Conversion uses ubiquitous 5/8" ballscrews and ballnuts. However,
there should be enough off the beaten path that the hobbyist/
enthusiast may find interesting. A pictorial summary can be found
here;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/d300_x2cnc

Nicely done! Beautiful page, too.

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Steel, Stainless, Titanium:
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : Guaranteed Uncertified Welding!
www.nmpproducts.com
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

wrote in message
...
Conversion uses ubiquitous 5/8" ballscrews and ballnuts. However,
there should be enough off the beaten path that the hobbyist/
enthusiast may find interesting. A pictorial summary can be found
here;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/d300_x2cnc

I have always been interested in the conversion projects. Very interesting.
The problem IMO is most conversions seem to be based around the smaller
mills like that. Is it just because they are such an inexpensive mill?

I do like your motor mounts and how you kept the manual operation. Do you
have an AC side switch so you can turn power off, move your machine, and
then turn power back on without frying your controller with back current?

On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 09:03:52 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
Conversion uses ubiquitous 5/8" ballscrews and ballnuts. However,
there should be enough off the beaten path that the hobbyist/
enthusiast may find interesting. A pictorial summary can be found
here;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/d300_x2cnc

I have always been interested in the conversion projects. Very interesting.
The problem IMO is most conversions seem to be based around the smaller
mills like that. Is it just because they are such an inexpensive mill?

I'm not finished, but did you follow the conversion of my Matsuura
MC1000 VDC? The machine weighs in at 16,000 lb. Or my completed Mazak
M4 lathe. It only wieghs about 9,000 lb.


I do like your motor mounts and how you kept the manual operation. Do you
have an AC side switch so you can turn power off, move your machine, and
then turn power back on without frying your controller with back current?

On 09/06/2011 11:03 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

I do like your motor mounts and how you kept the manual operation. Do
you have an AC side switch so you can turn power off, move your machine,
and then turn power back on without frying your controller with back
current?


I did a servo conversion on a 150-Lb mini-mill, mostly as a demo to drag
to shows. You can hit E-stop and move the machine manually, and
then clear the E-stop and be back to CNC operation, without ever losing
the coordinate reference.

It is an ugly hack, as I use it for a test bed of various ideas, motors,
drives, etc. it even has rigid tapping capability.
See http://pico-systems.com/minimill.html

Jon

On Sep 6, 12:01*pm, steamer wrote:
* * * * Nicely done! Beautiful page, too.


Thanks!

On Sep 6, 12:03*pm, "Bob La Londe" wrote:

*Is it just because they are such an inexpensive mill?

Possibly.


I do like your motor mounts and how you kept the manual operation.

Retaining full manual capability was a priority. Having to turn on
computer (or wake from standby), log in and run the CNC software just
to drill a hole or two makes no sense IMO. However, I'll have to get
used to the small handwheel for the Z-axis.


Do you
have an AC side switch so you can turn power off, move your machine, and
then turn power back on without frying your controller with back current?

I can either turn off the power supply or use a switch that connects/
disconnects power to the drives. Normally use the latter.

On 2011-09-06, wrote:
Conversion uses ubiquitous 5/8" ballscrews and ballnuts. However,
there should be enough off the beaten path that the hobbyist/
enthusiast may find interesting. A pictorial summary can be found
here;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/d300_x2cnc

Interesting and well documented -- within the limitations which
the web site put on your own added text. I mean who cares about the
camera (a nice one) or the EXIF data when you are documenting a project
like this -- but you live with what the web site will allow. :-)

A question and a suggestion to follow -- both related to turning
the ends of the ball screws:

1) Was it truly necessary to anneal the ends of the screws? I
believe that they are only case hardened, so after a first
heavy cut to get under the case, you should be fine. (Perhaps
with the insert tooling you were using, you could not take that
heavy a cut. I've used that style of insert tooling, and have
long since abandoned them for the more industrial style with a
carbide anvil under the inserts among other things.

2) Looking at the photo showing the teeth of the chuck jaw lining
up with and resting on the crests of the ball screw thread, I
suspect that the other two chuck jaws would be touching at
non-optimum places, so what I would probably do (if I did not
have collets large enough for the task), I would have taken some
aluminum, mounted it in the chuck and marked the point in the
middle of the #1 jaw, then bored it to barely clear the ball
screw, then removed it from the chuck and slit it at a point
midway between two chuck jaws (probably 180 degrees opposite the
marking for the #1 jaw), then put it back in the chuck (using
the mark to put it in the same position), so it would act as a
reasonable collet and be less likely to damage the crests or
flanks of the ball threads.


