Machine Performance: Rigidity vs.

Spindle Power - What is the

limit?
8/21/2016

1 Comment

As I use my machine the past couple months I realize I have a knowledge gap when it comes to setting
speeds and feeds for a particular cut. I use G-Wizard software to determine the settings and then typically
modify the output with the tortoise/hair slider bar because I feel the machine cant handle that setting or
think it wont produce a good surface finish. The problem is that I dont have a good enough knowledge
base in machining nor in this particular machine to make these judgments. In addition, I dont think Ill be
able to gain this knowledge easily as I only use the machine intermittently in a hobby sense which would
take forever to develop a knowledge database on cut history. So my end goal in the testing outlined in this
post is to develop an understanding of when my structural machine components deflect enough under load
to cause performance issue in the cut. Another way to say this is to study my machine rigidity/stiffness
based on the input of my spindle power. The resultant of the test will then be used to adjust/limit the
spindle HP rating in G-Wizard software to produce overall more accurate feeds and speeds for my
particular machine. Ill be referring to the G-Wizard software developed by CNCCookbook along with
some relevant article from that site.

First off lets take a look at the G-Wizard machine setup for my particular router.

Notice that my Spindle HP Max is set to 2.7 HP, working envelope entered in as 25x29x5.5, and a
Machine Weight of 1100 lb. There is three ways to refine the performance of the machine. First is to
simply set the maximum HP and leave it along. Second and third youll need to click on the Adjust
button in the Spindle HP column which will bring up the following options.
Youll notice that 2 additional options are presented in this popup window. The Weight Adjusted HP
option will task G-Wizard software to estimate an adjusted HP based on the weight and working envelope
sizes you entered on the main machine. The Curve Compensate option will use the spindle power curve
data (if you have it) to adjust the feeds and speeds data. As you can see I have a 2.7 HP spindle and G-
Wizard is suggesting an adjustment of 1.41 HP for the weight adjustment option. The actuality of the
machine limiting performance is someplace in between 1.41-2.7 HP and I hope to determine that in this
test.

Before I go any further I have to say that if you still have interest at this point you must head over to
CNCCookbook and read up on the articles related to this topic its packed with invaluable information
and I simply cannot do this subject justice myself. This post is simply to walk you through my method and
show you some results for my particular machine (plus video of the event of course).

So the main article from CNCCookbook which got my butt in gear to perform this test was Set up G-
Wizard for Small CNC Machines. After reading this post I had a brief correspondence with the author
Bob Warfield and he helped clarify some key points for performing this test. In particular this test should
focus on machine rigidity so we want to avoid any other influences which might lead to performance issues
any good test should attempt to remove all extraneous variables. To achieve this we want proper chip
clearing, good lubrication/cooling of the tool, minimized tool deflection, and to hopefully avoid any natural
resonance characteristics of the machine.

Ill use a 1/2 two flute TiAlN coated end mill in a profile milling operation straight along a piece of
aluminum. Ill keep the cut width set to 40% of the cutter diameter and only vary the depth of cut to
gradually increase the spindle power from a low value up to the spindle maximum.

Below is a screenshot from G-Wizard of the last test Ill attempt at max spindle hp (Case #11 in table
below).
 ve checked off the box for G-Wizard to use HSM to calculate feeds and speeds as my simple
profile milling operation has no corners to deal with. This, along with a carbide coated two flute
cutter, bumps up the spindle RPM and federate to be within the range my spindle can produce
maximum horsepower (2.7 HP within 18000-2400 RPM) & maximum cutting feed rate or 220 IPM.
The tool deflection is kept well in check at my maximum test case (well below 0.001) to avoid any
influence from tool chatter. This is one of the reasons to use the largest cutter diameter you
possibly can for this test. Make sure you also minimize tool stickout as much as possible.
Cut width remains constant through the test cases at 40% of cutter diameter (=0.2). This is a
healthy enough cut to demand max spindle HP at a reasonable cut depth (max 0.348) while still
allowing the cutting edges to be outside the cut for proper tool cooling and chip evacuation.
Note: Make sure you dont have any spindle compensation turned on for your machine profile when
setting parameters for this test.

Below is the full set of test cases obtained by varying only the depth of cut in G-Wizard. The actual output
was initially outputting a spindle speed between 21000 and 23000 but I simply forced a 22000 RPM in G-
Wizard to simplify the test and avoid changing the sound in the video.
So now off to the shop
Setup is shown below. I want to make sure I have a nice big chunk of aluminum bolted down to the fixture
plate securely to avoid any influence from stock deflection (thin walls) or deflection in the
clamping. Again making sure to remove those pesky variables from the testing. I also ran around and made
sure I had no loose connections in the machine giving all the bolts a nice tightening. Hmm what else to
consider collet chuck tightened onto the tool, tool stickout ok, mist on. Youll notice that Ive placed the
stock directly onto the fixture plate as this moves the spindle in the lowest position on the z-axis
representing the worst case but probably typical cutting scenario.
Just before starting the test I realized that I want the resultant cuts on this chunk of aluminum to give me a
nice easy way to compare the surface finishes but if I simply pass at the same axis location and only
increase depth Ill potentially scuff up the previously cut surface. To remedy this Ill need to prep the stock
by creating preliminary steps of 0.004 for each test case (see figure below). In addition, after this prep
step Ill machine the opposite face square and take initial measurements. Ill be able to squeeze in the first
7 test cases into my 1 thick aluminum stock and will take passes in both the X and Y axis. If I need to go
past case #7 Ill use the opposite side to get #8-10 and if I get to pass #11 Ill gladly pull out a new piece of
stock unlikely.
Note: After performing the test I realized this whole stepping 0.004 per test was overkill. If performing
this test I suggest simply offsetting each test case by 0.001 to make sure you dont spoil the previous test
cut surface finish and simply live with the fact the last cut will be x thousands wider a cut (probably little
impact).

