[WFCustom]

I called Tormach this morning with a couple of technical questions related to my planned purchase of a 1100 in the next couple of months.Talked to a nice lady who got me the answers I needed, and then I queried her about the "rumors" of a pending upgrade to the 1100, IE: 1100M.
She was very non committed in her response, and suggested I subscribe to the Tormach blog where the "latest announcements will be posted.
When I mentioned that it seemed like they want no leaks from corporate before the official announcement (if any) she laughed and said they are trying their best.
I for one will not order an 1100 untill I see what is in the offfing as far as upgrades etc. I don't know whether they wan't to get rid of the old models first but you would think that they would be promoting the new and improved version as soon as possible.
It may not be a Hass but is still a chunk of change to lay out and find out a month later that you are outdated.
Just one mans opinion.
Greg

[Master_Arvist]

I agree and this is where I am currently at and the changes look well worth the wait as long as it is reasonable.

[Spinnetti]

...and replaced with FAR worse problems...

And someone please tell me the great value of rigid tapping? A T/C holder can do very nearly the same job, and is more than adequate for all but a few corner case applications (like tapping to the very bottom of a blind hole), and those few cases can be easily handled with thread milling, which gives you a LOT more flexibility, albeit at lower speed. I have a set of six home-made T/C heads I use for all my tapping.

Regards,
Ray L.

I think you missed my point - I like the enclosure, panel in the enclosure, not having the control box in the cutting area etc.... Just better thought out in some ways. Not trying to say it was a great machine for whatever reasons, just that it had some features that were better, as to all the pro level machines. It wouldn't take a ton more money to have a decent stand/enclosure/way covers.

[cjtoombs]

I suspect that the reason they didn't implement rigid tapping is a combination of software and hardware shortcommings. The motor has very little torque at the low speeds that you need to run for tapping which means that it is likely that the spindle will slow down some. Combined with the limmitation on Mach3 and Linux CNC (the basis for PathPilot) of only reading one pulse per revolution and you have a combination in which the z movement is likely to get out of synch with the taps needed momvement and lead to tap breakage. It was probably also a low prioroity given the intended use and user base expected for the machine.

[CL_MotoTech]

I suspect that the reason they didn't implement rigid tapping is a combination of software and hardware shortcommings. The motor has very little torque at the low speeds that you need to run for tapping which means that it is likely that the spindle will slow down some. Combined with the limmitation on Mach3 and Linux CNC (the basis for PathPilot) of only reading one pulse per revolution and you have a combination in which the z movement is likely to get out of synch with the taps needed momvement and lead to tap breakage. It was probably also a low prioroity given the intended use and user base expected for the machine.

Ahh thanks. I know Mach only reads once per revolution but I figured Linux CNC/PP had solved that.

[PCW_MESA]

Ahh thanks. I know Mach only reads once per revolution but I figured Linux CNC/PP had solved that.

LinuxCNC (and therefore PP) has always been able to use encoder feedback for spindle synchronized moves
The Slant pro Lathe depends on this of course...

[CL_MotoTech]

LinuxCNC (and therefore PP) has always been able to use encoder feedback for spindle synchronized moves
The Slant pro Lathe depends on this of course...

So the hangup is a lack of rotary encoder and perhaps the spindle motor? Seems like pretty minor things technologically and financially speaking. I look forward to Tormach charging $1200 for a $20 encoder and a slightly different spindle motor.

[PCW_MESA]

So the hangup is a lack of rotary encoder and perhaps the spindle motor? Seems like pretty minor things technologically and financially speaking. I look forward to Tormach charging $1200 for a $20 encoder and a slightly different spindle motor.

Its often awkward to mount an encoder on the spindle, on the Tormach it probably needs to be belt connected or a large encoder disk added to the bottom of the spindle pulley

[jwatte]

I do a lot of M2.5 threaded hole, and each of them has to be hand tapped. M2.5 with a compression holder is, I'm told, "not advised."
With rigid tapping, you have the hardware drive down Z exactly in line with the speed of the spindle. If you have an encoder on the spindle, this is technically simple.
However, more interesting, is the use of BLDC motors in the current lower-end mills. Because of the way BLDC works, the controller knows at all times where the motor is (within a few degrees) because it needs this knowledge to properly drive the motor phases. Thus, this knowledge that it already has, could be extracted and used, using basically software only.
Now, would this be the first time a company has considered charging for a purely software upgrade? No.
(I hear Haas charges thousands both for the ability to use all the RAM that's already in the controller, for actual G-code programs, and for turning on the bit of the software that looks more than one move ahead to plan the toolpath. I would, too, if I were like them, and could get away with it!)

[rowbare]

I do a lot of M2.5 threaded hole, and each of them has to be hand tapped. M2.5 with a compression holder is, I'm told, "not advised."
With rigid tapping, you have the hardware drive down Z exactly in line with the speed of the spindle. If you have an encoder on the spindle, this is technically simple.
However, more interesting, is the use of BLDC motors in the current lower-end mills. Because of the way BLDC works, the controller knows at all times where the motor is (within a few degrees) because it needs this knowledge to properly drive the motor phases. Thus, this knowledge that it already has, could be extracted and used, using basically software only.
Now, would this be the first time a company has considered charging for a purely software upgrade? No.
(I hear Haas charges thousands both for the ability to use all the RAM that's already in the controller, for actual G-code programs, and for turning on the bit of the software that looks more than one move ahead to plan the toolpath. I would, too, if I were like them, and could get away with it!)

