[Skyfire]

Hi Wizz, imagine coming home and saying, "Hey, guess what, I bought a mill".....followed by a deadly silence as she who must be obeyed says, "What the heck do I want a flour mill for, the bread's delivered".

There's just no simple way that anyone can imagine how to explain it's just for fun....unless you have a production run item, just for fun is the best excuse.

One thing's for sure, there'll be no more unaccompanied trips to machinery fairs for you for a very long time.

As far as I can recollect, the XYZ travels are 200 X 125 X200.....small envelope, but if you start at the ICNC-0 model and work round the requirements for all and sundry, pretty soon you'll have a Bridgeport and then some want a longer table on that one too.

I used to doodle on a piece of melamine board a mill for a DIY build that would cover a small job about the size of a CD, a 5" cubic block capacity......circuit boards and model engineering stuff etc, and always the build plan grew bigger and bigger, so you just have to emphasise the direct and immediate need and work to a plan.

You don't have to justify anything when you just want to have fun.

I'm polishing the family jewels at the moment, ready to get a quick redemption appraisal at the local pawn shop, so perhaps the stamp collection and the baggy bottom designer shorts I bought in the 80's and never wore will get added to the pile.

After I explained all the working parts of a CNC mill to my daughter, she said, "Yes, I understand how it works, but what do you want to do with it?".......welllllll, I've played with all my other toys, so this is a newie on the block.....LOL.....I'm never going to grow up.
Ian.

Hi my friend. You always have the interesting words here... very funny..haha..

I've been busy these two days with a lot of business things to deal with.

hmm.. Just a small correction. the travel range of this machine is 210*140*200mm. or 8.3"*5.5"*8"

I really consdiering to make the formal products with longger worktable. like X travel 10"...

It's very popular psychology that we always want "bigger" machines.. I think it's very similiar to that when we buy a new PC. We always hope the fatest CPU, biggest hard drive and RAM..etc. But an important question is: What you want to with it? I think every choice must be reasonable depending on your needs, and budget also. I would like to have a machine as big as possible to do various works.. including possible works in future. But must be permitted by my wallet now..and consider the future needs reasonably. If I want to buy a CNC for my workshop for business, I will buy a big machine just if I can pay it; If I'm a modeling engineer, or home DIYer, I will buy a small machine just covering my small work range...Just based on the real need at now.

As a machine provider, I think my target is to providing series machines of different size and satisfie different custom with different needs.

I've finished the initial version of the datasheet. But some pictures inside need further edit now.. But anyone want the current version can email me..:cheers:

[handlewanker]

Hi Sky, I quite agree....where do you draw the line for capacity.

In this build I would feel quite happy with the present work envelope of say 210 X 140X 200, but as time goes by the need for that longer job crops up and you start to anticipate on day one the possibility that you just "might" get a job 1 metre long.........the mind boggles at the thought of buying a machine with parameters for future requirements "just in case" etc that never occur.

This is the great cost factor race.....do you buy the bigger but more expensive machine with features you never use, or with the exact science of hindsight know all your future requirements and buy small at day one.

I don't really know, but as my needs are for fun and entertainment and watching the wheels go round, I think that any other machine build that has larger travel dimensions would be reaching for the stars just because one day I might want to go there.

So, on with the Motly, with the price in our hands the justification for our toys can be decided by the depth of out pockets.....LOL.

If you intend on extending the range, then a person who decides mainly on the If factor will no doubt never be satisfied unless he/she has a machine costing an arm and a leg and having been totally hand built to their requirements, and I don't think you want to get involved in hand made one off machine builds just for a limited few customers.

It would be interesting to see what direction you would go for the next models, but as in the car industry, the moment the manufacturer announces the new specifications for the next model, the sales for the current model dramatically fall off.

Yes, we all want it bigger, longer, faster, and more versatile, but not in this build, as it's a jewel in it's own right, and the price is so inviting.

In 1974 British Leyland axed the manufacture of the Morris Minor 1000 to enhance the sales prospects of the newly designed Morris 1100 with hydrolastic suspension, but as the Morris Minor 1000 became a classic car, the 1100 model is practically non existent and not considered a collectible item.