SANIFY CHECK and more ramblings before I start testing.

Im just about ready to perform the test and realize that I never considered using a end mill to make a
0.2 wide by 0.348 deep cut in aluminum at a feed rate of 220 IPM with this machine. I really dont think
the machine can do this and will be amazed if I come close. Ill take a guess here and set my
expectations. Well I went back to G-Wizard and setup some scenarios with different cutters which I
remember entering as goals during the build some basic setups which I used to get a feel for what I
wanted the machine to do during the design phase. Most of my entries resulted in a MRR between 3 to 7
ci. Looking at my table above Ill guess, or hope, I can do case #6 which would slightly exceed my
expectations at a MRR of 8.27 ci A half inch cutter taking a 0.188 depth of cut with 40% stepover not
too shabby for a DIY router build well see!!

Sorry I know I should simply get on with the testing but I cant stop drawing conclusions before I
start. First off I glanced back up to the table and see that case #6 has a HP rating of 1.43 wow, thats
exactly what G-Wizard estimated HP would be for weight compensation in my router setup at 1100 lb. Is it
coincidence that my initial development which used G-Wizard to estimate my expectations now matches up
perfectly probably not as I used the CNCCookbooks article Ultimate Benchtop CNC Mini Mill as one
of my guides were in Part 4 Bob lays out this exact approach to get an initial idea for the performance you
want and to help size components.

OK so I suggest simply clicking on the video before reading anything further. Ive tried to keep
everything as consistent as possible for each cut including the location of the microphone. Try to pick up
on which cut should be my last attempt.
Partial Conclusions test is not complete yet:
Well as you can see in the video I had issues twice now. Both times the cutter stopping had less to do with
reaching the limit of spindle/rigidity and more to do with simply running into the fact that the steppers cant
handle the cut I THINK! As I post this Im still thinking about the whole situation and have a post over
at cnczone forum to clarify if this could be a different issue. Im fairly confident my overall machine could
have taken a bit more the surface finish looks absolutely fine to me and I didnt hear anything spectacular
which indicated an issue. The steppers seemed to be my limit.
The first test at 220 IPM was actually run at 250 IPM (dumb mistake). I then modified the feed rate in an
attempt to get steppers more torque. Changed to 180 IPM and got a couple more cuts out of her. The table
below shows my actual test cuts from the video.

Im a bit surprised the stepper failed at about the same spindle HP input with 180 IPM then at 250 IPM. I
would have expected it to perform better as the torque available at the reduced stepper RPM should have
allowed a bit more headroom. So is about 1 HP my limit for the steppers? I still think I have headroom
available in the machine rigidity as the surface finish looks ok to me The pictures below show the surface
finish for tests 1-4 and 6 & 7 were identical but I mistakenly took a finish pass off those cuts so you can
only see in the video (no pic).
I spent the entire day reviewing the stepper specifications and what type of draw on the steppers could have
taken place during that cut. Looked at cutting force, current draw, and even did a test where I hooked a
force gauge up the axis and measured the amount of force required to cause the stepper to stall & miss
steps. The force on the gauge was about 55# while the software calculated 27# for the first stop cut its a
bit too close at the 220 IPM setting but somethings fishy here. If it was simply a stepper issue I would
think Id hear the whining of the missed steps which I didnt and Mach4 became flaky after the cuts on the
video which is not typical when the steppers are pushed enough to miss steps.
Maybe someone out there will indicate that the surface finish is in-fact not ok?
For now, thats all Ive got. Will still post this and follow up later as have more information, solve this
issue, or get some servos and have at it again.
This test, although not the expected results, will prove very valuable if the outcome is new axis motors. As
it stands this test has shown that I'm only using about 1.2 HP from the spindle and machine rigidity is
holding up well. This gives me a nice justification that improvements in the axis motor will be put to good
use. The question now is how much bigger do I go!

1 Comment

CNC Router Fixture/Tooling Plate & Axis Zeroing: Design and

Manufacture
4/23/2016

0 Comments

The design of the router fixture plate went through a few iterations in my mind and during this time I've left
the plate a simple solid aluminum table and mounted all my jobs up to this point onto an MDF spoiler
board attached to the plate. I've done this because I don't have much experience in part setup, the use of
CNC machines, nor the use of CNC software to locate parts and wanted to first get a feel for how a fixture
plate can best be used prior to drilling a bunch of tapped holes. In this post I'll walk through each aspect of
"how to setup and start a job" on a CNC router and explain my decisions and final design. Warning: This
post if filled with my assumptions without extensive experience running a CNC machine.. Also of note is
the fixture plate is 5083 Aluminum 29" x 23.5" x 0.63" at a cost of $161 from MidWest Steel & Aluminum.