Get an auto-reversing tapping head for the small taps. Don Clements has been using a Procunier for years with great success.

bob

[PCW_MESA]

I do a lot of M2.5 threaded hole, and each of them has to be hand tapped. M2.5 with a compression holder is, I'm told, "not advised."
With rigid tapping, you have the hardware drive down Z exactly in line with the speed of the spindle. If you have an encoder on the spindle, this is technically simple.
However, more interesting, is the use of BLDC motors in the current lower-end mills. Because of the way BLDC works, the controller knows at all times where the motor is (within a few degrees) because it needs this knowledge to properly drive the motor phases. Thus, this knowledge that it already has, could be extracted and used, using basically software only.
Now, would this be the first time a company has considered charging for a purely software upgrade? No.
(I hear Haas charges thousands both for the ability to use all the RAM that's already in the controller, for actual G-code programs, and for turning on the bit of the software that looks more than one move ahead to plan the toolpath. I would, too, if I were like them, and could get away with it!)

One advantage of rigid tapping is that you can do peck tapping, which is not possible with a tapping head

[SCzEngrgGroup]

One advantage of rigid tapping is that you can do peck tapping, which is not possible with a tapping head

It is entirely possible with a T/C tapping head, not a reversing one. Though with a VFD spindle, and no encoder, controlling depth is tricky.

I actually have a variety of tapping heads - used them all. I have a brand-X Chinese, a TapMatic, a Procunier, all reversing heads. Then I have my 7 home-made T/C heads. Since making the T/C heads, I have no use for the others. The Chinese, TapMatic and Procunier are all quite different, each with it's own plusses and minuses, and quirks. The Procunier is, in most respects, the best of the bunch but also the most expensive. The friction clutch is FAR more aesthetically pleasing than the dog clutches on the other two. But, for day-to-day use, the T/C heads are, IMHO, by far the best all-around solution.

Regards,
Ray L.

[spumco]

Drifting off-topic a bit...

Rigid tapping - I get a little more Z clearance by just using a short collet, although Ray's home-made T/C heads are pretty darn short. Also - for my particular non-Tormach mill - I am lacking in very low RPM torque due to my pulley ratio. Peck tapping permits me to tap up to 1/2-13 in steel fairly deep, whereas it'd stall if I tried to tap much over 3/4" deep in one shot.

Yes, I could threadmill, but I haven't invested in one of those yet. Rigid tapping isn't necessary, but it opens up a few options that a non-synchronized spindle/head arrangement can't quite manage. And if I ever switch to a BT30 spindle the encoder is already in place for spindle homing.

[sansbury]

I do a lot of M2.5 threaded hole, and each of them has to be hand tapped. M2.5 with a compression holder is, I'm told, "not advised."

For what it’s worth, I’ve been tapping 4-40 holes in 6061 with the ER-16 TC holder for a while without any difficulties. I’m using a Balax form tap, going up to .250” deep. M2.5 is pretty close in size.

[jwatte]

That's good to know, thanks!

[IMT]

For what it’s worth, I’ve been tapping 4-40 holes in 6061 with the ER-16 TC holder for a while without any difficulties. I’m using a Balax form tap, going up to .250” deep. M2.5 is pretty close in size.

I've tapped 4-40 in 416 SS and O2 with the ER-20 TC. I use a #42 drill (.0935) after I broke a tap with the standard #43.

[syscore]

For what it’s worth, I’ve been tapping 4-40 holes in 6061 with the ER-16 TC holder for a while without any difficulties. I’m using a Balax form tap, going up to .250” deep. M2.5 is pretty close in size.

I second this.

[kstrauss]

From Tormach's latest email:

Tormach’s commitment to research and development, engineering innovation, and CNC machining support remains as the cornerstone of the company. We relentlessly invest in new product development and product expansions, as well as differentiated niche products and standard commodity products.

We have a knowledgeable and talented team of engineers and machinists working on breakthrough product ideas – just for you. We're not afraid to move into new manufacturing product categories if we believe there's value and contributions we can make for you.

As part of all this, stay tuned for a big announcement next week!

[Master_Arvist]

Rumor is there will be two versions of the machine. 1100M and 1100MX. The MX will be the servo driven model and has rigid tapping. The base casting is different which suggest larger y travels. The 1100M has the larger base castings, this is all from someone who used the machine at Battlebots, but is stepper driven and no rigid tapping. The price point for the servo machine has been suggested that it will be a stones throw from a Haas Mini Mill.

[Advil]

The biggest advantages to a servo drive motor for me would be larger slower drilling, larger slower tapping period rigid or not and slower feeds and speeds with large end mills. Handy for titanium or stainless. Not to mention being able to run a good sized arbor slitting saw at the proper stupidly slow RPM with plenty of torque.

I've idly perused a few catalogs of large servo motors that could replace my 770 drive... but if you already have a working machine it's a silly expense and a LOT of work.

Now on a bigger more rigid 1100... it's going to come down to cost.