> From: "Southerland, Greg" <gesoutherl...@sbec.com>
> Date: August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
> To: <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
> Cc: "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutch1...@hotmail.com>
> Subject: new CNC router for the club
> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet etc. Any help will be welcomed
> Greg Southerland
> S&B Engineers and Constructors
> Control System Designer
> 713-845-5307
For anyone who might not be aware, I have a very large industral router at
my shop in KS that I'd like to make available to the club. Pics are
attached.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
> *From:* "Southerland, Greg" <gesoutherl...@sbec.com>
> *Date:* August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
> *To:* <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
> *Cc:* "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutch1...@hotmail.com>
> *Subject:* *new CNC router for the club*
> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage
> that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my
> partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the
> space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The
> router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
> ****
> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an
> awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project
> and we can come close to paying for freight for the router. ****
> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
> etc. Any help will be welcomed****
> ** **
> ** **
> ** **
> Greg Southerland****
> S&B Engineers and Constructors****
> Control System Designer****
> 713-845-5307****
> ** **
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> For anyone who might not be aware, I have a very large industral router at
> my shop in KS that I'd like to make available to the club. Pics are
> attached.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> *From:* "Southerland, Greg" <gesoutherl...@sbec.com>
>> *Date:* August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
>> *To:* <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
>> *Cc:* "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutch1...@hotmail.com>
>> *Subject:* *new CNC router for the club*
>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage
>> that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my
>> partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the
>> space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The
>> router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
>> ****
>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an
>> awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project
>> and we can come close to paying for freight for the router. ****
>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>> etc. Any help will be welcomed****
>> ** **
>> ** **
>> ** **
>> Greg Southerland****
>> S&B Engineers and Constructors****
>> Control System Designer****
>> 713-845-5307****
>> ** **
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> For anyone who might not be aware, I have a very large industral router
>> at my shop in KS that I'd like to make available to the club. Pics are
>> attached.
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> *From:* "Southerland, Greg" <gesoutherl...@sbec.com>
>>> *Date:* August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
>>> *To:* <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
>>> *Cc:* "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutch1...@hotmail.com>
>>> *Subject:* *new CNC router for the club*
>>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail
>>> carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is
>>> my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to
>>> the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it.
>>> The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of
>>> plywood. ****
>>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be
>>> an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our
>>> project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router. ****
>>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>>> etc. Any help will be welcomed****
>>> ** **
>>> ** **
>>> ** **
>>> Greg Southerland****
>>> S&B Engineers and Constructors****
>>> Control System Designer****
>>> 713-845-5307****
>>> ** **
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
From: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com [mailto:txrxlabs@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Jeff Hutchison
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:44 PM
To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] Fwd: new CNC router for the club
Dimensions are 12'3" wide 16'6" long 9'0" high - and it weighs 10 tons!
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
A few more photos from when we moved it to KS
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
For anyone who might not be aware, I have a very large industral router at
my shop in KS that I'd like to make available to the club. Pics are
attached.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Southerland, Greg" <gesoutherl...@sbec.com>
Date: August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
To: <gregs1...@hotmail.com>
Cc: "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutch1...@hotmail.com>
Subject: new CNC router for the club
I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage that
rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my partner. We
have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the space is so
high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The router is a 5
spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an
awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project
and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from getting
this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing this
project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at the
Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet etc.
Any help will be welcomed
Greg Southerland
S&B Engineers and Constructors
Control System Designer
713-845-5307
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Tx/Rx Labs" group.
To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<mailto:txrxlabs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Tx/Rx Labs" group.
To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage > that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my > partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the > space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The > router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an > awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project > and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from > getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing > this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at > the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet > etc. Any help will be welcomed
This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could
experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet
materials like plywood.
I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter' do
you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage
>> that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my
>> partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the
>> space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The
>> router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an
>> awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project
>> and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>> etc. Any help will be welcomed
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Freight costs are pending... I have a family friend that helped us get it
to KS for pocket change...
It's the riggers that ended up being a bit of an expense - If I remember
right, it was 2,100 to put it on the trailer, and 2,500 to take it off. I
also had to pay to have the side of my building taken off and put back!
Haha.
