A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

Thanks, guys!

i

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

Thanks, guys!

i

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

Karl

Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

Thanks, guys!

i

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

He might be more happy with something like this...

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/tls/2041027551.html

On 2010-11-09, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

Karl, it is a POS in what ways? This is the real question.

The next question is, is there some fatal flaw in it that makes it
more difficult to retrofit than my Bridgeport?

In retrospect, my Bridgeport Interact was easy to retrofit, I just did
not know anything, and it was the learning that was hard.

i

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 15:31:45 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

On 2010-11-09, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

Karl, it is a POS in what ways? This is the real question.

Good for its time. But that has past. 'letronics have a bathtub curve
for reliability. He's going to fight breakdowns without parts
available.


The next question is, is there some fatal flaw in it that makes it
more difficult to retrofit than my Bridgeport?

same job.

In retrospect, my Bridgeport Interact was easy to retrofit, I just did
not know anything, and it was the learning that was hard.

Learning is hard for old farts. But it keeps you young.
i

On 2010-11-09, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 15:31:45 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

On 2010-11-09, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

Karl, it is a POS in what ways? This is the real question.

Good for its time. But that has past. 'letronics have a bathtub curve
for reliability. He's going to fight breakdowns without parts
available.


The next question is, is there some fatal flaw in it that makes it
more difficult to retrofit than my Bridgeport?

same job.

In retrospect, my Bridgeport Interact was easy to retrofit, I just did
not know anything, and it was the learning that was hard.

Learning is hard for old farts. But it keeps you young.
i

OK, good to know. I agree about learning. That retrofit job left me
exhausted.

i

On 2010-11-09, Ignoramus32694 wrote:
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Hmm ... the one image which you posted the link to is a bit low
resolution, but the controller looks familiar to me.

Differences from the Taiwanese Bridgeport clone with an Anilam
conversion:

1) The handwheels were plastic deep dishes with spring-loaded
folding cranks which would not bash your leg or whatever was
within reach if an unexpected rapid move came up.

2) The Bridgeport clone conversion had taken the quill stop rod
and coupled a ball screw to that for quill feed. (The real
Bridgeport "Series I" I have uses a hollow ball screw around the
quill, so the feed force is concentric with the spindle. I
can't really see what is being done here.

3) My Bridgeport Series I has a fixed ballscrew for the X axis
and a nut which is rotated by the motor (originally stepper,
now servo). This has the advantage of eliminating whip in the
leadscrew during a rapid move -- but also eliminates the
possibility of using a handwheel to manually feed it.

4) I don't see the tape system for holding the program files (a
small box which sits on top of the cabinet), but you can use a
computer connected to the RS-232 port to accomplish the same
thing -- and quicker. You'll need to find the magic code to
switch save/load output/input to the RS-232 from the interface
for the tape drive.

5) Looks like a really solid machine -- confirming what I have
read about Lagun machines. Made in Brazil, IIRC.

6) The Crusader II has a sort of conversational programming
mode -- which translates to actual G-code inside the machine
as you can determine by examining the file produced by saving a
program to a computer.

7) Assuming that it is like what I worked with -- always remember
to turn off the power to the control box (switch on the back) or
you will come back to find the base pan full of waylube from the
constant operation of the oiler.

[ ... ]

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Well -- you have what I can offer based on the photo and my
twenty-year-old memory of the Crusader II by Anilam.

I have no idea how much wear the machine has suffered. However,
it does seem to be missing the crank handle on the Y-axis wheel.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 2010-11-10, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2010-11-09, Ignoramus32694 wrote:
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Hmm ... the one image which you posted the link to is a bit low
resolution, but the controller looks familiar to me.

Differences from the Taiwanese Bridgeport clone with an Anilam
conversion:

1) The handwheels were plastic deep dishes with spring-loaded
folding cranks which would not bash your leg or whatever was
within reach if an unexpected rapid move came up.

This one seems to have handles permanently affixed to the dishes.

Perhaps they do not engage to the screws, unless pushed.