First, the simple operation of finding, and then more importantly re-finding repeatably, a zero location for
the X & Y axis.. I was very surprised to see that my simply toggle type limit switches which double as
home switches in Mach4 are re-finding the absolute machine zero position with a repeatability of under
0.001". BUT I don't have extensive data yet and still don't trust them so will likely still use some very
accurate mechanical switches which I purchased specifically for finding home (once Mach4 and/or the
smoothstepper get there act together with home offsets). These switches do not actuate from the ramp
angle of the stop block as the toggles do which eliminates a point of error, are connected to the structure in
a stiffer manner, and cost ~$75 bucks vs the toggle switch $7 (not sure how this cost is justified but I'll
assume it's something otherwise I'm just a boob). This has given me a high level of confidence that the
absolute machine position can be found, and re-found from cold start, emergency stops, etc. In addition to
that confidence gained, I've specifically located the switches to actuate and read zero at a location which I
feel most of my part setup will coincide with. Further, at this zero point, my ball screw nut is at the very
end of travel along the screw shaft and at the motor drive end so as not to worry about thermal growth of
the shaft influencing the zero from a cold to warm machine. It's surprising how much a ball screw nut
location along the screw shaft can be effected by thermal growth during operation. THK lists 5 deg Celsius
variation during operation, dependent on loading, which results in 0.002" over a meter - not drastic but why
not simply design out the error when finding zero. I've tried to show this last point in the picture below
focusing on the table axis but all 3 axis are set up with the same approach.

Second, I want the fixture plate to play an accurate role in the router operation. This is not simply a wood
spoiler board and will have accurate machined holes which I want to use to confidently locate a job (same
as a vise on a mill). Therefore the fixture plate must have a relationship to the previous step of finding
machine zero in an accurate and repeatable way - not to mention squareness to the linear motion.
To this end I've machined two pocketed features into the fixture plate to create accurate edges which will
represent the X/Y axis zero point of the fixture plate and together will allow me to 'tram' the plate along the
table motion axis. To find the edges I'll use an electronic edge finder ($25 bucks) as my typical spindle
speeds are simply too fast for a traditional edge finder (thing freaks out at very high RPM). The resulting
offset of these edges to the machine absolute zero found by the limit switches will then become my home
offset entered into Mach4 to set the starting machine (or work) zero upon startup. Now I expect that in the
beginning I'll verify the location of the fixture plate zero to the software zero with the edge finder on a
regular basis but expecting this operation to eventually be a periodic maintenance check.
Now that the software, via the electrical switches, can repeatably find the fixture plate location and
orientation properly it's time to drill some holes. Of course the hole pattern on the fixture plate will be
located relative to the machined pocketed edges to the best ability of the machine I have available for such
a large part... which of course is my router.
So now to the grid pattern I've chosen. First up is the tapped holes which I'll be using 3/8"-16 threads to
match the set of hold down tooling I already have from the mill. I'll be spacing the threaded holes on a 1.5"
grid with some locations missing due to the linear rail mounting locations from below. I'll also be
substituting 17 of these locations with a 5/16" precision hole to be used for accurate location of subplates
(CarrLane CL-3-RP, CL-3-DPX) or used as edge alignment features. I'll be adding a precision 0.500"
precision counterbore feature to 31 of the threaded holes to be used together with a shoulder bolt (CarrLane
CL-32-SS) for semi-accurate locations... not sure if this is useful yet. Two independent 3/8"-16 outside the
standard grid are required to allow mounting a 4" Kurt vise which I have. And lastly I'll be engraving
letters and numbers along the axis.

I've started off with a set of already owned 3/8"-16 standard hold down clamps and added to this a set of
CarrLane 'Tiny Vise Edge Clamps' CL-6-TVR & CL-6-TV. The below picture shows the current hardware
I'll be using to setup jobs onto the fixture plate including the Kurt 4" vise, pins, etc as mentioned above.
Update 8/7/16: The standard hold down clamps shown in the figure have proved to cause issues with
machining around the edges of parts due to the height of the clamp above the part - the spindle collet and
mist nozzle start to interfere with machining path. I've since purchased some more CarrLane parts to remedy
this situation by attempting to utilize a low profile side clamping hold-down. Part were a bit expensive but I
think will be worth the cost.... CarrLane part numbers CL-15-SAC and CL-10-SAC.

