|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
2014 season sideplates/pontoons, freshly painted from our gracious sponsor.
18-01-2014 23:28
apalrd
I'm curious, why did you choose that lightening pattern over something simpler?
18-01-2014 23:39
DampRobot|
I'm curious, why did you choose that lightening pattern over something simpler?
|
18-01-2014 23:40
IndySam
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/39301?
18-01-2014 23:47
WileyB-JNo 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.
19-01-2014 00:01
cadandcookies|
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.
|
19-01-2014 00:16
WileyB-J|
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)?
|
19-01-2014 00:21
cadandcookies|
Good questions man.
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. |
19-01-2014 00:37
roystur44I 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.
19-01-2014 00:43
cadandcookies|
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. |
19-01-2014 00:55
WileyB-J|
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. |
19-01-2014 09:45
Tem1514 MentorI 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 