Back
[02:52:52] <judedude> I am using a hobbyCNC board and I receive an error when I configured ny limit switches as N.C per the getting started guide v2.2. I receive an error when I start EMC. Am I connecting the home and limit wrong ?
[03:06:24] <eric_unterhause1> sometimes programmers need to back away from the keyboard and keep their "neat" features to themselves
[03:06:40] <eric_unterhause1> there is some button you can press by mistake that makes firefox bigger than the screen
[03:15:45] <eric_unterhause1> judedude: can you share the error message with us?
[03:18:09] <judedude> I did not write it down but I believe it said Error: Home 0 node. This goes away if I select invert on the configuration menu.
[03:18:45] <jtr_> quit
[03:19:19] <judedude> I ment to say unselect the invert box.
[03:19:37] <jtr> oops - sorry
[03:20:07] <eric_unterhause1> maybe your limit switches are normally open?
[03:21:18] <judedude> I check them with a meter and they tested normally closed. I also checked the pin #10 to grnd and there is not mush voltage there 24mv.
[03:21:36] <eric_unterhause1> when homed or when not homed?
[03:23:04] <judedude> not homed. The EMC does not recognize the switch when I select home. So not homed.
[03:27:48] <judedude> The pins are pulled up with a 10K resistor on the board but that shouldn't affect it.
[03:28:34] <judedude> How do I know if the parallel port is working correctly ? Is there a quick way to test it ?
[03:28:41] <cradek> I am not sure what the problem is since you don't have the error message, but the solution is the same: troubleshoot. run halmeter, select the axis's home switch pin, and poke the switch
[03:29:02] <cradek> if it doesn't change from FALSE to TRUE when you poke the switch, it won't home right
[03:29:20] <cradek> if it's inverted, change the invert flag
[03:29:27] <cradek> if it doesn't change at all, fix your wiring/pullups
[03:30:05] <judedude> I remember looking at that and it said false. SO if I poke it and it doesnt change the parallel port is dead ?
[03:30:26] <cradek> or your wiring is wrong, or you picked the wrong pin, or your pullups aren't right, etc etc
[03:32:00] <judedude> I am sure the wiring is correct and I did choose the correct pin. In fact I switched pins and none seem to work.
[03:32:07] <dgarr> any interest in converting hal_input params to pins?
http://filebin.ca/sguybq/diff.hal_input.py
[03:34:12] <cradek> dgarr: if you need that I'll happily commit it for you (but after the 2.3 branch)
[03:36:12] <dgarr> i thought it would be consistent with other conversions params to pins. it would be considered new functionality or insufficiently tested for 2.3?
[03:36:44] <cradek> it is consistent - but it's not a bugfix and we're in bugfix-only mode
[03:37:06] <cradek> we've busted several components by changing params to pins (but they were in C - I'm sure this is safer)
[03:37:19] <dgarr> ok -- after 2.3 would be fine with me
[03:37:42] <cradek> ok, don't let me forget
[03:38:05] <cradek> brb
[03:42:01] <dgarr> i'll try to remember. i'm still trying to find ways to make joypad work with hal_input in pre2.3 (it worked with hal-input-1.13)
[03:42:43] <BlackyGER> Hi & *ping*
[03:47:49] <BlackyGER> I´m new to EMC² and run a small desktop mill with stepper motors. My question may be odd, but i´ve read about the hostmot interface and asking myself if the hostmot is able to be some kind of configurable buffer which takes a series of commands and executes them itself, without the need for an RT-API.
[03:48:07] <SWPadnos> no
[03:49:00] <SWPadnos> Mesa Electronics does have an FPGA configuration that includes a soft processor (they call it softDMC), and you may be able to make a buffer for that
[03:49:09] <BlackyGER> i read something about a watchdog setup which may lead to have it executing the next 5 steps or so
[03:49:18] <SWPadnos> but the hostmot2 specifically uses the host for motion (hence host-mot)
[03:49:27] <SWPadnos> nope
[03:49:57] <SWPadnos> the watchdog trips if EMC2 stops updating the card for a long time (I don't know how long that is)
[03:50:21] <BlackyGER> yeah i´ve read about this option
[03:50:24] <SWPadnos> there have been cases where the PC has crashed, but the realtime kernel kept executing G-code
[03:50:35] <BlackyGER> rofl
[03:50:42] <SWPadnos> you couldn't stop it, but it worked great :)
[03:50:54] <BlackyGER> hehe... thats a statement :-)
[03:51:17] <SWPadnos> I've seen something similar when testing a Mesa card for other purposes. the latency is quite a bit better with the kernel crashed than with it running normally
[03:51:40] <BlackyGER> the end-switches and emergency stops are handled by EMC² (given they are not hardwired)
[03:51:48] <SWPadnos> (crashed hard enough that it didn't respond to pings)
[03:51:57] <BlackyGER> ?
[03:52:11] <SWPadnos> you should never say "emergency" unless the switches are hard-wired
[03:52:29] <SWPadnos> the PC was crashed badly, so badly that it wouldn't respond to a ping from another machine
[03:52:32] <eric_unterhause1> JMK put on a demo with a encoder where linux crashed
[03:52:46] <SWPadnos> but the RT system was still running, outputting square waves I could see on my scope
[03:52:53] <BlackyGER> ok... wrong wording. but it won´t move without proper signal from these switches
[03:53:20] <BlackyGER> (handled in RT-kernel?)
[03:53:26] <SWPadnos> ok, if the switches prevent motion external to the PC, then I'm happy calling them "emergency" stop switches :)
[03:54:00] <BlackyGER> of course... and they need to be NO
[03:55:44] <BlackyGER> ok, back to the buffer thing.. chances are bad i get to FPGA development very soon, so i wonder how the card itself is doing a ramping of the steppers
[03:56:03] <BlackyGER> when it needs the watchdog to execute any steps
[03:56:57] <BlackyGER> or did i get something wrong with the hostmot kind of controlling the steppers
[03:57:20] <SWPadnos> EMC does all the calculating. the mesa card only provides a high speed step generator and encoder counter (and PWM and more I/O)
[03:58:05] <BlackyGER> ah, ok
[03:58:13] <SWPadnos> if emc crashes such that it no longer updates the step frequency registers and the watchdog, then the Mesa card will stop generating steps some time later - like a few milliseconds
[03:58:42] <BlackyGER> ok, the latency itself, thats understandable
[03:58:58] <SWPadnos> sure. you have to wait a while before you can tell that the PC is "too late"
[03:59:30] <BlackyGER> there are no plans in getting the Mesa to do some internal calculation? or is it outside of the scope of EMC?
[03:59:46] <eric_unterhause1> emc doesn't work that way
[03:59:52] <SWPadnos> there are no plans I know of, and it's not really the way EMC is designed
[03:59:58] <BlackyGER> i understand
[04:02:11] <BlackyGER> it´s not a problem, i just try to understand if i can get some improvement for speed or host load
[04:02:38] <BlackyGER> vs. the parallel interface solution
[04:03:21] <eric_unterhause1> get a better computer?
[04:03:29] <BlackyGER> controlling the mill by e.g. usb is also a nice advance
[04:05:17] <BlackyGER> the hardware here is not a problem... i try to understand if i can seperate the mill (a bit) from the PC.
[04:06:29] <SWPadnos> the PCI Mesa cards are a significant advantage over a parallel port
[04:07:12] <SWPadnos> if the PC CPU is relieved of the very high speed step generation/PWM generation, and encoder counting, then you can use almost any computer made in the last 10 years to run EMC
[04:07:19] <BlackyGER> is a GUI/running X a must for EMC?
[04:07:33] <SWPadnos> you only need a 1ms realtime thread, which is very easy on anything even approaching modern hardware
[04:07:42] <SWPadnos> it's not a must, but it makes some things a lot easier
[04:07:59] <SWPadnos> there are the diagnostic programs like halmeter and halscope, which only run in X
[04:08:14] <SWPadnos> also, the text mode user interfaces aren't as well maintained as the GUI ones (like AXIS)
[04:08:38] <BlackyGER> of course... just playing a bit with ideas... like getting EMC to run on hardware without screen and keyboard...
[04:08:59] <BlackyGER> controlled over network or so
[04:09:55] <SWPadnos> sure, that's easy :)
[04:10:10] <BlackyGER> VNC?
