Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - lloydsp

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 599
1
Members Machines / Re: BF20 Mill conversion
« on: Yesterday at 19:50:28 »
My opinion is that an air spring on the vertical axis is always a plus.  Sure, it adds complexities (like always requiring an air supply and having LARGE exhaust capabilities on both ends of the cylinder for rapids), but having a zero weight spindle is important to me, so that all the motor has to move is inertial mass.

Some (few) machine controllers know how to program drive currents to the motors to counteract weight, using higher current to lift.  Most don't, and some power supplies cannot cope, even if the controller knows how.

To that 'exhaust' issue, I provide the largest lines I can to and from a balance cylinder, and a large-capacity reservoir on the bottom end, so there's a place for the lift air to go rapidly on the down-stroke, and a place for it to come from rapidly on the way up.

That, because most low-pressure regulators don't have a high-volume relief path for excess pressure nor the ability to relieve tiny increases in pressure quickly -- they usually show some hysteresis.

Since the reservoirs work at relatively-low pressures, I just make them up from PVC pipe, caps, and an air fitting.  If the reservoir has a volume of +10X the cylinder, the cylinder never sees any appreciable pressure change during rapids.

Lloyd

2
Members Projects / Re: rc model wing
« on: February 13, 2025, 22:24:09 pm »
Yep.  I've tried a number of low-cost and freeware CAM packages -- and a few 'not so low-cost'.  So far, none holds a candle to CamBam in terms of its versatility.  All the rest of them seem to 'lock' you into constraints that are not reasonable.  I'll keep running it until it won't, anymore!

I make a fair portion of my income doing machining and routing work, and CamBam plays a role in much of it.

Lloyd

3
Members Machines / Re: BF20 Mill conversion
« on: February 10, 2025, 13:55:45 pm »
Boy!  That is one HONKIN' motor for that small a table!  ;D
L

4
Gary,
How thick are the walls, how small are the holes, and what is the material?  That sounds almost like it might be suited to a slow plunge move than a canned cycle.

Lloyd

5
Members Projects / Re: Mill Mage
« on: February 06, 2025, 00:27:24 am »
In other words, they're not receptive to ANY negative commentary, whatsoever.  Eh...

That's a too-restrictive agreement, from my perspective.  If they're afraid of negative comments (even about 'general perceptions), then they already KNOW it's not 'up to snuff'.

Lloyd

6
I did that today with no primitive ID conflicts, but I copied the associated MOp separately, THEN generated a new primitives ID list after the copies were complete.  When I copied the MOp, it did create some id conflicts.  They didn't matter, because I repaired the MOp's primitives list afterwards.

The list from an old 9.8 drawing ALSO DID have duplicate iDs with my already-populated 1.0 model into which I was importing the primitives, but CB automatically reassigned them new IDs as they were copied.  Since I copied them into their own layer, it was easy to correct the MOp, simply by selecting the MOp's primitives list (three little dots), then selecting every primitive in that new layer I'd created.

Selecting even a LONG list of primitives is easy.  Click on the first one in the layer.  Cursor to the last one and shift-click.  Those two and every one between will all be selected.  Then just hit ENTER.  That REPLACES every primitive in the MOp, it doesn't just add them, so it instantly does what you want.

Bingo!  The MOp is corrected.

Lloyd

7
Members Projects / Re: Auto-tracing a captured image
« on: January 29, 2025, 00:53:33 am »
Thanks, all.
I downloaded the McMaster drawing.  It was not an X-Acto blade, but an 'industry #11 blade', and NOT the same dimensions as the X-Acto.

Since every brand of 'industry #11 blade' I've purchased has been a different shape with a different lug hole position (or no lug hole, at all), I am forcing my customer to go with the authentic X-Acto #11 blades.  Even their #11-M (which only offers a slightly rounded tip, instead of a needle-sharp point) is a different shape from the #11!!!  The shape is different, and the 'lug hole' is in a different place in the shank.

I took the McMaster drawing into CB, and corrected the dimensions and various apexes' positions to exactly match the X-Acto measurements, then cut a recess in some Al stock that shape and 0.001" oversized to check fit.  The blades fit closely and well, with no discernible play.

Lloyd

8
Members Projects / Re: Auto-tracing a captured image
« on: January 05, 2025, 02:50:01 am »
Eddy, I tried potrace, but it only traces (well, smooths) and existing bitmap line drawing.  It will not extract outlines from a photo or a scan of a part.

