![]() |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Ron,
I would love to see more build pictures of your interesting 'stepchild' if you have any ? Also; would you give some insight (pointswise) on why ( in your opinion ) you choose your mechmate/multicam inspired design over the 'standard' mechmate ( with the same mods ) ? In other words; what are your major motivations, because I assume it has cost your more time (and money) then it would when opted for a 'standard' build with the same mods. And last but not least; do you have any comments on your cut quality/speeds compared to a real Multicam & what did you save budget wise with your approach? Thanks for your answers ! |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Besser ,
I had toyed with the idea of ATC modification.As a cabinet maker 95% of what I mill are sheet goods.The additional $4,000 usd for a handful of bit changes did not prove to be a prudent expense.By the way a machine in my business that can cut straight lines as a saw, line bore holes for shelf clips then dado these pieces,ready for fabrication saves me between $100-$150 per hour, let alone the curve work. A friend of mine paid off his $200,000 cnc in two years doing the type of work.He bought a second one. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Vishnu,
Thank you, Perhaps some videos in the future.The large rectangular tubing beams are 6x 12inches 10 feet x3/8 wall 450lbs each.$ 16,000-$17,500.To put it in prospective if you were to buy a shopbot alfa machine delivered and installed with these options it would be almost double this price ,with a discount on performance.Let me say this design is specifically (light medium duty) for production use. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Fox,
The primary reason for this design was for ease of access.As a cabinet person we handle alot of 4x8 foot sheet goods.Three years ago I contacted shopbot to find out if they would be interested in building a light medium duty (2,000)Lbs. or above for cabinet makers.They were disinterested.At that time, most machines were under $20.000 or the other extreme of $100,000on up.I was looking for something in between.I spent two years in research looking at different designs trying to be as objectively fair as I could.There is no perfect machine. They all have pluses and minuses.To critique multicam 4 to10years back ,They were very lacking in speed as were most expensive cncs at that time.All proprietary equipment.Overpriced. Tech service $$$$ will kill you. The newer model 3000,5000 are more productive.There old style base frame ,the best Ive seen of all. It was Simple, heavy, and does not want to flex.Ive got friends that have Shopbots ,technos,omnitechs,multicams here locally.The more expensive cut a little faster ,but I don't see a difference in the cut. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Ron,
thanks for the answers, I understand where you are coming from. Love to see some more (detail) pics of your build ! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Fox, Ive pretty much laid this lady bare, Is there a particular area of interest that you would like to zoom in on?
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Ron,
You opened with a quote of "30 pics" and sofar I counted 18 ![]() Just kidding; if you have some pics of: - the table construction between main beams below crossbeams - Vacuum system routing inside table ( i'm puzzled how you created the vacuum, or are you sealing your spoil board somewhere ?) - overall pics from a different standpoint - top details of your vacuum table That would be great.... Sidenote: Some pics are probably perfectly clear for you as an owner (hey, you can dream this thing by now, I imagine); but for me it's hard to see how made your construction from some angles. I am orienting on a Mechmate build, and regularly browsing the forums to get a decent background on all the various bits and pieces, before I start to build. I am also looking in all mods done by different people on this forum, to understand why they did them, and to see what I would like to incorporate for my purposes. Your stepchild is an interesting blend. Last edited by Fox; Fri 04 December 2009 at 11:23.. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Fox, Here is a couple more pictures underneath.What is your purpose for your build job?If its for business production you might want to design a machine to your own specific needs.The machine that I'm using was designed for cabinet work,for the ease of loading 4x8 sheets on and off the table.All electronics are on board,this means that I can move it anywhere in the shop and in five minutes have it up and operating by plugging into a different outlet.All the motors, drives , control board,mach3 software are mechmate.In fact anybody that can operate a mechmate can run this machine.Its not like a mechmate its identical, the only difference is TABLE and GANTRY design that is far better suited for people who commonly work with sheet goods.
![]() |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Ron, thanks for sharing those images. They are more helpful than you might think to others trying to sort out design options.
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Brad, what is it that your trying to accomplish with your build? What will you use it for?
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Ron, I'm a hobbiest, I do this to keep me out of bars. Actually, at the moment I'm on a train at 75MPH running down the US east coast - work always interferes.
My MM (#10) is up and running, upgraded to a chinese spindle, and I'm playing with both vacuum hold-down, and with Google sketchup to produce the snap-together geometry from the MIT architecture research that led to Physical Design Co. (Check out the work of Lawrence Sass and his team if you're interested in the background). I meant to release my Sketchup to Gcode plugin some months ago, but then the fall busy season happened, so it's delayed. In the meantime, I cut ornaments for our Xmas tree, and other small toys for the kids when I can, and I try to give helpful comments based on my build and theatre experience. In this case, I was just appreciating the very practical and well thought out design work. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Brad,If I can be of any assistance to your vacuum hold down concept,feel free to pm.
Larry sass and co. sound a little like Frank lloyd Wright philosophy.Got to love the days when our youth were creative,inspired and excited about thinking outside the box.(One small step for a man,One giant leap for mankind). |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
When you are in the habit of end-loading, the risk of bumping the gantry is minimal - I guess the side-loaders have to be a lot more cautious about bumping the gantry? We don't have problems with using unskilled labour to do the end-loading. If I was inclined to do a MM design for side-loading, I would think of lowering one side only . . . . . |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Hi Gerald,Here's a couple of pictures that might better explain this design.I spent a few years powerlifting and I am in good health.The exercise of lifting material is not a issue.Still the balance of the commercial shop as you well know, requires a intelligent and efficient shop layout to be competitive and hope we say,profitable.Although each shop may differ from one another,commonly we all love convenience.
These pictures show how easy it is to not lift,but to slide the sheets from the truck to the cart,then to the machine.The gantry is never in the way,as it automatically homes to the far end of the table after each file cut. Regarding the design, after cut, the parts are easily accessed from each side ,without the effort of stretch.From my shops point of view,I don't know how to make it any easier.My only real complaint, is the refusal of the parts to assemble themselves. ![]() To consider a raised rail design for our use.The drawback would require end loading only.Because our parts are spread throughout the table,how do we efficiently remove those parts? Would we start by removing parts from end (a) ,leaving the gantry parked in the center, then walk around the back of the machine to remove those parts?Do I stretch to reach the parts left under gantry,or do I choose to move the gantry again to expose those parts left in the center and dare risk taking those parts over the raised rails with more obvious concerns.This table design is only a 4x8 footprint .If I had chosen a larger, say 5x12 foot table, these issues would be compounded. ![]() Last edited by cab. guy; Tue 15 December 2009 at 12:59.. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Ron consider having about 200 sheets of 9' x 6' in stock, about 15 varieties in colour, thickness, type stacked on edge in a "library". Opposite the stacks are 4 MM's side by side with 0,0 home away from from the stacks. In this scenario I see no benefit of lowered side rails. Anyway, I hadn't meant to argue one style over another . . . . this is the MechMate site and it is a lot different to what you built. Your following statements were way off the mark:
Let's not get into a contest about that here, because then I'll pull the plug on this thread. Come to think of it, I'll probably pull the plug anyway - this thread is not helpful to people who want to build MechMates. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
This thread now closed and archived.
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Gerald D
Gerald, I think you misunderstand,#44 response was a answer to repeated questions above, regarding modifications in table design as to the benefit of panel processing as it applied to my shop specifically.All I conveyed were the questions that I personally faced that led me down this path.
As I pm you 2 weeks ago, I'm neither here to sell or steal,I'm merely giving back to interested parties any information that might be helpful in there build jobs.Its clearly understood that this is your website.Many of the members helped build this site,by adding resourced information,to them is also owed a debt of gratitude.The area of the forum (Anything not directly connected to constructing mechmate cnc)was the area you put me in.If you genuinely feel that I am harming this forum let a group of my piers judge me.I ask that until which time ,that you would reinstate the thread Red headed step child,that I might offer assistance to someone else who has helped me. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Thread re-opened for a while.
The uniqueness of MechMate lies in its gantry, y-car and z-axis designs. This website was created because of people wanting to copy what I had built for myself. The downloadable plans from this site focus 99% on the mechanics of the machine and replicates something that I had built and tested for myself. The forum is intended as a tool (maybe "handbook"?) of conveying the gaps in the plans to someone who wants to get my mechanical design to a fully running condition. The absolute emphasis of the design embodied in the plans is low-cost, low-skilled DIY build, with common tools, in most countries, with easily available materials & components, producing acceptable production cut quality for wood-based boards. Every "improvement" that is suggested/tried by builders is simply checked against the aforementioned criteria before it is considered for adding to the plans. The plans have remained mostly unchanged. Ron, your build did not use any significant part of the MechMate mechanical design. You did use this forum to build your control system, but that doesn't give you rights to claim that you built a "MechMate". You are actually knocking the basic MechMate design and saying that it wasn't good enough for you. You are entitled to your opinion, but please find another place to say that. It doesn't matter what your peers may think - it is entirely my personal decision whether I am going to allow this forum to become another CNCzone, or whether I am going to tighten up on what goes in here. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You may argue that this guy Experimental hybrid MechMate – Tehran, Iran is also not building a true MechMate, but read through his thread and see his tips on grinding rails, drilling/tapping holes and general approach to work in a country where tools/materials are limited. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
I'm always impressed with the number of folks, many from less industrialized areas than the US where any tech is readily available, who are able to pull off the construction of one of these fabulous machines. It also seems that once the machine is built that they tend to actually use it to their economic benefit. I'll go out on a limb here and say there are basically two styles of cnc builders....those who build for the joy of it and those who see it as a means to an end. Nothing wrong with either approach, but the fact that the end product result of the easily sourced parts + some elbow grease is so much greater than the cost indicates truly elegant design to me. Anyone with enough money can buy linear guides.
I'm guilty to a certain extent of gearheadedness, tinkering and "improvement." However, having a machine that takes up half the shop forced me to turn my thoughts to potential products that would leverage the production abilities of the device. Based on past experiences, and qualified by the difficulty and repetition of hand production, I believe I have identified just such an item. I fully expect to sell >$100K , easily, in the coming year at an embarrassingly good profit margin as a very much part time business. The item is precise, very time consuming to build with non cnc equipment, and high value in relation to materials consumed. There is absolutely nothing limiting in the design of the Mech, it will cut as quickly as I can load various parts stations along the 20' table and accuracy is far from being an issue. Hats off to the creator of the "Red Headed Step Child", it's a fine looking piece of equipment. While not nearly as snazzy looking in comparison, I'll define the value of my Mech by what it can do for me financially. I recognize that in the Man and Machine relationship that I am the weak link. When I can program as efficiently as the machine can cut I'll start looking at improving the machine. Don't see that happening anytime soon. Preemptive apologies to anyone I've offended. Chuck Thursday 17 November: Thread finally closed and archived - GD |
![]() |
|
|