[04:10:39] <SWPadnos> you can theoretically have a headless PC with no X, but it's not trivial to figure out exactly which libraries are required to run an X client program
[04:10:42] <SWPadnos> VNC is one option
[04:10:57] <SWPadnos> or remote X, or an NML-connected UI, or emcrsh
[04:11:21] <SWPadnos> EMC eas designed from the beginning with networking in mind
[04:11:23] <SWPadnos> was
[04:11:32] <BlackyGER> yeah... that was my intention
[04:12:02] <SWPadnos> one of the first incarnations used a VME backplane with separate computers for IO and motion control, so they had to be able to talk to each other "remotely"
[04:14:29] <BlackyGER> hmm... i saw it is quite simple to add new switches and actuators to the EMC functionality, is this still possible with the Mesa-Setup?
[04:15:08] <BlackyGER> .. like using it´s GPIOs?
[04:15:54] <BlackyGER> or does it require the FPGA program to be modified?
[04:18:31] <SWPadnos> if you don't need the speed of the FPGA, you can use the GPIO any way you want in software
[04:18:50] <SWPadnos> so you can do tool changers and that kind of thing using GPIO
[04:20:13] <BlackyGER> cool! (ok, oversized for what i am using right now... but interesting, for suction or such)
[04:21:48] <BlackyGER> but what do you mean with "if you don´t need the speed of the FPGA"? It runs slower once you i would use GPIO or that the FPGA load will increase?
[04:23:05] <BlackyGER> i can´t imagine the load of three steppers will outperform the 50MHz clock
[04:23:42] <SWPadnos> it's highly unlikely
[04:23:47] <BlackyGER> :-)
[04:27:06] <BlackyGER> i think i will order one of those boards.. not only for milling, let´s see what nice stuff i can do with it and maybe i get to FPGA-programming then.
[04:27:24] <SWPadnos> they're very nice boards to grow into :)
[04:27:54] <SWPadnos> I did a project where I used a 5i22 and some custom HAL components to make a power supply controller
[04:27:59] <BlackyGER> of course... and they are quite affordable... with the Euro-Dollar conversion
[04:28:11] <SWPadnos> plus some custom analog boards to plug into it
[04:28:12] <SWPadnos> heh
[04:28:30] <SWPadnos> yeah, they are. even in dollars, they're in the same price range as hobby-class stuff
[04:28:39] <SWPadnos> I've got to run. have fun experimenting :)
[04:28:45] <BlackyGER> thanks
[04:28:56] <BlackyGER> and thanks for letting me bug you :-)
[04:42:31] <dareposte> anybody have a suggestion for what style of indexable lathe tool holder to get?
[04:42:36] <dareposte> there seems to be a dizzying array
[04:42:45] <dareposte> with no general consensus on any of it!!
[04:43:22] <eric_unterhause1> probably because it doesn't really matter?
[04:57:26] <dareposte> hm
[04:57:33] <dareposte> so the cheaper the better then?
[04:57:36] <dareposte> for the inserts i mean
[04:57:59] <dareposte> there is geometry after geometry for the actual insert, and a ton of different holders for each type
[04:58:01] <eric_unterhause1> sandvik seems to be well regarded
[04:58:30] <dareposte> so i know that rake angles are important
[04:58:34] <dareposte> back rake in particular
[04:59:02] <dareposte> clearance angles maybe self explanatory and important so long as they don't interfere
[04:59:08] <dareposte> what about lead angle?
[04:59:27] <dareposte> and can you put neutral or positive rake inserts in a "N" type tool?
[05:02:37] <eric_unterhause1> what is your material, feed and speed?
[05:03:56] <dareposte> aluminum, brass, steel, a bit of everything
[05:04:37] <dareposte> i'd prefer to use a slightly positive rake angle just to keep the cutting forces down, my lathe is pretty small
[05:04:43] <dareposte> and under powered
[05:05:03] <dareposte> sort of like the moped of lathes
[05:05:14] <dareposte> it'll get you there eventually
[05:05:37] <eric_unterhause1> you can probably minimize the number of inserts you need, but brass needs negative rake, aluminum and steel positive
[05:06:09] <dareposte> so would it be correct to state that the rake angle is set by the insert, and not by the holder?
[05:06:13] <eric_unterhause1> unless you get one of the face centered cubic brasses
[05:06:31] <dareposte> mostly aluminum and steel, with the occasional bushing or whatnot
[05:06:33] <eric_unterhause1> I'm pretty sure that is the case, but I never really looked too hard
[05:07:01] <dareposte> okay
[05:07:03] <eric_unterhause1> I took a manufacturing course before they invented these tools
[05:07:28] <dareposte> i took one, but they focused only on grinding your own
[05:08:02] <dareposte> didn't really get into practical production
[05:08:05] <eric_unterhause1> well, it is the same principle
[05:08:22] <eric_unterhause1> we did cnc with paper tape
[05:08:34] <dareposte> i should probably clarify... they had us grind one type of bit, the classic HSS with the classic angles
[05:08:51] <dareposte> talked a bit about rake angles and clearance, but didn't elaborate much on that part of the course
[05:08:56] <eric_unterhause1> that's more than we did, but I did make a nice threaded shaft
[05:09:10] <dareposte> we didn't actually make anything, just turned the ground bit in for evaluation
[05:09:27] <eric_unterhause1> we also made an ashtray out of cast aluminum
[05:09:31] <dareposte> fancy
[05:09:45] <eric_unterhause1> yeah, and we cast the blanks for the next class to machine
[05:09:49] <eric_unterhause1> we hobbed a gear
[05:09:50] <dareposte> back when you could still smoke without getting sued for it
[05:10:09] <eric_unterhause1> It was a fairly nice Virginia Tech ashtray
[05:10:18] <eric_unterhause1> my stepmother smoked at the time
[05:11:32] <dareposte> casting is fun too
[05:11:50] <dareposte> but i guess i didn't get so much out of it as i should have, not even knowing what to ask
[05:12:01] <dareposte> the instructor was a pretty knowledgeable machinist
[05:12:12] <dareposte> probably could have milked him for tons of info if i had known a bit more
[05:12:25] <eric_unterhause1> I slept through an exam, flunked the course so I took the lab twice. I got really good at that stuff
[05:12:58] <dareposte> flunked shop?
[05:13:05] <dareposte> good call
[05:13:10] <eric_unterhause1> it was a manufacturing processes course
[05:13:10] <dareposte> i would like to go back and take it again now
[05:13:36] <eric_unterhause1> I had an A in the lab, but it isn't a separate course
[05:13:45] <dareposte> oh that bite
[05:13:46] <dareposte> s
[05:13:54] <dareposte> usually the labs are what take up all the time
[05:14:05] <eric_unterhause1> that one I didn't mind
[05:14:34] <dareposte> so i'm looking through a kennemetal catalog, and it **appears** that they have different tool holders for negative and positive rake tool holders
[05:14:50] <eric_unterhause1> that make sense, doesn't it?
[05:15:59] <dareposte> not sure... that would make it seem as if the insert does not set the rake angle, only the tool holder
[05:16:03] <toastydeath> dareposte: the toolholders done by clearance angle, not rake
[05:16:11] <dareposte> but then why have N and P inserts
[05:16:14] <toastydeath> twp clearance angles, actually
[05:16:18] <toastydeath> *two
[05:16:40] <toastydeath> one angle is the amount of clearance the toolholder itself puts on the tool by angling the pocket up and down
[05:16:46] <dareposte> oh
[05:16:55] <toastydeath> the second angle is the natrual clearance of the insert itself that the toolholder is expecting
[05:17:01] <dareposte> so a P tool holder should be able to take N inserts then...
[05:17:02] <toastydeath> obviously, all that affects rake
[05:17:12] <toastydeath> i don't know, i never bothered to memorize all the numbers
[05:17:30] <dareposte> positive rake insert needs more clearance, so it stands to reason it could take a negative rake insert
[05:17:41] <dareposte> supposing all else is equal with supporting the insert
[05:17:41] <eric_unterhause1> toastydeath: how do you select the insert and tool?
[05:17:51] <toastydeath> eric_unterhause1: what do you mean
[05:18:07] <eric_unterhause1> say you have a job, and need to select the insert and tool you are going to use
[05:18:18] <toastydeath> eric_unterhause1: i look at the job, and look at the available inserts/inserts in the catalog
[05:18:37] <toastydeath> they'll tell you what the application is in the book
[05:18:50] <toastydeath> and a little bit of experience
[05:19:32] <dareposte> so what i'm looking for is a general purpose indexable holder that takes cheap inserts, and will work for turning steel and aluminum. ideally it could both face and turn without a tool change
[05:20:27] <toastydeath> why are you using inserts, first of all
[05:20:34] <toastydeath> what is wrong with using brazed carbide and hss?
