X3 mill with rails, ATC, new motor

[dazza]

a cracking thread again jon.
im looking forward to seeing how this performs,thanks for posting ;)

[Jonathan]

im looking forward to seeing how this performs,thanks for posting ;)

You're not the only one!


I finished rewinding the motor the day before yesterday, so here it is ready to varnish:




Checked the back-emf constant was correct by spinning it in the lathe and measuring the peak voltage with oscilloscope. Then powered a small light bulb with it for general amusement...




I tested the motor with my driver last night, just open loop control - will post a video if anyone's interested.


I started a job at university yesterday, so progress will be slower for now. I'll instead concentrate on finishing off the motor driver design and making them.

[Jonathan]

loved the bolt spacing theory so thanks for sharing that, cant wait to see the rest, keep up the good work !

Since you seem to like bolts, here's my justification for putting four setscrews in the motor pulley...

A setscrew works by applying a force which results in a contact force between the opposite side of the shaft and bore. Based on the tightening torque of the setscrew, we can calculate this force and if the co-efficient of friction between the shaft and bore is known, the holding torque can be determined - approximately of course.

For one screw it's very simple - the axial force on the screw is equal to the contact force (C) between the shaft and bore, so:

.
.
.
.

.
.
.

The motor shaft diameter is 12mm, we can fit M5 grubscrews, they're black and according to this list the tightening torque is about 4.7Nm, so substitute that lot in:

.

With multiple screws, we have to resolve the forces to find the effective contact force. Define the angle as the angle between the two screws, then resolve the force on one screw in the radial direction and double it to get the radial force for both screws:

.

I put the screws spaced at 90° because it makes milling the flats on the shaft easier, but this formula shows that the smaller the angle between the screws, the greater the holding torque, so 60° would have been better. For 90° that reduces to ., so now we have .. That torque is a little greater than the motor rating, but shock loads could impose much higher torques so I added another two screws further along the shaft to double the load capacity.

Some pictures I forgot to post of testing the motor:

[Jonathan]

A week ago I made some progress with the power drawbar in preparation for the ATC system, here's a quick video to demonstrate:



More to follow in a couple of weeks, other projects getting in the way...

[Jonathan]

I got the ATC working this weekend - at least in principle:





I've made quite a few parts for the carousel etc, but they're all quite simple so it didn't take long. There's a few issues I've mentioned in the video - the main things are to add sensors, change the coupling between the carousel and gearbox for something stiffer and check the clamping torque upon the toolholder. It's currently just controlled using a few lines of gcode - the air solenoids are currently controlled from LinuxCNC via relays just using the M64/M65 commands and delays. When I've got time I'll do it properly, so sensors are checked at each stage (using M66) to avoid mishaps.

[Clive S]

Looking good, it will be interesting to see it working under real load conditions but it looks like a first on this forum.

Well done. ..Clive

[dazza]

Now that's porn,16 tools..it looks smart..i vaguely remember you mentioning mesa/pico hardware for this mill,did you bother.
will the turret be bidirectional and take the shortest route to the next tool or..not that it matters it seems quick enough.
nice work.

[Jonathan]

Looking good, it will be interesting to see it working under real load conditions

I almost forgot - I did try cutting with the DC motor and it seemed fine, but that's not a good comparison considering how much higher the torque rating of the new motor is.

i vaguely remember you mentioning mesa/pico hardware for this mill,did you bother.

For now I've decided it's too expensive for what it gains - more and faster I/O. If I need more inputs/outputs I can add a 2nd parallel port and until I use servo motors the frequency limit of the parallel port is adequate. One temptation for using a motion controller is it could fit in the back of the column, so I'd be able to get all the electronics inside the column.

will the turret be bidirectional and take the shortest route to the next tool or..not that it matters it seems quick enough

Yes - that shouldn't be a problem. I've currently tuned the carousel motor to run with quite low top speed and very low acceleration as the low stiffness of the coupling means it oscillates too much if I run it faster, so it will certainly be quick enough when that's fixed.