Mach3 user thinking about switching over....
- PetefromTn
- Offline
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 64
- Thank you received: 0
I have seen that video and it is really intriguing to me as I am working on something similar.
Yeah A rack mounted toolchanger would be simpler and easier and Hossmachine on mach 3 did it in two different configurations so it is very possible. I am not terribly sure how but he certainly did it and made a video or two describing how he did it. Gotta watch them and learn.... Peace
Pete
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
I am of the opinion that a 7i43 makes more sense than a second parallel port. A quick google suggests that there might well be support for the 7i43 (and 5i20 family) in Mach3I may have to break down and buy another paralell port card and a relay board from Arturo. This will give me a bunch of useful inputs and outputs....
I have already done one, so might be able to help. www.cnczone.com/forums/vertical_mill_lat...ller_conversion.htmlI have seen that video and it is really intriguing to me as I am working on something similar.
Posted today to the EMC2 developers list: thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.emc.devel/4102Yeah A rack mounted toolchanger would be simpler and easier and Hossmachine on mach 3 did it in two different configurations so it is very possible.
EMC2 has long has good support for toolchange strategies which don't need axis movement, this allows axis movement using G-code too.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- PetefromTn
- Offline
- Senior Member
-
- Posts: 64
- Thank you received: 0
That is really cool that they are actively updating and adding functionality for EMC2 on a real time basis like that. As far as the toolchanger power drawbar your design is excellent and works a treat apparently but it is also not gonna work on an R8 spindle. There are a lot of fellows that would LOVE to be able to configure R8 tooling into a workable power drawbar with pullstud retention like that but most just go down the road to an impact driven drawbar. I am using the Tormach TTS system and while it is lighter duty perhaps what it gives up in that arena it more than makes up for it cost per toolholder and repetitive Z axis height as well as having a short holder for ease of toolchanges.
I am still on the fence here about wether to just go with a tension compression tap holder and run with Mach3 since I already have it or go for the gusto and dump everything for EMC2. I do not have ANY doubts that EMC2 will do a lot more than Mach3 can but I gotta think on this one. I wish the rigid tapping setup was not so complicated but I guess to maintain precise control you need to be...
I see from your avatar that you are of the leather suited plastic puck wearing knee draggin' maniacs like myself.... Bravo dude you are my new hero.. peace
Pete
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
As far as the toolchanger power drawbar your design is excellent and works a treat apparently but it is also not gonna work on an R8 spindle. There are a lot of fellows that would LOVE to be able to configure R8 tooling into a workable power drawbar with pullstud retention like that but most just go down the road to an impact driven drawbar.
Looking at the dimensions, the base taper of R8 and BT30 are the same. You could probably sleeve-down an R8 spindle to take BT30, with the spring-stack on top, all retained by a hollow threaded tube from the top. The advantage of this would be that R8 is really rather too long, requiring excessive knee-lowering for toolchanges.
However, the TTS system solves the same problem very neatly. If you look at samcoinc's Kearney and Trecker retrofit (that belt driven encoder video is one, look at his toolchange videos) you will see that the toolchange on that is almost the same as the TTS, if a little bigger.
TTS also looks to be rather easy to convert to pneumatics. Depending on the spindle bore you ought to be able to use a system much like my pull-stud system, but with the TTS collet simply screwed on to the end rather than using a gripper system. I think the pneumatic release that Tormach build uses an external spring-stack, but inside the spindle bore seems neater to me.I am using the Tormach TTS system and while it is lighter duty perhaps what it gives up in that arena it more than makes up for it cost per toolholder and repetitive Z axis height as well as having a short holder for ease of toolchanges.
That is a decision only you can make. We are a rather partisan crowd here.I am still on the fence here about wether to just go with a tension compression tap holder and run with Mach3 since I already have it or go for the gusto and dump everything for EMC2.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.