CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations)

Posted by Smoke
on 2001-01-23 14:59:25 UTC
I sure would like to know (via a sketch) what you call a gantry design and
what you call a bridge design.

I might want to build one of these CNC routers one of these days and I'm
just wondering what (all you experts) would call the one I've got designed.

Smoke

>Some thoughts on machine design:
>One of the MAJOR disadvantages of a 'gantry' style machine (like you
>have) is "axis error buildup". What this means is that ANY 'flex-
>ability' in X WILL BE ADDED to Y, and whatever 'flex-ability' is in Y
>(which now includes the X problems) WILL BE ADDED to Z! Finally,
>whatever Z has on its' own will be added...
>
>A bridge design "solves" this problem by NOT connecting Y support to
>the X axis. But at the cost of larger footprint, longer slide
>travels, etc.
>
>The reason I'm saying all this to you is your statement re: changing
>the Z axis shafts... This is like putting a solid performer (think
>circus acrobats) on the shoulders of two wobbly, 'supporters'!
>
>In a gantry design, the X axis (being 'lowest' in the stack) needs to
>be STIFF!!!
>
>Keep in mind that any mass you add at
>"the top" of the stack is like putting the fat man on the shoulders
>of the child... (circus again)
>
>It may even be worth making the X travel shorter, and "picking it up"
>by making the Y travel greater... When using unsupported shafts this
>will definitely increase overall machine stiffness (all else being
>equal).
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Ballendo
>
>>Thanks all those who responded to my stiffness quiestions.
>>
>>Taking cuts no more than 1/2" the bit diameter, and running the
>>routine twice has solved 90% of the problems.
>>Still get some flex when the 1/4" router bit plunges in. I'm putting
>>the 3/4" rails on Z, and trying different bits.
>>Richard S
>
>
>
>Welcome to CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@...,an unmoderated list for the
discussion of shop built systems, for CAD, CAM, EDM, and DRO.
>
>Addresses:
>Post message: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@egroups.com
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@egroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@egroups.com, wanliker@...
>Moderator: jmelson@... timg@... [Moderator]
>URL to this page: http://www.egroups.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>bill,
>List Manager
>
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>
>

Discussion Thread

ballendo@y... 2001-01-23 14:07:07 UTC RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) Bob Campbell 2001-01-23 14:52:34 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) Smoke 2001-01-23 14:59:25 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) ballendo@y... 2001-01-23 15:29:51 UTC Re: RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) ballendo@y... 2001-01-23 15:36:08 UTC Re: RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) Bob Campbell 2001-01-23 15:37:06 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations) Smoke 2001-01-23 16:12:17 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: RE:rE:re:Re: not stiff enough! (machine design considerations)