PS, how about a small digital readout, blue numerals, retro-fittable, to indicate the RPM of the spindle, it would have to have a Hall effect sensor to the spindle to allow for the pulley variations that people would fit......that would be cream on the top of the ice cake....LOL.

OK, so it could be attached to the front with a magnet, but if a space were made on the control panel with a blanking panel to allow it to be fitted later etc, that would be really cool.
Ian.

[wizard]

Hi my friend. You always have the interesting words here... very funny..haha..

I've been busy these two days with a lot of business things to deal with.

hmm.. Just a small correction. the travel range of this machine is 210*140*200mm. or 8.3"*5.5"*8"

I must have missed hat earlier in the thread. You are effectively competing with machines like the TAIG but on a far more robust platform. Even TAIG offers their mill in tow different ax axis travel variants.

I really consdiering to make the formal products with longger worktable. like X travel 10"...

This is where the decision making gets tough. For many your machine has perfectly fine travels even now, though admittedly a little extra wouldn't hurt. However if you are going to offer only one variant I'd go to 300mm. It is only 50mm more.😜😜😜

If you have plans to go offer multiple versions then stick with the current design and sell a long table version that might support between 475 and 510mm of travel. That is if your mechanics can support such a long travel.

Why the big differential in travels between the short slide version and a long slide version? Mainly to give people real options in capacity, many people won't bother with a 2" difference. Plus the extra stroke allows for positioning outside the part area for example to measure tool length or machining of fixtures.

It's very popular psychology that we always want "bigger" machines..

Yep that is sometimes a problem. However on the other hand it allows people to address real issues they may have. Many products people tend to machine have long measurements in one dimension. Just a few examples:

1. Bayonets, knives and swords.
2. Laminated signs
3. Train models
4. Engine parts like connection rods, cylinders, crank shafts and other features.
5. Receivers.
6. Steam engine parts.
7. Shafts (key way cutting)

It isn't that the current machine is a bad configuration, it is certain that many will jump at a chance to own one, but it is just as certain that some will look at the X travel and discount the machine because of that. Obviously no machine is perfect and you need to control costs so the end decision is yours. These guys, Web, give you some idea of what some mini CNC machines look like today.

Note that some of the parts listed above are fairly light weight. However this is obviously a small machine and you need to worry about stability and safety. If you do consider a brother for this machine that has a longer table, make sure it is rational mechanically.

I look at it this way, your posted movies are delicious, they just leave me salivating for a machine like this. However when I look at the stroke limits I see frustration. We won't be machining a Bowie on one of these mills. Nor will we be doing signs on the machine or any of a number of light weight machining jobs. Jobs that the machine would otherwise be perfect for if it has a longer X axis stroke.

I think it's very similiar to that when we buy a new PC. We always hope the fatest CPU, biggest hard drive and RAM..etc. But an important question is: What you want to with it? I think every choice must be reasonable depending on your needs, and budget also.

Believe me budget is a big issue. That is one reason why I'm reluctant to bring up other features. The X stroke length only comes to mind because it is a significant restriction on what the machine can do.

I would like to have a machine as big as possible to do various works.. including possible works in future. But must be permitted by my wallet now..and consider the future needs reasonably. If I want to buy a CNC for my workshop for business, I will buy a big machine just if I can pay it; If I'm a modeling engineer, or home DIYer, I will buy a small machine just covering my small work range...Just based on the real need at now.

Exactly! It is a tough decision to make from a business standpoint, will your customers find up the cost of the extra table length objectionable. Further what is the demand out there.

As to your machine I could see businesses putting it to use commercially. Especially if you offer an engraving spindle and longer X travels. For example sign makers could make use of the machine when a router type machine might not be advisable.

As a machine provider, I think my target is to providing series machines of different size and satisfie different custom with different needs.

I agree 100%. The question then becomes is a long table version the way to solve your customers needs. It might not be, because from pictures it is hard to tell if the machine is robust enough to be offered in a long table variant.

I've finished the initial version of the datasheet. But some pictures inside need further edit now.. But anyone want the current version can email me..:cheers:

I will wait for the final version.

[wizard]

Hi Sky, I quite agree....where do you draw the line for capacity.

It is a tough one!

