Hello Guest it is April 19, 2024, 11:41:30 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 - Davek0974

2011
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 06, 2016, 05:49:36 AM »
Same R&P setup as mine Stirling, I have 4Nm motors though.

I was pondering ballscrew when I built my table but your point was one of the reasons i did not use them, the rack on my gantry (X axis) is exposed and I have concerns about that. The Y racks are nicely tucked away under cover plates on the sides and so far have remained clean. I fitted double wipers and muck scrapers on my linear blocks - it tightened them up a bit but hopefully will extend their life, I also grease regularly to flush any muck out.

2012
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 06, 2016, 03:31:31 AM »
Thanks for the numbers Dave.

What travel, dia etc of screw do you use. I may have a spare 10mm pitch ballscrew if I can find it, not seen it for a while but I know I bought more than one. It is 25mm dia screw and a fairly long nut on it and it has been shortened, prob about 100-120 travel, I originally had it fitted to the quill on my very first retro, a manual Bridgeport.

Hood

Thanks for that, mine is only 10mm dia, i have emailed the maker as they do offer a 10mm x 4mm pitch screw that is a direct swap-in, that would be a nice easy upgrade. Its a two-start version of the standard unit.

2013
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 05, 2016, 03:17:51 PM »
Yes it would be a pretty easy swap too, 10mm trapezoidal screw fitted i think, will make a note and look out out for a steeper thread, i think 744rpm is right at the top of the scale for a nema23 on 50v and getting it lower would be good.

2014
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 05, 2016, 02:25:15 PM »
I had it set originally at 1200mm/min and 900mm/s/s acceleration, this seemed a tad low so I pushed it up until it screeched which was at 2000mm/min so i backed off to 1500mm/min. The acceleration went way up to 5000mm/s/s before a screech so backed that down to 4000mm/s/s which gives an estimated 0.3g and 744rpm measured with a tacho on the motor shaft. I think thats ok for a 3.1Nm Nema23 motor. Steps per mm is 1000, 2mm pitch screw direct drive.

Dave

2015
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 05, 2016, 02:20:52 AM »
3.1Nm on my Z and CNC4YOU.co.uk DSP stepper drives

2016
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 04, 2016, 04:26:05 PM »
I did the second time ;)

2017
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 04, 2016, 04:18:32 PM »
Yep good old inches, D'oh!

Got both files cammed up and will be testing them saturday.

Post results pictures here or elsewhere?

Thanks

2018
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 04, 2016, 03:45:14 PM »
Hmm, odd, do you scale that when importing ??

Tried it here and sheet cam says it 6mm wide by 5mm tall, might need surgical laser to cut that one ;)

2019
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 04, 2016, 02:49:19 PM »

Keep working toward turning hobby into business...  paycut from dayjob... But may be more enjoyable.... Retirement business maybe in future.

Already trying that idea ;)

Care to post up your file?

2020
General Mach Discussion / Re: Physical buttons for plasma
« on: February 04, 2016, 02:16:06 PM »
Dave, did you have a look at the PDF I posted a forum page or two before?

(I'm out of ideas)

Yes, thanks, i have seen that before but as TP says, its high-end stuff but i guess some of the info will down-scale to our size equipment.

what would be really useful is a standard test piece  that could be passed around forums so results could be compared - it may be that 90% of what we all seek is not possible and if everyone got the same results on the same part it would prove it.

just a thought.