And, yes, Greg is talking about the linear rail project. We'd like to
kickstarter it and end the horrible reign of Inventables (makerslide) and
begin the horrible reign of Greg's wonder-rail.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Forrest Flanagan
<solenoidcl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could
> experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet
> materials like plywood.
> I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter'
> do you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Let me know what I can do to help. This would be a great machine to have
>> at the lab.
>> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:11:33 PM UTC-5, steelcutter wrote:
>>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail
>>> carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is
>>> my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to
>>> the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it.
>>> The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of
>>> plywood.
>>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be
>>> an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our
>>> project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>>> etc. Any help will be welcomed
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
I want to have a brain storming meeting. On Thursday at 7:00 to figure out how to raise money for the cnc router we. Will discuss the linear rail as a possible solution
> From: Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
> Date: August 15, 2012 5:13:37 PM CDT
> To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] Re: new CNC router for the club
> Reply-To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
> Freight costs are pending... I have a family friend that helped us get it to KS for pocket change...
> It's the riggers that ended up being a bit of an expense - If I remember right, it was 2,100 to put it on the trailer, and 2,500 to take it off. I also had to pay to have the side of my building taken off and put back! Haha.
> And, yes, Greg is talking about the linear rail project. We'd like to kickstarter it and end the horrible reign of Inventables (makerslide) and begin the horrible reign of Greg's wonder-rail.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Forrest Flanagan <solenoidcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet materials like plywood.
> I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter' do you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me know what I can do to help. This would be a great machine to have at the lab.
> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:11:33 PM UTC-5, steelcutter wrote:
>> Date: August 15, 2012 12:50:08 PM CDT
>> To: <greg...@hotmail.com>
>> Cc: "Jeff Hutchison" <jhutc...@hotmail.com>
>> Subject: new CNC router for the club
>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it. The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of plywood.
>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet etc. Any help will be welcomed
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Me and my friend Josh (We were the two guys working on the plasma cutter
week before last) here.
Josh is from MAXIM Crane in Beaumont. He says he's like to see the new
place where it would be going, and get some other information that would
regularrly gathered by one of the salesmen. If he can get the information,
then he can help us with the move. Any chance we can get some help seeing
the new place, and getting the information he needs?
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Freight costs are pending... I have a family friend that helped us get it
> to KS for pocket change...
> It's the riggers that ended up being a bit of an expense - If I remember
> right, it was 2,100 to put it on the trailer, and 2,500 to take it off. I
> also had to pay to have the side of my building taken off and put back!
> Haha.
> And, yes, Greg is talking about the linear rail project. We'd like to
> kickstarter it and end the horrible reign of Inventables (makerslide) and
> begin the horrible reign of Greg's wonder-rail.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Forrest Flanagan <solenoidcl...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>> This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could
>> experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet
>> materials like plywood.
>> I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter'
>> do you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Let me know what I can do to help. This would be a great machine to have
>>> at the lab.
>>> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:11:33 PM UTC-5, steelcutter wrote:
>>>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail
>>>> carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is
>>>> my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to
>>>> the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it.
>>>> The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of
>>>> plywood.
>>>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be
>>>> an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our
>>>> project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>>>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>>>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>>>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>>>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>>>> etc. Any help will be welcomed
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> I want to have a brain storming meeting. On Thursday at 7:00 to figure out
> how to raise money for the cnc router we. Will discuss the linear rail as a
> possible solution
> Sent from my iPhone
> Begin forwarded message:
> *From:* Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
> *Date:* August 15, 2012 5:13:37 PM CDT
> *To:* txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* *Re: [TX/RX Labs] Re: new CNC router for the club*
> *Reply-To:* txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
> Freight costs are pending... I have a family friend that helped us get it
> to KS for pocket change...
> It's the riggers that ended up being a bit of an expense - If I remember
> right, it was 2,100 to put it on the trailer, and 2,500 to take it off. I
> also had to pay to have the side of my building taken off and put back!
> Haha.
> And, yes, Greg is talking about the linear rail project. We'd like to
> kickstarter it and end the horrible reign of Inventables (makerslide) and
> begin the horrible reign of Greg's wonder-rail.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Forrest Flanagan <solenoidcl...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>> This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could
>> experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet
>> materials like plywood.
