cnc for marble

[Rufe0]

Just about every industrial Stone cutting machine uses Helical R&P.

That doesn't necessarily mean that R&P is 'the ideal solution'. Hate to say the obvious but if everyone jumped off a cliff would you join them? R&P is great for a number of things, I think primarily where you have a very long travel. Is it ideal for a machine where you primarily need smooth slow speed movement in a travel length acheivable by a screw? I don't think so but thats just my opinion.

Your also Wrong about the Resolution and Micro steps because no one who runs steppers would run at FULL step 200ppr.

Yes sorry if it came across as me suggesting you use fullsteps. Of course you should use microstepping. What I should have mentioned is... referring to my link http://www.micromo.com/microstepping...-and-realities

"The real compromise is that as you increase the number of microsteps per full step the INCREMENTAL torque per microstep drops off drastically. Resolution increases but accuracy will actually suffer.

The consequence is that if the load torque plus the motor’s friction and detent torque is greater than the incremental torque of a microstep successive microsteps will have to be realized until the accumulated torque exceeds the load torque plus the motor’s friction and detent torque.

Simply stated, taking a microstep does not mean the motor will actually move!"

A microstep doesn't guarantee movement. For my point about wanting a high resolution for smooth slow speed to be valid and useful the resolution has to be real world accurate resolution.

So how many microsteps can you guarantee? Well ofcourse your motor could stall completely, but lets put that to a side for a moment. 1 microstep/full steps you can guarantee them. 2 yeah thats fine. 4 probably OK. 8 maybe I wouldn't be confident. More than that I would say you definitely couldn't call that guaranteed accurate movement.

From the point of view that over doing it is better than under doing it, using 200steps/rev for this calculation means you definitely will get that accuracy. However realistically 400/2microsteps or 800/4microsteps is probably the right thing to base the calculation on.

When the machine is built you can still run it at whatever microsteps you like, nothing stopping you doing that.

I'm suggesting something like 20mm pitch screw with 1/3 belt drive. 20mm/3 = 6.6mm / 400 = .016mm or / 800 = .0083. 0.016mm - 0.0083 real world accuracy. Or better yet a 10mm pitch screw with a belt drive.

[JAZZCNC]

That doesn't necessarily mean that R&P is 'the ideal solution'. Hate to say the obvious but if everyone jumped off a cliff would you join them? R&P is great for a number of things, I think primarily where you have a very long travel. Is it ideal for a machine where you primarily need smooth slow speed movement in a travel length acheivable by a screw? I don't think so but thats just my opinion.

You obviously never built a large machine.? If you had you'd realise the complications involved with using long ballscrews and why R&P is more suited so therefore Ideal for this application and why it's used. Got nothing to do with following the crowd it's a practicle solution that does the job.

Yes sorry if it came across as me suggesting you use fullsteps. Of course you should use microstepping. What I should have mentioned is... referring to my link http://www.micromo.com/microstepping...-and-realities

"[I]The real compromise is that as you increase the number of microsteps per full step the INCREMENTAL torque per microstep drops off drastically. Resolution increases but accuracy will actually suffer.

Ok here again we have typical Theory not matching real world usage. These things your reading while true have no real world affect on how the machine performs, well not that you'll see while using.
There are so many variables that come into play that affect the performance so much more than these technical technical details. Quality and spec of drives and motors along with voltage will have much greater affect, as will Machine stiffness and Resonance.

Motor Ms theory is based on Fixed parameters for a particular motor/drive/voltage/ combination which mostly goes out the window in real world because of too many variables make the machine setup a moving target.

The simple fact is that what your quoting from the article regards Ms/torque etc doesn't have any noticble affect in real world use because of all the other variables come into play. But running the motors in MS range that lets them get affected by resonance certainly does. This is a 100% fact not theory with 95% chance of happening if you run at full step with poor spec components.!

When the machine is built you can still run it at whatever microsteps you like, nothing stopping you doing that.

Sorry but again this not true. There is a limit you'd run at. Running too high causes all sorts of undesirable results which have a negative affects on performance and system.
The simple fact is that there is NO IDEAL setup and each combination of components and machine design/Stiffnes needs to be setup to suit that machine. . . .But there is a Limit.!!

We are not going to agree on this probably but I'm sure you'll come to realise what I'm saying when you have built a machine.!

[Rufe0]

Re:JAZZCNC

Your not saying anything that I haven't said. I said he should try out different settings to find what works best.

I'm saying on top of that he should design his new machine with high resolution in mind for smooth slow speed assuming that you won't get better than 2 or 4 microsteps accuracy. That way if you set your machine to 8 or 16 microsteps and it achieves that accuracy then great you've not lost anything. If it can only achieve half that accuracy then thats OK because you designed it with that in mind from the start.