Machining:
I used a 3/16" carbide 2 flute end mill to helical mill the 3/8" tapped and precision holes to a 0.3025"
diameter with a 5.5 ramp angle. I then used a 0.3135" carbide reamer on all these holes running it at 1800
RPM and 10 IPM. I had to use carbide because my spindle had 0 hp with the RPM required for a HSS
reamer. I thought even with a carbide reamer I'd have issues at 1800 as this is way off the charts for this
spindle (calculated 0.3 hp at 1800 RPM) but it went rather well without the spindle getting warm at all as it
has an electric fan cooling. Engraved letters and numbers along the edge of the plate was done with an
Amana Tool 45733 60 deg carbide engraving bit. As for tapping the 3/8" holes...... Believe it or not this
operation took over 3 weeks!! I planned to use a Micro-100 TM-250-16 carbide thread mill and although it
took some time to figure out the programming it worked beautifully .... FOR 5 HOLES !!!.... before it
snapped the bit. At $65 bucks I wasn't about to try this technique again, didn't even care what I could have
done better, and immediately started to hand tap the holes. Got about 15 holes done the first night... back at
it for 15 more the following day, and then woke up the next morning and had debilitating back pain! I hate
tapping - always have and know the twisting motion isn't good for an already deteriorated disc
situation. So 4 days on my back to think about the alternatives. I couldn't use the router spindle for ridged
tapping because of the low torque available at the required RPM in addition to not really knowing the exact
RPM to match with z axis feed as it has a VFD. I considered purchase of a Tapmatic for the milling
machine but the plate is simply too large to put on the mill and the cost of these units is quite high.
So.... I ended up purchasing an Articulating Tapping Arm - and LOVE IT! The catalyst came from a video
blog by NYCCNC covering the Flexarm A-32 unit but I couldn't justify the cost of this production unit in a
hobby shop. I ended up buying a 'budget' unit new off Ebay (also available on Amazon) made in England
by "Machine Tapping" and distributed by SRA in MA (exact unit at this Link). There are other low cost
options on ebay but I think this unit is superior at $999 as it comes complete with a full set of ANSI clutch
tapping collets and allows the head to pivot 90 deg (the Chinese models on ebay do not have either of these
items or come with ISO collets - watch out as these don't match american purchased taps both inch and
metric). The unit runs fantastic and the flexibility to use all around the shop will generate far more use than
a Tapmatic type chuck for me. I currently have the unit mounted directly to the router base and it has full
range to cover the entire Fixture Plate and a nearby vise. As the unit can be simply lifted off the mounting
post I'll likely add additional posts at the mill and the workbench and move this tapping arm to wherever I
need it. I was impressed with the quality of this unit including the tapping collets and pneumatic driver and
would certainly recommend if a grand is burning a hole in your pocket - or you hate tapping as much as
me. The only thing I can say slightly negative about this unit is that it sucks the air down rapidly - it works
so we'll that you want to keep the button depressed, immediately start tapping the next hole, and with my
little 30 gallon reciprocating compressor this simply isn't possible (2 holes then pause about 60 seconds).
Below image gallery shows some in-process manufacturing of the plate and some shots of the tapping arm.
Some parting thoughts:

The last step in the process is to have the 5083 aluminum plate hard anodized. This may be a bit
overkill for the amount of use the plate will get but aluminum scratches quickly, I think it will give
the plate a nice polished look, and the cost is not too bad at about $160. I will have to mask the
edges for the electronic edge finder as hard anodizing is not conductive. I used an orbiting hand
sander with 800 grit paper to clean up the plate surfaces prior to dropping off at the platter - I'm sure
this was unnecessary but gave the plate a beautiful finish. Back from the plating operation (added
pic) - they didn't follow the directions and anodized the pockets for the electronic edge finder so I
ended up applying multiple coats of oven cleaner to the pockets to remove the anodizing :(.
I didn't do anything to improve the flatness of the plate but think this might have been a mistake. I
was not sure how the router would do with respect to surface finish and as I hadn't tried this
operation on the router, and the flatness of the plate already measured within 0.0015"; I opted to
leave well enough alone. Since then I've machined plates flat with a 1/2" carbide end mill and the
surface and flatness were well above my expectations - If I had to do over I would have certainly
taken a skim cut of the fixture plate to improve the flatness/squareness with the spindle axis.
 I expect to use 1" diameter by 0.125" thick standoff washers to lift the work off the table when
requiring full penetration or full edge machining of the work. I expect the CarrLane Tiny Edge
Clamps to still clamp the work edge with this offset.
As the tapped holes are reamed to the same inside diameter as the precision holes I expect that after
tapping the ID of the tap will retain enough integrity to be able to use a dowel pin for simple
alignment at any tap location.
Prior to machining the holes I really should have stopped and figured out the linear error of the ball
screws as I'm using standard grade accuracy rolled screws. To do this I could simply borrow the
linear scale encoders from my milling machine and map out the error in Mach4. But to my
knowledge this feature does not yet exist in Mach4 and the location of the milling machine wrt to
the router together with the cable length on the linear encoder makes this difficult, I'm lazy, and
simply want to start using this fixture plate properly right away - so unfortunately I've skipped this
step and hope it does not bit me later on.

Cheers,
Rob
0 Comments

CNC Router Machine Enclosure: Design, Build Details,

& Results (also a mist coolant system)
2/6/2016

0 Comments

One of the first things I realized after the machine started cutting was the amount of mess created. Chips
were not only flying around the shop but creating a major problem by littering the table X-axis rails and
ball screw. In this post Ill describe my recent addition to my router by detailing the machine
enclosure. Ill start with the list of requirement, get into the design, pics and video of build, and then offer
some alternatives which I investigated along the way. "Enclosure" is a term used loosely here as you'll see
it's not your typical containment box approach.

