I still think this is a terrible idea. Just because we have a significantly larger space does not mean we need to piss it away on giant obsolete machines, just because we can get them "cheap" and they look impressive.
Seriously, is it really worth it to lose 200 square ft. of space on a 30 year old machine that only has 32 square ft. of working space?
Even if you want to make it multi use, you're going to have to replace the controller because the dusty fossil that is controlling it won't be able to satisfactorily handle a waterjet, laser, plasma, or anything else. Those old controllers were not designed to be modified or even customised by anyone other than the dark cabal of the manufacturer's sanctioned technicians. They are so closed and hardware-tied that doing any useful modifications means completely replacing the controller, and possibly motor drives.
It doesn't matter how cheap this thing is, it isn't worth it.
On Monday, September 10, 2012 9:41:52 AM UTC-5, Jeff wrote:
> I just got the shipping info on the router:
> $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 <jhutc...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > 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 <soleno...@gmail.com<javascript:> >> > 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<javascript:> >>> > wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, greg southerland <greg...@hotmail.com<javascript:> >>>> > wrote:
>>>>> not even in the same classs as the industiral one we want
>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> From: kenneths...@gmail.com <javascript:> >>>>> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:52:55 -0500 >>>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club >>>>> To: txrx...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>
>>>>> 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 <jhutc...@gmail.com<javascript:> >>>>> > 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 <kenneths...@gmail.com<javascript:> >>>>> > 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 <jhutc...@gmail.com<javascript:> >>>>> > 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 <tensa...@gmail.com<javascript:> >>>>> > 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.
> I still think this is a terrible idea. Just because we have a
> significantly larger space does not mean we need to piss it away on
> giant obsolete machines, just because we can get them "cheap" and
> they look impressive.
> Seriously, is it really worth it to lose 200 square ft. of space on
> a 30 year old machine that only has 32 square ft. of working space?
> Even if you want to make it multi use, you're going to have to
> replace the controller because the dusty fossil that is controlling
> it won't be able to satisfactorily handle a waterjet, laser,
> plasma, or anything else. Those old controllers were not designed
> to be modified or even customised by anyone other than the dark
> cabal of the manufacturer's sanctioned technicians. They are so
> closed and hardware-tied that doing any useful modifications means
> completely replacing the controller, and possibly motor drives.
> It doesn't matter how cheap this thing is, it isn't worth it.
> On Monday, September 10, 2012 9:41:52 AM UTC-5, Jeff wrote:> I just
> got the shipping info on the router:
>> $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
> <jhutc...@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
>>> <soleno...@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:
>>>>> So I assume that we've decided to not pursue this?
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club To:
>>>>>> txrx...@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
> <jhutc...@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-me >>>>>>>> chmate_4x8_comprehensive_bill_materials.html
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry
>>>>>>> <kenneths...@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
>>>>>>>> <jhutc...@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 <tensa...@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
I really have to disagree. I think that if we have the room we might as
well get it rather than saving that room for other things at a future date.
If something else comes along that we want more (or can do the same in a
smaller space) then we can get rid of this. But until then, I know I
personally could really use this and I'm sure others could too.
On Sep 11, 2012 10:08 AM, "Mark Sullivan" <m...@marksullivan.net> wrote:
> > I still think this is a terrible idea. Just because we have a
> > significantly larger space does not mean we need to piss it away on
> > giant obsolete machines, just because we can get them "cheap" and
> > they look impressive.
> > Seriously, is it really worth it to lose 200 square ft. of space on
> > a 30 year old machine that only has 32 square ft. of working space?
> > Even if you want to make it multi use, you're going to have to
> > replace the controller because the dusty fossil that is controlling
> > it won't be able to satisfactorily handle a waterjet, laser,
> > plasma, or anything else. Those old controllers were not designed
> > to be modified or even customised by anyone other than the dark
> > cabal of the manufacturer's sanctioned technicians. They are so
> > closed and hardware-tied that doing any useful modifications means
> > completely replacing the controller, and possibly motor drives.
> > It doesn't matter how cheap this thing is, it isn't worth it.
> > On Monday, September 10, 2012 9:41:52 AM UTC-5, Jeff wrote:> I just
> > got the shipping info on the router:
> >> $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
> > <jhutc...@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
> >>> <soleno...@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:
> >>>>> So I assume that we've decided to not pursue this?
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club To:
> >>>>>> txrx...@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
> > <jhutc...@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 -
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry
> >>>>>>> <kenneths...@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
> >>>>>>>> <jhutc...@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 <tensa...@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
That's an awfully big investment for something we're not sure of. We do also already have the smaller CNC machine that does amazing things with both wood and metal.
I'd like to spend 1/7 of the proposed cost of moving this machine in order to have very generous runs of all-new ethernet cable throughout the lab, and basically guarantee that we'd never outgrow it. Or 1/4 that amount to get one of the really nice 3D printer kits with the heated beds. Or some DIY CNC routing machine (kit?) that's more than 3 axes. Or a car lift. Or better insulation so we can air-condition the quiet area.
I'm not against the idea--that is a sexy machine--but I question the wisdom of using our limited resources to obtain it.
> I really have to disagree. I think that if we have the room we might as
> well get it rather than saving that room for other things at a future
> date. If something else comes along that we want more (or can do the
> same in a smaller space) then we can get rid of this. But until then, I
> know I personally could really use this and I'm sure others could too.
> > I still think this is a terrible idea. Just because we have a
> > significantly larger space does not mean we need to piss it away on
> > giant obsolete machines, just because we can get them "cheap" and
> > they look impressive.
> > Seriously, is it really worth it to lose 200 square ft. of space on
> > a 30 year old machine that only has 32 square ft. of working space?
