Form Correction Compensation Software for Controlled Waviness SCD Tool Making

With SCD tool grinding machines with nano precision capability, one must question the value of available form compensation software offered on some of these machines. Is it really worth the investment?

Based on the years of diamond tool wear analysis, I can't help concluding that the hard and soft directions in the diamond's crystal structure plays a large role when it comes to wear patterns that form during the cutting process. A more consistent hardness through the sweep of the radius will produce a more consistent wear as opposed to a fluctuating hardness value across the sweep will produce a more uneven wear pattern that translates to reduced surface quality of the parts being machined.

Yes the form ccompensation software can help you produce controlled waviness tools with extremely low waviness by compensating for the difference in hardness value of the hard and soft directions, but how many cuts will your customer get with this tool before the wear pattern affects the surface finish?

I believe that it would be a much better investment to commit to research that would expose crystal orientations that would  represent a more consistent transition between the plane within the diamonds to promote the production of high precision diamond tools that would not only cut more consistently for the manufacturers, but also retain its precision form longer to result in better performance and longer tool life.  

http://www.diamtech.ca/

Natural Diamond or Synthetic Diamond?

For a long time now, I always wondered when it comes to precision diamond tool performance, if it really makes a difference if the customer are working with natural diamond tools or synthetic diamond tools such as sumicrystal or monodie. Some claim that tool performance will be based on what type of material is being machined, however most tool users require specific geometry that is better achieved on natural or synthetic and given that these two types of diamonds are generally used in two diffrent crystal orientation, is it fair to compare apples with oranges?

Sumi's or mono's are typically available in the 4 point orientation as for the natural diamond used in SCD toolmaking are generally prepared with the table in the 2 point orientation. So is it really the material that is being cut that dictates the compatibility or is it more the resistance value that these diamond represent when presented with the clearance angle required? For example, the jewelry industry claims that when machining platinum with synthetic diamond tools, tool performance is much better than when worked with natural diamond, could it be because these tools require very little clearance on the cutting edge and that synthetic diamond  will tend to offer a much more consistent hardness when ground with minimal clearance then natural which work better for higher clearance tools. This fact already dictates that the synthetic tool will offer a more consistent edge wear and wear induced form deviation when cutting platinum.

To truly be able to answer the question, we would have create tools using both types of diamond, but oriented in the same plane(2point or 4 point), but then again this also represents an issue given that most synthetic plates used originally come from a cubic stone as for the naturals, they are commonly from octahedral or dodecahedral origin. I have seen synthetic octahedral synthetic diamond on the market recently, perhaps this would be ideal stone type for some testing...

http://www.diamtech.ca/#!solutions