New Machine Build Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine - Page 8


Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678
Results 141 to 152 of 152

Thread: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

  1. #141
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    Gary I have installed a lot of machine shop stuff, it does not need to be level just all on the same plane. If it needed to be level the Navy machinists would never get anything done.
    Quote Originally Posted by GME View Post
    I agree completely, Bill, at least in theory. How do you get a consistent plane that is not level, or perpendicular to level?
    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    I level with a standard level after checking to make sure its true. On a lathe I turn a round bar and check. On a milling machine the head is trammel to the table or vice your using. Over on The Village Press Home Shop Forum they discuss this from time to time, some would call it arguing!!

    Are you using 3 inch square tubing to build your frame?


    Bill,

    I moved our discussion to my old thread, so we don't hijack Dan's.

    I think missed a point you were trying to make. In the first quote above, you suggested that a consistent plane, not level, is what matters. I agree in theory, but for me, getting something in a consistent plane that is other than level would be very tough. That's why I asked how you do it. Then, you came back with using a level. I guess you were saying that if the machine is not perfectly level, it's okay, because you are going to tram anyway, and would end up where you wanted to be. There is the question of inducing twist over time, which could cause excessive or premature wear on the ways, but probably not so much of problem with a small, "relatively" light machine. Anyway, I got it all as level as possible, then trammed. I should be good to go. Same goes with the CNC. I will level it as well as I can, and tram the spindle as usual. That's what I did with my first CNC and it worked out okay.

    I am not using tubing to build my frame. I'm using 3 inch square 80/20 extrusions - the heavy duty ones. The base design looks pretty much like the Saturn 2. on each side, a 3 x 3 piece of extrusion running fore and aft, 5 pieces of 3 x 3 running up and down, and another 3 x 3 on top of the uprights, also running fore and aft. A difference is in the cross pieces the spoilboard mounts to. I am using 3 x 3s for those pieces as well. Probably a bit of overkill, but I wanted the extra stiffness the larger extrusions would provide. I'm using 3/4" and 3/8" aluminum plates for the gantry interface. The 3/8" piece corresponds to the thin interface plate welded to the gantry. The 3/4" piece mounts to the linear rails. Lots of holes, slots and threads to cut. I like this interface design, because it gives more adjustability than most any other design. Difficulty with adjustability was a major problem I had with my first machine. It's interface design was similar to the early extrusion gantry used on the Saturn 2. My first machine gave me fits when I squared the gantry. I used every bit of adjustment it had, and I had to work hard to get it.

    I thought about using steel and welding, but I knew that without serious work designing and building a jig, I would never achieve an acceptably flat, square and plumb frame. Even then, I could expect weld stresses to cause alignment problems. At the end of the day, I wasn't confident that I could pull off a machine that I would be happy with. Actually, I was pretty confident that I wouldn't be any off than I was with the Saturn I sent back. I'm okay with aluminum. My first machine worked okay, after hours of tweaking. Also, CNCRP has a lot of very happy owners of their pro machines. The machine I'm building is significantly heavier and stiffer than theirs, so I think I will be happy in the end.

    Oh, I forgot to mention that I bought CNCRP's ball screw Z axis. I also went with an 80mm X 160mm extrusion (vs. the imperial equivalent), so I could build the X axis running gear to follow CNCRP design. Metric meets imperial at the 3/8" gantry interface plate.

    On other thing. On Dan's thread, you mentioned moving to Acorn, if you finally get fed up with Mach3. As I commented in a post sometime back, it only accommodates four driver/steppers, which rules out a rotary axis. No big deal, if you are not interested in a rotary axis. I started with Mach3, but migrated over to Mach 4 awhile back. I love it. I believe Gerry has commented on Mach4 being difficult to set up, but I found it pretty straightforward. With a smoothstepper, Warp9 has a tutorial for setting up Mach4 (most of the settings are in the Smoothstepper plugin). It's well written and easy to follow. Just follow the instructions and you are off and running. The only thing I don't like about it is the lack of support for the usual pendants, or a joystick. Instead, they have an included plugin for a ShuttlePro. The ShuttlePro is just okay. It has many of the pendant functions, but it's not particularly comfortable to hold and just looks and feels cheap. I liked the X-Box joystick setup in Mach3 much better, although I planned to change to a pendant until I learned that Vista is the only pendant with a plugin, it wasn't fully functional, and the folks at Vista have showed no interest in improving the plugin. I just checked; they are still on ver. 1.00.

    What have you been working on lately?

    Gary


















    .





