Messages

1

General Mach Discussion / Re: Spindle Control Takes 70% of processing power??? (Cant run spindle and G-Cod

« on: May 06, 2010, 02:35:49 PM »

Hood,

Its a 2.4 ghz Celeron, 1 Gig Ram, Ati Radon 9250.
Does it load down a computer that much to run a standard step/direction spindle? Closed loop is just nice, to get the exact spindle speed. With the VFD based drive, its not very linear steps/sec to Rpm. So closed loop makes it accurate.
Closed loop on/off seems to have a minimal effect.

Thank you.

XRay-Man,
I am not sure I understand your test.I have tried this.
I placed a switch that changes the VFD Spindle Controller, back to the original pot control. If I switch it to manual control and run the same gcode it runs fine. Spindle On Ground are common, but the diver board is opto isolated from the computer.
My understanding most noise like this would come through the ground/ or lack there of. By leaving the grounds common and having the spindle on (making noise) but manual control. It runs the gcode fine.
I think this means its not noise? Or am I not getting this right?

Thank you both for your time,

I hope I answered what you were asking.

TJ

2

General Mach Discussion / Spindle Control Takes 70% of processing power??? (Cant run spindle and G-Code.)

« on: May 05, 2010, 02:26:47 PM »

Hi all,

So I have been having a problem with mach recently and I couldn't figure it out for the longest time.

What happens is it seems to load down the processor and then stutter through the tool path. I re built the system ( re installed windows, mach and all my drivers). I had assumed that something had become corrupted in windows ect.

I have been running spindle control on my x3 mill for a while now, it had seemed to be intermittent, and I though it related to the G-Code file. It is most noticeable with long G-code files - 10,000 lines +, or complex 3 axis tool path moves, such as helical entry.

After messing around I noticed that just turning on the spindle maxes out the processor, for a few seconds, then it drops to around 70%, and stays there. No G-Code or anything else running. I just hit f5 to turn on the spindle.

Some Other info that might relate.
At system Idel with mach running system processing is around 2-5%
Running the same (10,000+line) gcode program, complex helical entry tool paths, with mach spindle control turned off, it used 60% of the processing power. Spindle on manual control.

I am judging processing power from the Task Manager Screen.

Mach Version R3.042.040

I am using a controller from Cnc4pc, a C6 Variable Speed Controller. It uses Step and Dir Signals to drive the spindle. I don't use direction control.

Max Spindle Speed is 3,000 RPM. I used to use this same Pc on an X2, with a 4,000 RPM spindle. No problems then...

This seems like something is just wrong, It shouldn't take that much processing to run the equivalent of 1 axis?

Any ideas suggestions on how I can fix this? (other than buy a new pc which I considered but buying anything new with windows xp (32bit).......)

Thank you for you time,

TJ

Note : Attached it my config file, if I somehow have something set really wrong that would be awesome if someone sees it.

3

General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach Ignoring Tool Change Macro

« on: April 27, 2010, 04:24:42 PM »

Fixed,
I dont know why this fixed it, but it did, so if you are having the same problem try the following.

Under General Config - Select Stop Spindle Wait For Cycle Start
Close
Request Tool Change - It will run the script and change the tool but force a cycle start click before continuing.
Save Settings
Restart The Machine
Open Mach - General Settings - Select Auto Tool Changer
Save Settings ..
And Viola It works like it should...

Gotta Love Computers....

 

4

General Mach Discussion / Mach Ignoring Tool Change Macro

« on: April 26, 2010, 10:19:54 PM »

Hello,
Ok So pre questions
Version R3.042.040 (Latest I think)
General settings - Run Tool Change Macro - Checked

Ok so short problem story,
I run it in VBscript editor it works fine.

I run M6 T4... or what ever tool it changes both DRO's, and does nothing.
The screenset I am using has a set of buttons that call tool change commands, click one same as above.

Full Story,
Two Key Dro/Params for the tool change to work.
1. The Tool Dro (Default tool # Dro for Mach)
2. Tool in Spindle (OEM Dro #1200, User Assigned)

It checks if they are not the same, drops off the tool in spindle, then goes to new tool and then goes back to its business.

Macro Location
/Mach3/Macros/Mach3Mill/m6Start

I am using a tweaked version of Hoss Machine's tool changer script to work with my setup.
To test I change the Mach Tool Spindle by Clicking and entering my desired tool, Then Tool in Spindle to the correct tool in the spindle. With VB Script Editor Open, Click Play... And it works like it should....

Any other tool change command = Nothing.

What is most odd is that it changes both my user DRO, and the tool DRO without actually running the script.

Attached is my config file, and the macro.

Any Suggestions or ideas?

Thank you for your time/help.

TJ

5

General Mach Discussion / Re: Advice on TTS Power Drawbar Design.

« on: March 30, 2010, 11:45:24 PM »

And finally the Video file.

files.me.com/tjhj/ cyozek

Thank you for the time,

Any suggestion would be greatly appricated.

