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

Gary,

Not really a problem, if the axis naming conventions are followed.
And the machine(s) are properly set up.
If you stand on the side of a gantry mill(or router), the actions are
just like the bridgeport.

It IS dangerous to define axes by in-out, left-right, up-down tho, as
your post demonstrates...

While we're here: Jon E's answer in the gcode example thread contains
another important point that could be overlooked by someone working
alone in the garage: That is, that the plus or minus of the motion is
relative to the TOOL. This means the BP mill table comes TOWARDS you
to move the TOOL in the plus Y direction... In a gantry router (we're
standing at the end of the gantry) the tool carriage is moving AWAY
from us for plus Y travel.

And Gantry left is minus X travel, while BP table RIGHT moves the
TOOL in the X minus direction.


There ARE some mis-labeled machines out there! The XYYZ of SuperCAM/
super-tech is one example... It is properly an XXYZ.

Hope this helps.

Ballendo

BTW, the minirobo is a "bridge" design.

>With regard to gantry and bridge style machines, I am a little
>confused. In a "normal" mill (like a Bridgeport or whatever), the
>operator is in front of the machine and the X-axis is right-left.
>The Y-axis is in-out.
>Your description below seems to indicate that the X and Y of the
>gantry/bridge machines is opposite to that of the conventional
>machines, with the in-out motion being the X-axis. Is this true?
>If so, I could see a real problem arise if you used the same g-code
>program to make parts on a MaxNC and, say, a Minirobo. They'd be
>flipped around!
>Any thoughts?
>Gary