Re: 3-axis machine configurations

Hi Carlos,

I too would be knee deep in chips if I just
built and not designed,reviewed, surfed and
reviewed some more.

Here is where I stand.

Build a small strong unit to allow me to
make some small parts and circuit boards.

Use that to make parts for a larger/stronger unit.
dedicate that second machine to making
larger parts and make it in a style that
will handle an array of projects.

example, a gantry style that could be used to
rout wood, make signs, make parts for a
larger envelope machine. this second machine
being capable of a work envelope of say
36 x 48 x 6 or 8

the 3rd and larger machine having a work envelope of say
36(48?) x 48 (96?) and 24 ?

or 24 x 24 x 24 ?

Each design being larger, costing more and
using more precision parts.

AS you review designs, you will soon realize that
a bridgeport is great, but way to expensive and
heavy if ALL you EVER want to do is rout PC boards.

the final design must be approprate for your
machining funcion.

Afterall, machines are not like pantyhose,
one size does not fit all.

my $0.02

Dave

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Carlos Guillermo" <carlos@v...> wrote:
> Just for the sake of discussion, I wonder what everyone thinks of
> the various possible axis configurations for a 3-axis CNC machine.
> I know if any of you are like me, you've spent way too long trying
> to decide on the perfect configuration for your "iron". Here are
> some of the layouts I've seen:
>
> 1. knee mill (ala Bridgeport)
> 2. bed-type mill (as in many vertical machining centers, and some
> horizontal machining centers)
> 3. moving gantry (as in many wood routers)
> 4. bridge-type (portal design?) with moving table and vertical
> slide mounted to cross-slide on bridge
> 5. bridge-type with moving table, "cutting" head mounted to
> cross-slide, and vertical axis accomplished by raising and
> lowering the cross-slide with a 2 screws (like in some jig
> grinders?)
> 6. gantry type, but with cantilevered cross-slide (some make of
> router?)
> 7. stationary table, with traveling column (like in some really
> huge 3-5 axis mills)
> 8. knee mill with ram-type y-axis (like some Deckels)
> 9. inverted vertical lathe
> 10. (insert your own here)
>
> The list could go on and on. I'm curious about the perceived pros
> and cons of each layout, and if there is an optimum combination to
> be found in terms of travels, stiffness, cost, compactness,
> flexibility of workpiece sizes, reconfigurability of "cutting"
> head, etc. I want a machine to be capable of everything,
> including:
> - metal cutting, including steel
> - hot wire foam cutting
> - surface grinding
> - wire EDMing
> - sinker EDMing
> - horizontal boring
> - lathe turning
> - jig grinding
> - glue dispensing
> - engraving
> - plasma cutting
> - etc,etc
> all with minimal changeovers or modifications.
>
> I could have finished many projects in the time I've spent
> evaluating and sketching different configurations. It's kind of
> fun, though; a nice mental exercise (the things we think about to
> relax...)
>
> Or am I just alone on this??
>
> Carlos Guillermo
> VERVE Engineering & Design