Show how to build a CNC machine from the very beginning to the end

[skillalot]

If I were Defeng.

Well, let's just thank the gods you are not! All the stuff I see you posting, not a single engineer would agree with you on anything.
It's your machine, and if you want it build the way you want, how stupid it is, then that's your choice. But don't praise all your ideas to heaven...

[handlewanker]

One thing ya'all overlook.....the SVM-0 is a small mill using ISO 20 tooling compared to the larger industrial stuff with ISO 30, 40, R8 etc, so it can benefit from the smaller far more compact and neater electrical power draw bar.

DEFENG will ensure it's adequate for the job.......even with the ISO 20 tooling, it will have enough force to push the bar down......who needs air.

BTW, if the electric power draw bar is adequate for the SVM-0 using the ISO 20 tooling, going to anything larger, say ISO 30 or R8 for TTS stuff would just mean a slightly larger electric one not a huge air solution.

Unclamping pressure does not get into the tons of pressure class even with bigger draw bars and tooling......if it did, the air cylinder would be bigger than the mill......LOL.....and so would the compressor.

I would suggest .......respectfully of course.....that if time to unclamp tools is so important, perhaps ya'all need to invest in a course for advanced Gcode programming which would be better to maximise the cycle time instead of quacking about a few seconds pushing a button for QCT with an electric solution.

Under Mach3 control and with ATC in the picture, the electric power draw bar is controlled by the program, so the cycle time is hardly affected anyway.....wise up, ya' blinkers are on too tight.......LOL.
Ian.

[louieatienza]

One thing ya'all overlook.....the SVM-0 is a small mill using ISO 20 tooling compared to the larger industrial stuff with ISO 30, 40, R8 etc, so it can benefit from the smaller far more compact and neater electrical power draw bar.

DEFENG will ensure it's adequate for the job.......even with the ISO 20 tooling, it will have enough force to push the bar down......who needs air.

BTW, if the electric power draw bar is adequate for the SVM-0 using the ISO 20 tooling, going to anything larger, say ISO 30 or R8 for TTS stuff would just mean a slightly larger electric one not a huge air solution.

Unclamping pressure does not get into the tons of pressure class even with bigger draw bars and tooling......if it did, the air cylinder would be bigger than the mill......LOL.....and so would the compressor.

I would suggest .......respectfully of course.....that if time to unclamp tools is so important, perhaps ya'all need to invest in a course for advanced Gcode programming which would be better to maximise the cycle time instead of quacking about a few seconds pushing a button for QCT with an electric solution.

Under Mach3 control and with ATC in the picture, the electric power draw bar is controlled by the program, so the cycle time is hardly affected anyway.....wise up, ya' blinkers are on too tight.......LOL.
Ian.

Now you've gone off rhe deep end.

First, if you weren't planning on using larger tools, then why on God's green earth did you order ER32 toolholders for you ISO20 spindle? Do you have 1mm endmills with 25mm shanks?

Defeng has gone out of his way to accommodate your whims. NOT because it's a better or even a good way. The air cylinders I've seen here and on Tormachs and Novakons are nowhere near as large, or heavy, as a 1-ton actuator or screw jack. Plus it's more complicated.

Also you seem to be a bit confused about how the air cylinders work. The compressor won't be running constantly. Where do you get this notion?

As to respectfully suggesting... you've never been respectful with anyone from the start, save for your transparent and obvious butt-kissing. It's really pathetic. You should hope that after you're burned every bridge here that some poor soul will still help you when you stare glaze-eyed at your machine with absolutely no clue what to do.

And how do you think Mach3 controls the draw bar? Magic? Is it built in? Maybe you can.explain to the peanut gallery how to implement ATC through Mach3. You don't even.know how to configure and tune your machine in Mach3. I suppose Defeng will have to save you there as well...

[handlewanker]

Louie......what you have to say is most probably valid, in a roundabout way, but I will learn to accommodate any problem I encounter, just as I have always done over the years.

Incidentally, where did you get the notion that I thought a compressor needed to be running all the time.......LOL.......give some credit for people knowing how their equipment works......on off, on off, on off......puff puff etc, and it stops when the pressure is up.

I opted for the ER32 chucks as they are able to hold larger shanks even if the actual cutting bit is smaller........I prefer to have a large shank rather than a smaller one........THAT IS MY PREROGATIVE......and the ER32 series goes down to 2mm........I also have several sets of the ER32 collets and don't want to outlay for another complete new series.........a set of the ER 20 collets for the High speed spindle will suffice for probably all my carving and engraving needs.

No doubt I'll work out the necessary for the power draw bar application.....,manual or otherwise.

By no stretch of the imagination is the air draw bar on the SVM-1 small and compact compared to the prospective electric one for the SVM-0.........pic attached in case you forgot how large it is.

With your infinite wisdom, inform me as to how big you think an air cylinder needs to be to give an 800 lb pull to the SVM-0 draw bar.......it ain't gonna be a small one........possibly a 2 stage job.......now that would be cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer........I'll wait for the electric one Defeng is developing, thank you very much maam.
Ian.