  2. #142
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1740
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Gary I guess I errored a bit. Since my garage floor was not poured level I just use a level to insure its close and all four legs are on the same plane. Meaning it does not have gaps under the feet. I install bolts to insure it does not walk around when in use but do not tighten, just snug. When you tram a mill table or router table to the head with a dial indicator it insures it will cut true. A lathe test bar shows the bed is not twisted.

    Here is some discussion on the subject from Practical Machinist but since CNC does not allow hot links from another board I have to do a edit

    Well I can't get it to work, thanks CNC Zone but go to Practical Machinist and do a Search for this > Thread: How important is leveling a lathe or mill 90643 No Links allowed here! I found with a Google Search

    Last edited by wmgeorge; 01-09-2019 at 08:39 AM.
    1000x750 Workbee CNC - Mach4 - PMDX USB - Windows 10 Pro


  3. #143
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    Gary I guess I errored a bit. Since my garage floor was not poured level I just use a level to insure its close and all four legs are on the same plane. Meaning it does not have gaps under the feet. I install bolts to insure it does not walk around when in use but do not tighten, just snug. When you tram a mill table or router table to the head with a dial indicator it insures it will cut true. A lathe test bar shows the bed is not twisted.

    Here is some discussion on the subject from Practical Machinist but since CNC does not allow hot links from another board I have to do a edit

    Well I can't get it to work, thanks CNC Zone but go to Practical Machinist and do a Search for this > Thread: How important is leveling a lathe or mill 90643 No Links allowed here! I found with a Google Search

    Thanks Bill,

    I've read a number of post on Practical Machinist, including those about leveling. Appreciate the suggestion, though. I have an Edge Technology Pro Tram System, which works great. I wish it had a greater distance between the indicators, but I still like it. I've used it on my mill and used it on my CNC spindle. It's a product I can recommend.

    Gary




  4. #144
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by ger21 View Post
    Don't take my word for it, as I don't have any experience with one. I'm assuming that since it's extrusion based, that everything has some adjustment? Based on all the post about adjusting the gantry on the Saturn, I have to believe that the CNCRP is much more adjustable??

    I just looked at the manual, and the gantry extrusion is attached with t-nuts in the slots, which should give you a little bit of wiggle room.
    I'm pretty sure that their parts are machined pretty accurately, and getting it square shouldn't be an issue.

    I LOT of people here are using CNCRP machines, and I've never heard of an issue assembling it square.

    Gerry,

    FWIW CNCRP uses 80/20 extrusions. In fact, from the posts I've read, the extrusions go straight to the customer from 80/20. I mention this because of 80/20's cut tolerances. They advertise a cut length tolerance of .015" and a squareness cut tolerance of .002" per inch. My first machine, the FLA 4x4 was 80/20. Their tolerances were sometimes blown, although they weren't necessarily the same from piece to piece. Take a .006 error (what I actually observed) on one end and extend it over a 60" and you can see it (assuming you are looking for it). I was using precision squares and it was clearly off.

    I just bought a load of 3"X3" extrusions for my newest machine build. The are off about .006-.008". When I started setting up the leg sets, I fastened one together, and put the second on top of the first. The error really stood out. I didn't have to look for it. On went in one direction and the other in the opposite direction, so the error was doubled. Otherwise, I wouldn't have seen it without a square. I haven't started checking the lengths yet (will have to stand them one end on a test plate and compare the length differences with indicators). I'm thinking that most folks assemble the CNCRP kits without putting in a lot of effort to check squareness and length of the extrusions. If they aren't looking for a problem, they don't find it. I know how it was when I put my first one together. I was excited to get it, and waded right in assuming that all was as it should be. I didn't have a mill at the time, so I fixed the ends with shims. Very fussy and time consuming. I also added some aluminum angle to ensure that the extrusions couldn't shift. This time around, I'll be milling all of the ends to square and length.

    In case anyone's interested, it's a deep dive to find 80/20's cut tolerances. If you put in a search on their site, you come up empty. The tolerances are found
    on page 851 of their catalog under Machining Services.

    Gary




  5. #145
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1740
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Yet there are thousands of CNCRP customers using those same machines day in and day out making money. Because of the adjustablity built and in the design that .006 inches of normal manufactoring toterance over 6 ft means nothing. Your final setup and adjustment makes it right. I understand your need to get things perfect on the build, especially after the last build .


    My other thought if you start squaring up by removing material on the end don’t you need to do the same for the other side and all related component's? Otherwise it would be out of square.

    Last edited by wmgeorge; 01-14-2019 at 08:05 AM.