Good job, anyway.
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 2011-09-06, wrote:
Conversion uses ubiquitous 5/8" ballscrews and ballnuts. However,
there should be enough off the beaten path that the hobbyist/
enthusiast may find interesting. A pictorial summary can be found
here;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/d300_x2cnc

Looks very nice, you need to post a video of it now...


i

On Sep 6, 8:51*pm, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

1) * * *Was it truly necessary to anneal the ends of the screws? *I
* * * * believe that they are only case hardened, so after a first
* * * * heavy cut to get under the case, you should be fine. *(Perhaps
* * * * with the insert tooling you were using, you could not take that
* * * * heavy a cut. *I've used that style of insert tooling, and have
* * * * long since abandoned them for the more industrial style with a
* * * * carbide anvil under the inserts among other things.


The ballscrew manufacturer (Roton) recommends annealing for easier
machining. Some posts recommend grinding off the hardened layer with a
grinder (heaven forbid) and those with better carbide tooling
recommend the same as you did. Interestingly, one fellow posted that a
machine shop he approached declined to take on the job for lack of the
proper tooling.

Agreed, those little triangle carbide inserts suck even for normal
steel. Hardened steel would probably kill them in an instant. They're
fine for alu, brass and soft metals IMO. Furthermore, my parting
blades are all HSS so annealing it was. No biggie, I had the
Benzomatic already (plumbing repairs).


2) * * *Looking at the photo showing the teeth of the chuck jaw lining
* * * * up with and resting on the crests of the ball screw thread, I
* * * * suspect that the other two chuck jaws would be touching at
* * * * non-optimum places, so what I would probably do (if I did not
* * * * have collets large enough for the task), I would have taken some
* * * * aluminum, mounted it in the chuck and marked the point in the
* * * * middle of the #1 jaw, then bored it to barely clear the ball
* * * * screw, then removed it from the chuck and slit it at a point
* * * * midway between two chuck jaws (probably 180 degrees opposite the
* * * * marking for the #1 jaw), then put it back in the chuck (using
* * * * the mark to put it in the same position), so it would act as a
* * * * reasonable collet and be less likely to damage the crests or
* * * * flanks of the ball threads.


Several posts on this too. Some recommend using collets and others
recommend filling the grooves with aluminum or copper wire then treat
the ballscrew as a normal shaft. I simply positioned the ballscrew
carefully and had no runout or slipping issues even when using the
die.

* * * * Good job, anyway.

Thanks! And thanks for the advice. I really need to upgrade my lathe
tooling.

On Sep 6, 9:58*pm, Ignoramus22698 ignoramus22...@NOSPAM.
22698.invalid wrote:

Looks very nice, you need to post a video of it now...


Thanks! Maybe...After I get a decent video camera. The one here is so
old it uses tapes.

" wrote:

On Sep 6, 9:58 pm, Ignoramus22698 ignoramus22...@NOSPAM.
22698.invalid wrote:

Looks very nice, you need to post a video of it now...


Thanks! Maybe...After I get a decent video camera. The one here is so
old it uses tapes.


Tape? One of my first video cameras was B&W, and was used with a pair
if 16 mm projectors!


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

On Sep 7, 8:33*pm, "DoN. Nichols" wrote:

* * * * I suspect that I might have tried punching a hole in the roaster
pans to pass the rod through, just to minimize radiation heating of the
rest. *I presume that the wrapping was soaked in a coolant of some sort
to keep conducted heat down to a minimum.


The pan is filled with water. The white towel is soaking in it. I'm
guessing that you can't see that because one of the issues with that
Pbase site is that the default image viewing size is large until the
viewer changes it to another size. The rinky-dink large size hides too
much detail. Those images were resized before uploading so that they
are best viewed at the "original" size like this;

http://www.pbase.com/eldata/image/137803386/original

Probably should have mentioned that in the OP. You only need to choose
original once and all subsequent images will be viewed at the original
size.


* * * * And the interesting thing is that while the holders are cheap
enough in sets, the inserts (alone -- not in the sets) cost more than
those for serious industrial tooling in my experience -- both based on
prices from MSC. *For most turning, I use the Aloris BXA 16N
(negative-rake) double ended holder, and inserts with grooves such that
while the holder is negative rake, the net effect is that of positive
rake -- but I still get the ability to turn the inserts over for three
more points, if I don't do something to chip them badly. :-)


Between Ebay, Enco and MSC I should be able to find suitable upgrades.


* * * * Yes -- collets if you have them large enough and can handle
through spindle diameters large enough for the workpiece. *The aluminum
or copper wire might work with chuck jaws which did not have those
precisely spaced grooves. *Aside from the makeshift collet which I
described above (quoted), an alternative would be shims of aluminum
between each jaw and the workpiece, likely with an 'L' bend in the end
to let you stop them against the end of the jaws.


Honestly, in the absence of collets, I would probably just chuck the
ballscrews directly in the chuck if I had to do it again. It's no big
deal IMO. But thanks for the suggestion. Someday soon I'll get me a
collet holder and a set.