Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Thanks for getting that fixed up for me. I added ball bearings on either side of the lower belt to tension it. I just used the same mounting holes from the step motor and it tightened up nicely. The single screw holding the D-rod shaft came loose and had to be tightened, so that's not the greatest thing. On the bright side, the holding torque is much stronger and I cut a test cylinder lengthwise and around the circumference and it did a great job. I also should do somthing about my scroll chuck because it loosens when I run the axis counter clockwise. A set screw in it should do fine. I also added an X home/limit switch in preparation for auotmated scripts. The main frustration I'm having right now is software. I spent hours setting up an automated cut through modeling software that I could have done in 15 minutes with manual commands. On Sep 4, 8:41 pm, Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net wrote: Gracias :-) - Original Message - From: Okla Mike (Liltwisted) To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2011 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Here it is inline and I also attached it On 9/4/2011 5:57 PM, Dustin Yoder wrote: Last time I left off, my A-axis didn't have enough holding torque. I tried to research a bigger stepper, but nothing substantially better in the 600-900oz range really fit at 3.5A for my G540 controller, and I didn't want to get into big bucks with another stepper, controller and parallel port, etc. Nema 24 motors claimed better torque, but the price was too high--same with bolt on gear reducers. I decided to try a gear reduction as the lowest cost option that I could reuse on the other axes if it didn't work. I ended up putting around $70 into it, which is around my limit that I wanted to spend right now. I'm going to attach a photo, so let me know if you do not see it. I used the existing holes in my headstock (one 3/8 hole and the 3/8 hole for the spring point for the indexing gears). I built a 6:1 gear reduction and pretty much eyeballed all the drill holes to get a reasonable result. All shafts on the gears are 1/4 D-shaped shafts that I got from mcmaster. The only modification that I made was to tap a 10-24 hole in the headstock to clamp the 1/4 shaft inserted into it(note the bolt sticking out of the top of the headstock.) I didn't feel like this was making an irreversible modification, so it fit within my guidelines. Originally, I wanted to turn down a 5/16 bolt to 1/4 on the end so that I could just screw it into the headstock without having to tap a hole, but my turning skills suck and I have no clue how to run my little metal lathe. I pressed oilite bearings into the aluminum frame for the 1/4 shaft. I figured they'd add a little durability. In all, this is a very garage shop/jury rigged setup, but it is functional. I'm going to test it out under load hopefully this week. Dustin ---- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3876 - Release Date: 09/04/11 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. hifiahdf.jpg 130KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Take a look at my software, Indexer Wizards. It should do what you want. You can get a free demo from my website. Rich Goldner Indexer Wizards http://WizardsbyRich.yolasite.com -Original Message- From: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com [mailto:legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Chainlink Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 3:47 PM To: Legacy Ornamental Mills Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Thanks for getting that fixed up for me. I added ball bearings on either side of the lower belt to tension it. I just used the same mounting holes from the step motor and it tightened up nicely. The single screw holding the D-rod shaft came loose and had to be tightened, so that's not the greatest thing. On the bright side, the holding torque is much stronger and I cut a test cylinder lengthwise and around the circumference and it did a great job. I also should do somthing about my scroll chuck because it loosens when I run the axis counter clockwise. A set screw in it should do fine. I also added an X home/limit switch in preparation for auotmated scripts. The main frustration I'm having right now is software. I spent hours setting up an automated cut through modeling software that I could have done in 15 minutes with manual commands. On Sep 4, 8:41 pm, Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net wrote: Gracias :-) - Original Message - From: Okla Mike (Liltwisted) To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2011 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Here it is inline and I also attached it On 9/4/2011 5:57 PM, Dustin Yoder wrote: Last time I left off, my A-axis didn't have enough holding torque. I tried to research a bigger stepper, but nothing substantially better in the 600-900oz range really fit at 3.5A for my G540 controller, and I didn't want to get into big bucks with another stepper, controller and parallel port, etc. Nema 24 motors claimed better torque, but the price was too high--same with bolt on gear reducers. I decided to try a gear reduction as the lowest cost option that I could reuse on the other axes if it didn't work. I ended up putting around $70 into it, which is around my limit that I wanted to spend right now. I'm going to attach a photo, so let me know if you do not see it. I used the existing holes in my headstock (one 3/8 hole and the 3/8 hole for the spring point for the indexing gears). I built a 6:1 gear reduction and pretty much eyeballed all the drill holes to get a reasonable result. All shafts on the gears are 1/4 D-shaped shafts that I got from mcmaster. The only modification that I made was to tap a 10-24 hole in the headstock to clamp the 1/4 