Anyone using the Tormach style TTS tooling system on a Bridgeport??
Just looking for more repeatability in tool mounting but unsure if the TTS system is a good match for a Bridgeport.
Thanks
Printable View
Anyone using the Tormach style TTS tooling system on a Bridgeport??
Just looking for more repeatability in tool mounting but unsure if the TTS system is a good match for a Bridgeport.
Thanks
Yes, I used it on my KRV, was really good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davek0974
Am out of stock at the moment but that will be rectified shortly.
Thats good to know, thanks
I'm using R8 ER32 chucks at present but being they are made by different companies, they all seat slightly off so repeatability is not 100%. I think the TTS is a way forwards, even with cheaper toolholder makes due to the way it locates on the nose.
There is also the notion of using a straight-shank holder with a nose ring fitted to convert into a TTS style holder, Tormach even sell a conversion kit with the ring and epoxy to fix it.
Is ER32 the way or will ER20 be up to the job? I'm not sure ER20 has enough bite on the tool shank.
What would be best...
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/new-10pcs...oAAOSwA3dYYyfL
or
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-C3-4-...EAAOSwTM5Y5YC-
Obviously i might have to shorten the latter one as you cant fit a 100mm shank into an R8 collet :)
The main reason for asking is that I think the first one is too short at 35mm shank???
I'm asking this out of ignorance - is the R8 taper and the accuracy of the shank of these tools good enough to define the position of the shank in the collet repeatably? I guess it is, it's just that because there doesn't seem to be a hard stop to set how far the "adaptor" shank goes in it doesn't feel quite right to me. I need to do the CNC conversion of my mill before I start thinking about powered drawbars and things, but the price of these things does make it look a practical proposition.
Hi
these are not R8, they are a 3/4" parallel shank, 1.38" long, at the end of the shank there is a 1.5" ring that locates the tool axially on the spindle nose - this is the secret to their repeatability for tool height.
I am using R8 now and they are not bad but do vary as not all made by same maker/machine etc - on the R8 the only location is the taper for both axial and radial location. The parallel shank system has the ring for axial and the R8 collet for radial location, as the collet is tightened it draws the shank into the spindle a little and snugs the ring against the spindle nose.
I have been looking at my tools and youtube videos etc and it seems ER20 is the best all round size, especially as i mostly play sub 1/2" tooling. The body of ER32 chucks is bulky and blocks the access for coolant when using smaller tooling.
I have been emailing the guy in China and am in the process of getting a price for 18 ER20's, 2 ER32's and a drill chuck :)
Thanks - I don't use R8 collets in my machine and I assumed that the collet finished proud of the spindle end. If it disappears slightly into the spindle, I can see how these toolholders work - I had a quick look at the Tormach data sheet on the TTS and they appear to sell a custom collet for the purpose. Makes sense now!
With regards to locating, one key thing to understand, is R8 is a collet system, not a spindle tool holding system.
The only reason R8 ended up being used for spindle tooling, is cheapness. It was far cheaper to equip a Bridgeport with a set of R8 collets, than a set of repeatable tool holders.
Fully agree m_c, I keep looking for a 30taper spindle but never seen one listed.
I did a test yesterday, last week i made the motor mount plate for my knee conversion, some fool made the bolt slots too small ;) yesterday i threw it back in the vise, set my axes zeroes with the Haimer probe and found the Z axis DRO in Mach3 was only off by 0.013mm or about 0.0005" - at least that proves the probe R8 taper is repeatable.
Maybe my issues are that my tool height setter uses a mock R8 socket that i turned up on the lathe - if the holders do not contact exactly the same area on this socket as they do in the spindle then I would see a height variation - this may be my issue.
