Messages

11

General Mach Discussion / Re: Duplomatic turret for Colchester

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:57:16 PM »

Pic4

12

General Mach Discussion / Re: Duplomatic turret for Colchester

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:56:46 PM »

Pic3

13

General Mach Discussion / Re: Duplomatic turret for Colchester

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:56:18 PM »

Pic 2

14

General Mach Discussion / Re: Duplomatic turret for Colchester

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:55:30 PM »

Hi Hood, 
Here are a few pics.

After a false start, (the coolant was comming out of the wrong position its all working supa dupa

The turret is mounted on a steel adaptor plate fixed onto where the Dixon tool post was fixed.
Pokeys and CNC4PC boards interface to the PLC control. (made by a buddy of mine).
Dave (brother) written the tool change macro and added a few extra buttons to the lathe screens.

It only took 2 years    
ATB
Derek (& Dave)

15

General Mach Discussion / Re: Continue from same point after e-stop

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:20:22 PM »

oops

16

General Mach Discussion / Re: Continue from same point after e-stop

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:18:36 PM »

spindle/coolant on, before re-starting.  RunFromHere can also be used, but I have not had a need for that, and have seen it screw up with the dopey "preparatory moves", so I just don't use it.
Regards,
Ray L.

I use RFH almost every day without too much fuss.
Thanks for the tip Ray - I'll try your method next time. the prep moves are sometimes a bit "scary" :-)

ATB
Derek

17

General Mach Discussion / Re: g0x10 moves to 9.9987

« on: October 14, 2011, 12:14:34 PM »

hi there,

my machine moves to 9.9987 when i tell it g0x10 - can anybody explain this to me?

have a nice day!

As I understand, it's the division of the distance by the steps per unit calculation.
Sometimes the desired distance is "inbetween steps" so Mach stops at the nearest step, which in your case is 9.9987.
The other option may of been 10.0025 which is "further away" from your target.
ATB
Derek.

18

General Mach Discussion / Re: gecko540 problem under mach3

« on: October 10, 2011, 03:23:24 PM »

3/4" is a VERY large tool to be using on a little X3.....
Regards,
Ray L.

What I was thinking - I'd be only using a 10mm cutter on my bridgeport.
8mm would be a better size on the X3.
ATB
Derek

19

General Mach Discussion / Re: gecko540 problem under mach3

« on: October 10, 2011, 02:22:59 PM »

I noticed the problem is also in the end mill , if the end mill is a little pushed in COLLET runs to the side , and it also gives the parts is larger 0.06mm  on both axes

Hi Komar,

0.06mm is a fairly small error which can be a result of the machine stiffness /  feed / rpm / cutter condition.

Does your program have a roughing pass, then a finishing pass (maybe several finish passes) and then a spring pass?
For an accurate 30.0mm bore I'd normally rough out to within 0.25mm, take 2 finishing passes at 0.125 each and then a following spring pass.
To take into account cutter wear, flex of the machine and tool holder, you'd also need to have cutter compensation to adjust the finished size.

I had a quick look through the old posts of this thread and can't see any details of the material / thickness  / type of cutter you are using.

ATB
Derek

20

General Mach Discussion / Re: Gravity vs. DC motor on Z-axis - gravity wins.

« on: October 10, 2011, 01:17:44 PM »

HI JT,

Could you explain why you can't do any "physical" mods?, such a spring counter weight.

Maybe could do this electrically,  have 2 voltages, a low voltage for Z down and a higher voltage for  Z up, to balance the speeds.
However, the longest way is always the shortest...in the end.

ATB
Derek.