A new cast iron 3 axis challenger weighing in at over 600lbs! - Page 15
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 281 to 294 of 294
  1. #281
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    2,693
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1293
    Likes (Received)
    1291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VulcanMachineCo View Post
    I wasn't asking about what the deflection should be lol, I was referring to needing to use extended tool holders to reach anything below a the 2-4" height bump a vise adds to increase more top end z travel on a small to medium sized cnc. A lot of the larger machines will have spindle nose to table distances of over 4" at min z. Ours is currently a hair above 2" but it was pointed out that it is too low?
    Well, your machine is probably not "normal" for this consideration (as it is a hobby grade*), but most machines get a vise installed, even a small one will take up 2" in Z thereabouts. No real need, IMO, to get the spindle nose so close to the table. Short gage length holders (I didn't see what you are using, BT30? or about that size) will be in the 2" range as well, then add on the tool and you get something like 4-5" taken up by tool, vise, and holder, not to mention the thickness of stock. Sometimes it is nice to get the tool a little bit lower (thinking plate type work), but in those cases you can use 123 blocks or something to get the work up higher.

    *Meaning your target audience may not have a vise, understand a (good precision) vise for workholding, etc. And/or be doing lots of sheet metal type things or arts and crafts things....

  2. Likes VulcanMachineCo liked this post
  3. #282
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    40
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1974 View Post
    Well, your machine is probably not "normal" for this consideration (as it is a hobby grade*), but most machines get a vise installed, even a small one will take up 2" in Z thereabouts. No real need, IMO, to get the spindle nose so close to the table. Short gage length holders (I didn't see what you are using, BT30? or about that size) will be in the 2" range as well, then add on the tool and you get something like 4-5" taken up by tool, vise, and holder, not to mention the thickness of stock. Sometimes it is nice to get the tool a little bit lower (thinking plate type work), but in those cases you can use 123 blocks or something to get the work up higher.

    *Meaning your target audience may not have a vise, understand a (good precision) vise for workholding, etc. And/or be doing lots of sheet metal type things or arts and crafts things....
    thanks, FYI we're currently speced a 12k rpm ISO20.

    Most of my own machining experience has involved making fixtures out of like 1" or .625" Al plate that would be tied down directly to the table that held things like copper heat exchangers, sensor brackets and other smaller parts; anything that we made several of would typically get a fixture plate made for it, though we didn't use a vise to hold the fixtures which I've seen others do to turn it into a pallet system. So that's the influence for my design decision.

  4. #283
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,309
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2947
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pariel View Post
    You're forgetting that reducing the travels also reduces the moments, which reduces the deflection that drives total mass of the machine.



    This should never be about opinion, IMO. I mean you're the one selling machine, so you make the call, but when I sell a customer a machine, I've already got a spec for things like deflection under load, and I design the machine to the spec. That includes going over the range of potential motion to determine edge cases that usually drive the design limits.
    Actually I didn't forget :P , I even looked up a couple of papers on deflections for various steel types of structures... (sad person that I am who should be doing other things right now.).


    So the bridge mill that get's shrunk in the wash is super rigid for it's size,(a machine that doesn't really exist) but the Robodrill's C frame is more floppy (theoretically) but it's travels are marginally smaller than some other machines but that 4000 lbs seems to be put to good use. So that "cubic" effect (in scaling of mass) does seem to creep in on the Robodrill in a +ve way and is seemingly proportionally more rigid. Robodrills have gone toe to toe with machines that weigh 10,000 lbs or more that have only marginally larger travels (at least for other c-frames).

    There ARE small bridge style mills , mobile mills for real work that do exist... Can't remember who makes them, It's a 2nd ops small mill that you might park next to a big cnc lathe to "hatch" the beginnings of a mini-cell.

  5. #284
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    9
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VulcanMachineCo View Post
    Cameraman, while your math is mostly correct (in that, in broad strokes, you can scale it like that), I disagree with your assumptions and conclusions. First our original prototype was a bridge style, so at that time if we were emulating a certain mill, I suppose you could say that included the Makino F5. The current one is different and if I had to guess what I might hear people say we were emulating, it'd probably be the Prototrak Op2 in that it has a similar configuration with the way the Z and X works.

    Next, looking at the spec sheet for the F3 and F5 I'd like to argue that our machine and the Makino are two completely different leagues and not just in size.

    Attachment 258922

    Some things I'd like to point out in their website and documentation is how much they stress the high precision of their machines. They use scale encoders with 0.05 micron resolution and feed rates (not just rapids but actually advertised as feed rates) of almost 800 ipm. A positioning accuracy of 0.00006" and a repeatability of 0.00004". There is no doubt in anyones mind that the stiffness and robustness of a frame on a machine like that needs to be through the roof. Our machine will not be a scaled down Makino F5, just the cost in parts and manufacturing to make a scaled version of that wouldn't probably be anything less than 20k being really optimistic.

