Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Laser Distance Measure

I had a sundstrad omnimill that only had about a 60" cube and was checked
for squareness with a granite square. It was accurate for the distance of
the square but the z axis had a twist that caused the machine to be out
.008". If you were using the Hamar laser you could pick up that type of
error very easily. The setup time is minimum and you can do 3 axes at the
same time. The Optodyne laser is the most affordable linear laser with
accuracy for most machine tools. I feel you can get the Optodyne position
unit for about $7000 and a digital readout is about the cheapest way to do
linear accuracy checks but the machine still has to be square for that to
count and you have to do the manual compensations in the CNC controls where
if you get the Optodyne System it will do all of the formatting for the CNC
pitch error comp tables.


Harko

On 1/7/07, b_e_bloke <blokeybloke@...> wrote:
>
> --- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com<CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Harko Schwartz" <ncmeinc@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Why don't you stick to a dial indicator to check backlash.and
> spindle sweep
> > and a 10 inch level which is all that I use on less precise machines.
>
> A fair question Harko...
>
> We do exactly that on routers and as you have observed precision is
> not so much of an issue there. We build and service router tables and
> the tools you mantioned are fine for that.
>
> Our firm (a small family business) as well as being an authorised
> agent for ECS control systems also does repairs and upgrades to
> large milling machines, five-axis installations, machining centres and
> the like. That is where it is desirable to have a simple laser
> distance measure without all the bells and whistles that are only
> necessary if you blindly believe everything that the sales reps tell
> you. For greatest precision we use a granite square and straight edge
> for a reference. Devices which are simple are inherently reliable and
> versatile.
>
> Also, a lot of our customers do not appreciate being "blinded by
> science" when what we do is really quite straight forward.
>
> By the way; Why do people always cite Rocket Science as being
> complicated? Rockets themselves are pretty simple: fuel, ignition,
> nozzle, whoosh! - nothing to it! It is the guidance of rockets that
> is complex.
>
> I wish you and everyone else here the very best for the year ahead.
>
> Regards
> John
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]