Re: minimill thoughts was Re: Dead Grizzly speed control/VFD

Hi Carlos,

Saw your images, Great! Looks like a fine machine. Just one question:
When do we get to see the finished goods? And how will you sell them?
How big?

OK, that was three questions. I'm sure we're all waiting for results!
14x9x10 would seem to be my "Big Brother" to the Sherline. PLEASE keep
us posted.

Alan KM6VV


Carlos Guillermo wrote:

>
> Ballendo -
>
> The first problem I ran into when trying to make a long x travel with the
> conventional configuration (slideways and saddle, ala Bridgeport Series 1)
> was "tipping over". If you have a table that is too long for its weight,
> the center of gravity of the entire machine starts getting to close to the
> edge of the base footprint. Of course, you could bolt it down, but you'd
> also have the problem of excessive overhang greatly increasing the loads at
> the bearing surfaces (both X and Y). This would, in turn, increase the
> friction forces at the bearings, requiring stronger muscles/motors, and
> accelerating wear (again, both X and Y). Now, any slop (both X AND Y) in
> the bearings will be exaggerated when the center of gravity of the table
> goes past the end of the saddle, because it will "rock" to the other end of
> the slop (the weight of the saddle will delay this a bit). All these
> problems are made worse by narrow y-axis bearing spacing, and short X-axis
> bearing length.
>
> I'm trying to avoid these problems in my ground-up machine by using a
> "bedmill" layout, where the table is shorter than the saddle, and the y-axis
> bearing spacing is fairly wide. Ideally, the CG of the table will not
> travel past the point of rocking the saddle, and since the saddle is longest
> and heaviest (reverse of typical knee-mill layout), there is additional
> margin before the table "teeters". If done correctly, there will never be
> enough overhung load to apply a moment to the bearings. The main problem I
> ran into with the bedmill layout for a benchtop mill was having a long
> enough table for fixturing, etc. without ending up with a super long saddle.
> I finally ended up with 14x9x10 inch travels (xyz) and an 18 x 8 table
> (which I hope to leave alone since I'll be sending out the foam patterns for
> castings soon). I'm posting images to the files section, in case any one
> wants to see them ;^)
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/CNC%20mill%20design/)
> Any feedback is welcome and appreciated.
>
> Carlos Guillermo
> VERVE Engineering & Design
>
> Ballendo wrote -
>
> What I can't figure out is why
> everybody makes the x axis travel so short (about 9 inches). Joe M at
> sherline says its because the extrusion warp and twist becomes
> excessive to machine away in longer lengths, but what's the grizzly
> excuse? poseidon? Prazi? MaxNC (could be same as Sherline)? REX?
> Myford? Shipping cost of the extra cast iron?
>
> Wm. Dubin and I have had an offlist(sherline list) conversation
> regarding a "bigger" sherline, but still little. Like a sherline with
> a 3 slot table (same spacing) and a 7 inch Y (2000 mill base) and a
> 12 inch X? I bet the person who brings this (or something like it in
> cast iron) to market will do well!
>
> The MaxNC 15 is close, but pretty expensive. And that lousy motor
> setup, IMO.
>
> Ballendo
>
> 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@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com, wanliker@...
> Moderator: jmelson@... timg@... [Moderator]
> URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
> bill,
> List Manager
>
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/