>> I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter'
>> do you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Let me know what I can do to help. This would be a great machine to have
>>> at the lab.
>>> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:11:33 PM UTC-5, steelcutter wrote:
>>>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail
>>>> carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is
>>>> my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to
>>>> the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it.
>>>> The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of
>>>> plywood.
>>>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be
>>>> an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our
>>>> project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>>>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>>>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>>>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>>>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>>>> etc. Any help will be welcomed
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
-- Patrick Wheeler
Patrick.John.Whee...@gmail.com
Patrick.J.Whee...@rice.edu
Patrick.Whee...@colorado.edu
patrick.john.whee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> See you tomorrow.
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>> I want to have a brain storming meeting. On Thursday at 7:00 to figure
>> out how to raise money for the cnc router we. Will discuss the linear rail
>> as a possible solution
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> *From:* Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
>> *Date:* August 15, 2012 5:13:37 PM CDT
>> *To:* txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
>> *Subject:* *Re: [TX/RX Labs] Re: new CNC router for the club*
>> *Reply-To:* txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
>> Freight costs are pending... I have a family friend that helped us get it
>> to KS for pocket change...
>> It's the riggers that ended up being a bit of an expense - If I remember
>> right, it was 2,100 to put it on the trailer, and 2,500 to take it off. I
>> also had to pay to have the side of my building taken off and put back!
>> Haha.
>> And, yes, Greg is talking about the linear rail project. We'd like to
>> kickstarter it and end the horrible reign of Inventables (makerslide) and
>> begin the horrible reign of Greg's wonder-rail.
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Forrest Flanagan <
>> solenoidcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is an amazing machine. A 4x8 working area means people could
>>> experiment with making furniture and even small rooms out of machined sheet
>>> materials like plywood.
>>> I'm interested in the freight cost as well. By 'project for kickstarter'
>>> do you mean the linear rail you assembled, or a different project?
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, texastiger <douglas.baug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Let me know what I can do to help. This would be a great machine to
>>>> have at the lab.
>>>> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:11:33 PM UTC-5, steelcutter wrote:
>>>>> I am working on a kick starter project involving a linear rail
>>>>> carriage that rides on a standard 8020 type of extrusion. Jeff Hutchison is
>>>>> my partner. We have decided that the cost of moving the new CNC router to
>>>>> the space is so high that there could be a chance that we would lose it.
>>>>> The router is a 5 spindle with saw that can talk a full 4x8 sheet of
>>>>> plywood.
>>>>> It was used to build cabinets. The servos are 3 hp each. This would be
>>>>> an awesome addition to the space. I have been running numbers on our
>>>>> project and we can come close to paying for freight for the router.
>>>>> If kick starter funds the min. amount. We are a few weeks away from
>>>>> getting this thing kicked off. Any help would be appreciated in preparing
>>>>> this project for kick starter. I have a running prototype that can seen at
>>>>> the Lab. We need to prepare the presentation (video) and the cover sheet
>>>>> etc. Any help will be welcomed
>>>>> Greg Southerland
>>>>> S&B Engineers and Constructors
>>>>> Control System Designer
>>>>> 713-845-5307
>>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/txrxlabs/-/Gwmi7Lr7hhgJ.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast? What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we really want to make that investment?
My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
other use.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net> wrote:
> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
> really want to make that investment?
> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
> - Mark Sullivan -
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least) tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving nimbly enough for plasma duty.
There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+ lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention, sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any acceleration.
This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router in the space that this one giant would take.
On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
> Yes it can be multiple machines.
> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the > rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same > kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any > other use.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to >> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost >> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it >> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast? >> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we >> really want to make that investment?
>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple >> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser >> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the >> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by >> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>> - Mark Sullivan -
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Tx/Rx Labs" group. >> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> txrxlabs+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing a
Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same space
as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
Chris provided.
This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
built for production where speed absolutely counts.
A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may be
happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
> acceleration.
> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing
> is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
> in the space that this one giant would take.
> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>> other use.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
>>> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
>>> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
>>> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
>>> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
>>> really want to make that investment?
>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>> googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
need cutting force.
But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
would work for plasma laser, etc.
Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that level,
so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to move
slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of running
it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size cutting
area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans next
friday when i come out.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing a
> Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same space
> as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
> Chris provided.
> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
>> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
>> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
>> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
>> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
>> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
>> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
>> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
>> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
>> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
>> acceleration.
>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing
>> is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>> other use.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
>>>> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
>>>> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
>>>> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
>>>> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
>>>> really want to make that investment?
>>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>>> googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is free
but for the shipping and square footage?
The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
- Table+motors: $4,500 USD
- Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
- Dust Management: $500 USD
- The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or vacuum
table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with
commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
> need cutting force.
> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
> would work for plasma laser, etc.
> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that level,
> so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to move
> slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of running
> it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size cutting
> area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans next
> friday when i come out.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing
>> a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same
>> space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
>> Chris provided.
>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
>> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
>> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
>> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
>> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
>>> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
>>> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
>>> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
>>> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
>>> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
>>> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
>>> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
>>> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
>>> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
>>> acceleration.
>>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This
>>> thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>>> other use.
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love
>>>>> to have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one
>>>>> cost I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the
>>>>> space it will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to
>>>>> this beast? What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it
>>>>> aside, do we really want to make that investment?
>>>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>>>> googlegroups.com.
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>>>> group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
This router is an endgame piece of equipment. You will not be looking
for yet another wood router to do something that this one can't. Just
this fact make it attractive so we can stop blaming the tools for
being our limiting factor. Any router that is 4'x8' is going to take
up more room than 4x8 with the clearances required around it. So try
not to compare a 5x10 machine foot print with this one because that
smaller machine takes up more space than 5x10 too.
Any talk about plasma and water jet is just a distraction. Water bed
is not compatible with this style machine and plasma would require
huge switch over time to clean all the sawdust and swap in a
different bed that wouldn't catch fire.
A high powered metal cutting laser could be compatible. Cutting 1/8"
acrylic with 500w would probably require faster feed rates than this
would provide, but I don't think the feed rates for metal are as high.
If you want to dream about adding stuff then a 2 axis head to make
this 5 axis would be possible. It sure looks to have the rigidity to
allow it, especially if you free up some space removing the saw and
2nd spindle.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is free
> but for the shipping and square footage?
> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
> Table+motors: $4,500 USD
> Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
> Dust Management: $500 USD
> The total cost of a complete MechMate without a spindle or vacuum table, is
> about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with commercial units
> in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <kennethscottba...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
>> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't need
>> cutting force.
>> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
>> would work for plasma laser, etc.
>> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
>> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
>> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that level,
>> so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to move
>> slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of running
>> it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size cutting
>> area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans next
>> friday when i come out.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing
>>> a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same space
>>> as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
>>> Chris provided.
>>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
>>> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
>>> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
>>> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
>>> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>>>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>>>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
>>>> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
>>>> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved in
>>>> plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
>>>> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
>>>> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>>>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
>>>> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
>>>> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
>>>> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
>>>> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
>>>> acceleration.
>>>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>>>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>>>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This
>>>> thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>>>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>>>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over 6'X13'.
>>>> You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router in the
>>>> space that this one giant would take.
>>>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>>>> other use.
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>>>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love
>>>>>> to have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one
>>>>>> cost I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the
>>>>>> space it will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to
>>>>>> this beast? What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it
>>>>>> aside, do we really want to make that investment?
>>>>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>>>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>>>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>>>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>>>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>>>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>>> txrxlabs+u...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is free
> but for the shipping and square footage?
> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
> - Table+motors: $4,500 USD
> - Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
> - Dust Management: $500 USD
> - The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or vacuum
> table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with
> commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <
> kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
>> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
>> need cutting force.
>> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
>> would work for plasma laser, etc.
>> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
>> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
>> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that
>> level, so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to
>> move slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of
>> running it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size
>> cutting area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans
>> next friday when i come out.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing
>>> a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same
>>> space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons
>>> that Chris provided.
>>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
>>> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
>>> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
>>> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
>>> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>>>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>>>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to
>>>> deal with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at
>>>> least) tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces
>>>> involved in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and
>>>> acceleration to maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was
>>>> capable of moving nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>>>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry
>>>> moving-bed design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's
>>>> own weight fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate
>>>> the 600+ lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to
>>>> mention, sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just
>>>> about any acceleration.
