Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting question
Posted by
Rick Miller
on 2001-11-13 17:05:31 UTC
Thanks for bringing up some of these points I hadn't considered; I just
received the Pacific Bearing catalog in the mail today and plan on reviewing
it further. At this point, I am starting to lean away from their use though,
mainly due to the clearance problem...
They do have some nice-looking slide assemblies in there though,
complete with ballscrews. Probably far too expensive for my tastes though.
Rick
received the Pacific Bearing catalog in the mail today and plan on reviewing
it further. At this point, I am starting to lean away from their use though,
mainly due to the clearance problem...
They do have some nice-looking slide assemblies in there though,
complete with ballscrews. Probably far too expensive for my tastes though.
Rick
----- Original Message -----
From: <ballendo@...>
To: <CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 6:24 PM
Subject: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting
question
> Rick,
>
> Thank you for mentioning this. A friend of mine likes to remind me,
> "WHY are they telling you this?" It often pays to remember that a
> company is in business to sell their product.
>
> While they DO have a greater contact area, being essentially a
> "high-tech" PLANE bearing, one has to consider the material that is IN
> contact... Frelon. Which is certainly? some variety of ptfe (teflon),
> and also relatively thin due to its tendency to "cold-creep" (deform
> under pressure). So what will eventually happen(with heavy loads) is a
> thin frelon surface "backed-up" by whatever the frelon is housed
> within. Not a bad design, and great for many apps, but definitely
> having more "play" than our other choices.
>
> And the physics of plane bearings means that the ratios of
> cantilever-ed load to distance between bearings is fixed at some value
> . A 2:1 ratio means the bearings must be(at least) twice as far apart
> as the distance to the "overhanging" load). Going outside of this
> value(say 1-1/2:1) produces poor results, and "sticking". Although the
> use of high-tech material like frelon modifies the ratio, Ball-bearing
> based linear bearings are more forgiving of poor ratio engineering,
> IMO.
>
> More pertinent than total load for us is the fact that a recirc-ball
> type linear bearing can be set to a ZERO or even NEGATIVE(pre-load)
> clearance; which the pacific bearing products expressly forbid. This
> means that no matter how much load is capable of being carried, with
> the Pacific bearings it will be carried with some "slop", due to the
> necessary space between the bearing and shaft.
>
> This is why I suggested the use of a bridge design over a gantry type
> if using these bearings. With a bridge, there is no "stack-up" of
> tolerance from the bearings supporting the table, and only a single
> stack-up (the Y axis supports the Z) on the bridge.
>
> One claimed advantage of the pacific bearings is that they DONT
> (according TO pacific) increase their "clearance"(slop) as quickly as
> some other type of plane bearings (such as sintered bronze; commonly
> called "oilite"). This, in my experience with these bearings, appears
> to be true.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Ballendo
>
> P.S. Thomson, Igus and others offer a type of plane bearing similar
> to, and in competition with, pacific.
>
> P.P.S. It IS possible to use these bearings successfully in many types
> of CNC machinery; just be sure to understand the trade-offs and limits
> of the choice.
>
> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Rick Miller" <apollo@a...> wrote:
> <snip>
> > This would seem to go exactly opposite of what they claim on their
> website,
> > that their bearings have a greater contact area and thus are capable
> of
> > higher loads than ball bearings. Either way, I keep thinking that as
> they
> > wear they will quickly introduce a lot of slop into the action, more
> so than
> > a ball bearing.
> <snip>
> > Rick
>
>
> Addresses:
> FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
> FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
>
> Post messages: 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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Discussion Thread
Rick Miller
2001-11-09 15:18:31 UTC
shafting question
machines@n...
2001-11-09 15:37:55 UTC
Re: shafting question
ccs@m...
2001-11-09 15:41:13 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] shafting question
JanRwl@A...
2001-11-09 16:02:05 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] shafting question
Rick Miller
2001-11-09 16:44:45 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] shafting question
Jon Elson
2001-11-09 21:44:13 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] shafting question
andesign2@y...
2001-11-09 23:40:33 UTC
Re: shafting question
ballendo@y...
2001-11-12 00:41:50 UTC
Re: shafting question
Rick Miller
2001-11-12 15:03:15 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: shafting question
ballendo@y...
2001-11-13 15:24:13 UTC
follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting question
Rick Miller
2001-11-13 17:05:31 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting question
thscarince@h...
2001-11-14 06:20:26 UTC
follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting question
Eric Keller
2001-11-14 15:56:38 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] follw-up on pacific bearings was Re: shafting question