Requirements:

Material removal is aluminum, therefore I can't simply do a dust boot. BUT design should allow for
the addition of a dust boot in the future.
Enclosure should not contain/restrict the chips into a small area around the cutter.
Work area must be visible at all times from in front of the gantry and both sides of machine. I need
to be able to see what's going on and want the ability to take pictures/video during cuts when
guarding is in place.
Must not restrict FULL access to the table for part loading/unloading operation. Quick removal can
be an option here but best is to have full access to table without removing anything.
Protect the linear rails and screws from contaminant during ALL cutting situations and cleanup
activities. "ALL" is a key point here and you'll see how this drove different design approaches
combined together.
Enclosure should not prevent quick cleanup of area INCLUDING some in-process shop vac or
compressed air use during the cut. Quick removable partitions for access is an option here.
Provide some level of protection from broken bits flying off.
Can not restrict current cutting footprint. ie - I considered simply boxing in the cutting table with
~4" side shields on the ends but this would take away from the available table length for mounting
(along with create a nuisance for part loading)
 Should not extend current router footprint. ie - I considered extending bellows or guards to the end
of the table to protect linear rails and screws but this would result in a larger shop footprint required
during the table end of stroke.

OK ... enough of that. It's just that this list proved extremely helpful for me to write down as I found
myself struggling to come up with a sufficient design for my specific router build.

Design Details:
Below you'll see the complete CAD design. It's a bit unconventional for a "Machine Enclosure" as it's split
into a combination of multiple approaches. The design can be broken down into three main sections: 1)
The 'conveyor' protection for the table linear rails and ball screw, 2) The rear guard/shielding, and 3) The
front/spindle shields.

"Conveyor" Protection
The protection for the X-axis Table is the odd ball design here. I haven't seen this approach used yet and as
I write this post, although I'm parts complete and ready to assemble, I've yet to verified it works (fingers
crossed). .... well, just ran the table with conveyor attached - works much better than expected for first
try. Will post a video at the end of this post - kinda cool.

You may say, "why not just mount 4 walls directly to the moving table".... First, the Y-axis gantry motion
is allowed to move the spindle beyond the extent of the table which would then crash into the side
walls. Ok, then make the side walls static by attaching them to the base and only attach the end walls to the
moving table. I played around with this design for awhile but the drawbacks were.. a) obstructed part
loading with the walls, b) used more material $ then the 'conveyor' approach, c) I didn't think I'd like the
looks of the end wall on the table moving around, d) I didn't really think it wise to mount any guarding to
the moving parts.

So the result is a 'conveyor' design using.... ready for it.... PVC schedule 40 pipe and a window shade. A 1-
1/2" PVC section makes up the two end rollers and are mounted to the base table. They don't actual roll but
I'm expecting the window shade to slide freely over the PVC. As my linear rails on the X-axis table extend
about 1" over the extent of the table (I was trying to utilize every last bit of material to maximize stroke), I
needed to make some cutouts for the rail and truck to move to the end position. I think the roller end
position will actually 'clean up' the visual appearance of the table end. A 1" PVC section is then 'slipped'
into position utilizing a slot in the PVC together with the Base 1/4" leg sections. I'm expecting this sudo-
mount to be enough to retain the 1" PVC in place (again does not 'roll'). As for the conveyor material, I
simply had the hardware store cut a cheap $10 window shade to width and will attach 2 pieces to each end
of the moving table, wrap around the rollers, and connect them with a spring for tension. Four (or more)
things can go wrong here.... 1) acceleration of the table causes the conveyor belt to buckle and flap enough
to cause issues, 2) the conveyor does not ride straight and possible slips off one side, 3) the tension of the
belt causes too much friction between the PVC and window shade, 4) the window shade material does not
hold up to the abuse from aluminum chips and continuous rolling back and forth. Time will tell.

Below are some more details of the CAD design for the conveyor.

Rear guard/shielding
The rear guard is a nylon conveyor stip brush (74405T9) from McMaster Carr with a compatible holder
(8813T52). I'm not concerned about visual in the rear so decided to try a brush. It's a 4" long 3/16" width
with diameter 0.014" general purpose nylon bristles. It's a bit stiff and I'd probably choose the 0.010"
diameter if done again. Mounting is simply to the backside of the uprights and allows 2 positions of
mounting, one which allows brush to lay flush with table and another 3/4" up to accommodate a thick
spoiler board. The bristles will allow about 1/2" part interference to go thru the entire length ok but any
higher than this and I think it may bend the aluminum mounting strip. So it will probably allow a 2" tall
part at a reduced width (~4") thru without issue as the overall force from the bristles will not come from the
entire length.

Front/spindle shields
The front shields are made up of Impact-Resistant 1/4" Polycarbonate sheet (8574K43 - blue in pics) &
0.04" thick Chemical-Resistant PVC Type I Film (87875K61 - yellow in pics) both from McMaster-
Carr. The side shields have 4 magnets bonded in to allow mounting to the steel upright and post and allow
quick removal. It also has a cutout where a single piece of film is bonded which allows the spindle to
pass. The main front shield film is mounted to a 3/8" rod which is then attached to a vertical 1"-3/8" post
mounted into the table with a 3/8" universal clamp to allow adjustment and quick removal. I should be able
to remove all the front shields in <30 seconds for cleanup etc.
Below slideshow has some pics of the final results and in process manufacturing ....... and below that is a
youtube video of the 'conveyor' in action.
Update 4/1/2016:
I have cut multiple parts and below is some observations and things I might change if doing again.