>>>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>>>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>>>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This
>>>> thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>>>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>>>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>>>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>>>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>>>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>>>> other use.
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>>>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>>>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love
>>>>>> to have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one
>>>>>> cost I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the
>>>>>> space it will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to
>>>>>> this beast? What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it
>>>>>> aside, do we really want to make that investment?
>>>>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>>>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>>>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>>>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>>>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>>>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>>>>> googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>>>>> group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
From: kennethscottba...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500
Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club
To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
you can build a mechmate for the price of shipping this one, ggggger-run-teeeed
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com> wrote:
But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is free but for the shipping and square footage?
The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
Table+motors: $4,500 USD Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD Dust Management: $500 USD The total cost of a complete MechMate without a spindle or vacuum table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD rangeSource - http://www.cnczone.com/forums/open_source_cnc_machine_designs/59304-m...
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't need cutting force.
But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it would work for plasma laser, etc.
Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why. Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that level, so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to move slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of running it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size cutting area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans next friday when i come out.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that Chris provided. This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration" is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are built for production where speed absolutely counts.
A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma). Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least) tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving nimbly enough for plasma duty.
There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+ lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention, sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any acceleration.
This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V. Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router in the space that this one giant would take.
On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
Yes it can be multiple machines. The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any other use.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net> wrote:
Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast? What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we really want to make that investment?
My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
- Mark Sullivan -
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group. To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
> ------------------------------
> From: kennethscottba...@gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500
> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club
> To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
> you can build a mechmate for the price of shipping this one,
> ggggger-run-teeeed
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is free
> but for the shipping and square footage?
> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
> - Table+motors: $4,500 USD
> - Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
> - Dust Management: $500 USD
> - The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or vacuum
> table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with
> commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <
> kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
> need cutting force.
> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
> would work for plasma laser, etc.
> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that level,
> so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to move
> slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of running
> it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size cutting
> area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans next
> friday when i come out.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing a
> Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same space
> as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
> Chris provided.
> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
> acceleration.
> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing
> is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
> in the space that this one giant would take.
> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
> Yes it can be multiple machines.
> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
> other use.
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
> really want to make that investment?
> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
> - Mark Sullivan -
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
> googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Nah, we're pursuing it, right? Pulling one of the walls off of that sheet
metal building would be like snipping a soda can. If anyone has a clever
fundraiser, I'd like to help.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Kenny Loveall <Ke...@kennyloveall.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>> not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
>> ------------------------------
>> From: kennethscottba...@gmail.com
>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500
>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club
>> To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
>> you can build a mechmate for the price of shipping this one,
>> ggggger-run-teeeed
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is
>> free but for the shipping and square footage?
>> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
>> - Table+motors: $4,500 USD
>> - Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
>> - Dust Management: $500 USD
>> - The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or vacuum
>> table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par with
>> commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <
>> kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
>> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
>> need cutting force.
>> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system, it
>> would work for plasma laser, etc.
>> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
>> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
>> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that
>> level, so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to
>> move slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of
>> running it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size
>> cutting area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans
>> next friday when i come out.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing
>> a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same
>> space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons that
>> Chris provided.
>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
>> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
>> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
>> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
>> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
>> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
>> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
>> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
>> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
>> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
>> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
>> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
>> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
>> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
>> acceleration.
>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This thing
>> is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>> other use.
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
>> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
>> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
>> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
>> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
>> really want to make that investment?
>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>> - Mark Sullivan -
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>> googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >> group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
Forrest, I don't think we'll need to pull a wall off the building - The
door should be big enough. If it is not big enough, you are right, it
would be easy to work around.
I also think that there is enough support for the router that it certainly
is still on the table. I have no timeline or deadline of any sort with
it. I have it in an 1800 square foot building up in KS, where it is a
large feature, but doesn't dominate the space.
I still haven't heard back on the cost for freight, but I'm hoping I can
get that part handled at no cost to the club.
