|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
pic: Finished side plates w/paint
|
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
I'm curious, why did you choose that lightening pattern over something simpler?
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
Quote:
Also, what machine were these cut on? Waterjet, mill, router, plasma, freshman with hand drills? |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
No particular reason for the pattern, it was mostly to express the capabilities of our recently acquired sponsor, a profile cutting company. The isotropic design also allows for a high degree of modularity, something which our team largely requires due to the methodology of our build season/beyond.
The outer plates (3/16" 6061-T6) were cut on a Flow AWJ, the inner plates (1/8" 5052-H34) were cut on a Mitsubishi 4K laser. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
That's interesting (to me, as someone who has little experience with waterjet or laser cutting). Were there any significant differences in the parts? Are there still any major differences in the final parts (other than the obvious)?
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
Quote:
The main reason for the usage of two different cutting mediums is simply due to the distribution of the machine allotment. Why nest out to just one machine when you can do it on two? Not much difference in cut quality. The laser should have a +- tolerance of 0.007", and 0.003" for the AWJ. The thinner 1/8" material theoretically will dissipate heat better, allowing the laser to be a more applicable operation; though the 3/16" shouldn't really have any issues either. The AWJ was just dormant at the time. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
Quote:
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
I bet that 3/16" alum panel took over 1.5 hour to make each piece and the 1/8" part on the MITS laser was a little under 1 hour. The time to pierce the material for all the small cosmetic holes is considerable. It looks like it weights a lot.
A CNC punch press would take about 3 minutes to produce the side panel. If the material was .060-.080 alum it would take about 10 minutes to laser cut a part. A well designed sheet metal part with some folds could take a fraction of time to make and a fraction of the cost to produce. Just some food for thought to keep costs down for teams with new sponsors. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
Quote:
I can't speak for whether it's more practical to create such parts in a sheet metal punch system or not, but there's always a learning curve when you get access to new toys! We make it a habit to ask our sponsors what sort of guidelines they would prefer us to use when designing parts for them to machine. Quick jobs and quick parts make for happy sponsors and a happy team. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
Quote:
I disclose I am employed as a design engineer for aforementioned company. I actually had all parts nested to the laser due to the reasons you mention. It was the president of my company who decided to switch the outer plates to the AWJ. But who's complaining? I believe cutting four of the outer plates took roughly 7-8 hours in total. (!) To cut the four inner plates on the laser took around 1.5 hours. Outer panels are 2.8 lbs each and the inner panels are 1.7 lbs each. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: pic: Finished side plates w/paint
I really like that Maple leaf shows pride living in the great white north.
Your Team number is a nice touch. To bad the plates can't be used as bummpers ![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|