shaft inserted into it(note the bolt sticking out of the top of the headstock.) I didn't feel like this was making an irreversible modification, so it fit within my guidelines. Originally, I wanted to turn down a 5/16 bolt to 1/4 on the end so that I could just screw it into the headstock without having to tap a hole, but my turning skills suck and I have no clue how to run my little metal lathe. I pressed oilite bearings into the aluminum frame for the 1/4 shaft. I figured they'd add a little durability. In all, this is a very garage shop/jury rigged setup, but it is functional. I'm going to test it out under load hopefully this week. Dustin -- -- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3876 - Release Date: 09/04/11 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. hifiahdf.jpg 130KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Have you seen Rich Goldner software? It might make things easier for you. http://wizardsbyrich.yolasite.com/ http://ornamentalmills.com/tips/spindle_shoulder/index.html has some tips on mounting a chuck or face plate. In addition a threaded locking collar will allow you to get you chuck extremely snug. Then when you go to remove the chuck, back off the threaded collar so the chuck will spin freely. I've also used a split collar and drilled a hole for a split pin to hold items on the spindle. A matching hole would be drilled in the adapter of the chuck. -Tim - Original Message - From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 12:46 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Thanks for getting that fixed up for me. I added ball bearings on either side of the lower belt to tension it. I just used the same mounting holes from the step motor and it tightened up nicely. The single screw holding the D-rod shaft came loose and had to be tightened, so that's not the greatest thing. On the bright side, the holding torque is much stronger and I cut a test cylinder lengthwise and around the circumference and it did a great job. I also should do somthing about my scroll chuck because it loosens when I run the axis counter clockwise. A set screw in it should do fine. I also added an X home/limit switch in preparation for auotmated scripts. The main frustration I'm having right now is software. I spent hours setting up an automated cut through modeling software that I could have done in 15 minutes with manual commands. On Sep 4, 8:41 pm, Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net wrote: Gracias :-) - Original Message - From: Okla Mike (Liltwisted) To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2011 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Here it is inline and I also attached it On 9/4/2011 5:57 PM, Dustin Yoder wrote: Last time I left off, my A-axis didn't have enough holding torque. I tried to research a bigger stepper, but nothing substantially better in the 600-900oz range really fit at 3.5A for my G540 controller, and I didn't want to get into big bucks with another stepper, controller and parallel port, etc. Nema 24 motors claimed better torque, but the price was too high--same with bolt on gear reducers. I decided to try a gear reduction as the lowest cost option that I could reuse on the other axes if it didn't work. I ended up putting around $70 into it, which is around my limit that I wanted to spend right now. I'm going to attach a photo, so let me know if you do not see it. I used the existing holes in my headstock (one 3/8 hole and the 3/8 hole for the spring point for the indexing gears). I built a 6:1 gear reduction and pretty much eyeballed all the drill holes to get a reasonable result. All shafts on the gears are 1/4 D-shaped shafts that I got from mcmaster. The only modification that I made was to tap a 10-24 hole in the headstock to clamp the 1/4 shaft inserted into it(note the bolt sticking out of the top of the headstock.) I didn't feel like this was making an irreversible modification, so it fit within my guidelines. Originally, I wanted to turn down a 5/16 bolt to 1/4 on the end so that I could just screw it into the headstock without having to tap a hole, but my turning skills suck and I have no clue how to run my little metal lathe. I pressed oilite bearings into the aluminum frame for the 1/4 shaft. I figured they'd add a little durability. In all, this is a very garage shop/jury rigged setup, but it is functional. I'm going to test it out under load hopefully this week. Dustin ---- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG -www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3876 - Release Date: 09/04/11 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. hifiahdf.jpg 130KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Tim, I'm running my X and Y at 50ipm and the Z and A at 20ipm; I hope that's the right way to say it. The Z axis has been working great today, so maybe I just found it's sweet spot. Steve, I was going to go with limit switches when the time comes, but I honestly don't know that I'll add them if all I do is issue commands manually. I worked on a 3 diameter by 4 long hexagon (on the end of a 32 walnut 4x4) that I'm going to turn into an acorn nut for my project. Clearly, you could see that the holding torque just wasn't enough as the router ran across the y axis of the workpiece. I ended up approaching the cut from the end of the workpiece toward the headstock to make it work out ok. It took forever at .1 depth and 6 passes per side at .25, but I did end up with a really nice hexagonal workpiece. I took one final cleanup pass along the y axis to see what would happen and the bit rotation was too much for the stepper and I got a little bit of movement. Also, with this kind of gcode, you can really see the weakness in the slide system as it changed directoins on the X axis. There's visible racking in the carriage and it doesn't travel completely smoothly. But, because I started each pass moving the bit in the same direction, my finished piece looks great. I've got a few more pieces to make on this table project, and I suspect that I can get good results with the current setup. I'm really trading time for some practical learning experience and some slowly made pieces. I'm ok with that. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Chainlink, Are you going to install limit switches or use software limits in Mach? I have a 900/Standard and added fuses to each motor. I also want to add limit switches. Still a ways from there as I need time to dig in and time is pretty short. Let me know if you want to see what a stock 900 standard CNC looks like for your upgrade reference. Thanks, Steve On Aug 19, 9:06 pm, Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net wrote: What's the rpm on the spindle? This is where you might benefit from using gears or a timing belt to increase the torque, but you will loose your speed. Stepper start loosing torque around the 500 rpm range generally. At least we know now that the 387oz range motor is too small. You might want to check your bushings on your z axis and make sure that they are not oversized and causing the z axis to bind up more than it should. I've seen a couple of the Z-axis where if you removed the lead screw, the router would not move up or down. There is a fine line between slop, freely moving and binding. Hopefully Art can guide you on the threading. I'd would like to see a sample g-code for the spirals that are not using g01 to make the move. I have assumed all along that a threading cycle could be used. Thanks for the update and video! -Tim - Original Message - From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 4:58 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I had my first success today with the upgrade. Here is a link to a video of the carve in action! Sorry about the loud volume; I wasn't in the mood to edit the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlQ46e3gwiA Details: I needed some 1 1/2 dowels for my newest table project, so I decided to try my best to use my CNC upgrade. I had problems in two areas: First, my Z-axis stalled when raising. Second, I had to make shallow passes to keep from stalling the A-axis. One thing I did notice was that as the motors warmed up, my z-axis was much better behaved and seemed to work well. I spent just about 8 minutes per dowel once I got the procedure down. I even bumped up the A-axis motor speed and ran it so that I could run some sandpaper over the finished dowel--it's pretty nice to be able to do that. I must say that I absolutely loved the ease of repeatability that the CNC commands provided. My Z axis held it's depth without having to constantly fiddle with locking down the Z axis on every depth change like I used to do. Small changes to depth are really easy to make. I ended up just where I wanted to be with my dowels, a bit undersized at 1.48 to 1.49. Although I spent most of my evening in the shop, I feel like my time was at least equally spent vs. manual milling without the added frustration and effort. It was nice to prepare the next blank while I was waiting. Next up, the big timesaver would be to cut my threads via CNC. I don't know where to start with that one, if anyone has any tips. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I had my first success today with the upgrade. Here is a link to a video of the carve in action! Sorry about the loud volume; I wasn't in the mood to edit the video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlQ46e3gwiA Details: I needed some 1 1/2 dowels for my newest table project, so I decided to try my best to use my CNC upgrade. I had problems in two areas: First, my Z-axis stalled when raising. Second, I had to make shallow passes to keep from stalling the A-axis. One thing I did notice was that as the motors warmed up, my z-axis was much better behaved and seemed to work well. I spent just about 8 minutes per dowel once I got the procedure down. I even bumped up the A-axis motor speed and ran it so that I could run some sandpaper over the finished dowel--it's pretty nice to be able to do that. I must say that I absolutely loved the ease of repeatability that the CNC commands provided. My Z axis held it's depth without having to constantly fiddle with locking down the Z axis on every depth change like I used to do. Small changes to depth are really easy to make. I ended up just where I wanted to be with my dowels, a bit undersized at 1.48 to 1.49. Although I spent most of my evening in the shop, I feel like my time was at least equally spent vs. manual milling without the added frustration and effort. It was nice to prepare the next blank while I was waiting. Next up, the big timesaver would be to cut my threads via CNC. I don't know where to start with that one, if anyone has any tips. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Hey Tim, thanks for your continued interest. I got to work on my electronics, but made an error in soldering one of my cables. Some solder got between two pins on one of my DB9 connections and blew out my G540 controller. I sent it back to Geckodrives and they told me that repairs were free, which is awesome, but I'm waiting for the controller to come back. One of my problems with my first cnc project was a direction error that would happen when I'd run the axis in mach3. I'd jog any axis and sometimes it would go the correct direction and sometimes it would not. Before the change in cabling that blew out my G540, I got to test each axis and had the same problem. So, I'm on hold until my G540 comes back, and I'm on vacation next week. I'm hoping to get back to this August 2. I'm potentially revising my goals based on the discussion here about not enough torque for the spindle. Another of my money making projects are segmented routed bowls. I'd still be happy if I could automate X,Y,Z to rout the inside of these bowls, which takes me about an hour. On Jul 21, 1:32 pm, Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net wrote: Where are you at with this project? -Tim - Original Message - From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 4:37 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Thanks all for all the advice on the gears and stepper sizes and practical advice in general. I'm worried about stalling too, which is why I tried to be as minimal as possible with the physical changes to the Legacy in case it does not work out. At any rate, hopefully I'll be able to get everything running this week so we can see what happens. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Another observation, you might want to take off your depth stop on your z-axis so an accident does not happen :-). -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 4:32 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Ok, I fixed the A axis so that the bed can be lowered raised. Note the block on the left side that I colored in red. If I put it on the top of the rail it is attached to, the carriage would hit it, so I'm going with not being able to raise my bed all the way to the top. This is no big deal; I haven't run into a single project that needed the bed to be raised all the way up. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
That's a direct drive on the spindle? - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 10:56 AM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I can feel that my free time is becoming more limited, so I figured I'd finish the X and A axes today. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Dustin How did you couple the motor to the legacy drive spindle? I am playing with something like your idea here ,but not on the CNC side of this scale. Did you make a coupler to fit over the notches of the spindle drive or did you just tap into the screw insert and us a jam nut? Nice job, Im just curious. Thanks. C.A.G. - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 1:56 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I can feel that my free time is becoming more limited, so I figured I'd finish the X and A axes today. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Pro's of the direct drive is no backlash. My concern is lack of power. That's why most people have timing belts or gearheads (gear heads designed to work with stepper motors) I believe legacy's first cnc version used laser cut gears and I'm sure that was a source of backlash. Their latest use gearheads, and I don't know what the Arty is using. Does anyone else know? I also noticed that the motor mount for the A axis is mounted to the outside rails. If it was mounted to the inner you would be able to tilt and raise the table. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Tim, yes, direct drive, is that a problem? I noticed others going with a belt and pulley system. Is there a reason for that? Curt, each axis is attached by a spider shaft coupling, the x, y and z are 5/8 and the spindle (A) is 3/4. I reversed the X axis leadscrew so that I could attach the coupling without interference from the square end that the handle attaches to. Other than that, the couplers just slide on and lock with an allen screw. Photo 1: X-axis coupled to stepper. Photo 2: Opposite end of X-axis. Photo 3: Spindle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I don't think you will have enough torque with the 1:1 ratio on the A axis. On the Joe's Hybrid CNC I built with Burney we used a 1200 oz/inch motor with a 3:1 ratio. On the Legacy that we CNCed we used a 620 oz/inch with a 3:1 ratio and it wasn't enough. Rich Goldner Indexer Wizards http://WizardsbyRich.yolasite.com http://wizardsbyrich.yolasite.com/ From: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com [mailto:legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dustin Yoder Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 6:36 PM To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Tim, yes, direct drive, is that a problem? I noticed others going with a belt and pulley system. Is there a reason for that? Curt, each axis is attached by a spider shaft coupling, the x, y and z are 5/8 and the spindle (A) is 3/4. I reversed the X axis leadscrew so that I could attach the coupling without interference from the square end that the handle attaches to. Other than that, the couplers just slide on and lock with an allen screw. Photo 1: X-axis coupled to stepper. Photo 2: Opposite end of X-axis. Photo 3: Spindle. _ To: legacy-ornamental-mills+dig...@googlegroups.com From: legacy-ornamental-mills+nore...@googlegroups.com Subject: Digest for legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com - 11 Messages in 4 Topics Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 06:03:26 + Today's Topic Summary Group: http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills/topics * Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC [2 Updates] * How to you properly reply to your topic from hotmail client? [3 Updates] * 20% Sale on Legacy CNC [3 Updates] * Slop in my 900 [3 Updates] Topic: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills/t/4aba35b8f169abd7 Dustin Yoder dustinyo...@hotmail.com Jul 07 09:24PM -0400 ^ I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net Jul 07 08:17PM -0700 ^ I think I would not increase the friction on the opposite side of the lead screw. Leave that to float. If the round bushings on the rails are not touching the top and bottom of the groove, I'd be willing to bet they have divots in them. You might want to rotate them to a new spot fresh spot. This is the plain round barrel type, not the top hat ones. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I knew the Artisans used a gear head and that's the best way to go in my opinion. I'm really curious what is behind the cover of the arty and mini arty. -Tim - Original Message - From: Jeff Becker To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 3:52 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC You are right that Legacy's early CNC's uses gears, and my artisan has a gear head, One question I had is how do you plan to index A axis. I also have the directions for converting Legacy to a cnc if your interested send me a fax number and I will fax them to you Jeff -- From: Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 6:49:00 PM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Pro's of the direct drive is no backlash. My concern is lack of power. That's why most people have timing belts or gearheads (gear heads designed to work with stepper motors) I believe legacy's first cnc version used laser cut gears and I'm sure that was a source of backlash. Their latest use gearheads, and I don't know what the Arty is using. Does anyone else know? I also noticed that the motor mount for the A axis is mounted to the outside rails. If it was mounted to the inner you would be able to tilt and raise the table. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Tim, yes, direct drive, is that a problem? I noticed others going with a belt and pulley system. Is there a reason for that? Curt, each axis is attached by a spider shaft coupling, the x, y and z are 5/8 and the spindle (A) is 3/4. I reversed the X axis leadscrew so that I could attach the coupling without interference from the square end that the handle attaches to. Other than that, the couplers just slide on and lock with an allen screw. Photo 1: X-axis coupled to stepper. Photo 2: Opposite end of X-axis. Photo 3: Spindle. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
With the cnc up grade to my 1500 the gear from the motor had about 24 teeth, the other gear had about 97, so you are looking at about a 4 to 1 ratio - Original Message - From: Rich rgold...@iname.com To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 4:05:06 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I don’t think you will have enough torque with the 1:1 ratio on the A axis. On the Joe’s Hybrid CNC I built with Burney we used a 1200 oz/inch motor with a 3:1 ratio. On the Legacy that we CNCed we used a 620 oz/inch with a 3:1 ratio and it wasn’t enough. Rich Goldner Indexer Wizards http://WizardsbyRich.yolasite.com From: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com [mailto:legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Dustin Yoder Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 6:36 PM To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Tim, yes, direct drive, is that a problem? I noticed others going with a belt and pulley system. Is there a reason for that? Curt, each axis is attached by a spider shaft coupling, the x, y and z are 5/8 and the spindle (A) is 3/4. I reversed the X axis leadscrew so that I could attach the coupling without interference from the square end that the handle attaches to. Other than that, the couplers just slide on and lock with an allen screw. Photo 1: X-axis coupled to stepper. Photo 2: Opposite end of X-axis. Photo 3: Spindle. To: legacy-ornamental-mills+dig...@googlegroups.com From: legacy-ornamental-mills+nore...@googlegroups.com Subject: Digest for legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com - 11 Messages in 4 Topics Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 06:03:26 + Today's Topic Summary Group: http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills/topics • Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC [2 Updates] • How to you properly reply to your topic from hotmail client? [3 Updates] • 20% Sale on Legacy CNC [3 Updates] • Slop in my 900 [3 Updates] Topic: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Dustin Yoder dustinyo...@hotmail.com Jul 07 09:24PM -0400 ^ I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net Jul 07 08:17PM -0700 ^ I think I would not increase the friction on the opposite side of the lead screw. Leave that to float. If the round bushings on the rails are not touching the top and bottom of the groove, I'd be willing to bet they have divots in them. You might want to rotate them to a new spot fresh spot. This is the plain round barrel type, not the top hat ones. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Thanks all for all the advice on the gears and stepper sizes and practical advice in general. I'm worried about stalling too, which is why I tried to be as minimal as possible with the physical changes to the Legacy in case it does not work out. At any rate, hopefully I'll be able to get everything running this week so we can see what happens. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Looks Great. Keep up with the good work. looking forward to hearing how it works out. Good luck. C.A.G. - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 7:32 AM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Ok, one more try at getting this to reply properly in hotmail, then I'll try another program. I made some progress yesterday on my project. First I adjusted the slider block so that it didn't make my round bushings on the back of the carriage hit the top of their channel. I rotated the bushings to a fresh spot to avoid some visible wear. I also flipped the Y and X leadscrews around to make it easier to put my stepper motor couplers onto. I built a frame and attached it to the back of the carriage and attached the Y stepper motor. I noticed that my Y axis is racking a bit when changing directions; I will eventually add the bushing modification to it on the leadscrew side. -- To: legacy-ornamental-mills+dig...@googlegroups.com From: legacy-ornamental-mills+nore...