One benefit which was a pleasant surprise was that I can loosen one of the universal post
connection, lift off, and simply pivot it out of the way and the opposite post keeps the rod and film
hanging in the air in any position - gives full table access very quickly.
The thin 0.005" window shade is holding up very well and moving great along the rollers. When I
do eventually replace due to wear I will go with thicker 0.012" but still simply buy a window
shade. I've looked at all kinds of "professional" film/conveyor material and just can't justify
anything which cost more as the shade does a fine job for cheap.
 The location of the side shields and front plastic guard is a bit too close to the spindle - I'll likely re-
position to allow some more room.
The gantry rails and ball screw are still getting some aluminum chips flying up onto them - not too
much but enough to drive me crazy. I will likely add a strip of the plastic film around the spindle
mount plate which hangs down about 1-2" to try to contain this issue. Kind of a partial boot.
During cuts chips were being contained well with the guards but a considerable amount of chips
were migrating below the cutting table and collecting very near the linear rails mounted to the
base. I solved this by adding two aluminum angles along the length of the base which completely
enclose the rails. This can be seen in some of the photos.

Added a Mist Coolant system:

I absolutely needed to add a mist system - spraying wd-40 from a can was not fun. I just happened to have
purchased 2 Wesco mist systems at an auction some time ago on the cheap to I went about to use as much
hardware as possible from one of these units to make a custom mist to fit my router build.
The Wesco mist unit works by delivering compressed air and mist to the nozzle tip with two small separate
tubes which run through the braided sleeve. The mist is then mixed with compressed air only after it exits
the nozzle tip - this can be seen in photo below - focus on the brass tip end of the nozzle. A flow valve
controls both compressed air and fluid independently with a manifold block which I mounted onto the z-
axis. The close proximity of this flow manifold to the exit nozzle allows fast response to flow changes.
To position the nozzle I opted for a small Noga model NF1033 articulated holder which has 51mm and
56mm arms. At $75 bucks this is not a very economical solution for holding a mist nozzle but I've wanted
to pick up one of these small Noga arms for the shop anyway, so "two birds". The unit comes with a 360
deg fine adjustment base attached with a dovetail to a permanent magnet which is all removed to expose a
simple M6 thread to mount directly to the spindle column mounting bracket on the router. The NF1033
also comes with a 3/8" clamp holder on the business end which fits the Wesco misting nozzle perfectly.
Below are some in photos showing the original Wesco mist unit and the modifications to adapt this to the
router.
The articulating arm of course moves the nozzle into position with ease and locks to exact location. The
reach of the arm allows the nozzle to be located around the spindle about 270. I opted to replace the
original Wesco SS coolant tank with a simply 2 liter plastic bottle which is located on the base and out of
sight behind the gantry. The elevation of the coolant for this style mist unit must be below the nozzle outlet
to avoid dripping when compressed air is removed and I also found that placing the tank too far below the
nozzle (on the floor of the base) created too much lag time to get the mist flowing and operation was
sporadic.
0 Comments
CNC Router Limit & Home Switches: Design & Performance
2/4/2016

0 Comments

This post will not be about the electrical details of home and limit switches but rather on my choice of
hardware and how I incorporated them into my fixed gantry design. Due to lack of experience in limit
switches and the unknown accuracy they give for repeatable home position I decided to include in the X &
Y axis both a set of limits and a separate (more expensive) home switch. An overview of the added
hardware and location is shown in the below CAD picture. Note that v03 on the download page now
includes this design.

For the Z-axis (pic below) I used a roller lever type micro switch manufactured by Renew, model #RV-
125-1C25. These guys are a bit on the cheap side in quality but I wanted to limit the size mounted onto the
z-axis. The toggle rail rides on the edge of the Z-axis moving plate while the limit switches are mounted
onto the rear permanent plate of the z-axis. Adjustment is made with some slots in the switch brackets and
the cables are routed thru the cable tray.
For the X & Y axis I was able to package a much larger limit switch and the quality of those units far
exceed the Z-axis. The X-axis table (pic below) used a roller lever style limit switch from CNTD, model
#CZ-7141, which is mounted directly onto the Brute machine table with an adjustable bracket and a toggle
rail mounted on the underside of the aluminum fixture table. I could have located both switches inline and
avoided the need for two toggle rails but this would have resulted in one of the limit switches mounted at
the extreme forward location of the machine and I simply did not want to look at the switch when the table
was in the extreme -X location so opted for 2 separate toggles which pushes the hardware out of
view. Update: After installing the 'conveyor' to protect the ballscrew and rails from chips I got rid of the
second toggle ramp on the right side and re-positioned the 2nd switch inline with the 1st on the left side.
The Y-axis gantry limit switches are button depress style switches from CNTD, model #CZ-7110. I chose
this style due to the lack of space between the Z-Axis assembly and the gantry rails for a toggle style and
the fact that I could 'hide' the entire switch inside the gantry rectangular beam. The button of the switch is
the only part exposed into the moving path of the Y axis gantry and is actuated by a toggle ramp mounted
to the back side of the rear z-axis plate. One drawback is the limited adjustability of the switch location
due to the hole restriction in the tubing; therefore, adjustment is made by carefully locating the elevation of
the button to the toggle ramp.
The home switches are higher quality precision contact switches purchased from Misumi (model #MSTKD-
EL) at a cost of $60 each. I wasn't certain of the repeatability of the cheaper limit switches (~$7) so decided
to use both on the X & Y axis and compare them. The home switches are mounted onto a simple mount
made from 1" steel round machined to include both the switch and a stop screw to insure I don't damage these
expensive units. Unfortunately at this time Mach4 together with my ESS (smoothstepper controller) does
not fully function with both home and limit switches so I've yet to have a comparison for you - I'll update
when software is fixed. At this point the limit switches seem to be very repeatable leading me to believe I
don't need the separate home switch.