  6. #146
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    Yet there are thousands of CNCRP customers using those same machines day in and day out making money. Because of the adjustablity built and in the design that .006 inches of normal manufactoring toterance over 6 ft means nothing. Your final setup and adjustment makes it right. I understand your need to get things perfect on the build, especially after the last build .


    My other thought if you start squaring up by removing material on the end don’t you need to do the same for the other side and all related component's? Otherwise it would be out of square.

    Thanks Bill. I recognize there are thousands of CNCRP machines out there working and earning there keep. Some owners probably got lucky and got extrusions that were cut to a closer tolerance. For others, it probably didn't occur to them that the parts weren't cut square, or were a little too long or short, and they didn't use precision squares to set them up. More likely, many just used tape measures, which wouldn't reveal anything being off. Ignorance is bliss, as they say. That's where I was when I started my first build. It never occurred to me that there could be variations. You have to search to find 80/20's cut tolerances, and the folks who sell kits don't tell you about it. For most things people make, e.g., signs, plaques and odd 3d pieces, you don't see the inevitable inaccuracies, so they don't really matter. However, if you want to make some close fitting parts, problems could arise. I am after accuracy, because I want to make some of those close fitting parts, and admittedly, I am obsessive about setting up my tools as accurately as humanly possible.

    Your observation about having to mill both ends is correct. It looks like 80/20 has very long tables on each side of their saw. This stuff comes in stock lengths of 145" and 242". Best I can figure, they throw a 20 foot piece on the bed, set a stop for the cut length, slide the stock to the stop and cut. Then, repeat for how ever many pieces are needed. If the blade is slightly tilted, or the fence and blade aren't perfectly perpendicular, you get an angled cut on each end (thus, the tolerances). That is what I'm seeing. I have what amounts to a parallelogram, which is what you would get with a saw slightly out of adjustment. What I'm seeing is the same thing I saw on my first kit machine - both ends angled in parallel.

    .006" out to square makes more difference than you might think at first blush. As I calculate it, .006" translates to .136" (more than 1/8") off a perfect 90 degrees for a 68" long piece. That's a lot. I'm also going to have to measure the lengths, so I get them all the same too. I plan to find the shortest piece and mill all the ends to get them to that length. I'm hoping to get lucky and find them to all be the same, But I'm not holding my breath. On some short pieces (I have 10 pieces 5" long (risers)) it will be an easy facing operation. On the longer pieces, it will be more difficult.

    Unfortunately, it's all a bit more complicated. I am using the same fastening method CNCRP currently uses for it Pro kits. 80/20 refers to them as anchor fasteners. With the anchor fasteners, the extrusions must be oriented such that one face is oriented on the top or bottom. The perpendicular faces must be oriented on one side or the other. The fasteners fit into milled holes in the extrusions, limiting the orientation. So, the tolerance error can affect plane A on one piece (side to side), and Plane B (up and down) on the next one. It has to do with the side the holes were milled into. No guarantees that all pieces were milled with a consistent orientation.

    I appreciate your comment, "final setup and adjustment makes it right," but short of milling the ends or using shims, I don't know how to set it up and adjust it to make it right. Some clarifying suggestions on exactly how you would set it up and adjust it, other than milling or shimming, would be greatly appreciated.

    I have one other challenge that's related to milling. My milling table is relatively small, about 27", and I have pieces as long as 68". That means significant weight will be hanging off the end of the table, and it must be supported in some fashion. I've thought about making an adjustable stand out of 1515 80/20, and adding some UHMW plastic I have for a sliding surface - it's very slick and will add nearly zero friction/resistance. I'll just need to make the stand perfectly coplaner with the milling table. Probably a very fussy exercise. Other suggestions appreciated. I haven't completed it yet, but will include photos once I get the build going. I'm still waiting on my glass scales/dro for my mill, before I get started.

    Gary




  7. #147
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1740
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    You almost need a horizontal mill.

    Gary if you look closely at their design its not like the Saturn where there is no real way to adjust parallel, square or level the bearing slides or rails. On the Camaster and as most commercial ones I looked at they are adjustable otherwise everyone would be making out square, out of round or have ridges on the flat planed surfaces. Sure the frame needs to be built as square as practical but the adjustment built into the design allows it to be set as close and true to square as you would want. Jump ahead in the instructions or the video I am sure you will find out how its done.

    I have found the folks at CNCRP to be knowledgeable and helpful in everyway, what I have purchased has been well designed and it worked. I do not see feedback online condemning the machines they make as being out of square or poor quality. .

