Eyeballs and comments sought for noob build

Hi,

I have been lurking here for quite a while and learned a lot in the process, so thanks to everyone for that!

I've spent a while designing my first ever CNC router based on what I have read here and elsewhere on the interwebs, albeit with absolutely zero experience in the CNC field, so would appreciate comments, criticisms and anything else you care to throw at it, bearing in mind that I have probably little if any idea of what you are talking about.

This machine will be used for milling soft and hardwoods, plastics and probably some shallow aluminium engraving. The work are is 900mm x 600mm. Much of it is based around 120mm x 80mm t-slot profiles. I have not made any decisions regarding the electronics yet, since I want to get the design to a workable state first. All suggestions regarding the electronics are gratefully received nonetheless.

The rails (20mm) for the gantry are located under the bed in order to save some width and reduce the amount of dust contact that will inevitably occur. No idea if this is a good idea, or a disaster in the making. Gantry walls are 20mm thick.

All the motors will be drive belts, which will allow me to play around with pulley ratios. I have read a considerable amount regarding the belts-versus-direct-drive argument, but for my purposes I'm keen on using belts.

Some piccies below, looking forward to comments, sagacious advice and no doubt some humorous comments with regards to the sheer noobiness of the design. Please be gentle :-).

Attachment 20551Attachment 20552Attachment 20553Attachment 20554Attachment 20555Attachment 20556Attachment 20557Attachment 20558Attachment 20559Attachment 20560Attachment 20561Attachment 20562

Hi
In general this is easy to build design but I would change it slightly:

1. Put rails on spindle plate and blocks on Z plate (this will give zero torque at top spindle position, your design create torque on spindle plate regardless of the spindle position)
Attachment 20675
2. Y blocks I would install on top rather on the bottom (it easy to make guard if you want to protect blocks against dust) - too big arm from bottom blocks to top of the gantry - think about forces
Attachment 20672
3. Direct drive is transfer vibration to the motor better to use gear and belt.
4. I would use one motor for Y drive driven by pulley
Attachment 20673
5. Gantry should be connected on the bottom - not open. This make it stiffer and side plate a bit thin
Attachment 20674

Loads of luvverly advice, thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

Hi
In general this is easy to build design but I would change it slightly:

1. Put rails on spindle plate and blocks on Z plate (this will give zero torque at top spindle position, your design create torque on spindle plate regardless of the spindle position)

---

Great idea. I don't remember seeing this anywhere, or probably I did, but simply didn't notice it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

2. Y blocks I would install on top rather on the bottom (it easy to make guard if you want to protect blocks against dust) - too big arm from bottom blocks to top of the gantry - think about forces

---

I was wondering about the pros and cons, so that's very helpful. Will have to look around for ideas to protect the rails from dust, or at least mitigate the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

3. Direct drive is transfer vibration to the motor better to use gear and belt.

---

Is the direct drive on the z axis such an issue? Should I make that belt drive as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

4. I would use one motor for Y drive driven by pulley

---

Is there a disadvantage of using two Y motors? Sure, they can get out of sync, but surely two homing switches/sensors should take care of that between jobs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

5. Gantry should be connected on the bottom - not open. This make it stiffer and side plate a bit thin

---

I was not sure about that. My thinking was that by using two Y motors, I could save some weight, and the two motors and lead screws would compensate for the added stiffness the connecting plate would provide. Is this incorrect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danilius

Loads of luvverly advice, thanks!

Is the direct drive on the z axis such an issue? Should I make that belt drive as well?

Is there a disadvantage of using two Y motors? Sure, they can get out of sync, but surely two homing switches/sensors should take care of that between jobs?

I was not sure about that. My thinking was that by using two Y motors, I could save some weight, and the two motors and lead screws would compensate for the added stiffness the connecting plate would provide. Is this incorrect?

---

belt transmission gives you extra flexibility, you can adjust gear ratio means=feed, easier do deal with resonance if any occurs, allows to mount motor in two position (up side down and shaft up).
Z axis takes most vibration as is driving spindle up and down, so those shaky shaky gets to the motor and disturb in high speed. My first machine was driven by coupling - cheap Chinese, than with plastic insert, odiham finally end up with 1:1 pulley.