@googlegroups.com Subject: Digest for legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com - 11 Messages in 4 Topics Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 06:03:26 + Today's Topic Summary Group: http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills/topics a.. Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC [2 Updates] b.. How to you properly reply to your topic from hotmail client? [3 Updates] c.. 20% Sale on Legacy CNC [3 Updates] d.. Slop in my 900 [3 Updates] Topic: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Dustin Yoder dustinyo...@hotmail.com Jul 07 09:24PM -0400 ^ I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net Jul 07 08:17PM -0700 ^ I think I would not increase the friction on the opposite side of the lead screw. Leave that to float. If the round bushings on the rails are not touching the top and bottom of the groove, I'd be willing to bet they have divots in them. You might want to rotate them to a new spot fresh spot. This is the plain round barrel type, not the top hat ones. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Keep up the Good work. Im impressed! Thank you for sharing. C.A.G. - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 6:12 PM Subject: RE: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Photos of Y and Z axis with steppers attached. I tried to keep this as quick and simple as possible. I used extra hardware that came with the legacy and used flexible spider shaft couplings from Mcmaster. They have 1 degree of angular misalignment, so I thought that would cover any small errors in my construction. It's basically like you see it--a 'U' shaped wooden frame bolted to the aluminum frame. At this point, I'm waiting on some electronics so I can rebuild my controller. I want to test the Y and Z to see if my steppers are strong enough. If I get really ambitious tomorror, I might work on the X and A axes, but I'm out of frame inserts and would have to use a more permanent mounting solution, which I want to avoid for now. -- To: legacy-ornamental-mills+dig...@googlegroups.com From: legacy-ornamental-mills+nore...@googlegroups.com Subject: Digest for legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com - 11 Messages in 4 Topics Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 06:03:26 + Today's Topic Summary Group: http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills/topics a.. Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC [2 Updates] b.. How to you properly reply to your topic from hotmail client? [3 Updates] c.. 20% Sale on Legacy CNC [3 Updates] d.. Slop in my 900 [3 Updates] Topic: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC Dustin Yoder dustinyo...@hotmail.com Jul 07 09:24PM -0400 ^ I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? Tim Krause artmarb...@comcast.net Jul 07 08:17PM -0700 ^ I think I would not increase the friction on the opposite side of the lead screw. Leave that to float. If the round bushings on the rails are not touching the top and bottom of the groove, I'd be willing to bet they have divots in them. You might want to rotate them to a new spot fresh spot. This is the plain round barrel type, not the top hat ones. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? -- You received this message because you are
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I think I would not increase the friction on the opposite side of the lead screw. Leave that to float. If the round bushings on the rails are not touching the top and bottom of the groove, I'd be willing to bet they have divots in them. You might want to rotate them to a new spot fresh spot. This is the plain round barrel type, not the top hat ones. -Tim - Original Message - From: Dustin Yoder To: legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I started my carriage upgrade today. I followed the adjustable gib strip topic here on the group to make a few adjustments to the carriage. After the changes, the carriage fit is a bit tighter and a bit harder to push along the rails. The slider block I added to the back side of the carriage is just a touch thick and it brought the round bumpers that run in the back rail to the top of the channel--which is why I think it's a bit harder to push. So, did I actually accomplish anything? I think I did. I put the Z-axis back on and locked down the X split nut and ran it up and down the rails a bit. Turning the X leadscrew is really really smooth now. I've also noticed that I can't detect any backlash in the split nut when I change directions. I'm not saying that there isn't any there, but I am saying that I can't see it, which is a bit better than it was. Before the upgrade, I had noticeable racking in the carriage from the front rail to the back. While this was not eliminated, it was reduced. Do you think I could improve my result if I add another rear carriage slider and put them on each side of the carriage rather than having one in the middle like I have now? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
When slaving A to X, I suspect that your problem is that both motors are turning the same direction. One should turn clockwise and the other counter clockwise. You built one CNC router why not build an indexer from scratch with the strength needed for the job. From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 8:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I thought that after the chat in the All New Members thread that I would actually attempt to convert my 1200 to CNC, since it may be of great interest to some of the members. On one hand, I hate to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate the work already done by Legacy; I have a certain amount of guilt about this. On the other hand, the CNC upgrade was something like $4000 and is no longer offered by Legacy, so I'm going to modify my machine in the way that I see fit. I'd like to explain where I came from to get to where I am today, ready to make this CNC conversion. I was one of the early adopters of the Carvewright when it was first released to Sears. The machine can do truly amazing work that makes me jump up and down with joy...when it works. The other times, and this usually means as soon as I accept a paid job for some CNC project, the machine breaks down in some obscure way and much swearing ensues, followed by opening my wallet to replace parts. In addition to reliabilty, my machine is not capable of routing a round hole. Most of my work tends to be vector cuts(wooden gears, trophies, etc.), so this lack of precision is disturbing. With this dubious history in mind, I decided to build a second CNC machine from scratch so that I had a reliable backup that was inherently more precise. I decided to build a Rockcliff Model D based on the ease of use of the plans and the cheap to make rail system. One feature of the Rockcliff D is that it has two stepper motors running the X-axis, the A-axis slaved to the X-axis. My machine was built entirely out of MDF and I was quite happy with the accuracy of my work. Everything was working according to plan until the day I hooked up Mach 3 and tested the different axes. During the test, the X-axis and its slave moved in opposite directions, tearing the gantry apart, ruining the entire build. I think the problem was either the type of cable I used(unshielded) to run from the motors or a weak parallel port on my PC (though I don't understand how direction could get messed up like that, it should have been just missed steps). So, there my broken machine sat for a year, $1000+ dollars invested in lead screws, steppers and drivers. Now we have arrived at this summer, and I had a new CNC project to work on, 6 trophies for the YMCA triathlon. I whipped them out on the carvewright and sure enough, it broke down with 2 to carve! I managed to solve the problem and finished the carvings, but I realized something important. Building another 3-axis machine doesn't really help me do anything different from my current capabilities with the Carvewright (when it works). My money and time would better serve me by adding something new to my toolbox, and that is ultimately why I've decided to try to apply CNC to the legacy. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I had the problem on the Y-axis as well. I'd try and jog one direction then back and sometimes it would continue on in the same direction. That's why I thought it may have been a cabling/parallel port problem. Also, I'd be willing to try to rebuild from scratch; I didn't find the construction difficult. I haven't found any plans to help guide my way though. Do you have any tips to point me in the right direction? On Jul 6, 2:50 am, Art Ransom akran...@tx.rr.com wrote: When slaving A to X, I suspect that your problem is that both motors are turning the same direction. One should turn clockwise and the other counter clockwise. You built one CNC router why not build an indexer from scratch with the strength needed for the job. From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 8:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I thought that after the chat in the All New Members thread that I would actually attempt to convert my 1200 to CNC, since it may be of great interest to some of the members. On one hand, I hate to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate the work already done by Legacy; I have a certain amount of guilt about this. On the other hand, the CNC upgrade was something like $4000 and is no longer offered by Legacy, so I'm going to modify my machine in the way that I see fit. I'd like to explain where I came from to get to where I am today, ready to make this CNC conversion. I was one of the early adopters of the Carvewright when it was first released to Sears. The machine can do truly amazing work that makes me jump up and down with joy...when it works. The other times, and this usually means as soon as I accept a paid job for some CNC project, the machine breaks down in some obscure way and much swearing ensues, followed by opening my wallet to replace parts. In addition to reliabilty, my machine is not capable of routing a round hole. Most of my work tends to be vector cuts(wooden gears, trophies, etc.), so this lack of precision is disturbing. With this dubious history in mind, I decided to build a second CNC machine from scratch so that I had a reliable backup that was inherently more precise. I decided to build a Rockcliff Model D based on the ease of use of the plans and the cheap to make rail system. One feature of the Rockcliff D is that it has two stepper motors running the X-axis, the A-axis slaved to the X-axis. My machine was built entirely out of MDF and I was quite happy with the accuracy of my work. Everything was working according to plan until the day I hooked up Mach 3 and tested the different axes. During the test, the X-axis and its slave moved in opposite directions, tearing the gantry apart, ruining the entire build. I think the problem was either the type of cable I used(unshielded) to run from the motors or a weak parallel port on my PC (though I don't understand how direction could get messed up like that, it should have been just missed steps). So, there my broken machine sat for a year, $1000+ dollars invested in lead screws, steppers and drivers. Now we have arrived at this summer, and I had a new CNC project to work on, 6 trophies for the YMCA triathlon. I whipped them out on the carvewright and sure enough, it broke down with 2 to carve! I managed to solve the problem and finished the carvings, but I realized something important. Building another 3-axis machine doesn't really help me do anything different from my current capabilities with the Carvewright (when it works). My money and time would better serve me by adding something new to my toolbox, and that is ultimately why I've decided to try to apply CNC to the legacy. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
Here is a starting point. - Original Message - From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 2:33 AM Subject: Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I had the problem on the Y-axis as well. I'd try and jog one direction then back and sometimes it would continue on in the same direction. That's why I thought it may have been a cabling/parallel port problem. Also, I'd be willing to try to rebuild from scratch; I didn't find the construction difficult. I haven't found any plans to help guide my way though. Do you have any tips to point me in the right direction? On Jul 6, 2:50 am, Art Ransom akran...@tx.rr.com wrote: When slaving A to X, I suspect that your problem is that both motors are turning the same direction. One should turn clockwise and the other counter clockwise. You built one CNC router why not build an indexer from scratch with the strength needed for the job. From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 8:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I thought that after the chat in the All New Members thread that I would actually attempt to convert my 1200 to CNC, since it may be of great interest to some of the members. On one hand, I hate to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate the work already done by Legacy; I have a certain amount of guilt about this. On the other hand, the CNC upgrade was something like $4000 and is no longer offered by Legacy, so I'm going to modify my machine in the way that I see fit. I'd like to explain where I came from to get to where I am today, ready to make this CNC conversion. I was one of the early adopters of the Carvewright when it was first released to Sears. The machine can do truly amazing work that makes me jump up and down with joy...when it works. The other times, and this usually means as soon as I accept a paid job for some CNC project, the machine breaks down in some obscure way and much swearing ensues, followed by opening my wallet to replace parts. In addition to reliabilty, my machine is not capable of routing a round hole. Most of my work tends to be vector cuts(wooden gears, trophies, etc.), so this lack of precision is disturbing. With this dubious history in mind, I decided to build a second CNC machine from scratch so that I had a reliable backup that was inherently more precise. I decided to build a Rockcliff Model D based on the ease of use of the plans and the cheap to make rail system. One feature of the Rockcliff D is that it has two stepper motors running the X-axis, the A-axis slaved to the X-axis. My machine was built entirely out of MDF and I was quite happy with the accuracy of my work. Everything was working according to plan until the day I hooked up Mach 3 and tested the different axes. During the test, the X-axis and its slave moved in opposite directions, tearing the gantry apart, ruining the entire build. I think the problem was either the type of cable I used(unshielded) to run from the motors or a weak parallel port on my PC (though I don't understand how direction could get messed up like that, it should have been just missed steps). So, there my broken machine sat for a year, $1000+ dollars invested in lead screws, steppers and drivers. Now we have arrived at this summer, and I had a new CNC project to work on, 6 trophies for the YMCA triathlon. I whipped them out on the carvewright and sure enough, it broke down with 2 to carve! I managed to solve the problem and finished the carvings, but I realized something important. Building another 3-axis machine doesn't really help me do anything different from my current capabilities with the Carvewright (when it works). My money and time would better serve me by adding something new to my toolbox, and that is ultimately why I've decided to try to apply CNC to the legacy. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to
Re: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC
I have to chuckle because your story is like so many people that have made the trek down cnc lane. It was a good idea but some details got in the way and the parts got put on a shelf but the desire never went away. Look at it this way, your not reinventing the wheel, but perfecting the cnc application on the manual platform. Unfortunately you might find that the platform is the reason the upgrades are no longer offered. Here's an idea for the Legacy, I originally considered a design that used a jackscrew and two racks on the legacy. Simple old school strong design. How are you going to deal with the friction and wear of the delrin bushings? Do you have the z-axis upgrade or will you be taking parts from the rockcliff? Are you going to manually tilt the bed? What's your budget on this project? Let's talks this out and see where it goes. -Tim - Original Message - From: Chainlink dustinyo...@hotmail.com To: Legacy Ornamental Mills legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 6:24 PM Subject: Build log of sorts for a 1200 upgrade to CNC I thought that after the chat in the All New Members thread that I would actually attempt to convert my 1200 to CNC, since it may be of great interest to some of the members. On one hand, I hate to reinvent the wheel and try to replicate the work already done by Legacy; I have a certain amount of guilt about this. On the other hand, the CNC upgrade was something like $4000 and is no longer offered by Legacy, so I'm going to modify my machine in the way that I see fit. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Legacy Ornamental Mills group. To post to this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to legacy-ornamental-mills+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/legacy-ornamental-mills?hl=en.