You'll notice that the home switch (and one limit which currently acts as home) is located directly at the fixed
end of the ball screw. This is because the ball screw incurs significant thermal expansion in operation
therefore for the most precise repeatability is obtained at the fixed end of the screw shaft. I was surprised to
learn that ball screws typically see about 2-5 deg C thermal change in operation and this results in an
expansion of 0.02-0.06 mm (0.0008-0.0023") at my maximum extended position. Also of interest is that
precision machines avoid this thermal error by 'stretching' the ball screw to the estimated maximum
displacement from the thermal expansion and fixing both sides of the screw shaft. This shaft now loaded in
tension will simply reduce the tension load as the temperature increases and have zero overall length change
due to thermal expansion. They also adjust for that stretch of the shaft by manufacturing the pitch to
incorporate that stretch... Neat! They talk about how to load the shaft in tension preload and set into the fixed
ends but I was discussing this with a colleague and we came up with a simpler (more diy) approach.... all you
have to do is heat the shaft to a set temperature (maximum expected) and then mount 'hot' into the fixed ends
and when it goes back down to 'shop' temperature it will be in tension. Just need to make sure your end
supports are directly connected together with a stiff enough connection to accommodate the tension load. Oh
and then have a special pitch manufactured.... ok, definitely not a diy item typically considered.

Some pictures below of the manufacturing and build (slideshow format)

Cheers.
0 Comments

CNC Router Performance: Accuracy, Repeatability, & Backlash

11/28/2015

6 Comments

Two major aspects of my fixed gantry router were left incomplete prior to making a few first cuts and
taking some basic performance measurements. One was the anti-backlash ball nut design, which this blog
post will focus on, while the other was Home/Limit switches which will come in a later post. Ill be
updating the download section to v0.2 which will incorporate both designs above.
As for the performance, my first impression of the accuracy was uplifting but the backlash was something
which needed controlling. This was a bit expected because I hadnt fully included an anti-backlash ball nut
design into the x y axis. What Ill do in this post is fully document the performance as is without any
improvements and then step through the changes and eventually record the final performance results with
respect to positioning.
Test Outline:
All measurements are taken with a 1 B&S Dial Indicator with 0.0005 graduations. The resolution of this
indicator is ~0.00015 as I can determine positions between the graduation markers and this, as it should
be, is better resolution of my positioning system which is 0.00026. As I want to also measure backlash I
will take measurements by approaching the position in both the positive and negative directions. I will then
repeat the process with a load against the moving axis in both pos. and neg. directions. Motors speed will
be set to 74 IPM which is 35% of rapid speed.

Test01: No Load; Positioning Pos. & Neg. Directions

1. Position stage from 0-0.8 in increments of 0.2 record data at 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6
2. Continue positioning in positive to 0.8, 1.0. Then reverse direction positioning to 0.8.
3. Negative position stage from 0.8-0 in increments of 0.2 record data @ 0.6, 0.4, 0.2, 0.0
4. Repeat 6x

Test02: Loaded; Positioning Pos. & Neg. Directions

1. Add 7 Lb. load in the Positive table direction

2. Repeat #1 -> #4 above.
3. Add 7 Lb. load in the Negative table direction
4. Repeat #1 -> #4 above.

Positioning Test Results (Test01 & Test02):

Table 1 Position Raw Data (Pre Anti-Backlash)

The tabular data is grouped into 3 separate tests. Blue/Black without Load, Orange/Red with a load in
positive axis direction, and Purple/Green with load in negative axis direction.
 Graph 1 Positioning (Pre Anti-Backlash)

Conclusion (Pre Anti-Backlash):

Repeatability:
0.0002 (+/- 0.0001)
Accuracy:
0.0004 (+/-0.0002)
Backlash (no load):
0.0005 (+/-0.0003)
Backlash (with load):
0.0018 (+/-0.0009)

The repeatability looks tight as expected. The accuracy of the unloaded Blue/Black set is a bit larger than
expected and hopefully this comes into better control when backlash is addressed. The backlash of the
Black/Blue unloaded set doesnt look to bad at 0.0005 but when comparing a loaded positive to negative
Red->Purple combination its quite apparent improvement needs to take place. Checking the manufacture
data on this ball screw shows its actually within spec (0.1mm/0.004). Note that this is a rolled general
purpose ball screw from NSK.

Anti-Backlash Nut Design:

The axis used for the positioning data above actually has my original anti-backlash design incorporated into
it using a Smalley wave spring. The load exerted between the nuts is about #10 proving to be too low and
doesnt accomplish much. The new design is shown below and will use disc springs to increase the load to
about #100 +/-25. Im using Misumi #SRBN-28-A Disc Springs which exert 1127 N (#253) over 0.6mm
(75% deflection). Ill stack 4 pieces in series and target ~30% deflection yielding #100 at a deflection of
0.96mm. As my ball screw has a 4mm lead, this results in rotating the secondary nut 90 deg to achieve the
target load. At assembly Ill need to check the orientation of the primary and secondary nuts when the disc
springs start to contact and add shims behind the disc springs until the resultant angle is 90 deg.
Edit 1/9/16: I finally found documentation for recommended preload on the ball nuts - both THK and
NSK document this very well in their technical docs..... "The optimum preload is one third of the
maximum axial load from the system. However, as an excessive preload adversely affects service life and
heat generation, the maximum preload should not exceed 10% of the basic dynamic load rating (Ca) of the
ball screw."
So I have 3 types of loading to consider.