    Also note that the Makino F3, which has about 10" less travel on the X than the F5, has relatively the same weight, and that their weight estimates are for the entire package, the frame, the motors, the linears, the stand/base that goes all the way to the floor, the electronics, the enclosure, the tool changer etc., while ours are are currently including the frame and estimating the motors, and estimating the electronics.

    For reference, using Tormachs 770m (since it's a machine in which I could find both weights), they're advertising around 350kg for the mill by itself (shipping weight) and about 650kg for the whole package including stand/enclosure/atc. Syil X5 goes from 300kg for the mill by itself to 800kg for base + enclosure + cast iron stand.

    EDIT: the picture I posted is small. I screen shot it from this link, page 6.
    http://www.bener.com.br/img/produtos...b497bde0a7.pdf
    I don't think anyone is expecting Makino level repeatability or positioning accuracy out of your machine. However, short travels and a very rigid frame could allow this machine to achieve respectable metal removal rates at a reasonable price. If you avoid the trap of building a machine that tries to "do it all," and figure out exactly what your goals are here, you'll have a much better product at the end. To me, 6" of Z travel seems about perfect for a benchtop mill like this as long as your spindle nose clearance is sufficient for a small vise (maybe a modular system?). It's always easier to lift parts closer to the spindle than it is to fit them into a space that's too small - look at what all the Speedio guys have to do to get a vise close enough to the spindle to be useful.

    If you make this rigid enough to do real work, compromising size for stiffness, I think you'll have something that fits the bill for prototyping that doesn't suck and maybe even light production/2nd op work. Hell, I'd love one of these to do simple 2nd op work if it can be done at the price you're talking about. Keep the travels as short as you can while still accommodating the intended use of the machine, and define that intent very specifically. Once you figure out exactly what it is you want to do, people here will be able to better help you. Caveat: most hobby machines define themselves by their flexibility, which is exactly why they suck at almost everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    There ARE small bridge style mills , mobile mills for real work that do exist... Can't remember who makes them, It's a 2nd ops small mill that you might park next to a big cnc lathe to "hatch" the beginnings of a mini-cell.
    I think these are what you're talking about.

  6. Likes cameraman liked this post
  7. #285
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,309
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2947
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VulcanMachineCo View Post
    Cameraman, while your math is mostly correct (in that, in broad strokes, you can scale it like that), I disagree with your assumptions and conclusions. First our original prototype was a bridge style, so at that time if we were emulating a certain mill, I suppose you could say that included the Makino F5. The current one is different and if I had to guess what I might hear people say we were emulating, it'd probably be the Prototrak Op2 in that it has a similar configuration with the way the Z and X works.

    Next, looking at the spec sheet for the F3 and F5 I'd like to argue that our machine and the Makino are two completely different leagues and not just in size.

    Attachment 258922

    Some things I'd like to point out in their website and documentation is how much they stress the high precision of their machines. They use scale encoders with 0.05 micron resolution and feed rates (not just rapids but actually advertised as feed rates) of almost 800 ipm. A positioning accuracy of 0.00006" and a repeatability of 0.00004". There is no doubt in anyones mind that the stiffness and robustness of a frame on a machine like that needs to be through the roof. Our machine will not be a scaled down Makino F5, just the cost in parts and manufacturing to make a scaled version of that wouldn't probably be anything less than 20k being really optimistic.

    Also note that the Makino F3, which has about 10" less travel on the X than the F5, has relatively the same weight, and that their weight estimates are for the entire package, the frame, the motors, the linears, the stand/base that goes all the way to the floor, the electronics, the enclosure, the tool changer etc., while ours are are currently including the frame and estimating the motors, and estimating the electronics.

    For reference, using Tormachs 770m (since it's a machine in which I could find both weights), they're advertising around 350kg for the mill by itself (shipping weight) and about 650kg for the whole package including stand/enclosure/atc. Syil X5 goes from 300kg for the mill by itself to 800kg for base + enclosure + cast iron stand.

    EDIT: the picture I posted is small. I screen shot it from this link, page 6.
    http://www.bener.com.br/img/produtos...b497bde0a7.pdf
    I'm just taking your temperature on that as originally you DID kinda say that your machine emulates the "Superior" layout of a bridge style as one of the initial selling points.

    And obviously your designs are evolving away from that idea so I was checking in with you that you guys are cognizant of that.

    Don't worry I am very aware of what an F3 can do.

