On Sunday 05 August 2018 17:03:42 Ken Strauss wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 2:31 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning > > > > On Sunday 05 August 2018 13:43:45 Ken Strauss wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Gene Heskett [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2018 12:57 PM > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Cutter compensation with mill turning > > > > > > > > On Sunday 05 August 2018 09:07:29 Ken Strauss wrote: > > > > > > > > Looking at the drawings for position 9, page 78 of 738, I too am > > > > confused. Can we be enlightened? IMO there are only 8 usable > > > > positions. Which in the practical world, none are 100% accurate > > > > because no one sets up a tool with the full side of its cutting > > > > edge inline with either axis. Thats just asking for and usually > > > > getting a squeak/chatter and a broken insert. > > > > > > The I/J parameters on a G10 L1 allow the specification of the > > > FRONTANGLE and BACKANGLE shown in the drawing. I'm guessing that > > > 30-degrees is the default for these angles. > > > > Are these angles to be expressed as the angle from the chip > > centerline, or in an absolute angle assuming 0 degrees is exactly > > away from the operator? Little but very important details are not > > adequately discussed, and that has discouraged my use of the tool > > table. > > From the illustration at the very end of > http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ToolTable it appears that > FRONTANGLE and BACKANGLE are measured from the centre line of the > tool. > > > Lack of a tool changer has also discouraged it, but thats my fault. > > Every design I have seen, and have been tempted to make, also wants > > to impinge on the operating envelope in ways its hard to work > > around. So 3 or so holders along the end of the table are out, as > > are those I've seen along the back edge of the table. Neither are > > practical from the standpoint of the uneven weight on the end of the > > table. > > I would also like an ATC but have balked at Tormach's price for such. > Tools for my size machine typically weigh far less than a pound each > so I'm not particularly concerned about the uneven weight. However, > not losing table space is critical. A changer with only four or five > tool holders would suffice for most of my work. There are several > simple designs such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s11izziBkbs > that seem to be a possibility.
Thats a sweet idea, but all holders would appear to be made to fit that custom spindle. So the whole thing would need at least a little red wagon full of rolls of SBA dollars. Good for a new design, sure, but would obsolete $2000+ dollars worth of tool holders I already have. The carousel could be made to fit the TTS holders easy enough, but what about a tool that doesn't fit a 3/4" r8?. Show stopper. Needs more thought to make it a bit more universal. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >-------- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's > most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users -- Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