Also, V ways and not box ways.

2) The Bridgeport clone conversion had taken the quill stop rod
and coupled a ball screw to that for quill feed. (The real
Bridgeport "Series I" I have uses a hollow ball screw around the
quill, so the feed force is concentric with the spindle. I
can't really see what is being done here.

This is how my Bridgeport Series II is, hollow screw around the
spindle.

This one, seems to have a screw outside of the quill.

3) My Bridgeport Series I has a fixed ballscrew for the X axis
and a nut which is rotated by the motor (originally stepper,
now servo). This has the advantage of eliminating whip in the
leadscrew during a rapid move -- but also eliminates the
possibility of using a handwheel to manually feed it.

4) I don't see the tape system for holding the program files (a
small box which sits on top of the cabinet), but you can use a
computer connected to the RS-232 port to accomplish the same
thing -- and quicker. You'll need to find the magic code to
switch save/load output/input to the RS-232 from the interface
for the tape drive.

Could be a problem , too.

5) Looks like a really solid machine -- confirming what I have
read about Lagun machines. Made in Brazil, IIRC.

6) The Crusader II has a sort of conversational programming
mode -- which translates to actual G-code inside the machine
as you can determine by examining the file produced by saving a
program to a computer.

Hm, interesting. The control looks very ancient, which is possibly a
good thing since it does not have a CRT.

7) Assuming that it is like what I worked with -- always remember
to turn off the power to the control box (switch on the back) or
you will come back to find the base pan full of waylube from the
constant operation of the oiler.

[ ... ]

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Well -- you have what I can offer based on the photo and my
twenty-year-old memory of the Crusader II by Anilam.

I have no idea how much wear the machine has suffered. However,
it does seem to be missing the crank handle on the Y-axis wheel.

Good Luck,
DoN.

On 2010-11-09, Ignoramus32694 wrote:
On 2010-11-09, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Its a bridgy clone series 1, not as heavy as yours. The control is a
POS. Use it if it still works. Otherwise, maybe you know somebody that
can do EMC???

Karl, it is a POS in what ways? This is the real question.

He is talking about the control -- the Anilam electronics.
While I have used one (perhaps twenty years ago) it was the first CNC
that I ever experienced, so I did not know what to look for then.

It worked nicely but there were things which I did not like (and
which may not apply to this conversion), such as the approach for
connecting the servo to the Z-axis quill feed. I *like* the way the
Series-I Bridgeport does it -- and I suspect that is the same way that
yours does it). I can't tell how the Lagun conversion does it. (BTW,
it is pronounced like "lagoon", not like "LASer GUN", since it is from a
Portugese speaking country.

The thing which gives the convenience of manual controls also
introduces the possibility of X-axis ball screw whip during rapid
motions.

The next question is, is there some fatal flaw in it that makes it
more difficult to retrofit than my Bridgeport?

The Anilam conversion of the Bridgeport clone used linear scales
(encoders) on the axes instead of rotary encoders on the servo motors.
This gives a more accurate reading of position, but will make the loop a
bit longer and harder to close and tune I suspect.

In retrospect, my Bridgeport Interact was easy to retrofit, I just did
not know anything, and it was the learning that was hard.

This should be fairly easy to retrofit as well -- easier if you
add encoders to the motors and ignore the linear scales -- assuming that
the Lagun uses the same setup. The servo amplifiers should be in the
cabinet under the angled arm supporting the control module. (Hmm ...
that reminder to turn it off when you go away -- that switch *might*
have been on the cabinet which had the servo amps, instead of the
control box. It *has* been twenty years, after all. :-)

I would probably use the existing servos and servo amplifiers,
and might actually use the Anilam computer as well, depending on how
well it still works, and whether the touch sensitive areas on the front
panel (in place of switches -- the only real switch is the panic switch)
still work and have not had the markings worn off from use.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"Ignoramus32694" wrote in message
...
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

The Crusader II control is pretty capable for manual programming, mine has
features to make the most of manual programming. There is something like a
1000 move limit that isn't bad for manual programming but if you use a
CAD/CAM system to generate 3d molds it could be a mess, having to break up
the program into smaller chunks and loading a partial program at a time.