TJ

6

General Mach Discussion / Re: Advice on TTS Power Drawbar Design.

« on: March 30, 2010, 11:41:23 PM »

Here are the cad pictures of the belt drive version/ and an video of explode to help make it easier to see what is going on.

Thank you,
TJ

7

General Mach Discussion / Advice on TTS Power Drawbar Design.

« on: March 30, 2010, 11:36:28 PM »

Ok So in consideration of using the Tormach Tooling System, I have embarked on the journey of some sort of a drawbar for a quill type machine. In my case it is an X3.
The unknown question is how much force is actually needed on the drawbar. So I have taken a different approach to how much force. Instead of trying to figure out how much torque is needed then the problems with the screw calculations. I solved how much force it would take to yield the drawbar. I think most of us don’t pull our drawbar our and find it necking from yielding. Referring to the AISC Manual for yield strength and data.

Assuming that the drawbar is of average quality steel. A36. The yield strength is 36 KSI. (if it works for skyscrapers, Ill take it)  My Drawbar has a nominal diameter of 7/16”. (Is this always the same? Or Close?) And a ф 0.9 Factor of safety /error. The resulting force to cause permanent deformation is 5411 lbs. Now taking the assumption we are not riding on this limit. 50% should suffice. So 2705 lbs, lets round to 3,000lbs of force and say no more than 5,000lbs. It can be increased later.

So here is the idea, a stepper motor, because it can hold the torque for prolonged period of time. I have a 420 oz-in Nema 23 Stepper motor (just an extra). Use the motor to apply the force to the drawbar while cutting, vs something like spring washers.

Now how to do it?
Basic Idea, the two primary plates would be pushed apart pressing on the top of the quill and bottom of the drawbar. The drive “screws” would be 5tpi Thompson ball screws. 0.625 Track Diameter. One screw on each side to ensure a symmetrical application of force. In the Force calcs from the ball screws I used an assumed efficiency of .8
Torque(lb-in) = Force(lbs)*Pitch(in)/(2*pi*eff)

Version 1. Use a series of timing belts to reduce the speed for more torque. Common SDP timing pulleys allow for a two step total ratio of 10.24 multiplication. Through the ball screws the motor would be able to well exceed the required force, and produce a maximum of 6755 lbs. Should cover it.

Version 2. Instead of using a complex scheme of timing belts use of a worm gear drive to create the torque multiplication, which can easily obtain the required torque or even use a much smaller motor.

It does require some guide to stop it rotating, but can be added later.

So here is the idea in more of a whole. Attached are a series of Solid Works Pictures to help portray my idea.

Is it feasible? Will it Work? Comments? Suggestions? Ideas?

Thank you for your time,
TJ

PS. The CAD is just a rough idea so it can be portrayed and seen better than I can explain.

8

General Mach Discussion / Re: Tormach TTS Belleville Spring Washer Deflection (Not Force)

« on: March 14, 2010, 01:20:51 PM »

I guessed correct. Now that's just odd.

Thank you for your time.
TJ

9

General Mach Discussion / Tormach TTS Belleville Spring Washer Deflection (Not Force)

« on: March 13, 2010, 01:04:40 PM »

Hi All,

After reading as much as I can, and reading through all of the thread
What The World's Been Waiting For - Yet Another Power Drawbar Design
http://www.machsupport.com/forum/index.php/topic,11826.0.html

An interesting discussion on how much tension force is needed.

But my big question is how much total deflection is needed?

If anyone is using a TTS ATC System, how much travel in the spring washers is needed to ensure a good tool release?

Thank you for your time,

TJ

10

General Mach Discussion / Re: Lathe Tool Compensation Is there a better way??

« on: January 18, 2010, 09:39:01 PM »

So maybe I am way over thinking this, but why not add the ability to measure the angle of the tool post.
Ok so here is the idea,
Take a Isolated Probe, mount it in a standard tool holder. Rounded of some kind.

Now I normally do embedded systems, so I am thinking take a potentiometer and mount it to the tool post in a manner that as the angle of the tool post is changed it changes the pot. It should not be a problem to achieve 12 bit resolution. And as most single turn pots have a rotation of 260 degrees. So considering that 10% of the ADC resolution will most likely be lost due to not getting a perfect ending on the pot. It should be quite realistic to get a position range of 0-3686 over the 260 degrees. The result is accuracy to 1/14th of a degree. If a 14bit adc was used 1/56th of a degree accuracy could be obtained.

I think the 12 bit solution would provide accurate enough angle offset to accurately position the tool.

So knowing the angle and difference to each tool from the probe in X and Y at 0, the new offset can be found using a macro.

The biggest question is how to get the information into Mach. I was thinking I could have it output pulses based on position, per angle. Maybe as an additional axis encoder? Then the macro could make a new offset based on the encoder position.

Maybe?

Does this even make sense.... Or am I missing the new point.

TJ