    1000x750 Workbee CNC - Mach4 - PMDX USB - Windows 10 Pro


  8. #148
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    You almost need a horizontal mill.

    Gary if you look closely at their design its not like the Saturn where there is no real way to adjust parallel, square or level the bearing slides or rails. On the Camaster and as most commercial ones I looked at they are adjustable otherwise everyone would be making out square, out of round or have ridges on the flat planed surfaces. Sure the frame needs to be built as square as practical but the adjustment built into the design allows it to be set as close and true to square as you would want. Jump ahead in the instructions or the video I am sure you will find out how its done.

    I have found the folks at CNCRP to be knowledgeable and helpful in everyway, what I have purchased has been well designed and it worked. I do not see feedback online condemning the machines they make as being out of square or poor quality. .

    Bill,

    We have a disconnect. I am not building a CNCRP design. There are some similarities, but also some big differences. My design looks like the Saturn. I start with 2 3x3 horizontal rails. I then attach five 3x3x 5 inch high vertical pieces on top of each horizontal rail. A second horizontal rail is added to each side on top of the verticals. The difference in my design and the Saturn is I added a little extra height to the verticals, and my parts are bolted. Another difference is the size of the cross pieces that form the bed. The Saturn uses steel pieces that are rectangular and narrower than the main horizontals and verticals. I am using 3x3 inch cross pieces. The larger cross pieces should give me twice the cross piece weight, twice the contact surface, and should translate into a bit more rigidity. Like the Saturn, my linear rails will mount on top of the upper horizontal rail and the gear rack will mount on the side. I am reusing the drives. They will mount in the same fashion as the Saturn. Unlike the Saturn, but like the CNCRP, my linear rails will have a little adjustability, because the slots in the extrusions allow for it. If I get extrusions milled to a close tolerance, it shouldn't require much (a few thousands) adjustment. I'm thinking of milling rail mounting jigs similar to CNCRP's, but use my precision straight edges with them to assure straightness. My 36" straight edges are ground to a tolerance of .0002" in 12", as close as I could ever hope to get. My Gantry interface plate arrangement is also similar to the Saturn 2's welded arrangement. The upper plate will be bolted and braced, rather than the Saturn 2's welded arrangement. I'll be using slotted holes like the Saturn's, so I will have the same adjustability when it comes to squaring the gantry.

    So you know, I looked at most every CNCRP build video out there, and have studied their written build instructions so much that I practically have them memorized.

    You also appear to misunderstand my comments about the CNCRP machines. I have the utmost respect for the folks there and for their machines. The shortcomings are with the 80/20 tolerances. Maybe CNCRP has some sort of deal worked out with 80/20 to have their orders cut to a closer tolerance. If they do, good for them, and good for their customers. If they don't it's out of their control. Their design is a solid one, and they have changed some things over time to make it better. I don't condemn their machines, or want to even suggest they are poor quality. I even bought their ball screw Z axis and related parts to incorporate in my design. If I thought their stuff was poor quality, I wouldn't do business with them. As I've said. my gripe is with 80/20. On the other hand, none of the stuff out there speaks to the tolerances or how to deal with it when encountered. I suppose if folks aren't complaining, there's no point.

    One other thing about CNCRP's design. Since they use the metric equivalent of 1.5x3 extrusions for their frames, there is less to go wrong. Their fasteners are milled to fit only one way, so the cutting errors will be consistent. At worst cases, the side rails will form a parallelogram, which isn't really a problem. The linear rails can still be coplaner and the gantry line up perpendicular. My first build, the FLA kit, was designed more along the lines of the Saturn. The risers were made of short lengths of steel tubing with holes drilled to line up with the extrusion slots. They weren't milled flat and square, but that's another story. I suppose I would have been better of embracing the error and simply create a parallelogram and call it good. However, with my present design, I brought some of the pain on myself by using the 3x3 profiles, since their orientation for fastening purposes is necessarily consistent. Always some sort of trade off. In the end, I get a stiffer and heavier frame, but I also get more work and frustration to be able to put it together with the accuracy I'm looking for. To be sure, it will not be as heavy or rigid as the Saturn. No bolt together machine will be. On the other hand, it should be way better than a bolt-together machine built with extrusions half the size.

    FWIW, both FLA and CNCRP have to sell at a price point for their kits. Larger extrusions flat out cost more, and because the are heavier, they cost more to ship. I got a deal on my extrusions, because 80/20 ran a short-term 15% off special at the end of the year. Basically. the discount paid for my shipping. Also, larger extrusions introduce the possibility of the tolerance allowances landing at right angles, which would probably be more obvious to the purchasers when putting their machines together. As a business that prides itself on exemplary customer service, safe to say they don't need that grief.