[05:20:49] <dareposte> nothing is wrong with them, they work great
[05:21:14] <dareposte> i would like to try inserts though just to see how they do
[05:21:27] <toastydeath> eric_unterhause1: i know that was kind of a bad answer, but machinery's handbook has a general list of rake/clearance angles for different tasks
[05:21:56] <dareposte> okay
[05:21:58] <toastydeath> there you can find an overview of all the tool angles and what they do, and then manufacturers do a bunch of additional stuff to the inserts not in machinery's handbook, and they'll explain it in the catalog
[05:22:07] <dareposte> i can look it up in there then
[05:22:11] <toastydeath> dareposte: that was not to you.
[05:22:16] <dareposte> oh
[05:22:17] <toastydeath> that's why i prefaced it with eric_unterhause1
[05:22:35] <dareposte> well it applied to me too anyway
[05:22:43] <eric_unterhause1> I was just curious how you did it
[05:22:57] <toastydeath> oh, "feelings" is the general answer.
[05:23:08] <eric_unterhause1> that was my guess
[05:23:25] <dareposte> what about "wedge" vs "clamp" vs "screw lock" vs "lever"
[05:23:34] <dareposte> for retaining them
[05:23:47] <toastydeath> "this negative rake, honed edge insert with a thick coating is not going to be good for finish turning aluminum"
[05:23:56] <toastydeath> dareposte: doesn't really matter
[05:24:02] <dareposte> marketing hype?
[05:24:04] <toastydeath> i've not had an insert come out on me under normal circumstances
[05:24:21] <toastydeath> inserts often require you take more than a .030" cut, by the way
[05:24:45] <dareposte> how do you do a finish pass then
[05:24:49] <dareposte> or is that your finish pass..
[05:24:50] <toastydeath> finish at .050
[05:25:11] <toastydeath> or, use a different tool with a finishing insert
[05:25:29] <dareposte> so if you miss it by a thou then you're done for
[05:25:38] <dareposte> heck miss it by .010 and you're done
[05:25:41] <toastydeath> it takes a lot of work to back the machine up
[05:25:49] <toastydeath> and dust it off a couple times
[05:25:54] <toastydeath> and the finish might suck.
[05:26:13] <toastydeath> on sufficiently rigid machines it does well but it will way over cut
[05:26:34] <dareposte> over cut as in like dig in?
[05:26:38] <toastydeath> yes
[05:26:58] <toastydeath> on less rigid machines, it will get nasty.
[05:27:08] <dareposte> what about on flimsy machines
[05:27:11] <toastydeath> nasty.
[05:27:25] <toastydeath> there are inserts you can find, inexpensive ones, that will do what you want
[05:27:50] <toastydeath> but i can't figure out why you'd want to use an iffy insert like that in place of properly ground hss or carbide tooling
[05:28:18] <dareposte> education mostly
[05:29:14] <dareposte> i agree that the practical reason for it is not so compelling
[05:29:15] <toastydeath> i don't know if kennametal has anything off the top of my head, but you're looking for a slightly positive rake tool (5-7 degrees maybe?) with 3-5 of clearance, triangular insert
[05:29:38] <toastydeath> and something that is not coated too thick, and something that doesn't have a honed edge
[05:29:55] <toastydeath> you might look at general turning/finishing inserts for steel
[05:29:58] <dareposte> 3-5 clearance is on the leading edge?
[05:30:13] <toastydeath> uh, the side of the insert
[05:30:16] <dareposte> oh
[05:31:17] <toastydeath> i suggest getting more of a general/finishing insert for steel because you're not going to do the crazy things on your machine that you can do in aluminum
[05:31:17] <dareposte> what about lead angle then, just to suit what I want to do?
[05:31:54] <dareposte> well part of the reason for starting to learn about these things is the urge to get a bigger machine
[05:32:16] <toastydeath> if you get triangular inserts, look for a lead angle of like, uh, 30 degrees?
[05:32:20] <toastydeath> -30
[05:32:26] <toastydeath> that way you can turn and face on the same tool.
[05:32:31] <dareposte> okay
[05:32:38] <toastydeath> and shoulder, etc
[05:32:49] <dareposte> so that doesn't make a terrible difference for finish or something?
[05:33:06] <toastydeath> lead angle mostly affects where the cutting force goes.
[05:33:09] <dareposte> i think that would be great, but didn't know the compromises
[05:33:34] <dareposte> how so?
[05:33:37] <toastydeath> with a negative lead, the tool will pull the work towards it
[05:33:44] <toastydeath> positive lead, the tool will push the work away
[05:34:10] <toastydeath> 90 or 0, depending on how you look at it, will mean all the force is going right into the headstock of the lathe
[05:34:12] <dareposte> oh that does make sense
[05:34:26] <dareposte> so clear now that you said that
[05:34:32] <toastydeath> lead angle makes more difference in boring operations
[05:35:03] <dareposte> so positive rake would sort of counteract a lead angle, by reducing the overall cutting force
[05:35:13] <toastydeath> sort of.
[05:35:23] <dareposte> and if my Z axis stepper is undersized, then a lead angle would ideally be better then no lead angle :)
[05:35:45] <toastydeath> no, because the amount of force the z axis is applying is fairly constant.
[05:36:29] <toastydeath> if you're applying 60 lbs (just say) in Z, as the lead angle changes, the resultant force is something more than 60, but it does not change that you are applying 60 lbs.
[05:36:49] <toastydeath> deflection increases, but the force the motor sees should be about the same.
[05:36:59] <dareposte> oh
[05:38:05] <dareposte> http://cgi.ebay.com/BRIDGEPORT-Romi-EZPATH-CNC-Manual-LATHE-HYDRAULIC_W0QQitemZ29030026624well very good to konw
[05:38:09] <dareposte> oops
[05:38:16] <dareposte> thanks for the education
[05:38:19] <toastydeath> np dood
[05:38:42] <dareposte> http://i15.ebayimg.com/04/i/001/29/0d/dbe2_12.JPG <--- what I was thinking of
[05:39:00] <toastydeath> if you can afford a romi, go for it
[05:39:16] <dareposte> maybe a used one
[05:39:33] <toastydeath> all the used ones i've seen are in the 10k usd ballpark
[05:39:39] <toastydeath> personally, if I was to buy a CNC lathe?
[05:39:47] <toastydeath> i would get a plain-jane turning center.
[05:39:56] <dareposte> yeah i've got about $15-$20k to get one and tool it
[05:40:06] <toastydeath> i would not muck around with hybrid machines because they are more money, and less tool
[05:40:21] <dareposte> so i was thinking $10-$12 for the lathe, the rest for tooling kit
[05:40:37] <dareposte> anything specific you'd recommend to watch for?
[05:40:46] <toastydeath> i would expect a beat up turning center from a reputable maker for 5-6k to beat the snot out of a 15k hybrid
[05:41:06] <toastydeath> i would look for ikeagi, okuma, mori seki
[05:42:06] <dareposte> so a turning center vs. a cnc "hybrid".... whats the down side
[05:42:06] <toastydeath> uh, nakamura-tome
[05:42:40] <toastydeath> some hybrids have cutsie conversational controls.
[05:42:48] <dareposte> no need
[05:42:51] <toastydeath> that aren't that useful to begin with, so it's not much of a loss
[05:43:05] <dareposte> the turning centers always have the full enclosure, so i can't see inside
[05:43:06] <toastydeath> the chucks tend to be A taper, not D taper
[05:43:15] <toastydeath> that's a plus, dude
[05:43:20] <dareposte> yeah i know
[05:43:24] <toastydeath> make SURE. make SURE. make SURE.
[05:43:25] <dareposte> but not when you're so ignorant as i am
[05:43:28] <toastydeath> if you get a turning center.
[05:43:30] <toastydeath> to get one.
[05:43:32] <toastydeath> where the door.
[05:43:33] <toastydeath> opens.
[05:43:38] <toastydeath> toward the spindle, TOWARD it.
[05:43:40] <toastydeath> not away from it.
[05:43:54] <dareposte> so the chips fall in?
[05:43:58] <dareposte> what about a sliding door
[05:44:03] <toastydeath> the door does slide.
[05:44:18] <dareposte> so why does it matter then?
[05:44:29] <toastydeath> if the door slides open away from the spindle (Z+) the chuck will spray coolant and chips all over you and everything nearby
[05:44:42] <dareposte> http://i7.ebayimg.com/03/i/001/36/f8/01ae_12.JPG <--- $7k
[05:45:09] <toastydeath> if it opens toward the chuck you have a way easier and safer time setting the machine
[05:45:14] <toastydeath> just like that machine there.
[05:45:20] <dareposte> oh i see
[05:45:32] <dareposte> so you don't necessarily stop the spindle when you open the door
[05:45:40] <dareposte> or the flood apparently
[05:45:46] <toastydeath> you do stop the flood
[05:46:04] <toastydeath> unless you're on a big lathe and the door is big enough to block it all, but anything under 15" swing will probably not have that
[05:46:28] <toastydeath> but it'll spit a substantial amount of coolant at you for about two minutes
[05:46:56] <dareposte> i see
[05:47:26] <toastydeath> other downsides, make sure you get a lot of tooling with the machine if you can
[05:47:50] <toastydeath> there are a few different turret designs and the toolholders that bolt on are not interchangable between those designs
[05:48:09] <toastydeath> but if you have a mill, it's pretty easy to make a toolholder.
[05:48:16] <toastydeath> just a block of steel with some holes in it.
[05:48:20] <dareposte> manual mill
[05:48:46] <dareposte> http://i24.ebayimg.com/08/i/001/35/dd/4da7_12.JPG <--- there's that beat-to-death okuma you were talking about earlier... $6k
[05:48:47] <toastydeath> perfect
[05:48:55] <toastydeath> re: mill, perfect
[05:49:08] <toastydeath> hahah, yeah that is pretty beat up, you'd wnat to see it under power if possible
[05:49:49] <toastydeath> check the control, and make sure you can find parts for the control
[05:50:00] <dareposte> you mean retrofit emc?
[05:50:07] <dareposte> ;-)
[05:50:08] <toastydeath> oh, or do that i guess
[05:50:17] <toastydeath> i'd hate losing all the turning cycles though
[05:50:24] <dareposte> good point
[05:50:45] <toastydeath> if you're going to use mastercam or something to do your toolpath, then there's no problem
[05:50:56] <toastydeath> but i hate, hate, hate having to program every stupid pass to rough something out
[05:51:06] <toastydeath> i'd rather call g71, program the contour, and walk away
[05:51:09] <dareposte> yeah i noticed that emc didn't have that
[05:51:25] <dareposte> i'd love to see it there too
[05:51:30] <toastydeath> http://cgi.ebay.com/OKUMA-CNC-LATHE-LC30-W-12-CHUCK-must-move-it-VIDEO_W0QQitemZ150328130385QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Lathes?hash=item150328130385&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A3|39%3A1|240%3A1318
[05:52:07] <dareposte> yeah i saw that one
[05:52:17] <dareposte> its a beast
[05:52:24] <dareposte> and the door opens the wrong way
[05:52:32] <toastydeath> no, it has two doors.
[05:52:43] <toastydeath> big lathes have two doors, and they roll along the length of the machine
[05:52:53] <dareposte> why is a D spindle better than an A spindle
[05:53:04] <toastydeath> a spindle takes about 20 minutes to change a chuck.
[05:53:11] <toastydeath> they are powered, however
[05:53:17] <toastydeath> which doesn't really help you much
[05:53:39] <toastydeath> D mount is all camlock, couple half twists of an allen key and the whole shenanigan is off
[05:53:50] <dareposte> that video the lathe sounds a little sick... lots of weird throbbing vibrations
[05:54:03] <toastydeath> a mount, you have to undo bolts
[05:54:09] <toastydeath> and despite sounding easy, it is not
[05:54:32] <dareposte> so the camlock spindles are desirable that way
[05:54:35] <toastydeath> yep
[05:54:40] <dareposte> good to know
[05:54:47] <toastydeath> but personally, i'd take an a spindle because they're more rigid
[05:54:50] <dareposte> i'd want a collet chuck and a closer on it for what i'm wanting to do
[05:55:01] <dareposte> should be able to fit one to either i would think?
[05:55:01] <toastydeath> turning centers have power chucks and collets
[05:55:45] <dareposte> i'm not sure that okuma would fit in a "residential" garage
[05:55:47] <toastydeath> if you can find a shot of the front of a turning center, there's usually a pedal on the floor
[05:55:54] <toastydeath> that opens and closes the chuck.
[05:56:02] <dareposte> pneumatic chuck?
[05:56:04] <toastydeath> but only power chucks, which may not be useful to you
[05:56:15] <toastydeath> not pneumo, hydraulic
[05:56:18] <dareposte> oh
[05:56:26] <toastydeath> there's a big hydraulic drawtube in the spindle of most turning centers.
[05:56:55] <toastydeath> screw an adapter onto it to fit whatever collet nose you slapped on, and it'll open and close your collets or power chucks for you.
[05:58:45] <toastydeath> http://cgi.ebay.com/Okuma-LS-N-CNC-lathe-Fagor-8025-control_W0QQitemZ170307882634QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Lathes?hash=item170307882634&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A3|39%3A1|240%3A1318
[05:58:54] <toastydeath> i would personally like to have one of these style lathes, a flatbed turning center
[05:59:14] <toastydeath> with a manual 4 jaw chuck on it
[06:01:23] <|dareposte|> so a turning center, with auto chuck
[06:01:25] <|dareposte|> that would be great
[06:01:40] <|dareposte|> i hate busting my knuckles on my chuck
[06:01:48] <toastydeath> auto chucks need soft jaws
[06:01:53] <toastydeath> a lot of soft jaws.
[06:02:07] <toastydeath> which, if you are doing production and it kind of sounds like you are planning on it, isn't so bad
[06:02:19] <toastydeath> but for dinky one of stuff, it's a consumable
[06:02:22] <|dareposte|> yeah that's the end goal
[06:02:24] <toastydeath> *off
[06:03:06] <|dareposte|> basically there's so much cheap machinery on the market at the moment, i'd like to pick one up and put it to use
[06:03:25] <|dareposte|> i would think a used one would probably hold value reasonably well too
[06:03:39] <|dareposte|> which makes it better than buying a new car or house
[06:03:46] <|dareposte|> or stocks
[06:03:53] <|dareposte|> or just about anything these days...
[06:03:56] <toastydeath> if you keep it well, it will hold a pretty decent amount of value.
[06:05:44] <toastydeath> and plus the tooling
[06:06:03] <toastydeath> if you get a package deal and wind up getting out, you can part it and probably make money
[06:06:32] <|dareposte|> a lot of these almost would cost more to get delivered and rigged in than what they're selling for
[06:06:48] <toastydeath> yep
[06:07:49] <toastydeath> i've never looked at rigging costs for one
[06:07:57] <toastydeath> i should, i suppose, or just ask my boss
[06:09:29] <|dareposte|> a decent sized fork would probably move one
[06:09:52] <toastydeath> oh, yeah
[06:09:56] <|dareposte|> i wouldn't think they weigh more than 5-6 tons
[06:10:00] <|dareposte|> for the big ones
[06:10:05] <toastydeath> they all have strap points
[06:10:08] <toastydeath> and a little diagram
[06:10:12] <toastydeath> "forklift this way"
[06:10:30] <toastydeath> the big ones usually weigh 6 tons
[06:10:38] <toastydeath> or a little more.
[06:10:44] <|dareposte|> not so bad
[06:10:46] <toastydeath> 13-15000 lbs
[06:10:55] <|dareposte|> definitely not going to move it around often though
[06:11:04] <toastydeath> hahaha
[06:11:09] <toastydeath> yeah, you'd have to re-level it
[06:11:29] <|dareposte|> also probably won't set it on a wood joisted floor like my current one is
[06:11:41] <toastydeath> no, that would be bad juju
[06:13:30] <|dareposte|> a 6" slab should hold it though
[06:13:35] <toastydeath> def.
[06:15:14] <|dareposte|> i'd get a smaller one anyway
[06:15:28] <|dareposte|> maybe 6000 lbs range
[06:15:48] <toastydeath> yeh
[06:16:58] <|dareposte|> the haas SL-40 says it weighs 25,000 lbs
[06:18:05] <toastydeath> can i recommend not getting a haas
[06:18:23] <|dareposte|> sure
[06:18:35] <|dareposte|> any reason in particular?