Some parts I used to make were both left and right hand. I wrote the
routine to make a single part, using nested loops and axis offsetting I
could make a matrix (3X7) of 21 parts in a single piece of material. I
added a code to mirror an axis and made the left hand parts.

I would say bottom line is that if the control works good, that's fine. If
not, it's an easy retrofit, encoders in, analog signals to drives, you've
done that before.

RogerN

On 2010-11-10, Ignoramus32694 wrote:
On 2010-11-10, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2010-11-09, Ignoramus32694 wrote:
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Hmm ... the one image which you posted the link to is a bit low
resolution, but the controller looks familiar to me.

Differences from the Taiwanese Bridgeport clone with an Anilam
conversion:

1) The handwheels were plastic deep dishes with spring-loaded
folding cranks which would not bash your leg or whatever was
within reach if an unexpected rapid move came up.

This one seems to have handles permanently affixed to the dishes.

I noticed.

Perhaps they do not engage to the screws, unless pushed.

I doubt it. Does it have dials with the handles? If so, they
need to stay in sync with the leadscrews, and a push-to-engage works
against that.

Also, V ways and not box ways.

Hmm ... Mine are dovetail ways for sure on the Y-axis and the
vertical ways for the knee. Not really sure about the X-axis, as they
are hidden enough to make it difficult to remember.

2) The Bridgeport clone conversion had taken the quill stop rod
and coupled a ball screw to that for quill feed. (The real
Bridgeport "Series I" I have uses a hollow ball screw around the
quill, so the feed force is concentric with the spindle. I
can't really see what is being done here.

This is how my Bridgeport Series II is, hollow screw around the
spindle.

Good -- concentric pushing then.

This one, seems to have a screw outside of the quill.

So it can over time produce wear of the quill in its bearings,
since it is always producing a side thrust.

[ ... ]

4) I don't see the tape system for holding the program files (a
small box which sits on top of the cabinet), but you can use a
computer connected to the RS-232 port to accomplish the same
thing -- and quicker. You'll need to find the magic code to
switch save/load output/input to the RS-232 from the interface
for the tape drive.

Could be a problem , too.

Not a serious problem. I found the codes for the switch in a
web site devoted to old Anilam machines.

Check out:

http://faculty.etsu.edu/hemphill/entc3710/ani-mill/index.htm

Chapter 14 tells you how to do the transfers including the magic
codes. It does assume that the serial port is connected to a switchbox
to select between cassette tape (a tiny one) punched paper tape, and PC.
(I guess two for the punched paper tape -- one for the tape punch, and
one for the tape reader. :-) Or maybe it is for selecting different
machines to connect to one PC. :-) I think that they must still be using
one at the school in question.

It includes the pinout of the RS-232 cable as needed for the
Anilam.

Other sections tell you a lot about other programming features.
I would suggest downloading and saving all the pages for future use.

You can read up on the programming there too.

[ ... ]

6) The Crusader II has a sort of conversational programming
mode -- which translates to actual G-code inside the machine
as you can determine by examining the file produced by saving a
program to a computer.

Hm, interesting. The control looks very ancient, which is possibly a
good thing since it does not have a CRT.

:-)

Yes -- is it most likely 20 years old or a bit more. Not a
problem for the hardware in a well maintained machine, but certainly so
for the computer. (Well ... it is likely old enough to be from before
the pirated electrolyte formula, so the capacitors may still be good.

But if the membrane switch panel front has gone bad, it is
certainly time to haul out EMC instead of trying to make it work. There
are a lot of switches on that panel.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

....
I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

Roger, are those scales quadrature? If so you could just hook'em up to
EMC.

Karl

On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:

"Ignoramus32694" wrote in message
...
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

This is noce (the scales), as it lets me to also use the mill with the
manual handles.

The Crusader II control is pretty capable for manual programming, mine has
features to make the most of manual programming. There is something like a
1000 move limit that isn't bad for manual programming but if you use a
CAD/CAM system to generate 3d molds it could be a mess, having to break up
the program into smaller chunks and loading a partial program at a time.

Yes, that sucks.

Some parts I used to make were both left and right hand. I wrote the
routine to make a single part, using nested loops and axis offsetting I
could make a matrix (3X7) of 21 parts in a single piece of material. I
added a code to mirror an axis and made the left hand parts.

I would say bottom line is that if the control works good, that's fine. If
not, it's an easy retrofit, encoders in, analog signals to drives, you've

This is nice to know.

One more question related to his mill, how much would it cost to pay
someone to do a "professional retrofit"? 13k?

i

On 2010-11-10, Karl Townsend wrote:
...
I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

Roger, are those scales quadrature? If so you could just hook'em up to
EMC.

Good point. Anway, feedback isn't a very complicated task in any case,
adding encoders or using scales.

i

"Ignoramus16525" wrote in message
...
On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:

"Ignoramus32694" wrote in message
...
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives
and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of
the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine
for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

This is noce (the scales), as it lets me to also use the mill with the
manual handles.

The Crusader II control is pretty capable for manual programming, mine
has
features to make the most of manual programming. There is something like
a
1000 move limit that isn't bad for manual programming but if you use a
CAD/CAM system to generate 3d molds it could be a mess, having to break
up
the program into smaller chunks and loading a partial program at a time.

Yes, that sucks.

Some parts I used to make were both left and right hand. I wrote the
routine to make a single part, using nested loops and axis offsetting I
could make a matrix (3X7) of 21 parts in a single piece of material. I
added a code to mirror an axis and made the left hand parts.

I would say bottom line is that if the control works good, that's fine.
If
not, it's an easy retrofit, encoders in, analog signals to drives, you've

This is nice to know.

One more question related to his mill, how much would it cost to pay
someone to do a "professional retrofit"? 13k?

i

I'm not sure what you mean by professional retrofit. New control of course,
but would you also want new motors, drives, scales or encoders, ball screws?
Personally I would only recommend an EMC or similar retrofit because the
machine isn't worth spending a lot of money ($13K) on. If I were going to
spend a good chunk of money I would prefer to find something with a tool
changer or at least an automatic drawbar (tools could be arranged on the
table for automatic machine pick up if you could control hold and release of
the draw bar).

The reason I like EMC for these machines is that it works well with the
analog signal and the encoder feedback for reasonable money.

RogerN

"Karl Townsend" wrote in message
news
...
I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives
and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine
for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

Roger, are those scales quadrature? If so you could just hook'em up to
EMC.

Karl

I'm not 100% sure but I think they are, I have the pin out around here
somewhere... found it

DRO Scale Pinout of Bendix 10-6 connector

PIN OUTS of 1 axis
.....A - Channel 1
.....B - Channel 2
.....C - +5 Volts
.....D - Ground
.....E - Shield Ground
.....F - Marker pulse

I bought scale connectors and the large control connector for my mill. I
was planning on connecting the EMC conversion through the existing
connectors so I could switch back to the Crusader II if I needed to run the
mill before the conversion was ready.

RogerN

On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by professional retrofit. New control of course,
but would you also want new motors, drives, scales or encoders, ball screws?
Personally I would only recommend an EMC or similar retrofit because the
machine isn't worth spending a lot of money ($13K) on. If I were going to
spend a good chunk of money I would prefer to find something with a tool
changer or at least an automatic drawbar (tools could be arranged on the
table for automatic machine pick up if you could control hold and release of
the draw bar).

The reason I like EMC for these machines is that it works well with the
analog signal and the encoder feedback for reasonable money.


I would never use anything but EMC, but this is not my mill.

i

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:14:46 -0600, Ignoramus16525
wrote:

On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by professional retrofit. New control of course,
but would you also want new motors, drives, scales or encoders, ball screws?
Personally I would only recommend an EMC or similar retrofit because the
machine isn't worth spending a lot of money ($13K) on. If I were going to
spend a good chunk of money I would prefer to find something with a tool
changer or at least an automatic drawbar (tools could be arranged on the
table for automatic machine pick up if you could control hold and release of
the draw bar).

The reason I like EMC for these machines is that it works well with the
analog signal and the encoder feedback for reasonable money.


I would never use anything but EMC, but this is not my mill.

i

The Camsoft refit I'm doing on the bedmill would probably run about
15K with new parts and a pro doing the work. The shop would be
responsible for all the electrician wiring which would be huge if
paying union rates.

I should end up just under 2K.

Karl

On 2010-11-11, Karl Townsend wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:14:46 -0600, Ignoramus16525
wrote:

On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by professional retrofit. New control of course,
but would you also want new motors, drives, scales or encoders, ball screws?
Personally I would only recommend an EMC or similar retrofit because the
machine isn't worth spending a lot of money ($13K) on. If I were going to
spend a good chunk of money I would prefer to find something with a tool
changer or at least an automatic drawbar (tools could be arranged on the
table for automatic machine pick up if you could control hold and release of
the draw bar).

The reason I like EMC for these machines is that it works well with the
analog signal and the encoder feedback for reasonable money.


I would never use anything but EMC, but this is not my mill.

i

The Camsoft refit I'm doing on the bedmill would probably run about
15K with new parts and a pro doing the work. The shop would be
responsible for all the electrician wiring which would be huge if
paying union rates.

I should end up just under 2K.

Awesome. I recall you found the camsoft kit on ebay. Cost of my EMC
conversion, including cost of the fourth axis Troyke rotary table and
everything, including a new PC, will be $2500.

i

On 2010-11-10, Ignoramus16525 wrote:
On 2010-11-10, RogerN wrote:

"Ignoramus32694" wrote in message
...
A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II

[ ... ]

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

I have a Bridgeport with an Anilam Crusader II control. I replaced the
servo motor drives with new AMC drives. They are set up pretty much like
your mill IIRC. The servos have tachometer feedback going to the drives and
the control sends +/- 10V to the drives for velocity command. The DRO
scales feed back the actual position of the table, not the position of the
motor. I have used my with the Crusader II control and that works fine for
most purposes, I do hope to do an EMC2 upgrade in the future though.

This is noce (the scales), as it lets me to also use the mill with the
manual handles.

Even if you are using encoders on the motors you would get the
same behavior, since the motors are not disengaged from the leadscrews
during manual mode. They are powered down, of course, but that is a
different matter. You *need* those motors on there to resist the
cutting forces feeding the ball screws.

The primary difference is that the linear scales have an index
output so your machine can be designed to home on power up without
needing to pay attention to mechanical switches (other than to stop it
if you are already past the index point, of course. :-)

The Crusader II control is pretty capable for manual programming, mine has
features to make the most of manual programming. There is something like a
1000 move limit that isn't bad for manual programming but if you use a
CAD/CAM system to generate 3d molds it could be a mess, having to break up
the program into smaller chunks and loading a partial program at a time.

Yes, that sucks.

I *think* that there may have been memory upgrades, as I
remember our "real machinist" (TM) producing a program with something
more than that to generate a very smooth complex curve -- generated from a
formula and printed out by computer.

Some parts I used to make were both left and right hand. I wrote the
routine to make a single part, using nested loops and axis offsetting I
could make a matrix (3X7) of 21 parts in a single piece of material. I
added a code to mirror an axis and made the left hand parts.

Yes -- even the old Bridgeport BOSS-3 (which is what my Series-I
started life as) had switches to reverse the axes.

I would say bottom line is that if the control works good, that's fine. If
not, it's an easy retrofit, encoders in, analog signals to drives, you've

This is nice to know.

One more question related to his mill, how much would it cost to pay
someone to do a "professional retrofit"? 13k?

No guess there. If the price is reasonable, it should take into
account the presence of the ball screws, the servo motors, and the
scales, so it *should* cost less than a from-the-ground-up conversion.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

Thanks, guys!

i

Good reliable iron. Cant speak for the control

Gunner

--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,

On 10 Nov 2010 02:58:52 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:


It worked nicely but there were things which I did not like (and
which may not apply to this conversion), such as the approach for
connecting the servo to the Z-axis quill feed. I *like* the way the
Series-I Bridgeport does it -- and I suspect that is the same way that
yours does it). I can't tell how the Lagun conversion does it. (BTW,
it is pronounced like "lagoon", not like "LASer GUN", since it is from a
Portugese speaking country.

Spain...is a Portagee speaking country???

G

--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 17:43:58 -0600, "RogerN" wrote:


I'm not sure what you mean by professional retrofit. New control of course,
but would you also want new motors, drives, scales or encoders, ball screws?
Personally I would only recommend an EMC or similar retrofit because the
machine isn't worth spending a lot of money ($13K) on.


Centroid....
http://www.cnc-machine-controls.com/LowerCostCNC.html

Standard M-400S control system includes everything from the control
console and keyboard to the servo motors and encoders. Computer, power
supplies, cabling. All prewired and ready to bolt on. Your cost for this
3 axis control package is 10,960.00.

Centroid's latest MPU11 CNC control system includes their new
DSP control card, wired electrical enclosure with PLC and 3 axis DC
servo drive set. You retain your existing DC servo motors & encoders.
You supply the PC computer, monitor, and keyboard.
Cost $4,410.00

Seems they have dropped their prices recently.....


--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,

On 2010-11-14, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:16:47 -0600, Ignoramus32694
wrote:

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

Pictures is he

A friend of mine is eyeing a Lagun FTV-2S mill with Anilam Crusader II
control.

This mill looks very similar to a Series I Bridgeport with all 3 axis
controlled by servos. Also has manual handles on all axes, in addition
to servos (nice).

I wanted to know what you think about those machines.

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Lagun-FTV-2S.jpg

Thanks, guys!

i

Thanks, guys!

i

Good reliable iron. Cant speak for the control


Thanks Gunner. The control seems to be a POS.

i

On 2010-11-14, Gunner Asch wrote:
On 10 Nov 2010 02:58:52 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:


It worked nicely but there were things which I did not like (and
which may not apply to this conversion), such as the approach for
connecting the servo to the Z-axis quill feed. I *like* the way the
Series-I Bridgeport does it -- and I suspect that is the same way that
yours does it). I can't tell how the Lagun conversion does it. (BTW,
it is pronounced like "lagoon", not like "LASer GUN", since it is from a
Portugese speaking country.

Spain...is a Portagee speaking country???

I had read that they were from Brazil, which *is* Portugese
speaking. But it would be pronounced the same in Spanish.

And they may have branches in both countries for all that I know.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 14 Nov 2010 05:48:23 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

On 2010-11-14, Gunner Asch wrote:
On 10 Nov 2010 02:58:52 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:


It worked nicely but there were things which I did not like (and
which may not apply to this conversion), such as the approach for
connecting the servo to the Z-axis quill feed. I *like* the way the
Series-I Bridgeport does it -- and I suspect that is the same way that
yours does it). I can't tell how the Lagun conversion does it. (BTW,
it is pronounced like "lagoon", not like "LASer GUN", since it is from a
Portugese speaking country.

Spain...is a Portagee speaking country???

I had read that they were from Brazil, which *is* Portugese
speaking. But it would be pronounced the same in Spanish.

And they may have branches in both countries for all that I know.

Enjoy,
DoN.

Lagun is indeed a Spanish company. Though I dont know if they have
manufactureing ability in Brazil


Kondia also is a Spanish company.

http://www.kondia.com/location.php

Gunner

--
"Confiscating wealth from those who have earned it, inherited it,
or got lucky is never going to help 'the poor.' Poverty isn't
caused by some people having more money than others, just as obesity
isn't caused by McDonald's serving super-sized orders of French fries
Poverty, like obesity, is caused by the life choices that dictate
results." - John Tucci,