Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Rifle stock

You would use a 4th axis (vertical rotary table) and a tailstock, just as
you would turn work on a lathe between the driven center at the headstock
and the tailstock "dead center" which just supports the work.

On Feb 2, 2008 8:04 PM, <dannym@...> wrote:

> I gotta thank you guys for answering my starter questions about CNC
> milling. You guys are the best!
>
> OK, next question. Say I'm building a crossbow with a rifle-type stock,
> say 32" long, with some nice complex curves and I have a Taig. This is way
> beyond the handling capacity of the table. In fact the whole thing sounds
> like I would do best with a 4th axis anyways not just putting it flat on the
> table on its side. But even still, it's far too long.
>
> Well first question is, I assume that even if this were something that fit
> on the table wouldn't we have 2 holders, one the powered 4th axis the other
> a free-rotating clamp? What is such a thing called, or do we just buy a
> cheap rotary table and remove the gears so it turns freely?
>
> Actually I could see extending the table with some sort of holder to
> attach the free-rotating clamp off to the side with like a board clamped to
> the Taig's table. I later realized the rotary 4th axis clamp need not be
> directly clamped to the table either. Even still, this would require 3,
> maybe 4 runs due to the Taig's limits on X-distance.
>
> Any comments? Is the idea sane at all, or should I limit myself to doing
> 3-axis milling with the work on its side? I suppose for the most part that
> would work. The trigger cavity and the track couldn't be carved in the same
> steps and there are limits to the features which could be carved into the
> edges, but then you don't always get what you want.
>
> How much of a pain-in-the-ass is it to work with 6 different runs (3 per
> side) with the stock removed and re-clamped, re-aligned, but offset 12" each
> time to expose another area for milling? Would say BobCAD work with this
> plan or make it really really hard?
>
> Danny
>
>


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