In this build I would feel quite happy with the present work envelope of say 210 X 140X 200, but as time goes by the need for that longer job crops up and you start to anticipate on day one the possibility that you just "might" get a job 1 metre long.........the mind boggles at the thought of buying a machine with parameters for future requirements "just in case" etc that never occur.

No body has asked for a one meter X stroke. I think the big frustration is that we can watch the videos and see outstanding performance for a machine this size. That is really inspiring. The problem is there are a lot of interests out there that would benefit from longer strokes on the X but don't really need the rigidity or structure of an outwardly bigger machine.

This is the great cost factor race.....do you buy the bigger but more expensive machine with features you never use, or with the exact science of hindsight know all your future requirements and buy small at day one.

No body wins at trying to predict the future. However it doesn't take crystal ball reading to know that that X stroke could become a problem for many users.

I don't really know, but as my needs are for fun and entertainment and watching the wheels go round, I think that any other machine build that has larger travel dimensions would be reaching for the stars just because one day I might want to go there.

That may be true from your perspective, I just see a mill that has so much potential but is constrained just a bit too much.

So, on with the Motly, with the price in our hands the justification for our toys can be decided by the depth of out pockets.....LOL.

While I'm sure many have deep pockets not all of us do. Thus we want to extract maximum value out of any machine we buy.

If you intend on extending the range, then a person who decides mainly on the If factor will no doubt never be satisfied unless he/she has a machine costing an arm and a leg and having been totally hand built to their requirements, and I don't think you want to get involved in hand made one off machine builds just for a limited few customers.

Actually customer machine builds can be good business if the customer is willing to pay. However in this case we aren't talking about customer builds but rather options. It is similar to going to Ford and choosing from a 1/2 ton pickup or a op1 ton model. Further this seems like an easy option to offer considering the way the table is made.

It would be interesting to see what direction you would go for the next models, but as in the car industry, the moment the manufacturer announces the new specifications for the next model, the sales for the current model dramatically fall off.

I don't think that will be a problem here as the next model up will likely cost a bit more. The rational next step up would be a model with a ISO 30 or similar taper and would likely weigh in at close to 3 time this machines current weight.

Yes, we all want it bigger, longer, faster, and more versatile, but not in this build, as it's a jewel in it's own right, and the price is so inviting.

You do have that right. However a longer table wold be even more inviting.

As to the price I think you will want to get in on the ground floor. I still have a hard time seeing how it will be possible to mass produces these at such a price. A shop will have to be built, people hired and contracts cut

In 1974 British Leyland axed the manufacture of the Morris Minor 1000 to enhance the sales prospects of the newly designed Morris 1100 with hydrolastic suspension, but as the Morris Minor 1000 became a classic car, the 1100 model is practically non existent and not considered a collectible item.

PS, how about a small digital readout, blue numerals, retro-fittable, to indicate the RPM of the spindle, it would have to have a Hall effect sensor to the spindle to allow for the pulley variations that people would fit......that would be cream on the top of the ice cake....LOL.

I rather like the stripped down focused on business look of the machine.

OK, so it could be attached to the front with a magnet, but if a space were made on the control panel with a blanking panel to allow it to be fitted later etc, that would be really cool.
Ian.

This is a CNC lathe, the info could be piped back to the GCode software.

[handlewanker]

Hi, a digital readout of the RPM would be an option I'd indulge in......nice to see how fast you are going and if you get cutter problems you know if you were pushing the envelope a bit.

If the table came in two sizes, it would satisfy those with bigger needs....probably also enable you to upgrade later if you found you needed the extra travel......the saddle travel would be the difficult one to extend as it would men a complete base casting change over, rails and screw.

With that thought in mind, perhaps the longer X axis travel and a new base casting to give more Y travel could go to the ICNC -2 model that would include a 4th axis, a digital readout package, coolant and an enclosure, mainly for those that want the whole lot in one go and are willing to pay the price......nothing like having a matched set of pistols when you want to go to town....LOL.