Does anybody have an estimate for riggers in Houston? In KS they will run
between 2 and 2.5k.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Forrest Flanagan
<solenoidcl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Nah, we're pursuing it, right? Pulling one of the walls off of that sheet
> metal building would be like snipping a soda can. If anyone has a clever
> fundraiser, I'd like to help.
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Kenny Loveall <Ke...@kennyloveall.com>wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>>> not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
>>> ------------------------------
>>> From: kennethscottba...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500
>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club
>>> To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
>>> you can build a mechmate for the price of shipping this one,
>>> ggggger-run-teeeed
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is
>>> free but for the shipping and square footage?
>>> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
>>> - Table+motors: $4,500 USD
>>> - Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
>>> - Dust Management: $500 USD
>>> - The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or
>>> vacuum table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par
>>> with commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <
>>> kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the acceleration/overall
>>> speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc. (typically), but they don't
>>> need cutting force.
>>> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system,
>>> it would work for plasma laser, etc.
>>> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
>>> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
>>> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that
>>> level, so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to
>>> move slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of
>>> running it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size
>>> cutting area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans
>>> next friday when i come out.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like comparing
>>> a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the same
>>> space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons
>>> that Chris provided.
>>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces. That's
>>> why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low acceleration"
>>> is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big routers are
>>> built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it may
>>> be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to deal
>>> with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at least)
>>> tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces involved
>>> in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and acceleration to
>>> maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was capable of moving
>>> nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry moving-bed
>>> design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's own weight
>>> fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate the 600+
>>> lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to mention,
>>> sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just about any
>>> acceleration.
>>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This
>>> thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>> other use.
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
>>> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
>>> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
>>> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
>>> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
>>> really want to make that investment?
>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>> googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>> group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
$1650 plus $150 per day per diem, i.e. 1 day is $1800, 2 days is $1950.
(excludes rigging on both sides)
Includes unhook the controller and knock down the horizontal ways/rails to
suitable hauling width and reinstall everything upon arrival.
I will cover the $300 to pull the wall off my building and replace it.
The total cost should be less than 7k, minus the revenue from the linear
rail kickstarter project and individual donations
Speaking of donations... anybody wanna contribute?
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Forrest, I don't think we'll need to pull a wall off the building - The
> door should be big enough. If it is not big enough, you are right, it
> would be easy to work around.
> I also think that there is enough support for the router that it certainly
> is still on the table. I have no timeline or deadline of any sort with
> it. I have it in an 1800 square foot building up in KS, where it is a
> large feature, but doesn't dominate the space.
> I still haven't heard back on the cost for freight, but I'm hoping I can
> get that part handled at no cost to the club.
> Does anybody have an estimate for riggers in Houston? In KS they will run
> between 2 and 2.5k.
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Forrest Flanagan <
> solenoidcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Nah, we're pursuing it, right? Pulling one of the walls off of that sheet
>> metal building would be like snipping a soda can. If anyone has a clever
>> fundraiser, I'd like to help.
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Kenny Loveall <Ke...@kennyloveall.com>wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, greg southerland <gregs1...@hotmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>> not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> From: kennethscottba...@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500
>>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club
>>>> To: txrxlabs@googlegroups.com
>>>> you can build a mechmate for the price of shipping this one,
>>>> ggggger-run-teeeed
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> But where are you going to find an already assembled Mechmate that is
>>>> free but for the shipping and square footage?
>>>> The basic cost of the MechMate is as follows:
>>>> - Table+motors: $4,500 USD
>>>> - Drivers+electronics (less CAD/CAM): $3,000 USD
>>>> - Dust Management: $500 USD
>>>> - The total cost of a *complete* MechMate without a spindle or
>>>> vacuum table, is about $8,500 USD. This easily puts the MechMate on par
>>>> with commercial units in the $15,000 to $20,000 USD range
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry <
>>>> kennethscottba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Its not perfectly suited. A heavy gantry limits the
>>>> acceleration/overall speed. Plasma and Laser don't need low acc.
>>>> (typically), but they don't need cutting force.
>>>> But limited only to the idea of using this as a motion control system,
>>>> it would work for plasma laser, etc.
>>>> Its big, and its a high production model, probaby rated for cutting
>>>> multiple boards at once. We probably don't need it, and this is why.