    Gary




  9. #149
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1740
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Ok I thought you were building the CNCRP Pro machine. I guess I would need to see a drawing to understand what your doing and how it would be better. Trust me I understand the reason you want to reuse as much as you can. I spent too much on mine.

    I wonder if a cold saw would work to true up your ends? The good ones are very solidly build and can be adjusted to meet your spec's perhaps? Wow, very expensive unless you can find someone who could it for you to a very close tolerance.

    Last edited by wmgeorge; 01-14-2019 at 06:08 PM.
    1000x750 Workbee CNC - Mach4 - PMDX USB - Windows 10 Pro


  10. #150
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    841
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    Ok I thought you were building the CNCRP Pro machine. I guess I would need to see a drawing to understand what your doing and how it would be better. Trust me I understand the reason you want to reuse as much as you can. I spent too much on mine.

    I wonder if a cold saw would work to true up your ends? The good ones are very solidly build and can be adjusted to meet your spec's perhaps?

    I have some rough working drawings, and some individual parts drawn in Fusion 360. When I get it all assembled in Fusion, I give you a copy.

    I had the same thought about using a saw. I don't have cold saw, but I've used my Festool chop saw on aluminum with a non-ferrous blade. With cutting wax on the blade it does a nice job. Also, I have it dialed in to under .001 in 12". My main concern is the fact that I will be trying to shave off a few thousands, rather than making a cut supported on each side of the blade. When you try to shave off material with most saw blades, the blade tends to deflect. I've tried shaving aluminum in the past. The results weren't stellar. Same problem with a crosscut sled on my cabinet saw. Blade deflection. I have a metal cutting chop saw (the carbide blade type), but I don't believe I could adjust it so it would be accurate enough and it would still deflect. Cold saws use hardened tool steel blades, so they may or may not work. Too much money for me to spend to find out. The cheapies start at a grand and go up fast from there. Finding someone to do it is, at best, a crap shoot. Most machine shops in my area are too busy to bother with a small job like this. Been there/done that with some projects in the recent past. I'm not sure I would trust the few small ones that might be interested. I've got the mill, so it looks my best option for now.

    Oh, one other thing. I recall you mentioning in another thread about Mach3 screwing up and your bit plunged into the spoilboard. Are you sure it was Mach3. When I was running Mach3, before I switched to Mach4, the same thing happened to me. However, as it turned out, it wasn't Mach3. The coupler on on my Z axis screw had loosened up and allowed the screw to turn independent of the stepper. Essentially, the screw was turning and lowering the axis under its own weight. It only did that when the stepper was running. However, what was happening wasn't at all obvious. I practically drove myself crazy trying to chase down the problem. As soon as I added some addition locktite and retightened the screw - problem solved. It never happened again. Note that I was cutting some parts that got screwed up by the slipping coupler. Once I fixed it, I reran them without incident. That confirmed for me that it wasn't a flaw in the code. Maybe not your problem, but I thought it might be worth a look.

    If you have an interest, and don't want to build a new control system (like Acorn), you can upgrade to Mach4. The lack of real pendant support is an issue for me, but otherwise it works wonderfully. Most of the setup is done in the SmoothStepper addin, and is pretty straightforward. Warp9 (the SmoothStepper folks) have a great tutorial for setting up in Mach4. Also, I would be more than happy to help you get it set up. Like you, I'm retired, so it wouldn't be hard to align our schedules. You get most of your settings from the Mach3 config (pins & ports and the like) and it's a breeze from there.

    Gary




  11. #151
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1740
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Gary so far no issues with Mach3 again and it could have been pilot error but I read about at least two others who had the same problem and it was not the coupling.

    1000x750 Workbee CNC - Mach4 - PMDX USB - Windows 10 Pro


  12. #152
    Member PLJack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    251
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Default Re: Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

    Quote Originally Posted by wmgeorge View Post
    Gary so far no issues with Mach3 again and it could have been pilot error but I read about at least two others who had the same problem and it was not the coupling.
    Bugs are bugs. All software has them. There are definitively plenty to go around in Mach3. As for me I have plunged a few times. All my fault.
    Jack.

    Jack
    Ponder Labs (https://tinyurl.com/y96aky5x)


Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


About CNCzone.com

    We are the largest and most active discussion forum for manufacturing industry. The site is 100% free to join and use, so join today!

Follow us on


Our Brands

Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine

Saturn 2 4x4 - Building 2nd Machine