With a package like that the option of an R8 spindle and draw bar should be considered as it enables an ATC to be the next big upgrade, provided a not too complicated power draw bar was in the picture......the ATC could just be a tool rack on the end of the table.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

OK, with lots of deliberation, I think a table with an extra 200 mm length, giving a work envelope of 400 mm longer than the "standard" offering, would have a lot of benefit, not really for machining at the end limits, but for those jobs where the physical length of the job needs to be on the table, whereas the machining part may just be around the centre where the table overhang would not be a problem......the cutter will always be centred over the middle of the Y axis anyway, even though the table is moved to it's furthest points in the X direction.

This in my mind would satisfy those that need the longer table from the outset and can anticipate that those longish jobs can be supported.

The longer table opens up the possibility of the ATC type with the tools all placed in a rack at the end of the table....no real work area lost on that score, but that's debateable.

Cost wise it means an extra 200mm of iron, rail and ballscrew length.......I think the ball screw could stay the same diam without incurring whip when at the extreme end of travel......possibly slightly heavier rails but not necessarily a must, although any increased size in the rails would increase the ability to resist milling forces, and this cannot be denied when you push the envelope with a heavier cut.....not quite CNC mode thinking, so I would not advocate heavier rails as being necessary.

With that option I would highly desire to have the spindle with modified R8 and draw bar too, to maximise the potential useage of TTS type tooling.

In my mind that would be the maximum change to be offered in this frame package without making design changes and inventory a problem.

I don't think having too many spindle end options would be good.......ER 20 would suffice for milling cutters within the motor and structure capacity for most milling and engraving.

Going to ER 32 or 40 means you can fit tooling with parallel shanks if QCT is only needed.

Other tapers like ISO 30 offer no further gain, unless you have a variety of these tools already on hand, but it also means you need a draw bar hole and that means manual tool change, and if the existing ISO 30 tooling has a retention knob, this makes the draw bar doubly complicated, but not impossible for those that want to DIY a draw bar with retention knob gripping capability.

I would like to see an all in one double pulley (one on top of the other) supplied as standard to give the 3,500 rpm and 7,000 rpm speed range by just slipping the belt off from one pulley to the next.....no pulley removal.

In a nutshell, a longer table, modified R8 and a double pulley would fit the bill very nicely.......and a RPM digital readout.

I wonder how much would be saved for a complete "kit" of parts for the buyer to assemble, down to the last nut and bolt......that option would be very interesting.
Ian.

- - - Updated - - -

[Dr.Fiero]

Kits while they have benefits, do pose a certain added level of required customer support. And when the source is in a major different time zone... Then you need more localized dealers, which adds a layer of cost and..... Well, you get the idea.

As for table size, I've got to agree. My first scratch built machine I ended up with a table about 10*11". It's just too damn small for much more than little engraving jobs. And even then... Marginal!

For real jobs, you need more space.

[wizard]

Kits while they have benefits, do pose a certain added level of required customer support. And when the source is in a major different time zone... Then you need more localized dealers, which adds a layer of cost and..... Well, you get the idea.

As for table size, I've got to agree. My first scratch built machine I ended up with a table about 10*11". It's just too damn small for much more than little engraving jobs. And even then... Marginal!

Finding the optimal table size or sizes is no easy task. We have to keep in mind the intended market and who will be buying the machine. Further who are they competeing against. If the target is something between a TAIG and an X3 then I really think the current configuration is fairly good. However 210 mm is just to short for me, the reality is to many projects have parts with wide aspect ratios.

For real jobs, you need more space.

That depends upon the user of course. One really has to consider personal interests to get the right fit. It is really no different than running a job shop where you normally fit a machine to a task at hand.

[Dr.Fiero]

Finding the optimal table size or sizes is no easy task.
...
However 210 mm is just to short for me

Yeah, that's pretty much what I just said! 21cm is right about my 10" that I ended up with, and found it too small (or short if you prefer).

[handlewanker]

Hi, there will always be a small parts unit that fills the need both from the economy point and the parts in question.

By increasing the table length the cost would escalate by about $500.

You can go on adding dimensions until you get to a Bridgeport size.

Linear way and ballscrew manufacturers make their products in standard sizes to cut down on inventory and allow continuous production, and if you want a size longer than the standard stocked item you buy the longer one and cut it down, wasting the cost of the extra length you cut off.

I think Skyfire could be induced to increase the table length, but hand in hand with the cost of the nearest way and ballscrew length in mind to cut out any extra machining work and also wasteage.