  8. Likes VulcanMachineCo liked this post
  9. #286
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,309
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2947
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roboman01 View Post
    I don't think anyone is expecting Makino level repeatability or positioning accuracy out of your machine. However, short travels and a very rigid frame could allow this machine to achieve respectable metal removal rates at a reasonable price. If you avoid the trap of building a machine that tries to "do it all," and figure out exactly what your goals are here, you'll have a much better product at the end. To me, 6" of Z travel seems about perfect for a benchtop mill like this as long as your spindle nose clearance is sufficient for a small vise (maybe a modular system?). It's always easier to lift parts closer to the spindle than it is to fit them into a space that's too small - look at what all the Speedio guys have to do to get a vise close enough to the spindle to be useful.

    If you make this rigid enough to do real work, compromising size for stiffness, I think you'll have something that fits the bill for prototyping that doesn't suck and maybe even light production/2nd op work. Hell, I'd love one of these to do simple 2nd op work if it can be done at the price you're talking about. Keep the travels as short as you can while still accommodating the intended use of the machine, and define that intent very specifically. Once you figure out exactly what it is you want to do, people here will be able to better help you. Caveat: most hobby machines define themselves by their flexibility, which is exactly why they suck at almost everything.



    I think these are what you're talking about.
    ^^^ I second that. (Definitely)

    YES that is exactly the machine I was thinking of (thank you ) .

    __________________________________________________ ____________________________________


    Why is everybody doing these types of things (smaller machines) so terrified of making a good machine rather than a bad one ? As engineers in the broadest sense "We" try to build (design , devise, develop) the best things we can. I think the "Lure" of a quick buck compromises what these machine could really be.

    You know... Make something better , not something worse ? Does the world really need another "Worse " machine ?

  10. Likes Roboman01 liked this post
  11. #287
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New Jersey
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VulcanMachineCo View Post
    I wasn't asking about what the deflection should be lol, I was referring to a functionality/feature opinion in that needing to use extended tool holders to reach anything below a the 2-4" height bump a vise adds to increase more top end z travel on a small to medium sized cnc. Using extended tool holders increases any deflection and runout issues which is why we thought to avoid it for standard usage in the design. A lot of the larger machines will have spindle nose to table distances of over 4" at min z. Ours is currently a hair above 2" but it was pointed out that it is too low?
    They're all connected...your Z travel is going to be a function of your deflection (almost certainly at max Z and min/max Y). You may have a little space to decide where your Z travel starts and ends, and personally I'd suggest that 4" is about right once you've got any size of vise plus a tool holder, but I'd let the physics do the driving rather than the other way around. If you can get reduced deflection at the cost of losing Z travel in the 0-3" or 0-4" from the table range, my bet is you need it.

    All that said, I don't think that asking people on PM what they want out of a machine is a good barometer for you. How many people here own a Tormach? Ask people who are going to buy it from you...this is what I said to GD about the SwissMak too. You guys aren't professional machinists, and for some reason you're bringing your products here to see what people think of them, when no one here will buy anything you make. You should be playing the Lean startup game and trying to sell a product to customers and see what feedback you get.

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    Why is everybody doing these types of things (smaller machines) so terrified of making a good machine rather than a bad one ? As engineers in the broadest sense "We" try to build (design , devise, develop) the best things we can. I think the "Lure" of a quick buck compromises what these machine could really be.

    You know... Make something better , not something worse ? Does the world really need another "Worse " machine ?
    I think in both this case and with SwissMak, we're talking about people who haven't done serious machining or serious machine design, and who aren't cognizant of all the critical aspects of either.

    Add to that a market that is mostly comprised of people with even less experience in both, and the results are pretty self-explanatory. None of these machines is a Tormach killer, but Tormach's prices have gone up so much over the past few years that there is a big space for machines that do almost anything for less.

  12. #288
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    286
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    40
    Likes (Received)
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    You know... Make something better , not something worse ? Does the world really need another "Worse " machine ?
    These are hobbyists who can't think outside the hobbyist sphere. It's easy to sell something when the bar is set real low.

    This guy's talking about toolholders being purchased off Ali Express FFS.

  13. Likes metalmadness liked this post
  14. #289
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    286
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    40
    Likes (Received)
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pariel View Post
    I think in both this case and with SwissMak, we're talking about people who haven't done serious machining or serious machine design, and who aren't cognizant of all the critical aspects of either.
    Hobbyists.

  15. Likes metalmadness liked this post
  16. #290
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    19

    Default

    Maybe it is because I come from an industrial background with, you know, real machines, but I have never understood these hobbyist machines. This isn't to say I disagree with "makers" or "maker spaces" or any of that. But if you can rent an industrial style space to open a maker space, you can afford a Haas DM-2 or something similar, or just a MiniMill. And your parts will be better, and you will teach real skills that translate to real value.

    I understand Tormach's business model, but lets be real, those machines suck. They work, they function as designed, but no way in hell are they comparable to even a low end Haas machine. I understand Saunders Machine Works/NYCCNC, and I enjoy his videos. But at the same time I could not fathom running a jobshop with Tormach machines on my shop floor. They simply are not rigid, or reliable, or even good. But give me a break...the new Tormach 1100 tops out at almost $30K for a light duty machine. That is an insane price when you could easily buy a used lower end machine, or even a brand new machine for $10-20K more.