[06:18:48] <|dareposte|> their site is convenient for ballparking specs though, pretty nice layout
[06:19:15] <toastydeath> haas, haas is like a first time amateur's entry into a professional art gallery
[06:19:24] <toastydeath> it is art, and it is okay
[06:19:55] <toastydeath> their controls are flashy, but lack depth - the subtle controls and feel you get on a more mainstream control are not there
[06:20:14] <toastydeath> features to keep the machine under fine control during setup are just plain old missing
[06:20:33] <|dareposte|> features such as...?
[06:20:45] <toastydeath> how the machine holds, feed/rapid overrides
[06:21:05] <toastydeath> they're all buttons, that are a little hard to press
[06:21:25] <toastydeath> on a fanuc/yasnac/whatever you can turn the feed knob to 0, and the machine will freeze.
[06:21:37] <toastydeath> so you can hit feed start and take a gander at the distance to go
[06:21:44] <toastydeath> not so much on a haas
[06:21:57] <|dareposte|> i see
[06:22:07] <toastydeath> many controls will also freeze rapids with feed at zero
[06:22:11] <|dareposte|> http://www.romiusa.com/gl240.htm <--- there's a romi stripped of it's armor, they look so simple like that
[06:22:19] <toastydeath> so no matter what, you can get a complete idea of what's going on before it goes anywhere
[06:22:41] <toastydeath> also the offsets are inconsistent - some are positive, some are negative for the EXACT same machine position
[06:23:00] <toastydeath> thta's a cool machine there
[06:23:28] <|dareposte|> no pricing though
[06:23:43] <toastydeath> if i had to bet, i'd say 50k.
[06:23:57] <|dareposte|> cheaper than an escalade
[06:24:07] <|dareposte|> it looks like it runs on linear guides
[06:24:08] <toastydeath> and infinitely more functional!
[06:24:20] <|dareposte|> i wouldn't have thought
[06:24:45] <toastydeath> linear guides are cool until you crash the machine and the machine puts a +.003" bulge in your turned parts
[06:24:51] <toastydeath> from then on out
[06:25:14] <|dareposte|> what gives there?
[06:25:15] <toastydeath> i'd do linear guides if i was using mastercam
[06:25:25] <toastydeath> and had vericut or something
[06:25:30] <toastydeath> the guides are bolted?
[06:25:37] <toastydeath> plus they're prone to brinneling
[06:25:39] <|dareposte|> the linears i've worked with you could use to beat the casting to death
[06:26:14] <|dareposte|> yeah the bolted connection would be a weak point i guess
[06:26:25] <|dareposte|> those linears look small too in the picture
[06:26:39] <toastydeath> we have a hardinge, pretty good make
[06:26:46] <toastydeath> took a good whack i forget how
[06:27:07] <toastydeath> but it flips up three thou as you come in to the chuck
[06:27:15] <toastydeath> the guides shifted
[06:27:22] <|dareposte|> you can get those re-set
[06:27:25] <|dareposte|> or change them out
[06:27:29] <toastydeath> i guess
[06:27:37] <toastydeath> or get a box way machine since i don't need 2500 ipm rapids
[06:27:44] <toastydeath> i'm okay with 500 ipm
[06:28:03] <|dareposte|> yeah or that
[06:28:09] <|dareposte|> i know i'd wreck one
[06:28:18] <toastydeath> exactly
[06:28:19] <|dareposte|> and aren't boxes cheaper too
[06:28:22] <toastydeath> yeah
[06:28:43] <|dareposte|> my machinist friend at work was telling me about one he got, some asian one that is a good name
[06:28:47] <|dareposte|> if that's possible
[06:28:51] <|dareposte|> tracks or trax or something
[06:28:58] <|dareposte|> haven't looked into it yet
[06:28:59] <toastydeath> almost all top-end machine tools come from japan
[06:29:19] <|dareposte|> trak maybe
[06:29:19] <toastydeath> sounds like a machine model, not a brand, but i could be wrong
[06:29:31] <|dareposte|> i think it was further south than japan
[06:29:36] <toastydeath> prototrak?
[06:29:53] <toastydeath> (that's a hybrid control)
[06:30:00] <|dareposte|> yeah his is a hybrid
[06:30:06] <|dareposte|> he's mostly a traditional machinist
[06:30:10] <|dareposte|> maintenance crib guy
[06:30:13] <toastydeath> taiwan lathes
[06:30:25] <toastydeath> are generally considered superior in that market
[06:30:26] <|dareposte|> but he bought one and has been making parts out of his barn with it for years
[06:30:50] <toastydeath> they are not fancy machines or particularly high accuracy, but they're far more solid than a lot of stuff that's out there
[06:30:58] <|dareposte|> http://www.southwesternindustries.com/swi/prod_lathes1.shtml
[06:31:03] <|dareposte|> that might be them
[06:31:23] <toastydeath> cool
[06:31:56] <|dareposte|> missing a few things i'd want though
[06:32:02] <|dareposte|> a tool turret for starters
[06:32:05] <toastydeath> haha, yeah.
[06:33:00] <|dareposte|> anybody still make a good box way machine?
[06:33:06] <toastydeath> yes
[06:33:19] <toastydeath> ALL of the high end manufactuers make box way machines
[06:33:28] <toastydeath> *manufacturers
[06:33:41] <toastydeath> and they still hand scrape the wayseats
[06:34:25] <|dareposte|> for visual effect?
[06:34:33] <toastydeath> no, because it's the right way to get the job done
[06:34:51] <|dareposte|> i've seen some where they would do that so it would hold oil
[06:34:53] <toastydeath> instead of machining the surfaces and shimming it
[06:35:02] <toastydeath> and thus reducing contact and rigidity
[06:35:04] <|dareposte|> i figured they would surface grind the ways
[06:35:08] <toastydeath> they note how much has to come off, and scrape it
[06:35:16] <toastydeath> they do grind the ways, because they're hardened
[06:35:36] <|dareposte|> oh the way seats
[06:35:41] <|dareposte|> missed that part
[06:35:45] <toastydeath> hah sorry
[06:35:55] <toastydeath> yeah the ways are just strips that bolt onto the seats
[06:36:06] <toastydeath> but to be fair, the ways of the grinder they use to make those ARE scraped.
[06:36:36] <|dareposte|> why couldn't they just grind the way seats too then?
[06:37:06] <toastydeath> it makes alignment easier
[06:37:07] <|dareposte|> no such thing as a gantry grinder?
[06:37:12] <toastydeath> there is a gantry grinder
[06:37:25] <toastydeath> they use it to grind the ways once they're installed.
[06:37:37] <|dareposte|> neat
[06:37:38] <toastydeath> it helps to have as accurate a starting point as you can
[06:37:44] <|dareposte|> you seem to know a lot about this
[06:37:49] <toastydeath> i rly like machining.
[06:37:54] <|dareposte|> i attempted to hand scrape a straight edge once
[06:38:03] <toastydeath> hahah how far'd you get
[06:38:16] <|dareposte|> i got one side straight
[06:38:25] <|dareposte|> to within a half thousandth
[06:38:29] <toastydeath> hot
[06:38:31] <|dareposte|> the other side i could never get parallel though
[06:38:40] <|dareposte|> so i guess they are both straight, but not parallel
[06:38:58] <|dareposte|> it was just a piece of 1/8" cold roll, so not a lot of surface to scrape
[06:39:08] <|dareposte|> maybe 8" long
[06:39:26] <|dareposte|> and i scraped the skinny edge
[06:39:28] <toastydeath> fighting flex too
[06:40:01] <|dareposte|> mostly wanted to see how it was done, and understand the principles
[06:40:12] <|dareposte|> maybe some day i'd like to get a casting made and fab a machine from scratch
[06:40:25] <|dareposte|> i think i would opt for grinding if possible though
[06:40:56] <toastydeath> certainly faster
[06:41:03] <toastydeath> scraping is nice because it's as accurate as you care to make it.