I think a relocation of 0.013mm is amazing for an old Bridgeport and totally acceptable. I need to run the same test on all tool holders when i get a chance before i order anything i think.
thought of fitting a tool length probe? the probes i use repeat at 0.005mm max error on my cnc
There is a bug with CSMIO setups that prevent tool probing while in the M6 tool change loop, seems CS Labs have no intention of fixing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by battwell
I like the Haimer probe :)
Did some assessment on repeatability, found two results...
Took a few random tools, zeroed the Z axis with my Haimer probe and then swapped tools, going to G1 Z0 F100...
T1 0mm
T3 +0.06mm
T8 +0.09mm
T10 +0.08mm
Now, before i dig any further, do those figures seem reasonable for a Bridgeport conversion??
No point looking for issues that are OK or can't be fixed.
Second result - with the Haimer probe fitted, if i repeatedly approach Z0 at F100 I get perfect result of zero every time. If I increase speed to F200 I get an error of +0.03mm, going to F300 or above I get an error of +0.04mm every time.
My thoughts are a following error in the servo setup maybe, overshooting and not correcting possibly?
if your on facebook- these are the probes i use and sell in the uk
https://www.facebook.com/groups/cncm...c_location=ufi
Dave - I had that problem with an IP/M but was able to fix it by using a slightly earlier version of Mach3. Not sure which CSMIO box you are using but have you tried that? Sorry if you've already been down that path! It's solid for me me, though, both for initial setting and using the fixed touchplate for second-operation resetting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Davek0974
IIRC i am on 062 - gave up messing some time back as i needed to use it, I might revisit this when i get to setting up my powered knee axis.
does probing work correctly as a seperate macro? (not in m6)
Yes if using Cslabs macros. The problem is with Mach rather than Cslabs but the workaround is to use Modbus and talk directly to the controller rather than going thru Mach.Quote:
Originally Posted by battwell
Bit fiddly for most but to the man with a DUZZIT Simplizzzz.:adoration:
As JAZZCNC said, yes it does - i use it on my mini-mill profile for the bridgeport, this has the high-speed spindle and no chance of using tool length offsets at all as the collet is part of the spindle, on this side of the machine i just tick "ignore tool changes" and output one file for each tool number. Its a little tedious but handy if the file is not 100% as they are smaller files.Quote:
Originally Posted by battwell
thats where a tool length probe on the machine comes in real handy. mine is always accurate to under 0.01mm - i hate having to re touch off etc. probably the best thing i ever fitted. (so good i now stock and sell them in the uk)
does it capture exact step output the probe was hit on (like mach with parallel port does) and uccnc now does after a bit of nagging?Quote:
Originally Posted by JAZZCNC
i presume the problem is with their plugin . are they going to fix it?
i havnt tried a csmio myself but i like to know each ones real life capabilities. (same question i forgot to ask re acorn too)
Would be useful.
I see its N/c switch - is there a way to get it N/o on the probe side??
no- it has to be nc (but could use a 2803 inline to invert signal)
why would you want to? nc allows probe to be checked ready - ie not stuck and connected before probing and after backoff
I'm using something like Mach3 version .028 and that works fine with the CSLabs macro for touch-off and M6start/end. When I tested the touch-off mechanism, I was getting +-1 microstep repeatability, which is about .03mm on my router. CSLabs say that they are monitoring the probe input in their firmware so there is no Mach3 involvement at that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by battwell
Even when Mach3 and the CSLabs firmware were still in development they just stood and shouted at each other - "It's all your fault!" Nothing is going to happen now. Looks a bit like CSLabs used an undocumented mechanism in Mach3 which Mach3 then changed after about v .028.
I use a touch plate on the high-speed setup - this is naturally N/o circuit, if its shorted or N/c then probing does not trigger, i was looking for an easy install :)Quote:
Originally Posted by battwell
just a matter of changing probe signal active high to active low in software. are you using mach3? or?
uccnc has added a second probe input so 1 can be configured nc and one no - genius.lol
i have 2 spare probes arriving today from germany ( and 2 for my machines)
Using Mach3 and CSMIO-IP/A controller.
Will have a look