    Do people really want CNC milling machines on their desk in their NYC apartment?

  17. Likes g-coder05, cameraman liked this post
  18. #291
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,309
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2947
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default Hasteloy -X VS. Tormach 770 M+

    Not to bash Tormach too much...



    Also strangely timely and apt.

    HASTELOY-X VS. TORMACH 770 M+ lol. (Can the Harvey "Zomie mill" save them * ).

    __________________

    Hasteloy X (super alloy) high nickel content and a bunch of knarly other components.


    I wish "They" would say "hard to machine materials" , or "difficult to machine materials" ... not HARD materials. (I think they are doggedly stubborn about that.).


    Hasteloy X has a Brinell hardness of 200 (BHN) and doesn't make it on the Rockwell C scale but checks out as 91 ish on the Rockwell B scale.

    __________________________________________________ __


    Kinda riffing off what @metalmadness is saying most folks that are trying to do something real in their garage startups need to have something real. IF they actually start doing real things then there is a need for volume and efficiency and Tormach struggles with that. (Beyond the need for real world modern repeatabilitys, accuracies and surface finishes.). "Peeps" like FullthrottleCNC and NERDLY and others and even SMW/NYC CNC had to go HAAS and other as soon as they realized what they were doing was real and worthwhile.[The FADAL folks seem to know what they want and what they are doing.]. With Tormach to ---> real things usually means that the $12K to $25K (investment) has to be "Junked" in a lot of cases as the resale value for a used Tormach can't be that wonderful. Better if you think you want to do something real take the risk on a more real machine and if it doesn't work out sell the machine (the HAAS'es for example hold pretty good value and there is always a buyer.). Financing is not always horrible/ deadly.


    __________________________________________________ _______________________


    * IS 95 minutes to remove 3 cubic inches of Hasteloy X really worth it ? [I know wire EDM can be interminably long but the results from wire EDM really are worth it.]. I remember having to buy inappropriately expensive tooling right from the start... Embarrassingly so.

    __________________________________________________ ______________________________________________


    @VulcanMachineCompany maybe the "HASTELOY-X challenge" would be a really good metric for your machine ?

    Could be cool.

  19. #292
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1011
    Likes (Received)
    754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post

    * IS 95 minutes to remove 3 cubic inches of Hasteloy X really worth it ? [I know wire EDM can be interminably long but the results from wire EDM really are worth it.]. I remember having to buy inappropriately expensive tooling right from the start... Embarrassingly so.
    It is worth it, if that's your only machine you have.
    And I think the stepover could have been upped a little to, which would have obviously reduced the cycle time.

  20. Likes cameraman liked this post
  21. #293
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    9
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barbter View Post
    It is worth it, if that's your only machine you have.
    I started off with a converted G0704 because that's what our budget allowed, and it was a small enough investment that we didn't have to worry if things didn't work out.

    It sucked. One time, the z axis ballscrew snapped in the middle of a peck drill cycle and dropped the entire head into the part. We have a super mini mill now, and that still sucks, but a lot less and for very different reasons.

    The G0704 let us figure out some of the challenges of running a job shop without a ton of pressure to make machine payments, and our clients understood that the machine was slow and delivery would take a while, so they gave us low-priority jobs. We ran that for about 8 months until we took delivery of the SMM, and it was a major factor that helped us (3 early 20-somethings with minimal credit and no money) get financing approval because it demonstrated that we could make money, even if it wasn't much.

    That's why I want a machine like this to succeed. I want something that's a little better than a Tormach or a G0704, priced in the low 10k range for a usable, basic machine that's nice and rigid with short travels for small parts. I don't want the ~22" of x travel on a G0704, because that's a weakness. I don't need most of its Z travel. I want it to be able to interpolate a boss or bore within a thou or two. Tormachs try to do too much in order to cater to hobbyists who want ~features~ and bigger numbers on the spec sheet, and their machines are lacking as a result. I've heard reports of Tormach machines that interpolate 2" circles .004" wider in Y than X, and while that might be fine for most hobbyists, it doesn't fly when you're trying to make money.

    Whether the OP wants to serve the market I'm most interested in is obviously up to them, but I think there's a need that's currently being neglected. Make a machine that can make money without a ton of headache and I'll strongly consider buying one for simple/small stuff.

  22. #294
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    589
    Likes (Received)
    359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cameraman View Post
    * IS 95 minutes to remove 3 cubic inches of Hasteloy X really worth it ?
    If you're making a battlebot in your garage, certainly. I think that's the kind of user this type of product is best for; you're making one, maybe three copies of a part at most, learning as you go, money is scarce and time plentiful. Let it run all day while you're at work, or over night.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •