By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by Allendale Jan 24th

Further Adventures with the Sieg KX3 & KX1

A thread for new owners of these machines to post in.

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Sarah12/04/2020 16:26:01
27 forum posts
4 photos

Hi Adam,

Thank you so much for your help 😊 I'll spend a bit of time tomorrow putting in your values and fine tuning to get the Spindle rpm matching rpm requested. I understand whay you said about ratios of Step per and Velocity, but still can't rationalise the big variance in the different machine's values, however as long as it works 😊

Still waiting for the new 6mm cutters, I've got 4 flute cutters, but I'll be patient and wait. Many project's to do lincluding trying to machine some 2mm carbon fibre sheet.

Thanks again,

Sarah

Former Member12/04/2020 17:22:08

[This posting has been removed]

Sarah13/04/2020 12:32:48
27 forum posts
4 photos
Posted by Adam Stevenson on 12/04/2020 13:13:25:

It was found to be 350 for best results, the velocity is the one important for the spindle. Lots of testing was done with these machines and each one from Arceuro was calibrated to allow a quicker setup by the users.

The actual values are regardless it is the ratio between them that matters. Think that for each 360º the computer sends steps, it is not just how many steps are sent but how fast the amount are sent too. But we are not sending steps but a Voltage that the controller uses to drive the motor at a set speed, they is also a in-built tacho that will increase or decrease the current to keep the speed constance. So at the end it is not the number of steps sent per revolution but the rate at which they are sent. So we pick a nice number and then how fast we send them and balance the ratio between them, in this case 350 x 4,000 or 35 x 40,000 or 3,500 x 400. The computer will have limits so we picked the mid ground that most PC's would work with.

Edited By Adam Stevenson on 12/04/2020 13:16:52

Hi Adam, I now understand what you meant about the ratios of Step per and Velocity.

Your 'Step per' multiplied by 'Velocity' figures are approximately double those of mine. I put your Step per x Velocity in to my machine and the sure enough the rpm doubled! A requested 2000rpm shot up to over 4000rpm! So presumably I can either have my 100 x 6000 or modify yours to 350 x 2000 (plus a bit of twaekage). Is there any practical difference between the two?

The X, Y and Z axis seem fine at 5us Step Pulse, they just sound a bit different.

Thanks for your help and patience.

Sarah

 

Edited By Sarah on 13/04/2020 12:40:40

Adam Stevenson13/04/2020 13:26:23
29 forum posts

You can use 100x6000 or 350x2000, it is the ratio that matters but once you pick a Step per keep that and the formula is simpler as you don't need to track two changing values like the X, Y, Z and A need.

(Required Vel) = [Screen RPM] X [current Vel] / [Measured RPM]

Once you get the 5,000 max done then you can change the pulley to 7000 max, I suggest not to put a high number as 7,000 is all you want and setting it to 100,000 max could then sending a 70,000 speed that can cause a massive load.

Sarah13/04/2020 16:36:21
27 forum posts
4 photos

Hi Adam

All done 😊

Thanks again for your help. Spindle speeds are quite close to demanded speeds and I've spent the afternoon practicing some bits in foam before I cut in aluminium.

Regards,

Sarah

Sarah13/04/2020 17:55:02
27 forum posts
4 photos

Hi Barrie,

Thanks for your post on milling carbon fibre, I've sent you a message with a few questions.

Regards,

Sarah

JasonB15/04/2020 17:41:24
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

Hi Nick. yes I'm getting to like it, still won't be getting rid of the manual machines but the CNC does open up the options available and enable some projects that may not have seen the light of day be brought forwards.


For the current engine that I'm working on I wanted a flywheel with quite a wide but thin rim and oval spokes tapering in width and thickness .

I have often used cast flywheels from other models but could not find anything to suit. Fabrication was an option but by the time I had sourced some thick wall tube, a disc to cut the spokes from and added something to beef up the hub area it worked out cheaper to go for the solid option so I ordered a 30mm length of 130mm diameter EN3 steel.

I decided to rough it out on the lathe and manual mill leaving material on all surfaces.

i did a dummy clearing program to mimic what I had done on the manual machines so that the CNC would not try and remove the metal again and then a clearing program was run starting at the height of the "disc" with a 1mm stepdown that left a finish like this

Then a finishing ramp with 0.2mm stepdown to give the draft angle to the inside of the rim and hub and then carry on down further to shape the spokes with a 6mm dia R1 tool

It then just needed a bit of fettling with the Dremel to blend the 0.2mm steps and I also added the bits to make it look like a 2 part flywheel.

A couple of coats of filler/primer and it's ready for colour.

Looks like I won't be needing many castings in the future.

Ian Johnson 115/04/2020 18:48:33
345 forum posts
98 photos

That turned out very nice Jason how long did it take to machine?

And like you say who needs castings when you have a cnc?

Ian

Andrew Evans15/04/2020 19:01:59
340 forum posts
8 photos

That looks great Jason - lovely job. Did you have any issue with the milling cutter going blunt part way through? Andy

Andrew Johnston15/04/2020 19:37:24
avatar
5972 forum posts
667 photos

Looking good. thumbs up

I might make one change. Using a 6mm ballnose cutter instead of a radius tip cutter would have given a better finish for a given stepdown, especially on the more vertical surfaces. Ideally one would vary the stepdown according to the slope of the work. Does Fusion360 have a command for scallop height rather than stepdown?

