough, and such a setup wouldn't work for 5 axis anyways as the workpiece must swivel in various directions, and 3 vises gets in the way even if the machine is large enough. They only make sense for more complicated parts. Otherwise for most routine machining, 3 axis assembly line setup makes sense if you are mass producing.

@@taiwanluthiers I don’t think you understood my comment. I meant that I would be able to program this part from block of aluminium and to finish it in one operation in one vice. That’s what I do on daily basis. One vice, one block of stock, press cycle start, after ~6mins you have completely finished part. Besides chamfers on one side but you would deburr it by hand 👍

eh, lets not be foolish here, production is a mindset, not a machine.@@sparklenebula6042

Good tips, was thinking this while watching the video.. I can't remember every making a part with a witness mark like that on purpose. I'm sure they will learn more as they go.

@@texastad1989 Actually I want to ask you.... is it easy to make plastic mould in cnc machining

On a five axis it'd be one op plus a finish face. All critical dimension and geometry would be done in a single operation so it'd be as accurate as the machine is. A pair of parts like that would be $250-ish. A batch of 100 could get down to $30 each.

@@AndyRRR0791 lol, my thoughts exactly... I love 1 and done parts... either tab a non critical dim off and scotch wheel it off or just deck it on a tiny op 2. I think simpleish parts with tight multi sided features is about 95% of the 5axis work i see

Thanks for watching! Having a bigger machine, more vices, and/or more axes would give options for fewer operations. We used four operations on our machine because we have limited depth of cut with the diameter tools we can fit in our tool holders.

This, taking 4 setups to make this is ridiculous. At most, 2. With clever 4th axis use, 1 setup. I've actually made plenty of parts like this before exactly that way.

Most amortization schedule would be done one timeframe only ( x years) and not relevant to usage, unless you can demonstrate a real cycle based cost impediment which I doubt anyone would bother to calculate for manufacturing shop machinery.

As much as it sucks, those small batch parts are what keep a lot of small shops and manual shops in business, because they're only a waste of time for big CNC shops- unless you're willing to pay the outrageous cost

Somtimes its about helping, not making money :)

Based on the wording of the comment I am presuming that you were the supplier here. That's quite generous of you. I am sure that customer will be coming back to you for future work. Feel free to drop your website address here 👍

@@oceanic8424 I made an overnight custom part for an expensive RC aircraft and only charged $20 for 4 hours of work. When I gave the customer the part, he thought I was way overcharging. I'll not do that again.

@@user-qy9rg3nt2l Clearly, the customer was someone that knows next to nothing about manufacturing parts and could not appreciate what you had done. These are lessons learned. 👊👊👊

@@oceanic8424 Agreed 100%

yeah, I ran a couple prototypes where we had to interface 2 OEM parts. At some point, it's just easier to go to the machinist and be like "this is the drawing, but they just need to fit" I could spend all day doing GD&T, but don't have the tools to verify they meet spec beyond my physical parts which act as a Go/No-Go.

@@RaphYkun yup! Makes our life easier too haha

Reminds me of when I needed a stepper motor to replace a piece of lab equipment. The previous generation had them available for $200 bucks. They didn't sell them for the new model. I found a company in china that could make them with a minimum order of 100. The cost? $2 each. Seriously. My boss said "but we dont need 100" and sent the equipment back to the manufacturer for repair. They charged us 2500 dollars and replaced the motor. In retrospect, I should have asked them if they could charge me for 100 and throw 90 of them in the trash. "They said they will sell us 10 for 400 dollars!" Hed probably have gone for it.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lblyns9kx5i-f6c.html

He only seemed to mention the cost of material... But then there is the machine and upkeep, the shop space, and time like you said. If its a hobby of yours then maybe its time well spent because you are enjoying yourself.. Thats worth a lot right there

Whether it will fit or not depends on your tolerances. If it's a part for your high end gear you can be sure the company that made the parts have their own standards, which also includes quality control. There are tools for that control: specially machined and "ground" calibrated parts - rectangular or oval in shape, for example. Oftentimes clients do their own quality control. So it all boils down to tolerances :) hope it answers your question!

@@viliusmarcinkevicius4747 Hi,dear friend,have contact information in the video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lblyns9kx5i-f6c.html

Great idea, hold it on a small/short dovetail in dovetail jaws, finish the bore in second op. for minimal distortion.

Nathan, once we get things more dialed in for production we will likely do a video going into those types of details. Thanks for watching!

Yea, even accounting for their own time / labor would have been nice. This is basic business practice, I'd argue, they haven't really explored this properly... It might be easy cheaper to do this outsourced when factoring in time, labor costs, tooling upkeep and opportunity costs

Yes. It was CLICK BAIT to label this with anything like "true cost" in the title. This was merely a quick run-through of one "instant quote" bit of software.

Agreed! Thanks for watching and the feedback! 🙂

I was thinking the same.

@@Svenne1981 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lblyns9kx5i-f6c.html

And You will get "F OFF" quotas too when trying to get a quote on a part that You need one or two of.

@@MindBlowerWTF no surprises there , i'd do the same

Agree, thanks for commenting. This video over simplified the cost of machining.

Hi,dear friend,have contact information in the video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lblyns9kx5i-f6c.html

I think that would be cheaper, but maybe not as good a solution for an aircraft part. More inspection and failure points, reduced strength in the weld zone, and you'd probably have to bore the tubing out to get the fit they wanted. But if it were for a car? Yeah, switch it to plain carbon steel, make it out of tubing and some water jet cut ears and it would be way cheaper, stronger and more fatigue resistant than the aluminum part, and not much heavier.

And, IIRC extrusion also improves material properties in the direction of the grain? I'm a little concerned about have such a high cyclic load component such as the landing gear, made of aluminum, which has very poor fatigue characteristics and is often difficult to predict service life in such a situation, as every landing is a different load cycle situation, effectively. Obviously it can be beefed up as needed, but converting to (ideally) high strength steel in the future is probably not an option due to weight.

The old quote wont be valid anymore anyways. Xometry has a time limit that quotes are valid for. You can't** use the same quote from 9 months ago, material costs change, available shops ready to make them, etc. Edit** misspelled

@@mecrob9852 the prices did drop back down after the chinese new year.. The quotes are held for a certain amount of time i dont recall , but youre right 90 days later they wont honor them

Knowledge and CAD/CAM system too.

Can cut those on any none cnc mill..

How much are one of those

@@Mackensp99 easily around 100k

@EngineeringScience Thank you and thanks for checking out the video! Send us an email at info@darkaero.com and we can send you a CAD file for a 5-axis part we are working on. :)

@@DarkAeroInc Sent, looking forward to this

I love this!!! Good luck you all.

Exactly what I was thinking...maybe even one setup with some manual blending to remove the little tooling tang left after breaking the part off.

It's for a plane. You don't want to leave any unneeded material at all. Sure it's only a few grams for one part, but those few grams add up considering the amount of unique parts that go in a plane. Especially in small ones a few kg can make all the difference!

?

@@3dprintdz461 they look high

@@AntonySimkin 4:14 high af...

Lol! well the machining could be improved. i can guarantee a cnc can give better tolerances repeatedly than a manual. especially if you use a high end machine. Plus you could probably knock this part out in 15 minutes once you get everything set to go.

@@dominic6634 I didn't say manual machining was different tolerance than cnc, I said reducing the number of operations would lower the tolerances, repeatedly. That being said, a cnc mill will have better tolerances than an inexperienced machinist, but an experienced machinist will hold any tolerance a robot can generate.

@@dominic6634 Hi,dear friend,have contact information in the video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/lblyns9kx5i-f6c.html