So it's up to Skyfire to suggest what extra length is practical for the best cost.

I for one would not want to have a problem caused by any overhang due to table length at the extreme travel causing deflection and inaccuracy, especially as you would fit the 4th axis on the end of the table....that would be counterproductive.

By that I mean, if the table is lengthened would the span of the Y axis rails need to be widened to carry the load, leading on to an increase in the Y axis stepper motor to move the extra weight, a simple case of proportions for the needs.

If the span of the Y axis rails needs to be increased, would that also lead on to increasing the length of the Y axis travel while we're about it, as the casting pattern would have to be reworked anyway and it would seem like a good idea to go that way, but that would mean extra way and ballscrew length.

In the end we now have the ICNC-2 machine for those that need a bigger machine in some quarters, and at the same time they'll also want more Z travel.....while we're about it...LOL..... oh, and with all that extra capacity a bigger spindle for bigger cutters......the cost is spiralling.

I remember a car magazine my son used to get where a guy fitted a 5 litre V8 into a VW Beetle....LOL.

On the other hand, if the machine can be supplied as a kit with the content according to the customers' needs, the cost would be saved by the customer assembly input, so it might be practical to have the options only in the kit form, and I don't subscribe to buying from a local dealer outlet.......that is one extra cost that would kill it dead for me......direct from the factory sales would keep the cost down.

It would also depend on what constitutes a kit.

If table with trucks, ballscrew and stepper were a unit, then this would stop any wrong parts being mismatched with a standard or longer table mix.

The same would go for the base where you would have the base casting, rails and ballscrew as one unit and the saddle with trucks for X and y axis on either side as another unit.....the column likewise.

The electronics would have to be completely assembled in the column to reduce wrong hook up problems, as one assembly is common to all options.

This would reduce assembly time and also fitting of parts due to tolerances etc.

For a cost reduction of that magnitude the customer would be required to align the various axis trucks and linear ways etc.

However, I would not be put off by a box of parts down to the last nut and bolt in separate packages if it significantly saved a bundle.

The Swedish based furniture manufacturers IKEA sell all their items in flat pack kit form right down to the smallest packet of nails and screws and usually just an Allen key to assemble the parts with,
Ian.

[Skyfire]

Hi guys. I've been some busy these days arranging some projetcs.

As handlewanker said, I did think about add the wortable length to get more cutting travel. But the table length can not be added too much as the reasons of handlewan mentioned. So I decided the last table length will be 450-460mm and the X travel up to 10".

Of course we can keep adding the travel range but we must consider the whole machine as a whole system and features must be within reasonable range. I think I will build some bigger type machine later of "SVM-1" to fit some customer needs. But This SVM-0 will be the smallest type fitful to some small/precision desktop machining needs with high performance and low cost. I will keep bring series machines to satisfy various needs start from here...

I have get the website domain name of "skyfirecnc.com". It's still under construction now.. Some slower than I expected..I will notice here when it's open.

Any needs or business talking can just email me for now to [email protected]

I have get the current SVM-0 datasheet and can send via email to possible customers.

Many thanks to you guys here for many brillent ideas. I will keep bring some "good things" with your help~~

[wizard]

Thanks for the update Skyfire!

[handlewanker]

Hi, I think that would be a good idea......a machine for a purpose rather than a multipurpose machine that doesn't perform well at both ends of the spectrum.

If the need for a larger table (and a bigger motor and a bigger anything else etc) is the preference, then the extra cost of a larger model that would be well balanced in X,Y & Z travel and the spindle power would be the way to go.

One change/modification will always affect another and you can't increase one dimension or component without losing the integrity of the design......better to have a next model with the necessary extended dimensions, motor HP and spindle options in proportion etc, than to attempt to build a bigger pocket battleship for all seasons that doesn't perform as anticipated.

It would be interesting to see how the next model would be proportioned both in axis travels and the HP rating.

Judging by the interest in the first model, the light industry sector would prick up their ears at the thought that an economical competitor to the Tormach 1100 was in the offing.

The first model is so very CNC state of the art orientated from top to bottom, that the second model can only make more CNC widows without a doubt.....LOL.

I'd like to see a preview of the possible design that takes it further.