Y drive, if your power supply can handle biggest nema 23 3Nm motor without extra voltage than one motor should be ok and will wait only few hundreds grams more than 1.9Nm. Advantage of having one motor and two ballscrew is lack of need for squaring the gantry (one motor less, 2 sensor less)
Motor have to be powerful enough so they do not loos steps, if you loose steps you loose your job, material, time.

Gantry - more braces make it stiffer - joining them under bed will increase the weight but benefit you gaining by stiffer, more accurate machine are far more important.
I hope somebody else will give you some inside, I only build 3 machines and even on last one I would make something different, now I designed another one will post it soon.

Good luck with the build

Thanks for that. I'm a little concerned that a belt that long will introduce other issues, so will see what to do about that. Will attempt to alter the z axis for a belt drive. I don't suppose it should be too difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

belt transmission gives you extra flexibility, you can adjust gear ratio means=feed, easier do deal with resonance if any occurs, allows to mount motor in two position (up side down and shaft up).
Z axis takes most vibration as is driving spindle up and down, so those shaky shaky gets to the motor and disturb in high speed. My first machine was driven by coupling - cheap Chinese, than with plastic insert, odiham finally end up with 1:1 pulley.

Y drive, if your power supply can handle biggest nema 23 3Nm motor without extra voltage than one motor should be ok and will wait only few hundreds grams more than 1.9Nm. Advantage of having one motor and two ballscrew is lack of need for squaring the gantry (one motor less, 2 sensor less)
Motor have to be powerful enough so they do not loos steps, if you loose steps you loose your job, material, time.

Gantry - more braces make it stiffer - joining them under bed will increase the weight but benefit you gaining by stiffer, more accurate machine are far more important.
I hope somebody else will give you some inside, I only build 3 machines and even on last one I would make something different, now I designed another one will post it soon.

Good luck with the build

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danilius

Thanks for that. I'm a little concerned that a belt that long will introduce other issues, so will see what to do about that. Will attempt to alter the z axis for a belt drive. I don't suppose it should be too difficult.

---

use good quality gates HDT 15mm braided one - there will be flex which shouldn't give you error bigger than 0.02mm (I referring here to my steel machine which was 115kg)

Food for thought. Thanks! Time to get back to drawing :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom J

use good quality gates HDT 15mm braided one - there will be flex which shouldn't give you error bigger than 0.02mm (I referring here to my steel machine which was 115kg)

---

Hi,

Connecting the gantry at the bottom will give little benefits but, by moving the legs far apart, the base will be a lot weaker.

Why would you put the X rails "hanging"? Only for dust/swarf protection? The side plates extension for guide blocks will deflect a lot and put pressure on the rails/blocks trying to twist them. I don't think it's worth it.

The gantry side plates are beefy but only when looking from one direction. If you cut out one third longitudinally and bolt it perpendicular you will have more rigidity in the Y direction without any loss or weight gain. And you can connect to your t-slot profile overhang.

OK, I think I have understood all this correctly. So, I'll move the rails up top, and stiffen up the gantry walls.

So, I have made some changes. I wasn't convinced that the extrusion on the gantry was going to be rigid, so that has been dropped in favour of some solid lumps of metal. It is also much shorter, and the rails have been moved up to the top.

Attachment 20926

Attachment 20930

What I'm wondering is if there is an optimum distance between carriages for the gantry.

Attachment 20927

I dont have any worksop equipment beyond the basic tools, so don't want to drill into the extrusions or anything, but I'm getting a bit lathered about the hseer size of the machine, given that it's only going to have a work area of 600 x 900. Currently the overall dimensions are roughly 1400mm x 940mm. I can trim a small amount off the length, but is there any way of getting this more compact?

Attachment 20928

Attachment 20929

Whydon't you put the horizontal plate of the X axis carriages under the gantry side plates. You will have a lot of unnecessary weight removed and by putting the ball nut support under the same plate you can shorten the ballscrew and the main frame (to the length of the rails). The gantry will slide above the ballscrew end blocks. It is also a good point to put the ballscrews closer to the working surface/plane.

I think you need a plate at the back of the gantry to crate a box. Even a thinner plate will increase rigidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danilius

What I'm wondering is if there is an optimum distance between carriages for the gantry.