Dave, I haven't been able to post attachments for months, here.  But if you can put it on a repository, you can post a link in the text of a message, either by hand or with the globe button above.   Like:

https://cambamcnc.com

Lloyd

9
Members Projects / Re: Auto-tracing a captured image
« on: January 03, 2025, 19:40:32 pm »
Tunc,
I would be interested in seeing how a 'good' capture looks.  I have two .jpg files, one captured in 'document' format, and the other as a photo.  How can I get those to you?

Lloyd

10
Members Projects / Re: Auto-tracing a captured image
« on: January 03, 2025, 12:46:07 pm »
Tau,
If you're talking about the bitmap smoothing and 'edge detection' function... heh!  That's why I was asking for 'other help'. :D

It really does not do a decent job, unless your bitmap is quite-nearly a perfect outline to begin with.  It just cannot follow edges unless the contrast ratio between object and background is nearly 100%, and there are zero shadows to contend with; even 'grey' shadows.

What you get is a rough, jagged line of dots with lots of points outside and inside the real line.  There's no real smoothing going on.

Lloyd

11
Members Projects / Auto-tracing a captured image
« on: January 03, 2025, 01:26:37 am »
This latest X-Acto blade holder project made me realize that I have no good way to capture the outline of a complex shape, and translate that into a CamBam drawing.

Do any of you have any favorite methods, like an auto-tracing algorithm, that would do that?

Lloyd

12
Members Projects / Re: A really 'fun', tiny pocket
« on: January 03, 2025, 00:39:20 am »
I did a couple-more iterations of that pocket, because I want the blade to fit without more than 0.002" of 'wobble' in the holder.  I was able to almost triple my feed-rate with this style cutter, and it still didn't seem to have any issues.  I also did one 'deep' pocket with it (almost the full cutting depth of the cutter), and it never had a problem.  I even used it to pilot-drill a bunch of small clamp screw holes.

For only about $6.00 per cutter (in packs of 5), I'm pretty impressed.

I had another fun thing today.  This one was actually fun, not said in sarcasm.

I have an old BoreRite electric edge finder.  I keep it, because it has a rigid sensing pin, instead of a flexible 'wobbly-ball', so it's good when you need really precise detection.  But the bulb was burnt out.  They sell them, still, but they're all three days to a week out for delivery, and I needed it today.  So, I took a penlight bulb, some 2-mil brass shim stock, and some heat-shrink tubing, and made one.

Yeah, I wasted a whole lot more time than the $6.00 cost of a bulb, but I got it made today, and it works.

I've got a Starret gauge, a wobbly-ball electric edge finder, and a spindle-mounted rotary bore gauge.  But all of them are only accurate to a half-thou' or so.  My mill can position accurately to a tenth, so with the rigid pin of the BoreRite I can actually index to a tenth.

Lloyd

13
Members Projects / Re: A really 'fun', tiny pocket
« on: January 01, 2025, 19:46:05 pm »
And... it fits!  Yay!  Now, I can actually mill the entire blade keeper.  I wasn't going to try, until I got this pocket figured out.

I was able to double my feeds, with no adverse effects.  These little cutters were designed for the task, and cut very aggressively (if you can call that tiny of a cut 'aggressive').  They throw clean chips, without a trace of clogging, with just mist coolant (aluminum specific fluid).

I call this a neat adventure!

Lloyd

14
Members Projects / Re: A really 'fun', tiny pocket
« on: January 01, 2025, 18:38:54 pm »
Well, that was a treat!  The job cut perfectly, in terms of the cutter's ability to handle it, and the pocket with island turned out clean and pretty.

I might even be able to increase the feed rate some.  The CAD of the X-Acto blade I received was wrong, so the blade doesn't quite fit in the pocket, but very nearly-so.  And now that I have a 'gauge', I can adjust my profile.

Thanks for the advice!

Lloyd

15
Members Projects / Re: A really 'fun', tiny pocket
« on: January 01, 2025, 16:27:11 pm »
Thanks, Fly.  I've converted your feeds and speeds to Imperial, and it'll be slow as heck at 4200 rpm (only 1 inch per minute or 25mm/minute), but it looks like it's 'doable'.

Your 0.9mm cutter is about half the size of mine, so I can probably (nearly) double the feed-rate.  I have five cutters, so doubling it is worth a try.

Lloyd


Lloyd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 599