[louieatienza]

Ian it was YOU, a few posts ago, who had concerns about a compressor running all day, or did you forgot? K

You'll need ER-20 collets for the high speed spindle. It would make more sense to be able to use them for both spindles rather than needing to have a set for each.

I don't the the cylinder on the SVM-2 is excessively large. And I bet you it's way lighter than any electric actuator or screw jack.

The 800lb air cylinders I've seen on motorcycle lifts aren't large at all, about the size of a comparable. electric actuator, maybe wider, but shorter. And with my "infinite" wisdom I can tell you the actuator, air or electric, PUSHES on the draw bar, not PULL it.

[ger21]

If anyone here doesn't like what others have to say, please ignore them. Name calling and posts that do nothing but argue will be deleted.
Don't turn this into a Tormach thread.

[mactec54]

handlewanker

There is nothing wrong with what you want to do, with having a mechanical lever, for the draw bar activation, there is nothing new to do it this way, there are machines that still use a lever system, just having an air cylinder is easier to do the job

In the photo being shown, with the air cylinder he has on the mill, there has been no design put into that part at all, that is an air over oil setup, is way bigger than it needs to be, this has been a off the shelf item, just mounted on top of the head

You could do the same with around 3" tall cylinder, may be less, most machining centers have a multi stack/stage air cylinder, as in the photo, this can be really small when designed for the job it has to do, a photo of a multi stage air cylinder

[handlewanker]

Hi.....I expect you're quite right, but I am against having the air solution and prefer to go all electric......less plumbing, less leaking etc etc.

Louie, you're somewhat right too.......in addition to the ER32 collets I also invested in a set of ER20 for the HS spindle.

It is quite on the cards during a milling set up that you'd need more of one type of collet if the cutters, drills etc are within the same crush down size of the collet, meaning you need to keep buying extras of the same size etc......I prefer to add to the ER32 stuff as and when...... I've got a couple of sets already.

If I'd plumped for the ER20 chucks for the milling spindle I'd be limited to the max size you can get into that collet range which is 13mm max.

I fully imagine that a long series 20mm cutter would be more stable when you're shaving the side of a large piece of work, or down in a pocket etc, than the same length in 13mm.....my choice.

My mistake....'tis push not pull to release.

Now the draw bar has been sorted out, it only needs Defeng to submit his design for approval.

BTW.....one thing no one has commented on or realised and that is with an air solution (or electric too) the cylinder doing the pushing is attached to the frame of the mill head, or even the spindle body.

When the cylinder pushes it is applying the load directly to the draw bar end and also the spindle bearings when it pushes down on the draw bar......by nature of the fact that the spindle is a rotating body and the push mechanism is fixed......it cannot be any other way in that design.

In the design I have the push is only on the draw bar and is isolated from the bearings.....try working that one out.
Ian.

[mcphill]

...cylinder pushes it is applying the load directly to the draw bar end and also the spindle bearings when it pushes down on the draw bar...it cannot be any other way in that design...

You are 100% wrong. I will let you figure out why.

[mactec54]

Now the draw bar has been sorted out, it only needs Defeng to submit his design for approval.

The blind leading the blind

When the cylinder pushes it is applying the load directly to the draw bar end and also the spindle bearings when it pushes down on the draw bar......by nature of the fact that the spindle is a rotating body and the push mechanism is fixed......it cannot be any other way in that design.

Not correct, it all depends on how it has been designed, as to where & how the load/force is applied, if designed correctly there is zero load on the Bearings with the use of an air/oil or electric for activation of the draw bar

In the design I have the push is only on the draw bar and is isolated from the bearings.....try working that one out.

Very easy, no working out to do, thousands of machines already are doing it like this, but if you are using your lever design everyone would like to see what you have come up with

[ihavenofish]

When the cylinder pushes it is applying the load directly to the draw bar end and also the spindle bearings when it pushes down on the draw bar......by nature of the fact that the spindle is a rotating body and the push mechanism is fixed......it cannot be any other way in that design.

well no. some do certainly, usually low end basic machines, but they use bearings designed to handle the load of releasing the drawbar. most industrial machines, and even tormach's drawbar for example, dont put any load on the bearings when the tool is released. its a nice easy system.

In the design I have the push is only on the draw bar and is isolated from the bearings.....try working that one out.
Ian.

its been worked out - 100 years ago. the question has always been why you are reworking it in your mind?

[G59]

Right on.

[integymachine]

Does this machine also require an air supply to blast the taper during tool change? Or possibly for positive air pressure inside the bearings to keep debris out.
I would be positive that a manual change or a lever actuated draw bar like an Emco pcmill doesnt require air because the operator can wipe the tapers.

Sent from my LGLS740 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2

[ihavenofish]

there is no air path through the spindle on the iso20 model. so no air cleaning of the taper.

its perfectly valid not to want to use air, but he seems to be kicking the idea down as if its a bad one, when its the standard on many of the best machines money can buy.

[handlewanker]

In the ideal World......where have I heard that before.........because thousands of things all follow the same path doesn't necessarily mean it's the ideal one.......sometimes it's the best one, but that's not ideal.