---

I don't think there is an optimum distance... The 20cm that you have in your project looks good to me. But I'm not an expert.

If you are using Hiwin 20 long blocks/ or even short/ , 200mm between both ends from outside measured is good for your machine. 260mm is desirable for serious build and i would say ideal, and 300mm for OTT and heavy gantry and really strong and large machine. So basically with Hiwin long blocks they will be almost touching each other .

The idea is the bit to be in that distance , looked from side. In other words the spindle overhang. But on a machine like yours even if not, its not a big deal, as bearings are much more rated than forces involved.

Took me a minute to figure out what you meant, but that's going to be the next change! Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulus.v

Whydon't you put the horizontal plate of the X axis carriages under the gantry side plates. You will have a lot of unnecessary weight removed and by putting the ball nut support under the same plate you can shorten the ballscrew and the main frame (to the length of the rails). The gantry will slide above the ballscrew end blocks. It is also a good point to put the ballscrews closer to the working surface/plane.

I think you need a plate at the back of the gantry to crate a box. Even a thinner plate will increase rigidity.


I don't think there is an optimum distance... The 20cm that you have in your project looks good to me. But I'm not an expert.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyan Silyavski

If you are using Hiwin 20 long blocks/ or even short/ , 200mm between both ends from outside measured is good for your machine. 260mm is desirable for serious build and i would say ideal, and 300mm for OTT and heavy gantry and really strong and large machine. So basically with Hiwin long blocks they will be almost touching each other .

The idea is the bit to be in that distance , looked from side. In other words the spindle overhang. But on a machine like yours even if not, its not a big deal, as bearings are much more rated than forces involved.

---

Thanks for that, quite reassuring.

So, having taken your sagacious advice on board, the gantry walls now sit on a block that is shared between the ballnut and the blocks. The ballscrews are essentially level with the bed. So, gentleman, in your considered opinion am I at the point where it's worth putting all the detail in now?

Attachment 21018

Attachment 21019

Attachment 21020

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danilius

So, having taken your sagacious advice on board, the gantry walls now sit on a block that is shared between the ballnut and the blocks. The ballscrews are essentially level with the bed. So, gentleman, in your considered opinion am I at the point where it's worth putting all the detail in now?

Attachment 21018

Attachment 21019

Attachment 21020

---

Yes, looking good now.

Hi,

Something to consider might be a double plate set up when attaching the y-axis. This allows for easier adjustment.
In essence the y gantry sides have a base plate attached to form a y-axis assembly. This can then be bolted to a matching plate that is attached to the x-axis carriages.
See http://www.mycncuk.com/threads/10403...aver/page4/#31 & the following post for a better explanation.

This can be seen in a very recent post of the finished machine here (post #69)
http://www.mycncuk.com/threads/10403...aver/page7/#69

Cheers

Good point of the double plate for easier adjustment.

If you want a stronger machine...
Attachment 21064

Regarding the length of the X axes screws and the overall length of the machine I do not see why you need the frame longer than the linear rails. If you lower the ballnut mount with a spacer and move it to the back (closer to the motor) you can shorten the screw at front by at least 10 cm, having the end blocks going under the gantry base plate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greeny

Hi,

Something to consider might be a double plate set up when attaching the y-axis. This allows for easier adjustment.
Cheers

---

It's definitely something to consider as a future mod, or son-of- machine. I really like the concept. Right now, since this is my first ever build, I want to keep things as crude as possible. From what I have read I have so mucg fun to look forward too, like aligning everything, tramming and smashing through a collection of cutters. Can't tear mt hair out anymore coz I'm bald.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulus.v

Good point of the double plate for easier adjustment.

If you want a stronger machine...
Attachment 21064

Regarding the length of the X axes screws and the overall length of the machine I do not see why you need the frame longer than the linear rails. If you lower the ballnut mount with a spacer and move it to the back (closer to the motor) you can shorten the screw at front by at least 10 cm, having the end blocks going under the gantry base plate.

---

Oooohh, nice one. Definitely need to give that a go. Thanks for that.

In fact, thanks to everyone. Sop far all the advice has been spot-on and seriously helpful.

Being such a noob, it just occurred to me while working on the detail that I have no idea if I should go for tapped holes or use nuts (nylocs?) instead. Is there a rule of thumb for this sort of thing?