>>>> Its got allt he features of industrial, but we won't use it at that
>>>> level, so, the tradeoffs for havng an industrial machin mean, its going to
>>>> move slower, take longer, and comsume for electricity (overll expense of
>>>> running it higher), If the shop is interested in a machine with this size
>>>> cutting area, i suggest we build a Mechmate. I'll bring a copy of the plans
>>>> next friday when i come out.
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Jeff Hutchison <jhutch1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Comparing this machine to a nice homemade router is a bit like
>>>> comparing a Mendel to a Stratasys. Sure, I can put several rep-raps in the
>>>> same space as a commercial extruder, but is that really what I want?
>>>> Similarly, comparing it to a plasma cutter is absurd for the reasons
>>>> that Chris provided.
>>>> This machine is definitely designed for handling cutting forces.
>>>> That's why it is so heavy and has so much horsepower. However, "low
>>>> acceleration" is a relative term. Compared to a plasma, yes, but these big
>>>> routers are built for production where speed absolutely counts.
>>>> A plasma head may not be the best idea, but Roland and I have already
>>>> talked about putting a 500W laser on it, and adding a waterjet head. For
>>>> grins, we could put an extruder head on it too.
>>>> Power is no problem - it comes with a phase maker. Not sure, but it
>>>> may be happy with the wild-leg power we have at the new space.
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Chris <tensait...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good candidate for a plasma
>>>> and/or laser retrofit (especially plasma).
>>>> Routers are designed to be heavy and rigid with low acceleration to
>>>> deal with the cutting forces involved. Plasma tables (the gantries, at
>>>> least) tend to be lighter since these are effectively no cutting forces
>>>> involved in plasma (or laser), they also require higher speeds and
>>>> acceleration to maintain cut quality. I'd be surprised if that beast was
>>>> capable of moving nimbly enough for plasma duty.
>>>> There is also a problem in that the machine is a fixed-gantry
>>>> moving-bed design. That means that even if the machine can accelerate it's
>>>> own weight fast enough for plasma cutting, it would also have to accelerate
>>>> the 600+ lbs. of water in a relatively shallow (3") water bed. Not to
>>>> mention, sloshing would be a major problem with a moving water-bed at just
>>>> about any acceleration.
>>>> This is assuming that the new building will even be able to power the
>>>> thing. I'm guessing that it is meant for 3-phase 480V.
>>>> Furthermore, as Mark pointed out, there is the issue of space. This
>>>> thing is 12'3" wide and 16'6" long but only has a cutting area of just over
>>>> 4'X8'. That's a huge footprint for very little working envelope. I built a
>>>> 5'X12' (cutting area) plasma table that had a footprint of just over
>>>> 6'X13'. You could easily fit a 5'X10' plasma/laser and a 4'X8' wood router
>>>> in the space that this one giant would take.
>>>> On Friday, August 17, 2012 8:59:28 AM UTC-5, Kenneth Barry wrote:
>>>> Yes it can be multiple machines.
>>>> The linear motion is 90% of the machine. What head is on it covers the
>>>> rest. Adding a laser is possible, adding lasr and plasma require the same
>>>> kind of "conversion" (Adding a instllable "bed" for water), as would any
>>>> other use.
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>>> Here comes the wet blanket. For which I apologize in advance.
>>>> As much as I love the idea of the router and as much as I would love to
>>>> have access to one, I feel that it's a bad idea. My reason is the one cost
>>>> I've not seen anyone mention. That is the opportunity cost of the space it
>>>> will occupy. How many square feet will have to be dedicated to this beast?
>>>> What percentage is that of our new space? Costs of moving it aside, do we
>>>> really want to make that investment?
>>>> My only mitigating idea is to ask if it could double up as multiple
>>>> machines. Could the gantry be equipped with a plasma cutting head, a laser
>>>> head, and maybe a water jet at some future date? At least that way, the
>>>> precious space would be doing multiple duty. We could recover space by
>>>> eliminating the existing plasma cutter, for example.
>>>> - Mark Sullivan -
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrx...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to txrxlabs+u...@**
>>>> googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>>> group/txrxlabs?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en>.
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to txrxlabs@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>> txrxlabs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/txrxlabs?hl=en.
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Tx/Rx Labs" group.
>>>> To post to
