Messages

411

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 22, 2016, 07:08:30 PM »

This one MIGHT do the job (;-) .

(;-) TP

412

VB and the development of wizards / Re: Macro to modify Z soft limit based on tool offset

« on: January 22, 2016, 06:05:42 PM »

I don't think you can.   Why not just set it correctly then use Tool Length offsets in your Gcode G43/49 .

(;-) TP

413

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 22, 2016, 03:53:05 PM »

The one thing you will HATE about it is the heavy spring and the wear and tear on the trigger/sear  then getting premature firing of teh weight. Been there many times. That spring plus the weight of the hammer will put a very heavy load on the trigger/sear surface contact areas.

Just add in an accumilator tank at the cylinder for air that way the volume is constant at teh hammer location. IF your pressure is dropping out of spec you have other problems (;-) You could simply add in a booster  at the hammer location to make SURE the tank is topped off pressure wise each time it cycles.  It should run many many thousands of cycles without fail.

IF the Pincher method works for you( bolt cutter style) I would consider a traveling Hydraulic unit or Air  unit and forget teh hammer.

(;-) TP

414

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 22, 2016, 01:04:45 PM »

The trigger and sear would forever be a problem child.  You could use an air cylinder arrangment to drive teh hammer similar to what you have drawn.

415

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 21, 2016, 09:02:27 PM »

IF it is traveling that fast then your punch hammer at that weight is going to be slower than the material is traveling . UNLESS yo hve one really BAD punch hammer solenoid and rebound spring (;-) And thenyou still may have a binding problem from teh traveling material side pushing on the punch.

Let me know what you figure out.

416

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 21, 2016, 08:28:18 PM »

Are you sure a traveling shear or saw would not be better ?  Any sort of tubing would be calasped on the ends ?

Just a thought, (;-) TP

417

Tangent Corner / Re: Electro-Punch design

« on: January 21, 2016, 05:41:58 PM »

WHATCHA building ??  One of the things you you will find harder to overcome is teh weight of teh hammer needing a large return spring then it take s a LOT more solenoid power to over come the spring AND add velocity to teh hammer.

I will take a look in some old books but most of teh formulas for solenoids and coils  should be on the web.

(;-) TP

418

VB and the development of wizards / Re: GetSelectedTool() not working for Mach3 lathe

« on: January 21, 2016, 05:13:12 PM »

YOu are using teh wrong tool change fornat for turn. Mill is M6 T1 for tool 1  and turn is M6 T0101 for tool 1.

419

General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma

« on: January 21, 2016, 05:08:02 PM »

NO I think it was just all covered (;-). Not much more to say. Mach3 is what it is and will never change. IF you want something better you have to move on to another brand controller (;-).

(;-) TP

420

General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma

« on: January 20, 2016, 03:12:13 PM »

HAve you seen Stirlings unit ?  RazorDance