Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Posted by
Jon Anderson
on 2001-01-25 17:41:50 UTC
If the groove can be cut in one pass, you might consider rigging a cable
to the back side of the spindle wrapped around a drum, out and around a
pulley, then attach to the carraige.
This would be a crude adaptation of something I read in HSM years ago to
cut very long tapers. The writer fixed one end of the cable to the bed
and the other to a drum on the cross feed screw that was sized
appropriately. Under power feed, the cable would unwind and advance the
cross slide. Dia must be calculated at drum dia + cable dia, less approx
2% or so for tension on the cable reducing that slightly.
This idea would work sort of in reverse, and I think you might have
trouble getting it to repeat for a second pass. But if you could do it
with a single pass and form tool, it might work.
Jon
to the back side of the spindle wrapped around a drum, out and around a
pulley, then attach to the carraige.
This would be a crude adaptation of something I read in HSM years ago to
cut very long tapers. The writer fixed one end of the cable to the bed
and the other to a drum on the cross feed screw that was sized
appropriately. Under power feed, the cable would unwind and advance the
cross slide. Dia must be calculated at drum dia + cable dia, less approx
2% or so for tension on the cable reducing that slightly.
This idea would work sort of in reverse, and I think you might have
trouble getting it to repeat for a second pass. But if you could do it
with a single pass and form tool, it might work.
Jon
Discussion Thread
beer@s...
2001-01-25 10:45:21 UTC
Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 11:05:21 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Jon Elson
2001-01-25 11:27:50 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Joe Vicars
2001-01-25 11:45:21 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Joe Vicars
2001-01-25 12:00:44 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 12:46:12 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
beer@s...
2001-01-25 15:23:54 UTC
Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Area51tats@a...
2001-01-25 15:45:23 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 16:09:10 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Alan Marconett KM6VV
2001-01-25 16:51:56 UTC
Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Jon Anderson
2001-01-25 17:41:50 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
ballendo@y...
2001-01-25 18:28:20 UTC
Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 19:07:13 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
ballendo@y...
2001-01-25 20:53:55 UTC
re:Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
JanRwl@A...
2001-01-25 20:59:22 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 21:05:49 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] re:Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 21:15:45 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
ballendo@y...
2001-01-25 21:44:57 UTC
Re: re:Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Smoke
2001-01-25 23:41:43 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: re:Re: Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
fastvid@e...
2001-01-26 09:15:24 UTC
Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?
Dick Ganderton
2001-01-26 13:58:21 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Is this too nuts to consider ?