791
Mach4 General Discussion / Re: dangerous malfunction of a machine driven by Mach4
« on: February 23, 2022, 09:05:57 PM »
Hi Hakan,
I think your'e over doing it, even 32mm has a stiffness of 1100N/um, easily twenty times the stiffness of my machine. Many comments I garnered from CNCZone concluded
that my ballscrews were too big for my machine, 800kg, with 150kg X axis weight.
I would expect 40mm diameter screws to be found on machines requiring 100kN or more of thrust and an X axis weight of tonnes...not hundreds of kg's but tonnes.
When I was finding parts for my new mill I like you thought the bigger the ballscrew the better...right? Wrong, a large diameter ballscrew, or at least an out-size ballscrew, requires huge torque
just to accelerate and that counts against toolpath following. As it turns out I can still get 0.25g with the ballscrews I've got with 750W servos, but I would have done even better with 25mm
ballscrews. When it comes to rotating components bigger is not always....or even normally....better.
I think your'e over doing it, even 32mm has a stiffness of 1100N/um, easily twenty times the stiffness of my machine. Many comments I garnered from CNCZone concluded
that my ballscrews were too big for my machine, 800kg, with 150kg X axis weight.
I would expect 40mm diameter screws to be found on machines requiring 100kN or more of thrust and an X axis weight of tonnes...not hundreds of kg's but tonnes.
When I was finding parts for my new mill I like you thought the bigger the ballscrew the better...right? Wrong, a large diameter ballscrew, or at least an out-size ballscrew, requires huge torque
just to accelerate and that counts against toolpath following. As it turns out I can still get 0.25g with the ballscrews I've got with 750W servos, but I would have done even better with 25mm
ballscrews. When it comes to rotating components bigger is not always....or even normally....better.