1. Moving the axis mass along the linear rails against friction. This is about < 3 N (0.7 lb)
2. Acceleration of the mass (to keep the balls preloaded at top speed). Using an top end estimate of 80
kg mass at 0.4 m/s^2 gives me 32 N (7.2 lb)
3. Cutting force. I'll estimate this one from a handy calculator found on Kennemetal
(http://www.kennametal.com/en/resources/engineering-calculators/end-milling-calculators/force-
torque-and-power.html) assuming a 3/8" end mill at the maximum slot cut on aluminum results in a
tangential cutting force of 182 N (41 lb).

So I'd only need 1/3 the total of all 3 above, or 72 N load (16 lbf). Now the ball screw dynamic load rating
(Ca) is 5370 N and taking 10% as a max allowable gives 537 N (121 lb). So someplace between 16-121
lb. I may have overshot with my original estimate of 100 lb and looks like I'll be running too close to what
the manufacture considers the top end. I'll need to re-check this but I think I'll readjust the shims in the anti
backlash design when I get a chance to give me a lower target preload - something in the range of about 30-
60 lb seems a better value. I'll need to recheck later but will still post now.... just know the load is a draft at
this time.
hmmm.... this may also be why I saw the top IPM feed rate drop from 190 to 170 IPM on final tuning.
Off to make the new secondary mount and try out the increased load. I'll update this post with final
position results soon... And back .... below is a picture of the new anti backlash assembly for the X axis
(table).
And before we get to the results a note on aligning the ball screw with the linear rails to insure it rides
parallel to avoid any type of binding. My approach is to use Gage blocks stacked on either side of the
linear rails to precisely position the ball screw to the center of the rails within 0.001". The assembly is very
easy and thought worth passing along.
And now for the linear positioning results with the anti backlash design installed. I repeated the exact same
tests as above. First I'll show an overlay of the original test result this time colored gray with the new
results in color.

Graph 2 Overlay graph, Gray=original data, Colors=With Antibacklash

You can easily see the improvement on the above overlay.
Below is the raw data.

Table 2 Position Raw Data (With Anti-Backlash)

And the data graphed below. Note that the scale needed to be reduced to +/-0.0004 to show the plots
better. That's a full range scale of <0.001" !!
 Graph 3 Position Raw Data (With Anti-Backlash)
Conclusion (WITH Anti-Backlash):
Repeatability:
0.0001 (+/- 0.00005)
Accuracy:
0.0003 (+/-0.00015)
Backlash (no load):
0.0003 (+/-0.00015)
Backlash (with load):
0.0006 (+/-0.0003)

LOTS of zeros..... Needless to say I'm happy with the results. I'll need to ponder the results a bit and be
back with some observations etc.
Update 01/29/2016: One aspect I've failed to include in this post is the performance aspects of my drive
system. For the above tests I was driving a 4mm pitch screw with a speed reduction ratio of 0.66 from a
NEMA23 1.8 deg motor at 2 microsteps (0.9 deg per step). The resulting accuracy predicted for this
system is 0.00026" (0.66 * 1rev/400steps * 4mm/25.4"). This accuracy is based on the resolution of 0.9
deg (+/-0.45 deg) of the motor only and does not take into account the screw belt etc. Results of the above
test look to be spot on at 0.0003".
What's next? Well I'm a bit unhappy with the top speed I can achieve with my current setup so I'm going to
be changing the speed reducer pulley setup to a speed increaser. I'll be going fro 0.66 to 1.33 ratio. This
will of course reduce my positioning accuracy at the current microstep of 2. Therefore I will also be
increasing the microstep setting of the motors to try and maintain the original accuracy. Luckily this was
already required when I did my final tuning of the motors as I found that the X & Y axis moved more
smoothly at an 8 microstep setting. It is my understanding that although you are requesting the motor to
achieve lower values of resolution with microstepping you soon come to a point which the error in the
motor to achieve a given step is simply larger than the resolution you've requested. As this error in step
position is most commonly about 10% of a step, you can improve accuracy up to about 10
microsteps. Once you pass the 10 microstep point the improvement in step 'size' resolution is simply the
same as the error in step position. So with that said, I'll be running the above test once more with 8
microstep setting and a 1.33 ratio - accuracy prediction for this setup is 0.00013" (1.33 * 1rev/1600steps *
4mm/25.4"). Wow - better accuracy with more speed? Ok... I'll be conservative here and assume that
although I'll be at 8 microsteps the accuracy of my motor will be about half that. So 0.00026" which is
exactly the accuracy I targeted in the begining.
Results will follow - it will be curious to see if the above holds true. I hope to have the new pulleys next
week and post those results around end Feb. Cheers.
6 Comments

CNC Router - General message board

9/27/2015

2 Comments

I've created this blog post specifically to capture general comments for the custom CNC Router project.
Please leave comments and suggestions below.
To return to the main 'CNC Router Build' page please click the link below.
Laser engraving machine shelf install