Thread: Cutter accuracy
Hybrid View
-
13-03-2017 #1You think that's too expensive? You're not a Model Engineer are you? :D
-
13-03-2017 #2
I take your point, but I am taking light cuts off MDF (a 1mm pass, 4mm depth of cut, 6mm cutter). I'm not saying I'm right, but I can't see how I can take cuts much lighter than that! I'm only removing dust at this point.
-
13-03-2017 #3
If your cut errors are consistent then you can use cutter compensation to correct for the mysterious error you are encountering.
If you want to locate the error and the cutters are not under size by the error you are seeing then something on your machine is flexing by close to the error amount, there is no magic by which a cutting edge can temporarily shift into another dimension to allow the edge to dodge the material ;-)You think that's too expensive? You're not a Model Engineer are you? :D
-
22-03-2017 #4
To draw a line under this one (at least, until something else makes me get out the worry beads)...
After doing a lot of checking, measuring everything I could, including duplicating measurements I had already done, I have concluded:
my X ballscrews (2005, C7) appear to have a pitch error of about 0.1mm in 100mm. This is somewhat greater than the nominal C7 accuracy of 50um in 300mm, and I would put it down to measuring error except that...
my Y ballscrew (1605, C7) appears to have a similar error but in the opposite direction. I would like to measure travel over a longer distance but I'm limited by the measuring tools I have available (Mitutoyo 200mm vernier caliper, in this case).
Both these errors could be compensated by tweaking "steps per" in Mach3 although I'm a little reluctant to do this without being able to check errors over a larger range.
All ballscrews seem to have about 50um backlash. I have not been able to find a spec for this for a C7 ballscrew, but it's a bit more than I would have hoped. However, for a machine intended for mainly woodworking, this is perfectly adequate, and even for making things like profiled aluminium plates isn't an issue. However, I might consider carefully doing things like machining a bearing housing and that might still have to be done on the milling machine with a boring head or suchlike.
Rechecking cutter diameters, I think that my original problem was that my single-flute cutters are cutting a tad undersize and I shall need to go through and carefully check and record actual cutting sizes so that I can include these in my CAM tool library. I note comments about tool tables, but on the whole I prefer to work with a "calibrated" tool library in CAM and not bother with tool tables in Mach3. I might change my preference in time (I have used tool tables with LinuxCNC in the past - I'm happy with the principle) but the net effect is the same. I have control of the whole CAD/CAM/CNC cycle and I'm not in a production environment where a machine operator will update tool tables locally due to wear/tool change or whatever without needing to re-CAM the part.
Thanks for all the comments, guys, but I have been suffering from my usual position that I don't quite trust anything that I have built while placing too much confidence in bought-in components!
-
23-03-2017 #5You think that's too expensive? You're not a Model Engineer are you? :D
-
23-03-2017 #6
I dont believe the ball screws have errors. More likely it will be that they are not parallel to rails a bit.
Hence when i designed my machines and in general my practice is to align as much as i can one rail in all directions using straight edge and so on. Then next in same axis. Using mounted-bolted plate what makes me sure all the way they are parallel to each other. Then i mount the ball screws or whatever and move axis to one end. Tighten ball screw by hand , move another end, tighten by hand, then repeat that a couple of times till all is tightened. And as the ball screw was guided by the rail, that means they always have same travel and are perfectly parallel. So no Mach3 compensation is needed. In short i dont see any other way to do it properly, except if all is machined to fit, even then doing it so will be better and easier.
Same is valid for belts, where i make perfectly sure all possible is parallel and square.
-
23-03-2017 #7
For a 1mm linear travel error in an axis over 1000mm you'd have to have the ball screw misaligned by around 2.5 degrees, a misalignment with the axis of movement of around 44mm end to end.
With the misalignment with the axis of movement at 10mm the total travel error over 1000mm would be 0.050mm
- NickYou think that's too expensive? You're not a Model Engineer are you? :D
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Bad accuracy with my cnc machine
By masinecc in forum Gantry/Router Machines & BuildingReplies: 12Last Post: 23-04-2015, 06:59 PM -
1mm position accuracy for timing belt
By motomage in forum Belt Drive, Pulleys & TimingReplies: 3Last Post: 01-02-2015, 01:46 PM -
Tool diameter accuracy
By Neale in forum Tool & Tooling TechnologyReplies: 15Last Post: 05-03-2014, 11:18 PM -
Accuracy Problem
By richie00boy in forum Machine DiscussionReplies: 12Last Post: 09-09-2013, 11:24 AM -
Machine bed accuracy
By Colin Barron in forum Gantry/Router Machines & BuildingReplies: 1Last Post: 03-11-2010, 11:24 AM
Bookmarks