Talk:Milling (machining)

Boring head or boring and facing head

The picture that wants to be a boring head looks as if it could be a boring and facing head.

john f86.172.78.192 (talk) 07:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

New language link

I'm trying to add another language link to the rest, but now it works with WikiData and it owns different codes, and I don't know how to combine them. Can anyone add: Español - Fresado http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresado Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.217.77.171 (talk) 16:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done—Done at Wikidata. Thanks for the heads-up. — ¾-10 00:31, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Suggested merge of CNC pocket milling into Milling (machining)

The current article Milling (machining) already covers a significant part of the material in the new article CNC pocket milling, including CNC milling, in some detail. There does not appear to be any reason to have that small article describing one sub-type of milling, separated from the main article. @Kangkan iitd: - pinging you as the main author of CNC pocket milling, so you are aware of this discussion.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Thanks for your concern. Although CNC pocket milling is a part of general milling operation, but it is not covered in Milling (machining) article. My article CNC pocket milling primarily deals with the various tool path approaches that are used in milling pockets. These approaches are widely used in industries. I believe it would be better if this article is kept separately. Kangkan iitd (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi all. The long-term goal should definitely be that Wikipedia covers pocket milling in telescoping (drill-down-able) detail. In keeping with WP:Summary style and WP:SPINOFF, it could potentially be either (1) entirely within a section of Milling (machining) or (2) overviewed in such a section and with a {{Main}} link to a full article. The choice of option 1 versus 2 is then based on how long the parent is and how long the child is. I looked at the length of both and concluded that both options would produce respectable results. If option 2, then all we need to complete it is a recap subsection h3 under Processes h2, following the Gang milling h3. If option 1, then merge it all into such a section. I think option 1 is less work in a way (because one doesn't have to bother composing the recap and judging what to leave out of it). Just want to reassure User:Kangkan iitd that either way, every bit of the value-add (all of the text and refs that you took the time to assemble) will still be instantly at hand for the readers—just ported to a root location vs satellite. Wanted to thank you for contributing it—love to see such content being built. — ¾-10 21:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks both for your input. In particular, I take the point that the main article is already quite lengthy, and I can see the argument for either approach. I look forward to reading comments from any other interested editors... --Gronk Oz (talk) 00:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Agree:MERGE!--BoldEditor (talk) 20:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Agree they should be merged --Possums (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Klbrain (talk) 05:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

YouTube links

I notice in the history that at least once, YouTube links have been removed as promotional. I found one still present in the article: [1]. This is produced by a particular manufacturer and I have accordingly removed it. It was introduced into the article with this edit in January 2013 when Milling machine was merged in. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

1980's-Present

While the rapid rise of NC/CNC programming radically changed the shapes that can be made easily, the simultaneous development of new cutting tool materials and geometry worked hand in hand with it. Sintered carbide/ indexable tip tool designs rapidly increased the rate of material removal by combining higher cutting speeds (=RPM) with greater depth of cut per revolution when compared to traditional High Speed Steel tooling. Faster material removal reduced the need for near net shapes prior to machining. This made it economical to make complex shapes from blocks of material without requiring casting or forging. Ceramic tipped tooling enabled final machining of hardened steel tools and reduced the volume of post-hardening grinding and polishing in some applications.

I am speaking as a tradesman during this era and I have not found references to support this yet. OCrugbytragic (talk) 06:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)