Andrew

JasonB15/04/2020 20:19:38
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

That's interesting Andrew as it was the more horizontal surfaces that showed the 0.2mm stepdown most with the finish getting better the more vertical the surface became, this image should come up larger if clicked and shows that near the tops of the spokes the step was most obvious

02 step.jpg

One consequence of using the RAMP path is that the tool just drops 0.2 mm over the "loop" be that once around the inside of the rim or once around each triangular cutout without any other options. You can see below how the tool made very few passes (blue line is path of tool) over the top edge of the spoke resulting in that long triangle that can be seen in the photo above.. I could have divided the job up into say three heights and set a finer stepdown for that area at the top of the spokes and maybe more than 0.2mm for the first inside of the rim as that is almost vertical (3deg draft angle)

ramp.jpg

Had I used the contour option where the tool moves around at one height then steps down then that has the facility to "detect shallow areas" and gives the option to set a different stepdown for those, as far as I can see there is not "distance between cuts". The pic below shows the greater number of passes over the shallow tops of the spokes when detection is enabled and set at 0.05mm stepdown. Only downside is it takes a lot longer to run and certainly longer than it took to Dremel the surface. Add to that the need to adjust feed for the slow moving middle of the ball nose cutter and it would be even longer I suppose if it was to be a bare metal surface then that would be the way to go but as it is supposed to be a painted "casting" then a bit of irregular hand finishing suits more.

shallow.jpg

Former Member15/04/2020 21:46:39

[This posting has been removed]

blowlamp16/04/2020 00:15:21
avatar
1480 forum posts
97 photos

In Fusion 360, Steep & Shallow toolpath strategy seems to give good results for this kind of job.

Martin.

JasonB16/04/2020 07:47:32
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

Barrie, Martin

Yes looking again there is the option to set a max stepover, pic below shows the effect of setting that at the same value as the stepdown which gives the path shown below which is somewhere between the two examples I posted above.

step over max.jpg

Fusion does have so many features that it takes a while to find them all, not helped by only using the CAM for a couple of items per month, with more use I'm sure I will become more familiar with it and not choose the Ramp option for parts like this well certainly not the spokes as it was ideal for the inner edge of the rim.

Muzzer who now posts on MEM also mentioned about using a 3D model of the roughed out part as the stock which would have been useful as I could have set the six holes as entry points as it was I just used a steep ramp angle and large dia to save time as the tool ramped down into the metal it thought was there.

Ron Laden16/04/2020 08:40:12
avatar
2175 forum posts
432 photos

That is impressive Jason especially looking at the close up of the finished spokes, you would never know that wasnt a casting. I learnt something to, didnt know that there are two part flywheels.

JasonB16/04/2020 08:44:33
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

You would Ron, it's better than a lot of castingsdevil

Sarah16/04/2020 17:11:17
27 forum posts
4 photos

Very impressive Jason 😊

JasonB16/04/2020 18:52:01
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

Well I think I may be getting somewhere now, Fusion suggests that the contour and ramp options which I was using are best suited to vertical or near vertical surfaces which probably explains why my horizontal ones were not ideal. I have found another option that they call "steep & shallow" which allows you to set stepover on horizontal surfaces and stepdown on vertical as well as "scallop" that Andrew mentioned.

Quickly entered in the same tool and 0.2mm values the results give a different tool path which sees the tool running along the length of the spokes much like Barrie said he would use and the simulator shows that leaving a much better finish, time is a bit longer but I could likely up the distance on the near vertical faces to compensate and would also gain a bit of time back with less Dremel work. I'll be trying this on the next suitable part. Pic of the revised toolpath.

steep n shallow.jpg

Andrew Johnston17/04/2020 09:47:13
avatar
5972 forum posts
667 photos
Posted by Ron Laden on 16/04/2020 08:40:12:

I learnt something to, didnt know that there are two part flywheels.

Quite common with larger flywheels, for a number of reasons:

The size of pattern and mould needed

The capacity of the foundry to melt and pour cast iron

Transportation of the flywheel to the customer. Moving something 30 feet long and 15 feet high is one thing. A 30 foot diameter part is a whole different ball game. Even with modern transport it'd be a challenge; there aren't many road bridges with a 30 foot high clearance!

Andrew

JasonB23/04/2020 17:37:56
avatar
Moderator
20283 forum posts
2218 photos
1 articles

Some of simple drilling and profiling cuts produced a couple of parts destined to become part of a "casting"

I think it's S275 steel at 3mm thick, 3mm dia holes were drilled with the first code and then screws added to help hold the part down before before changing to a 3-flute 4mm dia cutter to do the shape in 4 depth increments and then a final 0.25mm full height finish pass. Couple of tabs used just to hold the bits in place.

Small one in place and the other to show how it mimics the shape of the other parts but is 1mm larger all round.

No video of this one as it's not particularly exciting.

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
ChesterUK
JD Metals
Eccentric July 5 2018
Warco
cowells
emcomachinetools
Eccentric Engineering
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest