Getting started with CNC Machine & software choice

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

Getting started with CNC Machine & software choice

This topic has 43 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 3 April 2014 at 00:08 by Bob Rodgerson.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 44 total)

1 2 →

Author

Posts
29 March 2014 at 09:06 #148359
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
I am considering purchasing a CNC milling machine with a view to light industrial use. I am reasonably conversant with AutoCad for which I have a licence. I have looked at all of the smaller machines on offer and am siding toward a Wabeco machine. Others I have considered are the Axminster and Arc Euro Seig machines. One option with the Wabeco machines is to buy them CNC ready and use controllers of your choice or to go with their own recommended software and controllers.

What I would like to know is which is considered the best option of both machine and software that I can integrate with AutCad?

I do not want to go down the second hand machine route preferring the guaranteed accuracy of a new machine.

Another thought I have had is, has anybody fitted a headstock with chuck to the table of a milling machine and used the X & Y axis to produce cmc turned parts?

I would also like to fit a CNC rotary table to the machine. Is this an easy option with the Wabeco machine?
Advert

29 March 2014 at 09:06 #15038
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
29 March 2014 at 09:28 #148363
blowlamp
Participant
@blowlamp
I would recommend CamBam as your CAM software. It will easily accept DXF output from AutoCAD and just about any other good CAD software and has functionality way, way beyond its price.

As for controller software, the common good ones seem to be Mach 3, LinuxCNC (totally free and very good) as well as Edingcnc, amongst other less popular varieties. Those mentioned all work with a fourth axis too.

Martin.
29 March 2014 at 11:14 #148376
Andrew Evans
Participant
@andrewevans67134
I would second CamBam. I do simple stuff and don't use a dedicated CAD package and use CamBam as a simple CAD package too. CamBam is easy to understand if you are used to Windows apps because everything is basically a series of properties that you can set in standard Windows style property grids. It's a lightweight application too so you don't need a huge PC to run it. You can a great free trial period to try it out and it's excellent value.

As for machines I have a Sieg KX3 which I find great (for what I do), I don't have a 4th axis but I believe it has the driver and wiring already installed and you can just plug one in. This is designed as a hobby machine so not sure how well it would fit for industrial use. Another good option for a new machine is a Tormach which look great value and I have read good things about – if I had the money I would get one imported from the States. Another good option is a 2nd hand Denford Triac, converted to work with Mach3. I have owned a couple of Denford lathes and they are well built machines.

I use mach3, which always works well although the user interface is very cluttered and I find the wizards hard to understand in some cases.

Andy
29 March 2014 at 12:11 #148382
David Jupp
Participant
@davidjupp51506
What do you mean by 'integrate with AutoCAD' ? Just accept output from it to work with, or do you want embedded CAM where changes to the CAD design can ripple through to the toolpath with little effort ?

An awful lot of CAM software will accept DXF input – even controller software like Mach3 and I think Linuxcnc will accept DXF input for profiling at least, without actually needing CAM software.

Will you need 3D toolpaths, or just profiling? If 3D, is your work in AutoCAD compatible with that need (many use AutoCAD solely as a 2D system)?

Will you be using only your own CAD to program from, or will you be accepting files from others (perhaps originating form other CAD systems)? Once complete, will designs remain fixed for manufacture, or will they go through many iterations or variations?

CAM software can be 'less than straightforward' to get to grips with – perhaps look at some trials to see which seems most natural for you. Look at user forums, discuss training options with the vendor – help to make the most of the software will probably be at least as important as its technical capabilities.

Cost is likely to be a factor to consider – prices vary enormously, some charge for maintenance.

It's a bit of a minefield – goo luck.
29 March 2014 at 13:59 #148387
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
I can offer more advise if needed, be more specific but steer clear of Wabeco's own software, it's the pits.
29 March 2014 at 17:14 #148399
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Hi All,

thanks for the advice, plenty of food for thought there. I will do some more research on CamBam and Mach 3 the latter of which seems to be very popular.

I use AutoCad as a 2d drawing/design aid and to be honest found 3d work to be a little bit too complex when I dabbled in it over 10 years ago.

Most of my work will be the manufacture of such things as alloy casings and covers for small IC engines of various sizes up to about 650 cc, connecting rods in alloy and steel and general milling jobs. From what David is saying I will probably only require profiling.

I like a challenge and this is being taken on as a pin money maker and a means of keeping my brain active in retirement. From what I can see it should do all of that.

I will be seeing my accountant soon to see which way the wind blows with regard to the recent changes to pensions and to see if, while I still have my own company I can buy a machine on the company even though I will probably be semi retired and it will not return much profit. Even if I can't I will probably still buy a CNC mill out of my retirement fund.

I will keep you posted as to how things pan out. In the mean time I might try to add some of the projects that I have used my inbuilt CNC to make for various old motorcycles.

John I might just take you up on your offer and I will certainly steer clear of the Wabeco software if I go down the Wabeco route.
29 March 2014 at 17:21 #148400
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Here are some pictures of a 1905 Rover crank case and crank I made from the solid.

Edited By John Stevenson on 29/03/2014 18:11:28
29 March 2014 at 17:22 #148401
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
I guess that doesn't work.
29 March 2014 at 17:46 #148404
Thor 🇳🇴
Participant
@thor
Hi Bob,

did you want to put a ***LINK*** to your photos? The link should load your first photo I think. Nice work by the way.

