[SCzEngrgGroup]

No subroutines, and not using Mach3. Like I said, the g-code is absolutely correct, and cut the parts properly when I re-worked them. It's a real stumper....

Regards,
Ray L.

[Hirudin]

If the code is right (and presuming it was executed properly), and the tool didn't change, the only thing left that I can think of is the part. Could the part have moved while that bore was being finished? Only about 25 thousandths were left on the part, right?

In other words...
Not the code
Not the tool
Not magic
Execution?
Part shift?
What else is there?

Long shot: if the spindle was starting and stopping, and if the bore was shallow enough, the tool could have, conceivably, gone down into the unfinished bore and followed the proper path without the flutes touching (or without them cutting) if the spindle wasn't running. Were there any nicks on the unfinished bore?

[SCzEngrgGroup]

If the code is right (and presuming it was executed properly), and the tool didn't change, the only thing left that I can think of is the part. Could the part have moved while that bore was being finished? Only about 25 thousandths were left on the part, right?

In other words...
Not the code
Not the tool
Not magic
Execution?
Part shift?
What else is there?

Long shot: if the spindle was starting and stopping, and if the bore was shallow enough, the tool could have, conceivably, gone down into the unfinished bore and followed the proper path without the flutes touching (or without them cutting) if the spindle wasn't running. Were there any nicks on the unfinished bore?

The bores were perfectly round, and perfectly centered - just the wrong size....

Regards,
Ray L

[daniellyall]

that`s just a magic trick of your controller it must have felt that you where happy and wonted to piss you of, the temp of cutter and air could do it or you where clamped a tickle to tight I don't think you will ever find what made it happen unless it does it again

[RCaffin]

I'm with Daniel (1st part of his reply).

Cheers
Roger

[Kenny Duval]

The machines have become self aware and knew that you made that hole too big. It's all Skynet's fault.

[AUSTINMACHINING]

Wow, that's a lot to be off. Let us know if/what you find. At least in was undersize :-).

[fishinguy1]

SKYNET ????

Sent from my SM-P607T using Tapatalk

[Kenny Duval]

SKYNET ????

Sent from my SM-P607T using Tapatalk

[kvom]

The only way a circular hole can be machined too small with correct g-code is via incorrect machine setup. The most likely is having the wrong tool, and the second possibility is using the correct tool with incorrect radius compensation. A third possibility is inadvertent setting of scale factors on X and Y.

[fishinguy1]

Yes, yes, sounds like great analysis.

Sent from my SM-P607T using Tapatalk

[LeeWay]

Lets move along. He is unaware. No threat.

Certainly sounds frustrating Ray. Any mistakes I have seen in machining with the Pulsar were blatantly obvious as to the cause. Thankfully errors are few and far between.

[fishinguy1]

Yes, at one time I had seen the mix-up at the machine tool, the tool off-set was set at Dia. When trying to use Radius comp.

Sent from my SM-P607T using Tapatalk

[SCzEngrgGroup]

Here's an update, since it's been quiet for a while:

I'm making progress, and the ATC is inching its way towards "production". The number of minute little details needing to be worked out is truly mind-boggling, but the list is shrinking. However, the first "production" prototype has been working almost perfectly for quite some time now, and I've been using it on a daily basis for several months, with surprisingly few issues. The only issues I've seen have been due to firmware bugs, and bad welding on the transfer arm mounting bracket (the transfer arm bracket failed, due to poor quality welds - my little wire-MiG is just not quite up to the task). In other words, the hardware now seems very solid. I've made numerous small improvements, especially in the firmware, and the web interface, and further improved the performance. At this point, I know of no significant issues - everything is working as it should, with virtually perfect reliability.

I'll be taking the second production prototype to my beta tester tomorrow, for a first test-fitting to his machine, after which I will make the first "production" mounting brackets, and hopefully get the whole system mounted on his machine in another week or so. He will also be doing the Mach3 plug-in, so that will be out of the way shortly as well. I do hope to get the first production units out the door later this year.