[06:41:07] <|dareposte|> yeah
[06:41:11] <toastydeath> not limited by the inherent accuracy of the grinder
[06:41:33] <|dareposte|> i can appreciate that, and also that it is one of the roots of precision tools
[06:41:40] <toastydeath> yep
[06:41:47] <|dareposte|> it might not be so bad with a good sized scraper
[06:41:53] <|dareposte|> and a lot of practice
[06:42:18] <toastydeath> that last part there
[06:42:19] <|dareposte|> i had a scraper made for scraping bearings in, which is apparently still done somewhat frequently
[06:42:21] <toastydeath> seems to be the crux
[06:42:29] <|dareposte|> but it was slightly larger than a kitchen knife
[06:42:37] <|dareposte|> maybe the size of a big wood chisel
[06:42:37] <toastydeath> wow
[06:42:52] <toastydeath> yeah, the scaper i've got has a carbide insert
[06:43:07] <toastydeath> makes it much easier
[06:43:11] <toastydeath> 20" long
[06:43:50] <|dareposte|> http://www.use-enco.com/CGI/INSRIT?PARTPG=INLMKD&PMPXNO=4839433&PMAKA=240-3363
[06:43:55] <|dareposte|> i think that's the one i got
[06:44:22] <|dareposte|> not really a true one like what you would use for scraping ways, but it served my purpose
[06:44:41] <|dareposte|> carbide would be nice
[06:44:54] <toastydeath> i also cheated and i have a lot of books
[06:44:59] <toastydeath> plus, i have dudes who scrape
[06:45:00] <toastydeath> at work
[06:45:06] <|dareposte|> what did you scrape with it?
[06:45:08] <toastydeath> and can be like "you're failing at everything"
[06:45:11] <toastydeath> some aluminum blocks
[06:45:40] <|dareposte|> what do they scrape at work?
[06:45:53] <|dareposte|> i didn't realize it was actually used much any more
[06:45:56] <toastydeath> nothing, but one of the owners has a side business doing large machine repair
[06:46:02] <toastydeath> and a huge part of their thing is scraping
[06:46:24] <toastydeath> so he is a really good scrapehand
[06:47:11] <|dareposte|> oh yeah that's neat
[06:47:38] <toastydeath> i never really got very far because aluminum is really not good for scraping
[06:48:50] <toastydeath> and i should have like, flycut the blocks
[06:48:52] <toastydeath> instead, i filed them down
[06:48:55] <toastydeath> so uh
[06:49:00] <toastydeath> they're nowhere near flat
[06:49:19] <toastydeath> i was doing the autogeneration thing
[06:49:22] <|dareposte|> i started out scraping the wide end of a 2" wide cold roll, welded into a T with another piece
[06:49:43] <|dareposte|> autogeneration?
[06:50:07] <toastydeath> take 3 parts that are not flat, and make them flat by checking them continually against each other
[06:50:18] <|dareposte|> oh
[06:50:26] <|dareposte|> yeah i thought about that
[06:50:29] <|dareposte|> but i already had a surface plate
[06:50:49] <|dareposte|> on this picture...
http://www.romiusa.com/images/content/ROMI_GL240Insert.jpg ... is that the spindle motor down at the very bottom left?
[06:51:00] <toastydeath> yessir
[06:52:08] <|dareposte|> strange place for it
[06:52:38] <toastydeath> dunno, maybe they have a model with a transmission
[06:52:45] <|dareposte|> so that ledge hanging off the front is just to hold the tailstock then
[06:53:02] <|dareposte|> the "bed" is that back set of linear rails
[06:53:02] <toastydeath> the what where?
[06:53:08] <toastydeath> oh, yeah
[06:53:28] <|dareposte|> man such a simple design
[06:54:24] <toastydeath> srs
[06:54:24] <|dareposte|> some steel, a couple precision bearings, servo motor
[06:55:12] <toastydeath> cast iron, really
[06:55:22] <toastydeath> meehanite
[06:55:33] <toastydeath> don't want steel in a machine frame
[06:56:21] <|dareposte|> not so sure about that
[06:56:26] <|dareposte|> our production grinders are all steel weldments
[06:56:51] <|dareposte|> as well as the boring and honing machines
[06:56:55] <toastydeath> the more steel you use in a machine, the higher the tendency to chatter.
[06:57:12] <|dareposte|> i've heard that before, but i have since seen otherwise
[06:57:12] <toastydeath> since steel doesn't have any internal damping properties, it just transmits whatever vibration right along
[06:57:25] <|dareposte|> i took a trip through our powertrain building and it was pretty amazing
[06:57:40] <toastydeath> i'm not saying it isn't used, but i've spoken with internationally recognized machine designers and they all agree on CI
[06:58:09] <|dareposte|> maybe cost prohibitive for one-offs then
[06:58:24] <toastydeath> dunno, could very well have enough damping somewhere else in the machine that it just doesn't matter
[06:58:26] <|dareposte|> but every 4 and 6 cylinder we make is faced and bored on those things
[06:58:40] <toastydeath> also boring is not exactly the most tedius operation
[06:58:49] <toastydeath> so it could be that there's just no need to use CI
[06:58:54] <toastydeath> since it's difficult to work with otherwise
[06:59:01] <toastydeath> don't need it, don't use it
[06:59:25] <|dareposte|> i've never heard where all the 'absorbed' energy actually goes though
[06:59:33] <|dareposte|> in CI
[06:59:52] <|dareposte|> or is it just not conducted through the frame so well
[06:59:56] <toastydeath> it loses energy as the vibrations try to pass through the graphite flakes
[07:00:01] <|dareposte|> stays isolated at the point of cause
[07:00:12] <toastydeath> as least that's my understanding of it
[07:00:48] <|dareposte|> loses energy to heat?
[07:00:51] <toastydeath> yeah
[07:01:42] <toastydeath> it's easy to prove that it's damping, just ring a rod of steel, then a rod of ci
[07:01:57] <toastydeath> but my understanding of the exact mechanism is really basic as you can see
[07:02:39] <|dareposte|> yeah
[07:02:52] <|dareposte|> intuitively it certainly is apparent
[07:03:40] <toastydeath> and it does depend on the graphite
[07:03:45] <toastydeath> because wrought iron rings just like steel
[07:04:18] <toastydeath> i don't know if high concentrations of boron nitride would produce damping steel, but that would be a really cool thing to see
[07:04:24] <toastydeath> since it forms all the same structures as carbon
[07:04:57] <|dareposte|> boron nitride?
[07:05:04] <|dareposte|> but carbon is so cheap...
[07:05:08] <toastydeath> well, yeah
[07:05:26] <toastydeath> just to see if it works, you know
[07:05:36] <|dareposte|> yeah
[07:05:39] <|dareposte|> what's it normally used for
[07:05:49] <toastydeath> high speed machining hard steel
[07:06:02] <toastydeath> since diamond can't cut steel at those temperatures
[07:06:59] <|dareposte|> i think i found a tool holder to try
[07:07:32] <toastydeath> hot
[07:08:04] <|dareposte|> http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT?PMPXNO=2148795&PMT4NO=59478392
[07:08:41] <toastydeath> awesome
[07:08:58] <|dareposte|> not sure if i can face with that though
[07:09:06] <|dareposte|> it has 0 degree lead angle
[07:09:40] <toastydeath> if you can find an insert with rake on it, you'll be good.
[07:09:48] <|dareposte|> TPG it says
[07:09:52] <|dareposte|> those are common enough
[07:09:57] <toastydeath> yep
[07:11:16] <|dareposte|> http://www1.mscdirect.com/CGI/NNSRIT?PMPXNO=16846516&PMT4NO=0
[07:11:22] <|dareposte|> was the other candidate
[07:11:27] <|dareposte|> which maybe would actually be better
[07:12:02] <|dareposte|> the right hand version of that though, not the LH
[07:12:21] <toastydeath> you only get 2 edges
[07:12:41] <toastydeath> those are, in my opinion, better tools, but the TPG style insert gives you three edges per insert
[07:12:45] <|dareposte|> yeah can you flip them over though
[07:12:45] <toastydeath> if you use positive rake, that is
[07:12:48] <toastydeath> well, no
[07:13:20] <toastydeath> you have to have a negative rake toolholder, with an insert designed to have positive rake in that holder
[07:13:24] <|dareposte|> i had a set of 1/2" TTMG indexables, but they were crap
[07:13:37] <toastydeath> then you can flip it and get more
[07:14:29] <|dareposte|> that's a bit bizaare
[07:14:45] <|dareposte|> a negative holder, with a positive insert?