Thor

Edited By Thor on 29/03/2014 17:47:54
29 March 2014 at 18:17 #148405
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Hi Thor,

I have quite a few pictures to post but the connection I have in my hotel is so slow that I am running out of patience and time to sort out how they appear. When I get home in a few days time I might get round to posting some more. I didn't want to put a link to the photos and cancelled that half way through.
29 March 2014 at 19:44 #148414
Neil Wyatt
Moderator
@neilwyatt
Bob,

I see the photos here. Quite an achievement, very impressive indeed.

Neil.
30 March 2014 at 19:44 #148479
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
I will try and add the remaining photos that I didn't manage to post yesterday.

Edited By JasonB on 30/03/2014 20:03:22

Edited By JasonB on 30/03/2014 20:07:51
30 March 2014 at 19:52 #148480
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Still not too sure about posting pictures . I want only links to the photos URL's I have listed not the whole library in my Photobucket account.
30 March 2014 at 20:05 #148481
JasonB
Moderator
@jasonb
Bob, the IMG code copied from Photobucket does not work on this forum, I have altered your post.

Next time copy the "direct link" from Photobucket and use that as the url, you need to click the little landscape icon along the top of the reply box and paste the direct link there, also alter the width to 500 in the same window.

J

Edited By JasonB on 30/03/2014 20:06:26
30 March 2014 at 20:16 #148483
Metalhacker
Participant
@metalhacker
Wasn't that the subject of some recent articles in HSM? I recognise the photographs!

Andries
30 March 2014 at 22:01 #148493
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
I was looking at the Axminster offerings of milling machines and was impressed with the larger of the two milling machines and the level readiness to use. I realise that they are based on Seig machines and may not be as robust as the Wabeco machines but for the money you seem to get a lot more and a decent software package. Any thoughts anyone?

By the way. The crank case half and the crankshaft were all made on machines using my own on board CNC software. It works reasonably well but occasionally makes a mistake or two.
30 March 2014 at 22:17 #148497
Bazyle
Participant
@bazyle
It looks like the Axminster one sticks the ARC one is a box and adds £3k. The software is undefined so potentially unmaintained unsupported unknown.

Would what you are doing fit on one of these hobby machines?
30 March 2014 at 22:21 #148498
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Bob,

The Axminster machines are Sieg based as you say but are also based on the Sieg controller hence the KX3-S suffix

The ones sold by ARC are the KX3-M suffix and use the Mach 3 control software.

The suffix S machines are not supported in the UK as it basically a Chinese controller with English screen.
30 March 2014 at 22:27 #148499
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Thanks for that John. I am visiting my accountant tomorrow and available budget figures for the machine will become available.

The way things are looking I might just go with the Wabeco machine fully fitted with stepper motors/servo motors and ball screws but buy my own controller and software.
30 March 2014 at 22:56 #148503
John Stevenson 1
Participant
@johnstevenson1
Don't quote me on this but I think they do offer one of the machines with Mach software but understand it's pricy.

What part of the country are you from Bob ? Perhaps someone local to you has a similar machine.

Depending on dosh there is always the Tormach machine, they are expensive because they come from the states and duty on equipment from the US if far higher than from China ? [ Don't ask me ? ] having said this they do have a very good spec and reputation.
30 March 2014 at 23:38 #148504
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Hi John,

I couldn't see one with Mach software in the price list but maybe it's a special on request.

I live in the south east manchester area.
31 March 2014 at 19:35 #148558
Ex contributor
Participant
@mgnbuk
Ebay 331164724100

Doesn't appear to have done much, has a toolchanger, some tooling and a "proper" control with servos.

The "proper" control & servos can be pricy to fix if they go wrong, but Fanuc stuff is very reliable.
31 March 2014 at 20:00 #148560
Another JohnS
Participant
@anotherjohns
Bob – FYI.

1) I have a little KX1 running LinuxCNC. Other 1 problem with a stepper motor driver setting, the thing just works.

2) Have a friend with a Tormach 1100 – big machine. Was looking at a 770, but don't think I have the vertical room.

3) look for G0704 conversions – you can purchase kits to do the conversion fairly painlessly. The "G0704" vertical mills are sold by many companies; locally, I'm sort of looking at a "King Canada KC20".

4) The KX3 is between the KX1 and the G0704 conversions in terms of size.

5) spindle speeds – my KX1 runs close to 7,000 rpm – great for small cutters in brass, but not good for slow speed larger milling cutter type of cuts. The g0704 style machines are limited to something like 2200 rpm, and have a gear change for high/low speed ranges.

6) I do have a blog with some things on it, focused on getting us model engineers up and running with CNC; I'm trying to target the common "Model Engineer", not the outliers who are either experts or will never touch a computer in a workshop (both valid – not a complaint) – go to "http://cnc-for-model-engineers.blogspot.com", and feel free to throw questions back.

7) There is no wrong choice, only differing opinions and suitability for your requirements.

Regards – John A. Stewart
31 March 2014 at 22:32 #148574
Bob Rodgerson
Participant
@bobrodgerson97362
Hi John,

I must admit that I quite like the look of the Tormach 1100 and after speaking to my accountant today there is room in the budget for one. I will have to consider what options to go for with it and find a forwarding company to import it into the UK. Over the next week or two I will make some calls and probably set the wheels in motion.

I will have to widen the door into the workshop that separates the workshop from the motorcycle garage area so that I can get one of my manual mills out and move in the Tormach.

I will look up your blog too. In the meantime is there any reading you would recommend?
Author

Posts