One of the idiosyncrasies of the way I'm doing this is that I like to do as much of the actual fabrication as possible myself. To this end, I am taking classes in several fabrication methods I do not myself own equipment for. We have a wonderful thing here in the SF Bay area called "Tech Shop" (TechShop is America's 1st Nationwide Open-Access Public Workshop -- What Do You Want To Make at TechShop?). It is basically a membership machine shop facility, which, for a very reasonable monthly fee, gives me access to a wide variety of machines and equipment. In particular, it gives me access to commercial-quality equipment for vacuum forming, injection-molding, water-jet cutting (VERY scary machines, BTW....), powder-coating (I do already have my own PC setup...), MiG and TiG welding, and much more. I have already completed classes in vacuum forming and water-jet, and will be using them for making the steel mounting brackets, and plastic housings for the ATC. In the next few weeks I will also be taking welding and injection molding classes for welding the brackets, and making injection molded sensor assemblies, and other small parts. The result will be a truly professional-quality toolchanger.

Regards,
Ray L.

[SCzEngrgGroup]

Here's a question for potential ATC users:

As you know, the original design included a plastic "skirt" around the carousel, as shown in the photos and videos of the previous prototype. I'm now wondering if this is necessary, or even desirable. From a functional standpoint, I don't see a compelling need for it. The carousel is high enough up, and far enough back, that virtually nothing reaches it. There will be very small amounts of coolant, and VERY few chips that manage to find their way to the bottom of the carousel itself, but I've never once had any coolant or chips get anywhere that they could at all affect performance. So, I now consider the "skirt" to be primarily a cosmetic part, which I would probably elect to leave out.

Whaddya think?

BTW - The test-fit to the beta machine yesterday went very well - I saw no issues, other than interference from the enclosure, which is mounted to the old (much smaller) trays. I will accommodate that by simply making a custom set of carousel brackets for that one machine, to move it forward by several inches. So, I can now draw up the final production mounting brackets, run over the hill to water-jet, weld, and powder-coat them, and get on with testing!

Regards,
Ray L.

[RCaffin]

Are there moving parts inside the pie dish? If so, there might be OSHA considerations. Could the user's hair get caught for instance? (Yeah, basically a rather silly Q, but so are OSHA sometimes.)

There might also be marketing/appearance considerations, although you can stick them where they won't fit in my opinion.

Cheers
Roger

[bhurts]

I run large industrial mills that have there tool changers much farther away from the cut then yours. I still get chips and coolant on and around the carousel. I know these mills aren't as powerful but your use may not reflect others. I'd hate to think something I didn't think was necessary could cause potential issues for the end user. Don't forget people will blow off the table with air hoses as well. Better safe then warranty rework.

Ben

[G59]

I run large industrial mills that have there tool changers much farther away from the cut then yours. I still get chips and coolant on and around the carousel. I know these mills aren't as powerful but your use may not reflect others. I'd hate to think something I didn't think was necessary could cause potential issues for the end user. Don't forget people will blow off the table with air hoses as well. Better safe then warranty rework.

Ben

I agree. Not only that, but machining cast iron dry, clouds the inside of the enclosure and the dust falls down like rain on everything.
Couple that with the mist from using coolant.
Just a thought.
I say built the umbrella and proudly display your logo on it.

[RCaffin]

I'm convinced!
Air hoses, cast iron, dust clouds ...
Needs a cover!

Cheers
Roger

[SCzEngrgGroup]

I think you guys are over-estimating what the skirt can do. It covers ONLY the sides of the carousel - it CANNOT cover the bottom, because that has to be open for the tools to hang down. So, if you're really blowing cast-iron dust directly into the carousel, no skirt is going to help. There is nothing exposed on the bottom that will be at all affected by coolant, and the carousel is an arm's reach from the front of the machine - no way will you accidentally get anywhere near it.

When I do face-milling, I get coolant spray, and sometimes chips, over the top of the side walls of my enclosure (which is taller than the machine), and onto the wall of my shop. They've never once ht the carousel, because it's so high, and so far back on the machine, it's pretty well shielded by the sheet-metal covers encasing the machine head. Hence, my question re: the value of the skirt. As far as I can see, it's purely decorative, not at all functional.

Regards,
Ray L.