The problem will always be the financial one, but you can't get married in your pyjamas just because a morning suit is too expensive to hire....LOL.....so we must expect to pay for the machine for whatever tickles our fancies.
Ian.

[Jere33my]

I have get the current SVM-0 datasheet and can send via email to possible customers.

[Skyfire]

Hi, I think that would be a good idea......a machine for a purpose rather than a multipurpose machine that doesn't perform well at both ends of the spectrum.

If the need for a larger table (and a bigger motor and a bigger anything else etc) is the preference, then the extra cost of a larger model that would be well balanced in X,Y & Z travel and the spindle power would be the way to go.

One change/modification will always affect another and you can't increase one dimension or component without losing the integrity of the design......better to have a next model with the necessary extended dimensions, motor HP and spindle options in proportion etc, than to attempt to build a bigger pocket battleship for all seasons that doesn't perform as anticipated.

It would be interesting to see how the next model would be proportioned both in axis travels and the HP rating.

Judging by the interest in the first model, the light industry sector would prick up their ears at the thought that an economical competitor to the Tormach 1100 was in the offing.

The first model is so very CNC state of the art orientated from top to bottom, that the second model can only make more CNC widows without a doubt.....LOL.

I'd like to see a preview of the possible design that takes it further.

The problem will always be the financial one, but you can't get married in your pyjamas just because a morning suit is too expensive to hire....LOL.....so we must expect to pay for the machine for whatever tickles our fancies.
Ian.

Hi Handlewanker,

You seems always have very interesting inputs! I can't agree more with your opinions on machine design and selections. I'm sure I will share my next designs with you on next models in some near future. I will PM you when I start next project... I've been too busy thess days to start some projects including this one...

I will post full enclosure version of this SVM-0 machine here some days later here. And, next will be a development work of 4th rotary table... I hope you guys can give your advise then~:cheers:

[Skyfire]

Thanks for the update Skyfire!

Hi wizard,

Thank you very much on many ideas here! I'm sure I will keep post anything of my next buildings here in future. I hope I can get your points then:cheers:

[Skyfire]

Hi everyone and my friends,

I just make a update here today that the very formal producted SVM-0 series CNC are under manufactured now and everything We are making standard.

I'm sorry have been many days without update because of new longger worktable molds and castings, formal engineeing sketches and procedures, formal electrics and control panels etc. And USB controller coupling tests, servo driving tests, and full enclosure version development.... just so many works need to be done to turn the SVM prototype in this thread to a high level formal producted CNC machine series and make sure upgradeable in future.

I'm just taking this project seriously now to make sure no disappointing aspects to end users. It's totally different thing between building a machine for fun and making a real product. I will post the quite formal version here soon and show many features as I have promised here. So..please just some more wait.

-------------------------
And, I would be happy to have any great suggestions from your guys, about SVM-1/2, the bigger and bigger versions. This project is on my desk now. What features you will need? of course, I think it's approched to some workshop/small industrial level.

Any features estimate or requirements. traveling range? spindle type? spindle power? etc.

I think this is not just a building now but a new brand set up issue. So, really appreciate if my friends here can give suggestions !:cheers:

[WoodSpinner]

Power draw bar with an eye to a 12 tool changer.

John

[CoolHand]

If you go the tool changer route on the bigger machine, use a standard taper and a standard retention knob.

Makes it easier for everyone if the tooling is standard and easy to find.

I think you'll find that an ATC adds an order of magnitude to the project though. Lots of new stuff to deal with when you get to switching tools automatically.

Also, as a personal desire, I'd very much like to see a length probe option for the machine, such that you can write a program to automatically probe the tools in the carriage for length and then store that offset information somewhere on a permanent basis to be used later when those tools are called up.

My old Moog machine had a subroutine and a probe for doing just that, and it made setup go a lot faster.

You could use either a pressure pad to sense when a tool touches down, or an IR eye like a lot of lathes use. Either way would be fine, the idea is to get the tool lengths into the machine offset page with as little headache as possible.

[Skyfire]

Power draw bar with an eye to a 12 tool changer.

John

Hi WoodSpinner,

Thank you for suggestions! Obviously it's a laboursome thing to chang tool frequently! I will keep in mind! Some easy tool changging way looks quite necessory!