Hello Guest it is April 28, 2024, 11:33:02 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - HimyKabibble

51
General Mach Discussion / Re: program run screen
« on: April 08, 2014, 05:05:55 PM »
Try re-selecting the screenset.

Regards,
Ray L.

52
General Mach Discussion / Re: Proximity Detectors
« on: March 30, 2014, 06:27:45 PM »
Thinking that a mechanical switch or optical sensor is going to be more trouble free than a proxy sensor is folly. Any sort of contamination that will interfere with a prox sensor will be at least 100x as good at interfering with a mechanical/optical device. There are some accurate and repeatable mechanical switches out there be prepared to pay about $50 for one. They work well when covered from direct contamination and are simple to wire up but still require a mechanical actuator making installation more difficult. I did some testing a few months ago on three different micro-switches that are commonly used on home brew DNC machines. I put together a rig so I could very precisely measure where the switch actuated and released. You can find the paper I wore on it in the documentation section of my website.

Optical sensor can be very accurate but get dirty very easily and are very sensitive to temperature (one that works great at 70F may not work properly at 40F). If the machine is in a relatively temperature environment and can be kept clean it is a good choice. It still needs a precisely aligned actuator/flag so it is harder to install.

A proxy sensor is sealed, has no mechanical actuator and is easy to mount. They are used on a whole lot of industrial machines as well. In the next few weeks I'm going to set up to test prox sensors shielded and unshielded with different target types to see what the accuracy and repeatability is like.

It is very easy to totally enclose a microswitch, and not much more so an optical sensor.  Totally enclosing a prox sensor, and its inductive "flag" is much more difficult, not least because of their much larger size.  On commercial machines, they are either totally enclosed, or mounted in a location where they are sufficiently protected that such enclosure is not required.  On small machines, mounting options are FAR fewer, due, if nothing else, to the small size of the machines themselves.  A sealed microswitch and enclosure can be very small indeed.

Regards,
Ray L.

53
General Mach Discussion / Re: Proximity Detectors
« on: March 30, 2014, 12:22:33 PM »
Unless your'e looking for extreme accuracy (in which case you're probably kidding yourself about the machines capability....), plain old high-quality microswitches work great, and are cheap and simple.  Next step up is optical switches.  Hall Effect switches are also good, but, like prox switches, must be protected.  There are tons of designs available on CNCZone's Benchtop Machines forum, and others.

Regards,
Ray L.

54
General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3, servos and no motion controller
« on: March 29, 2014, 11:35:29 PM »
There is a "cross-over" point in power requirement where servos start making more sense that steppers - something around 400W, IIRC.  Below that point, for "typical" applications, like a milling machine, a stepper will do everything a servo will do, performance-wise, and at a lower cost.  Above that point, steppers can no longer deliver the performance, and servos start to make more sense, albeit at a hggher cost.  But, 400W is FAR more than is required for a BF20. 

There are always applications at both ends of the spectrum for which that rule does not apply, because of unusual requirements, like extreme speed, or something similar.  The trick is to design the drive system to fit the application, not just blindly mix and match components.  It takes actual engineering to do it right.  But, for milling machines and routers, the rule works pretty well.  Yet, most people still seem to believe that lost steps are an inherent characteristic of stepper motors, and servos will ALWAYS perform better, and never lose steps.  Just ain't so....

Regards,
Ray L.

55
General Mach Discussion / Re: Proximity Detectors
« on: March 29, 2014, 11:20:23 PM »
Unless you can completely protect them from chips and swarf, you might want to reconsider.  Prox sensors WILL trigger on chips, even aluminum chips.  I would recommend optical sensors, or plain old switches.

Regards,
Ray L.

56
General Mach Discussion / Re: Mach3, servos and no motion controller
« on: March 29, 2014, 08:29:54 PM »
Well, Im trying to match servo motors output shaft size to the readily available ball screw size. This is determined by what is included in the cnc retrofit kit(s). Some are 8mm, and some are 1/4"  Of course, a nema23 size frame in the mid range power and wattage wize is about right for a small mill(bf20). So, making everything match up physically, and electronically is actually a bit complicated. My router works great on stepper motors, but it seems like servos are the way to go when making heavy hogging cuts. The router loses steps if pushed too hard. When I mention heavy hogging,, I mean in terms of a 300 pound bench mill,, so I know, not real heavy,, but presumably much deeper than the aluminum framed router can handle.

Servos are NOT inherently any better than steppers at anything.  For machines in the size range you're talking about steppers are perfectly capable of performing every bit as well as servos under any conditions the machine itself can handle IF the stepper system is properly designed.  Of course, a badly designed servo system is also quite capable of performing very badly.  My "big" machine, a Novakon Torus Pro runs steppers, and is capable of 350 IPM rapids, and taking "hogging" cuts a BF 20 could not even dream of.  Servos add absolutely nothing to the real-world performance, other than slightly less noise.

Regards,
Ray L.

57
General Mach Discussion / Re: G28 G91 Z0.
« on: March 27, 2014, 11:09:54 AM »
Sounds like you're either not homing your machine, or you're homing it incorrectly.  The home position for the Z axis should be at the very top of travel.

Regards,
Ray L.

58
General Mach Discussion / Toggling Spindle DIR Pin From CB Macro?
« on: March 26, 2014, 02:19:51 AM »
Okay, I realize this sounds crazy, but....  I would like to be able to toggle the Spindle DIR pin from a CB macro, using ActivateSignal/Deactivate.  Is this possible?  There is no CB constant defined for that I/O, but I'm wondering if there might be a way to "trick" it into working, perhaps by mapping another signal (like an OUTPUTx) to the same pin.

Regards,
Ray L.

59
General Mach Discussion / Re: imach pendants
« on: March 23, 2014, 01:46:40 AM »
I've owned three VistaCNC pendants, and am completely satisfied with all of them.

Regards,
Ray L.

60
General Mach Discussion / Re: Moving Mach3 license
« on: March 13, 2014, 10:15:29 PM »
Just copy the file license.dat to the new machine.

Regards,
Ray L.