[07:14:50] <toastydeath> it's pretty standard, but the inserts tend to be more expensive
[07:14:51] <|dareposte|> i guess for finishing or something
[07:15:10] <toastydeath> for all kinds of things
[07:15:42] <toastydeath> it's very common to find a 5 degree negative holder, with an insert that is 12-30 degrees positive on the chipbreaker geometry
[07:15:58] <toastydeath> so the 5 comes out of that insert, and you get the effective rake
[07:16:04] <toastydeath> but they're like 10 bucks a pop in a lot of cases.
[07:16:09] <|dareposte|> wow
[07:16:42] <|dareposte|> better stay away from those then
[07:18:26] <|dareposte|> so i would probably want one with a relief angle then
[07:18:40] <toastydeath> yeah
[07:18:42] <|dareposte|> or i'm going to rub it with positive rake insert
[07:18:51] <|dareposte|> so the TNMG, i think the N=0 degree relief angle
[07:19:10] <toastydeath> if you take a no relief insert, you have to get a negative toolholder or it rubs
[07:19:18] <toastydeath> which means you have to buy a more expensive insert to get back to positive rake.
[07:20:02] <toastydeath> if you get an insert with like 5 or 7 degrees of clearance, you can buy a flat top insert with no geometry on the top of the thing, and use a positive rake holder
[07:20:08] <toastydeath> those inserts can be found cheaper, 3-4 bucks
[07:20:12] <toastydeath> but you get fewer edges
[07:20:24] <toastydeath> which comes back to tpg being the cheapest per edge
[07:20:32] <girlmeteor> why is ray tracing important in CAD?
[07:20:59] <girlmeteor> girlmeteor is now known as ibuffy
[07:21:24] <toastydeath> girlmeteor: if you're going to be doing high quality rendering for customers or something, ray tracing gives you a very realistic result
[07:22:18] <toastydeath> solidworks has some stupid raytracing thing that we used to model our products for our pamphlets, and it came out pretty darn nice
[07:22:55] <|dareposte|> doedsn't it simulate actual light rays hitting it, and make for cool specular reflections and what not?
[07:23:04] <toastydeath> yep
[07:23:06] <|dareposte|> like shrek-type rendering
[07:23:24] <|dareposte|> so for CAD, it's not important. mostly marketing tool
[07:23:41] <|dareposte|> or product concept communications
[07:23:44] <toastydeath> depends on who's using the cad package, if it's an engineer nobody cares, but an artist or designer might
[07:23:54] <|dareposte|> wouldn't they use a modeler then
[07:24:04] <toastydeath> dunno but solidworks has a really robust modeling thing.
[07:24:07] <toastydeath> we used it, it worked
[07:24:14] <|dareposte|> yeah no doubt
[07:24:16] <toastydeath> you're probably completely right though
[07:24:23] <|dareposte|> i think the artists use 3dsmax though
[07:24:46] <|dareposte|> even the big "artistic" yachts are designed in those types, because parametrically defining them would be near impossible
[07:25:09] <|dareposte|> but with those mesh tools you can get sufficiently close to dimension, but still nudge and bump to make it look nicer
[07:25:39] <|dareposte|> solidworks is the cat's meow as far as i'm concerned
[07:25:56] <|dareposte|> we have to use inventor at work and it kills me
[07:26:02] <toastydeath> haha screw inventor
[07:26:09] <|dareposte|> literally every day i lose a little more of my life just from using that crappy software
[07:26:16] <toastydeath> it's like autodesk went, "oh my god, we're no longer relevent to mechanical engineering"
[07:26:19] <|dareposte|> i may as well smoke a pack a day
[07:26:20] <toastydeath> and freaked out
[07:26:35] <|dareposte|> yeah
[07:26:39] <|dareposte|> it can't even open an iges file
[07:26:41] <|dareposte|> without croaking
[07:26:52] <|dareposte|> and if you do somehow get it to open, you can't manipulate or measure it
[07:27:27] <toastydeath> lol
[07:27:28] <|dareposte|> so if we get a huge point cloud back from measurement, we have to go borrow their machine to view it
[07:27:46] <|dareposte|> but naturally they also want to use it for more measurements
[07:28:00] <toastydeath> funny thing, those cmms
[07:28:55] <|dareposte|> the cmms make their own reports, so those aren't the problem. its the dang laser scanners that generate so much data
[07:29:23] <|dareposte|> and of course I/S thinks all you need is a 3 year old laptop with no video ram to do your job
[07:29:30] <toastydeath> oh
[07:29:32] <toastydeath> haha
[07:29:36] <toastydeath> amazing
[07:31:02] <toastydeath> man
[07:31:04] <toastydeath> i wish we had cool stuff
[07:31:21] <toastydeath> we have one manual cmm that isn't very good, and a 30" comparator.
[07:31:28] <|dareposte|> comparators are cool
[07:31:34] <|dareposte|> we dont have any of those in my shop
[07:32:06] <toastydeath> =(
[07:32:37] <|dareposte|> we do have two 12 foot or so dual-arm cmms, a manual measurement table the same size, and a dozen portables
[07:32:54] <toastydeath> what do you measure
[07:33:01] <|dareposte|> auto body
[07:33:04] <toastydeath> coooool
[07:33:28] <|dareposte|> at first yeah, but its always the same
[07:34:13] <toastydeath> well, yeah
[07:34:22] <|dareposte|> learning to use it was like hiking everest, but once you're done its not so much fun
[07:34:54] <toastydeath> "it's awfully chilly up here"
[07:36:10] <|dareposte|> yeah
[07:36:25] <|dareposte|> i was intrigued by the "probe" function on emc
[07:37:05] <toastydeath> in what sense
[07:37:34] <|dareposte|> that it was there..
[07:37:44] <|dareposte|> wouldn't have expected a cnc controller to be able to do that
[07:38:00] <toastydeath> g31 on most fanuc controls!
[07:38:26] <toastydeath> of course it doesn't know anything, so like, you'll be programming a whole lot of macro stuff
[07:39:05] <toastydeath> of course they call it something retarded and non-obvious
[07:39:21] <toastydeath> so only those of us who read manuals for fun *cough* stumble across it
[07:39:22] <|dareposte|> what can you do in macros?
[07:39:42] <toastydeath> in emc, a whole lot but i don't know anything about it
[07:39:55] <toastydeath> fanuc macro A is a bunch of G codes to do math and store variables, that's about it
[07:40:01] <|dareposte|> i just discovered incremental positioning, but macros would be even better
[07:40:16] <toastydeath> fanuc macro b is like BASIC on your machine control
[07:40:21] <toastydeath> looping, branching, etc
[07:40:30] <|dareposte|> that's a start
[07:40:42] <toastydeath> but emc doesn't do that, and macro b costs money if it's not already on the control
[07:40:47] <|dareposte|> if we could get python or perl interpreters integrated in that would be very worthwhile
[07:40:53] <toastydeath> emc has it's own thingamabob that works really well from what i hear
[07:41:37] <toastydeath> it would be nice to have an actually extendable machine controller with an object language
[07:41:41] <toastydeath> instead of gcode
[07:41:56] <|dareposte|> yeah that would be nice
[07:42:02] <|dareposte|> although not standard, so probably doomed to failure
[07:42:24] <|dareposte|> or niche adoption
[07:42:34] <toastydeath> =(
[07:43:15] <toastydeath> my vision is objects like toolpaths, tools, coordinate systems, machining methods
[07:43:21] <toastydeath> so you can just apply them to each other and whatnot
[07:43:27] <toastydeath> it's nice to dream
[07:43:44] <|dareposte|> that would be cool
[07:44:04] <|dareposte|> turret->index(tool1)
[07:44:15] <|dareposte|> part1->turn(profile1)
[07:44:51] <toastydeath> well like, imagine the tools had all the correct speed and feed information defined for materials
[07:44:56] <toastydeath> that you defined earlier
[07:45:05] <toastydeath> and a machining method, like square roughing or something
[07:45:27] <toastydeath> you could apply the square roughing method, with tool one, to toolpath 1, in coordinate system 2, or whatever
[07:45:34] <|dareposte|> yeah
[07:46:10] <|dareposte|> and link it all to a part object that defined all the operations, the material, the tool types required, etc
[07:46:37] <toastydeath> yeah man
[07:51:22] <|dareposte|> so apparently there are different grades of carbide
[07:51:37] <toastydeath> yeah
[07:51:40] <|dareposte|> maybe that would explain my past poor performance with TTM inserts
[07:51:50] <|dareposte|> what would happen if i used C2 carbide on normal steel
[07:51:55] <toastydeath> i don't know
[07:52:24] <toastydeath> i don't know the C categories, because they're only like, application guides
[07:52:37] <toastydeath> they're not a linear progression of any sort, like by rupture strength or whatever
[07:53:26] <toastydeath> there's another scale, PMK/NHS or N<something>S
[07:53:42] <toastydeath> which is stainless, cast iron, steel / nonferrous, hard turning, and special
[07:53:49] <toastydeath> then they give you a number from 10-50
[07:54:29] <toastydeath> lower is tougher with higher rupture strength for roughing/interrupted cutting at slower speed, and higher is more brittle but with very high hot temps
[07:54:43] <toastydeath> i find that more useful than the C scale, most manufactuers do as well
[07:54:52] <toastydeath> so they put it right on the label
[07:54:56] <toastydeath> of the insert box
[07:55:03] <|dareposte|> ok
[07:55:40] <toastydeath> goodnight dude
[07:55:45] <|dareposte|> night
[07:55:50] <|dareposte|> thanks for the education
[07:56:04] <toastydeath> np, thanks for listening to rambling
[07:56:31] <|dareposte|> enjoyable
[08:05:22] <ibuffy> where do you guys work that require to know this software?
