Ok... I really need a high speed spindle machine that is bigger, faster and
has better wear characteristics than the Taig. The Hurco is coming along
nicely, but it definitely does not have a high speed spindle. Not even
close. I've played with the idea of just using a router on it like I did
the Taig, but then its kind of a headache to deal with switching spindles in
control. No horrible, but not great. I have not found a speed multiplier I
can afford so I was thinking about making my own belt drive spindle with
pulley's to multiply speed, and then just mount it with a router-esque style
spindle mount on the quill of the Hurco. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but with
some planning I would not have to do any controler changes when going from
one spindle to the other. Just load a different machine profile depending
on which spindle I planned to use. This leaves coolant spray. At 25K-35K
RPM even a 1/32" cuter throws coolant everywhere. I put the Taig in a full
enclosure because of it, and it works pretty good. Putting the Hurco in a
full enclosure is problematic at best. If I stick with 5000 RPM and slower
machining with the stock spindle (not suited for my most common jobs) I
could use a fence on the table, like Iggy and other have used on their knee
mills, but it won't even come close to containing the spray of a high speed
spindle. Maybe some form of accordion way covers that slide on rails inside
the the top of the fence pushed back and forth by the quill?

Alternatively, I could just use the Hurco to make gantry style router
machines. Well some of the parts. My concern then is (as the title of this
post says) is rigidity. Most gantry router machines are made out of
aluminum. Since I actually push a cutter hard enough to momentarily bog a
1HP router from time to time would they be rigid enough for the job? I
really don't have or plan to have the facilities to melt and pour cast iron
so my thoughts were could I get somewhere in between by making the gantry
routers out of C-channel steel. The Hurco could certainly do all the
cutting on it. My big concern is that I recall discussions here and
elsewhere about harmonics, etc in regards to why machine tools are machined
cast iron rather than steel.

No I can't really afford the step up to a "real" high speed machine yet.

On 2011-09-22, Bob La Londe wrote:
Ok... I really need a high speed spindle machine that is bigger, faster and
has better wear characteristics than the Taig. The Hurco is coming along
nicely, but it definitely does not have a high speed spindle. Not even
close. I've played with the idea of just using a router on it like I did
the Taig, but then its kind of a headache to deal with switching spindles in
control. No horrible, but not great. I have not found a speed multiplier I
can afford so I was thinking about making my own belt drive spindle with
pulley's to multiply speed, and then just mount it with a router-esque style
spindle mount on the quill of the Hurco. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but with
some planning I would not have to do any controler changes when going from
one spindle to the other. Just load a different machine profile depending
on which spindle I planned to use. This leaves coolant spray. At 25K-35K
RPM even a 1/32" cuter throws coolant everywhere.

Are you sure of this statement?

i

I put the Taig in a full
enclosure because of it, and it works pretty good. Putting the Hurco in a
full enclosure is problematic at best. If I stick with 5000 RPM and slower
machining with the stock spindle (not suited for my most common jobs) I
could use a fence on the table, like Iggy and other have used on their knee
mills, but it won't even come close to containing the spray of a high speed
spindle. Maybe some form of accordion way covers that slide on rails inside
the the top of the fence pushed back and forth by the quill?

Alternatively, I could just use the Hurco to make gantry style router
machines. Well some of the parts. My concern then is (as the title of this
post says) is rigidity. Most gantry router machines are made out of
aluminum. Since I actually push a cutter hard enough to momentarily bog a
1HP router from time to time would they be rigid enough for the job? I
really don't have or plan to have the facilities to melt and pour cast iron
so my thoughts were could I get somewhere in between by making the gantry
routers out of C-channel steel. The Hurco could certainly do all the
cutting on it. My big concern is that I recall discussions here and
elsewhere about harmonics, etc in regards to why machine tools are machined
cast iron rather than steel.

No I can't really afford the step up to a "real" high speed machine yet.

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message
...
Ok... I really need a high speed spindle machine that is bigger, faster
and has better wear characteristics than the Taig. The Hurco is coming
along nicely, but it definitely does not have a high speed spindle. Not
even close. I've played with the idea of just using a router on it like I
did the Taig, but then its kind of a headache to deal with switching
spindles in control. No horrible, but not great. I have not found a
speed multiplier I can afford so I was thinking about making my own belt
drive spindle with pulley's to multiply speed, and then just mount it with
a router-esque style spindle mount on the quill of the Hurco. Yeah, it's
a lot of work, but with some planning I would not have to do any controler
changes when going from one spindle to the other. Just load a different
machine profile depending on which spindle I planned to use. This leaves
coolant spray. At 25K-35K RPM even a 1/32" cuter throws coolant
everywhere.

When you get up to that speed, you probably would be better off running dry.
High-speed milling is generally done dry these days, or with a very lean
mist of vegatable oil. VW uses peanut oil.

At those speeds, in commercial milling of steel or iron, cutters typically
are multi-coated. If the top coat or the second coat is aluminum oxide, as
it often is for cutters made for high-speed machining, using coolant will
wreck your cutters in a hurry.

I put the Taig in a full enclosure because of it, and it works pretty
good. Putting the Hurco in a full enclosure is problematic at best. If I
stick with 5000 RPM and slower machining with the stock spindle (not
suited for my most common jobs) I could use a fence on the table, like
Iggy and other have used on their knee mills, but it won't even come close
to containing the spray of a high speed spindle. Maybe some form of
accordion way covers that slide on rails inside the the top of the fence
pushed back and forth by the quill?

Alternatively, I could just use the Hurco to make gantry style router
machines. Well some of the parts. My concern then is (as the title of
this post says) is rigidity. Most gantry router machines are made out of
aluminum. Since I actually push a cutter hard enough to momentarily bog a
1HP router from time to time would they be rigid enough for the job? I
really don't have or plan to have the facilities to melt and pour cast
iron so my thoughts were could I get somewhere in between by making the
gantry routers out of C-channel steel. The Hurco could certainly do all
the cutting on it. My big concern is that I recall discussions here and
elsewhere about harmonics, etc in regards to why machine tools are
machined cast iron rather than steel.

No I can't really afford the step up to a "real" high speed machine yet.

"Ignoramus10693" wrote in message
...
On 2011-09-22, Bob La Londe wrote:
Ok... I really need a high speed spindle machine that is bigger, faster
and
has better wear characteristics than the Taig. The Hurco is coming along
nicely, but it definitely does not have a high speed spindle. Not even
close. I've played with the idea of just using a router on it like I did
the Taig, but then its kind of a headache to deal with switching spindles
in
control. No horrible, but not great. I have not found a speed
multiplier I
can afford so I was thinking about making my own belt drive spindle with
pulley's to multiply speed, and then just mount it with a router-esque
style
spindle mount on the quill of the Hurco. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but
with
some planning I would not have to do any controler changes when going
from
one spindle to the other. Just load a different machine profile
depending
on which spindle I planned to use. This leaves coolant spray. At
25K-35K
RPM even a 1/32" cuter throws coolant everywhere.

Are you sure of this statement?

Well, my router(s) turns upto 35K (actually a little faster no load -
checked with an optical tach) and coolant hits all four walls of the
enclosure. Well three. The front is a clear plastic shower curtain until I
get around to making a plexiglass door. It hits the sides solidly upto
about a foot above the table at over a foot away from the cutter in all
directions. Not a solid stream, but some spray hits every surface of the
enclosure including the roof. You might argue that the air from the router
fan is part of the problem, but the net result is the same. Most of my
cutting is with larger than 1/32", but it throws coolant around too.

Or were you arguing that what I am using isn't really coolant? LOL. Or the
semantics of the word "everywhere" since you probably haven't felt any spray
from my machine(s). ROFL.

So nobody has an opinion about coolant containment? Or rigidity of a
machine made out of steel vs aluminum vs potential harmonic ringing vs
cast iron?

Well, I have _opinions_ about it, but I'm not an expert. (and I didn't
catch this thread until now, so I don't know what you suggested.

I enjoy flood. I use mist sometimes, but don't like it for the mess.
Mist (even with a 'fogless' mist applicator) fills the shop and my lungs
with coolant fog, and I don't really want to clean it up or breathe it.

I built a four-sided lexan shield system for my mill with movable gates
for extreme knee positions. It captures almost every drop. A few fly
out the top, but very little, really. It's erected with slot-to-bolt
fixturing and a couple of speed nuts. It only takes about 45 seconds to
remove or erect.

LLoyd


LLoyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...

So nobody has an opinion about coolant containment? Or rigidity of a
machine made out of steel vs aluminum vs potential harmonic ringing vs
cast iron?

Well, I have _opinions_ about it, but I'm not an expert. (and I didn't
catch this thread until now, so I don't know what you suggested.

I enjoy flood. I use mist sometimes, but don't like it for the mess.
Mist (even with a 'fogless' mist applicator) fills the shop and my lungs
with coolant fog, and I don't really want to clean it up or breathe it.

I built a four-sided lexan shield system for my mill with movable gates
for extreme knee positions. It captures almost every drop. A few fly
out the top, but very little, really. It's erected with slot-to-bolt
fixturing and a couple of speed nuts. It only takes about 45 seconds to
remove or erect.

What kind of spindle speed are you dealing with? I've seen lots of simple 4
walls bolted together shields for mills, but most of them top out at 5K or
less. My 1HP router clocks at upto 35K. Its slowest speed is 8K (roughly).

"Bob La Londe" fired this volley in
:

What kind of spindle speed are you dealing with? I've seen lots of
simple 4 walls bolted together shields for mills, but most of them top
out at 5K or less. My 1HP router clocks at upto 35K. Its slowest
speed is 8K (roughly).

I've got a speeder-upper, too -- up to 12K. At that speed, it turns flood
into a kind of coarse mist, but it still doesn't get out into the room like
the fog from my 'true' mist coolant system.

LLoyd

Overall, you probably would learn a lot of useful and interesting things by
giving it a try. You have the right idea about using spot-welded mesh or
something similar to get a mechancial bond. Concrete doesn't stick well to
flat steel when it's vibrated a lot.

There's a thread with nearly 3000 posts on CNCzone concerning building
machines with steel weldements and using epoxy resin and rocks to fill
and provide damping. Several machines have been built this way.

Karl

"Karl Townsend" wrote in message
news

Overall, you probably would learn a lot of useful and interesting things
by
giving it a try. You have the right idea about using spot-welded mesh or
something similar to get a mechancial bond. Concrete doesn't stick well to
flat steel when it's vibrated a lot.

There's a thread with nearly 3000 posts on CNCzone concerning building
machines with steel weldements and using epoxy resin and rocks to fill
and provide damping. Several machines have been built this way.

Karl

That sounds like a lot of reading, but it might save Bob more time than he
would lose by experimenting with structures that take a while to build.

BTW, those concrete-filled machine tools typically use a polymer-modified
concrete that provides better bonding and more vibration resistance than
Sakrete.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:35:25 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Karl Townsend" wrote in message
news

Overall, you probably would learn a lot of useful and interesting things
by
giving it a try. You have the right idea about using spot-welded mesh or
something similar to get a mechancial bond. Concrete doesn't stick well to
flat steel when it's vibrated a lot.

There's a thread with nearly 3000 posts on CNCzone concerning building
machines with steel weldements and using epoxy resin and rocks to fill
and provide damping. Several machines have been built this way.

Karl

That sounds like a lot of reading, but it might save Bob more time than he
would lose by experimenting with structures that take a while to build.

BTW, those concrete-filled machine tools typically use a polymer-modified
concrete that provides better bonding and more vibration resistance than
Sakrete.

I scanned the thread one night. Lot of discussion on the fill
material. It was called polymer concrete at some points and epoxy
resin at others. Lots of discussion on the proper aggregate and size
distribution of it. The whole idea is to dampen vibration.

Karl

"Karl Townsend" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:35:25 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Karl Townsend" wrote in message
news

Overall, you probably would learn a lot of useful and interesting things
by
giving it a try. You have the right idea about using spot-welded mesh or
something similar to get a mechancial bond. Concrete doesn't stick well
to
flat steel when it's vibrated a lot.

There's a thread with nearly 3000 posts on CNCzone concerning building
machines with steel weldements and using epoxy resin and rocks to fill
and provide damping. Several machines have been built this way.

Karl

That sounds like a lot of reading, but it might save Bob more time than he
would lose by experimenting with structures that take a while to build.

BTW, those concrete-filled machine tools typically use a polymer-modified
concrete that provides better bonding and more vibration resistance than
Sakrete.

I scanned the thread one night. Lot of discussion on the fill
material. It was called polymer concrete at some points and epoxy
resin at others. Lots of discussion on the proper aggregate and size
distribution of it. The whole idea is to dampen vibration.

Karl

FWIW, there was a lot of money spent in the late '70s and early '80s on
developing "concrete" machine tools, some of which were quite successful but
most of which cost more in materials and labor than a common cast iron
machine tool. It still has some life in it and it continues to hold a lot of
promise, particularly for custom machines. I think it was IMTS '82 or maybe
'84 that a half-dozen or so showed up on display.

They first tried polymer-modified Portland cement; then polyester resin (not
good for the job); and then epoxy with graded granite aggregate.
Epoxy/granite was the trick. It's also cost close to $100/gallon for the
epoxy. Some builders called the latter "polymer concrete."

But just using the "concrete" as a filler for a steel structure is a
different animal and a lot easier to do. Modified Portland cement, something
like the materials they use for concrete building repairs, and common graded
stone aggregate seems to work OK for that, at a pretty cheap price.

The design issues are a little tricky because the concrete cannot be loaded
in tension or in shear at all. It first appears that a small amount of steel
can be used to take up tension loads, but that coupling issue is not a
trivial thing, so it takes some knowledge of machine structural design to
get it right. But it's doable.

--
Ed Huntress