Ideal, interpreted as the best that CAN ever be, as opposed to the next best that could be.

BTW.......if you apply a force to an object you also apply a corresponding reverse force.....unless you are jet propelled and create the force without needing a place to apply the force from.

The power draw bar DOES apply a reverse force to the machine's frame, casting whatever it's attached to.......not a problem, but the main force is applied to the top of the draw bar AND THAT APPLIES FORCE DIRECTLY TO THE BEARINGS PER SE via the spindle, .....in case you missed that out......how can it not be so.......enlighten me if otherwise please.

True, the spindle design calls for heavier bearings that cater for the extra loading when the power is applied......not an ideal solution, but the best that is around, considering.

I don't think Defeng would take kindly to being classed by Mactec59 as blind in the design field........this whole thread is about his design(s), and on that score I placed my money firmly on the nail.

I'm going for the electric power draw bar design as it's an instant fix despite it also being in the class as not the ideal solution but the best that can be.

I invent and design things for solutions to apparent problems......that is my interest and to date has paid me quite a few thousands dollars (20K +) for inventions that really worked and were adopted by industry for their use when the existing methods failed......long story.......so I speak from a background of achievement, not wishful thinking, and if Thomas Eddison was alive he'd no doubt say...."That's my boy".....LOL.

The apparent problem I've previously stated is that the Bellville spring washers are in a relaxed state when they are most needed to apply the maximum clamping force and at their most compressed state when they are being forced to release the tool from the draw bar gripper.....not the ideal state of affairs, but the best that is currently available.

Without hijacking the thread with infinite nit picking question answering, I'll just state that I have a design that applies the reverse to the currently well used designs and does not load the bearings at all, but as the electric design is an apparent instant quick fix, that's what I'll be using.

I don't know if Defeng is also working on an alternative pneumatic PDB for the SVM-0, as some others seem to prefer it......that's his prerogative.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

well no. some do certainly, usually low end basic machines, but they use bearings designed to handle the load of releasing the drawbar. most industrial machines, and even tormach's drawbar for example, dont put any load on the bearings when the tool is released. its a nice easy system.







its been worked out - 100 years ago. the question has always been why you are reworking it in your mind?

Oh?....... I wasn't aware the CNC industry was around 100 years ago., or PDB's either.

Perhaps you could back it up with some info as to how it worked.....no sense in me re-inventing the wheel.....talk is cheap, tangible results count more.

BTW, it's not only in my mind but in my computer data base too.
Ian.

[Dingenman]

Pff... Ignore mode should stay ON but someone here makes it very hard to resist to comment.

All I want to say is: do some research (the information is available) before placing incorrect statements about technical challenges which have been dealt with a long time ago.

Sorry to have intervened your monologue..

[rustyh]

BTW.......if you apply a force to an object you also apply a corresponding reverse force.....unless you are jet propelled and create the force without needing a place to apply the force from.

So a jet engine doesnt have a corresponding reverse force!! I'd love for you to explain this one!!

I invent and design things for solutions to apparent problems......that is my interest and to date has paid me quite a few thousands dollars (20K +) for inventions that really worked and were adopted by industry for their use when the existing methods failed......long story.......so I speak from a background of achievement, not wishful thinking, and if Thomas Eddison was alive he'd no doubt say...."That's my boy".....LOL.

Egotistic as usual, I would imagine Thomas Edison would put you right on pretty much everyone one of your thought processes

I would suggest .......respectfully of course.....that if time to unclamp tools is so important, perhaps ya'all need to invest in a course for advanced Gcode programming which would be better to maximise the cycle time instead of quacking about a few seconds pushing a button for QCT with an electric solution.

Under Mach3 control and with ATC in the picture, the electric power draw bar is controlled by the program, so the cycle time is hardly affected anyway.....wise up, ya' blinkers are on too tight.......LOL.

Only a few days ago, you were delving in to your first G-Code tutorial Videos, now you know all this too, thats some quick learning, going to have to call you jonny 5

[rustyh]

Rustyh..........learn how to spell or get your spell checker fixed....its Defeng, not Defneg...........rotflmao....

I invent and design things for solutions to apparent problems......that is my interest and to date has paid me quite a few thousands dollars (20K +) for inventions that really worked and were adopted by industry for their use when the existing methods failed......long story.......so I speak from a background of achievement, not wishful thinking, and if Thomas Eddison was alive he'd no doubt say...."That's my boy".....LOL.

I know you're quite sensitive when it comes to spelling, so just thought I had better point out that Edison is spelt with one "d".
Right I'd better "rotflmao" you must be using the same spell checker as me!

[mactec54]

I don't think Defeng would take kindly to being classed by Mactec54 as blind in the design field........this whole thread is about his design(s), and on that score I placed my money firmly on the nail.

You are missing the boat, Defeng has not done any Design what's so ever with the setup of the air/oil cylinder, this setup that he is showing is an off the shelf item just mounted on top of the head above the spindle, with the way this has been mounted it will place a direct load on the Bearings when activated, which is wrong, so no thought/design has gone into this part at all

So if he was waiting for approval then my answer was correct