To big steppers?

[JW1977]

I havent assembled the gantry yet because there are some decisions left before i can do that. However, its based on 2pcs of 80x80 alu extrusion profiles with TBR 20 supported rails bolted directly on them.
They will be held by two (dont know the English term) "short sides" in 10 mm alu. The ballscrews are 2 pcs of RM1610 for X and RM1605 for Y and Z.
The moving piece is also based upon a 80x80 with two TBR 20 supported rails bolted on it. That should give a good idea about friction and the masses that should be moved.

Right now i have to decide one of the following Before i can go on and calculate the steppers,
1. IP-M with 4 steppers. (- for the gantry geometry correction)
2. IP-M with 3 steppers and a belt for the "slave drive". (- for the belt drive but + for no problem with geo. corr. and only 3 motors/drives)
3. Smoothstepper, Pokey or simular with a good breakoutboard, 4 steppers and no problem with the gantry geometry correction. ( - Quality compared to IP-M? Do need a good BOB)

[JAZZCNC]

Right now i have to decide one of the following Before i can go on and calculate the steppers,
1. IP-M with 4 steppers. (- for the gantry geometry correction)
2. IP-M with 3 steppers and a belt for the "slave drive". (- for the belt drive but + for no problem with geo. corr. and only 3 motors/drives)
3. Smoothstepper, Pokey or simular with a good breakoutboard, 4 steppers and no problem with the gantry geometry correction. ( - Quality compared to IP-M? Do need a good BOB)

Why do you think #2 is (-) using belts.? It's not a bad thing it's a good thing. Belts are not a problem regards accuracy and they keep the screws perfectly sync together. This shouldn't be under estimated and I'd much rather have belts linking screws than using two motors slaved together.
Where it becomes cloudy is if the machine is wide. Then belts get messy and awkward so not always ideal.

[JW1977]

When im building i always comparing options. Which is best but what compromises must i make? At first glance, no belt seems like the better option. Its one "link" less in the drive. There may be pros also like with the sync you mentioned. I would like to use the IP-M because you have managed to convince me. If it werent for the gantry squaring it would have been clear.
You and others say that the "hard correction procedure" work well so im leaning towards that or the belt drive...
The other options arent so cheap after all since they demand a decent BOB to work well...
Btw the belt would be roughly about 1400 mm total...

[Clive S]

You and others say that the "hard correction procedure" work well so im leaning towards that or the belt drive...

I would go with the single belt rather than the solid stops It is a tried and tested route with many people using it. If you can afford it go with the mains 230V drive and the nema 34 for the twin screws. The AM882 drives are good they also have stall detection. Make sure you get the 8 wire low inductance motors for the Y and Z axis

Good luck with the build

[JW1977]

I would go with the single belt rather than the solid stops It is a tried and tested route with many people using it. If you can afford it go with the mains 230V drive and the nema 34 for the twin screws. The AM882 drives are good they also have stall detection. Make sure you get the 8 wire low inductance motors for the Y and Z axis

Good luck with the build

Im gonna do do that!
I havent studied the drivers that much yet but i mentioned the AM882 as an example of a "better" driver.
I will definetly go for Mains 230V.

Thanks!