![]() |
|
|
Welcome to the CNCzone.com-The Largest Machinist Community on the net! forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. |
| Home Page | Today's Posts | My Replies | Classifieds | Reviews | Photo Gallery | Web Links | Share Files | Mark Forums Read | Advertise With Us | Ad List |
|
|||||||
| Stepper Motors and Drives Discuss stepper motors, drivers and related topics here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have recently been battling with some bad mid range resonance on my x3 mill. I am using a Xylotex 4 axis drive with 425 oz steppers. I had reduced the resonance by greatly reducing the Vref on the drive. However this is a very poor fix as it hurts performance. I looked at several damper designs used on engines. Elastomer, fluid and a pendulum type. I decided a pendulum type might offer the quickest response and be able to absorb a wider frequency range so I gave it a shot. The results are nothing short of amazing. It completely absorbs all resonance and vibration problems I was having. I was able to turn up the Vref to full power without a trace of resonance with the damper installed. Remove it and the ugly resonance is back. It's dramatic how well this damper works. TCI makes a automotive type of this damper for racing and they call it the "rattler". This is because when it is working you can hear the rollers working. It's very interesting to hear this damper work. At feeds where there was usually resonance the damper will be very active with the rollers making noise while they are absorbing the resonance. At speeds when the stepper is in a resonance free operating range it is dead silent. It's easy to make. My design is about 2.45 in diameter with 9 rollers.The rollers have .045 clearance in the pockets. http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...rdamper001.jpg http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...rdamper002.jpg http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...rdamper003.jpg http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...rdamper004.jpg Steve
Last edited by S_J_H; 02-12-2007 at 12:27 AM. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats pretty cool to see you fixed your problems. I'm still a little uncertain as to how it works, but nonetheless it does work, so thats great!
Do you think resonance wouldn't be an issue had you used the 269 oz/in motors from xylotex? Are you happy with the 425 on the z-axis? I suppose one of my decisions will be to see if a 269 oz/in compared to the 425 oz/in would work better upon the z-axis. What I'm getting at is perhaps the resonance is a function of the 425's? |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steve, this is cool. While I have gotten rid of most of my reasonance it comes back and haunts me from time to time on some very specific movements. Any chance you have dimensions on parts so that I can create one test. Thanks
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ninhil, I have a set of 269's also and yes they do have less resonance for the most part. But they are quite a bit weaker. The 425's with the damper are much stronger. I have no issues with resonance on the z axis. The leadscrew drive is totally different than what I have on my table and it just does not seem to have this problem. For a Q&A on this type of damper I'll refer to a real automotive damper using a similar design.- http://www.tciauto.com/Products/Tech...ttler_tech.asp Buzz, It was brought to my attention I should test the damper without rollers and with the rollers packed so they can not roll. This to qualify the effect is from the action of the rollers and not simply a flywheel effect. I will do those tests tonight or tomorrow and report back. I'll give some measurements at that time. Steve
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Do you need to lower your acceleration due to the extra weight on the motor?
__________________
Gerry (Note: The opinions expressed in this post are my own and are not necessarily those of CNCzone and its management) |
| Sponsored Links |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steve, thanks. Think there would be a different if this was made out of wood or metal? While I could make it out of metal it would be more complicated.
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well the flywheel effect alone is responsible for about 90-95% of the reduction using my lab quality senses for test measurements
. With the rollers functional the steppers are just a little bit quieter and smoother than with them packed tight. With the rollers removed it still has enough inertia to dampen maybe 80% over nothing at all attached to the stepper. A simple flywheel does a tremendous job of eliminating the resonance and I guess I am just late to learn this. The extra work to make this functional damper over a simple flywheel may not be worth it as the motor impulses are weak enough to be damped pretty well with just a simple flywheel. GER21, I ran the roadrunner test code in MACH AT 60IPM and 6 for acel with the damper on and it was the smoothest code I have ever seen with this mill. In other words, no I did not have to lower the acceleration at all. I may be able to raise it now that all the vibration and resonance is gone. Steve
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Buzz, I suppose it could be made from a hardwood. I think you'll need steel rollers though. I would first try a metal flywheel as that is simple to make compared to this damper and it seems to work almost as well on my mill. But if anybody wants to make one of these roller dampers and give it a try, the specs for the one I made are- body 2.45" diameter 9 holes on a 1.75" bolt circle Holes .505" wide and .625" deep. roller slugs .460" wide and .585" long Steve
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Steve, thanks for all the info. I will give this a try this week and let you know how it goes.
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Besides being considerably more compact, the above adds to the benefits of a belt drive for steppers.
e.g. No coupler needed, easy change to flywheel dampening, and minimal alignment problem. The roller dampener seems really neat. I wonder about the effect of more weight clearance or using lead (or DU - i heard it is really heavy & cheap in Iraq) ![]() Thanks for the thread! Pres |
| Sponsored Links |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
S J H
It's amazing how much of a difference that has made. I'd like to do it on my steppers as well. My steppers do not have the shaft out the back of the motor. I guess that yours did. Would it make any difference if I had the flywheel on the other shaft of my timing belt setup no the actual motor shaft? I wonder if it will, because I have a 4" alum. timing pulley there anyway. Wouldn't that alum. pulley do just the same. I have also replyed to the same post on yahoo groups, dunno if it sent ok though. Cheers Peter Australia |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
About a year back I picked a stepper out of a copier with thick laminated metal disk on the end shaft and never knew what it was for, now I do.
I think I destroyed it in the removal but as a diligent packrat its "remains" are lying around somewhere. I will post a pic if I find it. Jason Edit: Found the pic |
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Vibration Damper | tachus42 | Stepper Motors and Drives | 6 | 11-17-2006 11:57 AM |
| BOSS retro w/Mach2 results: | jderou | Bridgeport and Hardinge Mills | 11 | 04-20-2006 11:21 AM |
| Results from using 8020 for a CNC router | WarrenW | 80/20, TSLOTS and other Aluminum Framing Systems | 0 | 01-05-2006 09:17 PM |
| Poor results, help please! | Swede | Hard and High Speed Machining | 8 | 04-03-2004 11:23 PM |