[08:12:23] <|dareposte|> not required, just fun for me
[08:12:38] <|dareposte|> for emc anyway
[11:02:50] <fenn> alex_joni: illuminated by light pollution:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/natelipkowitz/3262341887/
[11:41:43] <alex_joni> fenn: I wanted to say "nice", but I'm not sure it's actually nice ;)
[11:41:48] <alex_joni> the photo is cool though
[12:03:27] <fenn> ho hum
[12:03:41] <fenn> i should make a mini version of that romi, out of welded steel and concrete
[12:03:55] <fenn> http://www.romiusa.com/images/content/ROMI_GL240Insert.jpg
[12:05:14] <fenn> some FEM analysis is probably warranted
[12:05:33] <BigJohnT> you should make a left and a right one
[12:05:52] <fenn> twins?
[12:06:03] <BigJohnT> yea
[12:06:12] <fenn> for my bilaterally symmetric machine shop
[12:06:26] <fenn> half the shop makes left handed threads
[12:06:59] <fenn> and all the magnets are backwards
[12:49:05] <skunkworks> http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=576710&postcount=244
[12:49:48] <BigJohnT> SWEET!
[12:55:34] <BigJohnT> hmmm I think I know where 2 or three large servos are...
[13:10:42] <alex_joni> skunkworks: cool
[13:11:23] <archivist> finally not a pic of the pcb :) when's production of boards ?
[13:16:34] <BigJohnT> I owe, I owe it's off to work I go
[13:28:25] <skunkworks_> heh - hooked to an actual machine - go figure ;)
[13:29:57] <fenn> * fenn mutters about documentation
[13:54:59] <skunkworks_> Good morning fenn
[14:20:20] <alex_joni> skunkworks: indeed a crazy idea
[14:20:39] <skunkworks_> :)
[14:21:47] <fenn> skunkworks_: where are you at project-wise with the k&t?
[14:24:27] <skunkworks_> the last thing we did was tear the old electronics out and started dissasembling.
[14:25:05] <skunkworks_> but it has been a few months. when dad retires - things will pick up.
[14:43:09] <cradek> skunkworks_: is that your design he's using?
[14:43:39] <cradek> (I didn't read the whole thread)
[14:45:15] <skunkworks_> cradek: I really don't think so - just the general idea ;)
[14:45:28] <cradek> ah, cool
[14:45:48] <cradek> but it's named after you anyway?
[14:46:08] <skunkworks_> I don't get it either...
[14:46:10] <cradek> I think it's amazing that you guys have made functional servo amps
[14:47:19] <skunkworks_> I still think it is a cool way of doing closed loop.
[14:48:19] <skunkworks_> the scematic he posted is not available anymore - but he used a different driver ic that got rid of the flip-flop. plus a little different current limit scheme
[14:50:57] <BJT-Work> http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=576326#post576326
[14:51:29] <cradek> ouch
[14:51:43] <BJT-Work> that's kinda what I thought
[14:52:42] <cradek> I'd do a lot of surfing and reading before resorting to posting "I suck"
[14:52:58] <BJT-Work> must be a bad day for him
[14:54:57] <fenn> skunkworks_: i think you should use a revision control system
[15:00:16] <skunkworks_> fenn: I have a hard time being organized.
[15:00:29] <skunkworks_> just ask my wife.
[15:01:38] <fenn> heh maybe your wife should use a revision control system then :P
[15:16:09] <skunkworks_> heh
[15:17:07] <archivist> wives do try to revise and update their fellas
[15:34:36] <skunkworks_> * skunkworks_ wonders what revision he is up to...
[15:35:24] <archivist> get earplugs ready and go ask wife
[17:52:41] <teneb> hey guys
[17:53:18] <teneb> i'm having issues getting my eth0 to assign the ip and ping the lan
[17:53:30] <teneb> i'm a windows guy, but i'm not a dumbass
[17:53:39] <teneb> can anyone point me to the correct config files?
[17:53:47] <teneb> or setup script?
[17:53:54] <teneb> for samba file sharing
[17:54:40] <cradek> try networking on the administration menu
[17:54:50] <cradek> if that doesn't help, try asking on the #ubuntu channel
[17:57:29] <jepler> the only linuxcnc-ubuntu specific advice is that if the device doesn't appear *at all*, install linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-12-rtai and see whether that makes a difference.
[17:57:42] <jepler> otherwise, any ubuntu advice on configuring network cards should apply
[17:58:28] <jepler> linux-ubuntu-modules mostly applies to wireless cards
[17:59:14] <jepler> http://linuxcnc.org/hardy/dists/hardy/base/binary-i386/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-16-rtai_2.6.24-16.22.linuxcnc.2_i386.deb
[17:59:41] <teneb> thanks
[18:09:03] <fenn> setting up your IP is a separate issue from sharing via samba
[18:09:22] <fenn> sudo ifconfig eth0 up <your IP>
[18:18:41] <Kohlswa7578> Hmm. I seem to have a lot of ideas lately (bad ones mostly or just not well thought thou). anyway several of the machines at work don't have good coolant level indicators. so I thought that's something that would require lite effort and give good results.
[18:18:49] <Kohlswa7578> Using a small microprocessor I could read a ultrasonic proximity sensor or perhaps something simpler like a potentiometer with an arm attached to a float and then present the value on a 3 digit 7-segment display or perhaps just a bar display.
[18:25:05] <fenn> and then it could email your blackberry when the coolant level is low?
[18:26:35] <Kohlswa7578> nah, thats overkill really.
[18:26:37] <toastatwork> that is the most amazing thing i have ever heard
[18:27:57] <fenn> earlier today i was talking with someone about how they hate the buzzer on the washing machine, and somehow we settled on emailing you as the simplest solution
[18:29:45] <fenn> think about it: you could do your laundry anywhere in the world and know when it's finished
[18:29:52] <Kohlswa7578> toastatwork. the idea is very simple but its something that could be implemented and actually do some good.
[18:30:24] <toastatwork> it would certainly save a few endmills
[18:30:32] <toastatwork> back to work i go
[18:36:12] <Kohlswa7578> Kohlswa7578 is now known as Kohlswa
[18:38:55] <Kohlswa> *sighs*
[21:12:01] <skunkworks_> thats Odd
[21:12:13] <SWPLinux> hey, it's hot here!
[21:17:37] <fenn> in vermont?
[21:19:23] <SWPLinux> no, Las Vegas
[21:20:21] <SWPLinux> it was about 0 when I left this morning
[21:20:28] <SWPLinux> (in Vermont)
[21:59:18] <|dareposte|> 0 fahrenheit or celsius
[22:02:29] <skunkworks_> F
[23:10:11] <JymmmEMC> SWPadnos: Have you ever thought of becoming a flight attendant? With as much as you fly, might as well get paid for it!
[23:17:26] <geo01005> Anybody online right now who has built a EDM power supply?
[23:38:43] <pjm__> geo01005 i didnt know what one was, but found this excellent write up
http://pico-systems.com/edm.html
[23:39:06] <geo01005> I'm reading that right now :)
[23:39:33] <pjm__> yeah its quite interesting, handy as it says, for getting broken things out of holes
[23:39:55] <geo01005> That one is a way simplified EDM power supply...
[23:40:35] <geo01005> Just a DC power supply with a current limit resistor.