> > Even if you want to make it multi use, you're going to have to
> > replace the controller because the dusty fossil that is controlling
> > it won't be able to satisfactorily handle a waterjet, laser,
> > plasma, or anything else. Those old controllers were not designed
> > to be modified or even customised by anyone other than the dark
> > cabal of the manufacturer's sanctioned technicians. They are so
> > closed and hardware-tied that doing any useful modifications means
> > completely replacing the controller, and possibly motor drives.
> > It doesn't matter how cheap this thing is, it isn't worth it.
> > On Monday, September 10, 2012 9:41:52 AM UTC-5, Jeff wrote:> I just
> > got the shipping info on the router:
> >> $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
> > <jhutc...@gmail.com <mailto:jhutc...@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
> >>> <soleno...@gmail.com <mailto:soleno...@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 <mailto:Ke...@kennyloveall.com>> wrote:
> >>>>> So I assume that we've decided to not pursue this?
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [TX/RX Labs] new CNC router for the club To:
> >>>>>> txrx...@googlegroups.com <mailto:txrx...@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
> > <jhutc...@gmail.com <mailto:jhutc...@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 -
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Kenneth Barry
> >>>>>>> <kenneths...@gmail.com <mailto:kenneths...@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
> >>>>>>>> <jhutc...@gmail.com <mailto:jhutc...@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 <tensa...@gmail.com
> <mailto:tensa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I disagree with Kenneth about it being a good
> >>>>>>>>>> candidate for a plasma and/or laser retrofit
> >>>>>>>>>> (especially plasma).
Several things here... yes, it is a very sexy machine... and it will come
with at least 1000' of plenum rated cat 5 if you want (I've got the cable
in KS, no problem adding it to the shipment)
And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks who don't
want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but there are some
folks who want this to happen and are willing to pitch in and make it
work. The folks who want the machine may also want the other things you
mention - I know I do. For me, making this happen doesn't make me any less
likely to chip in for a car lift, or a 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser
chainsaw router with a heated bed.
Best regards to all, including the negative nancies,
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:34 PM, David Nielson <naptas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's an awfully big investment for something we're not sure of. We do
> also already have the smaller CNC machine that does amazing things with
> both wood and metal.
> I'd like to spend 1/7 of the proposed cost of moving this machine in order
> to have very generous runs of all-new ethernet cable throughout the lab,
> and basically guarantee that we'd never outgrow it. Or 1/4 that amount to
> get one of the really nice 3D printer kits with the heated beds. Or some
> DIY CNC routing machine (kit?) that's more than 3 axes. Or a car lift. Or
> better insulation so we can air-condition the quiet area.
> I'm not against the idea--that is a sexy machine--but I question the
> wisdom of using our limited resources to obtain it.
> Several things here... yes, it is a very sexy machine... and it will come with at least 1000' of plenum rated cat 5 if you want (I've got the cable in KS, no problem adding it to the shipment)
> And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks who don't want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but there are some folks who want this to happen and are willing to pitch in and make it work. The folks who want the machine may also want the other things you mention - I know I do. For me, making this happen doesn't make me any less likely to chip in for a car lift, or a 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser chainsaw router with a heated bed.
> Best regards to all, including the negative nancies,
> Jeff
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:34 PM, David Nielson <naptas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's an awfully big investment for something we're not sure of. We do also already have the smaller CNC machine that does amazing things with both wood and metal.
> I'd like to spend 1/7 of the proposed cost of moving this machine in order to have very generous runs of all-new ethernet cable throughout the lab, and basically guarantee that we'd never outgrow it. Or 1/4 that amount to get one of the really nice 3D printer kits with the heated beds. Or some DIY CNC routing machine (kit?) that's more than 3 axes. Or a car lift. Or better insulation so we can air-condition the quiet area.
> I'm not against the idea--that is a sexy machine--but I question the wisdom of using our limited resources to obtain it.
> David
> -- > 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.
> And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks
> who don't want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but
> there are some folks who want this to happen and are willing to
> pitch in and make it work.
I am a Negative Nancy and will probably stay that way but I am perfectly willing to pay and do my share if the decision of the club is to obtain the machine. I am against the *decision*, yes. But I will cheerfully support any decision the club as a group makes, even if I voted against it.
Josh Bridges (My friend the welder/fitter, with all the Tattoos), is
fabulous as a fabricator. It may make sense to build a Mechmate. They can
do what this machine can do, are large, and reasonably fast. With his
connections thru his work, we can get a steep discount on raw materials for
the build. There was an estimate of the cost of the machine. The estimate
was generous. I've got a machine that would be a mechmate if i had about
$1000 worth the upgrades (essentially, if i built my table differently),
and its cost me $4000 - $5000. The other cool thing is, that a single
controller/compuer can control multiple machines. Several of my buddies do
this switching between controlling their router, or their small high
precision metal-mill. Instead of this machine, (not that i have donated
more than foo money on Fridays), it may be nice to consider building 3
units with the cash we might spend on this machine. Namely,
A mechmate
An Automated Metal Mill and
A Foundry (Because the mechmate can be used to create patterns for the
foundry to pour large parts.) The overall footprint would be much smaller,
giving room for close workspaces (in the room used for this one large
machine, the router, foundry supplies, and the mill, and probably a small
work area could live)
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net> wrote:
> > And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks
> > who don't want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but
> > there are some folks who want this to happen and are willing to
> > pitch in and make it work.
> I am a Negative Nancy and will probably stay that way but I am perfectly
> willing to pay and do my share if the decision of the club is to obtain the
> machine. I am against the *decision*, yes. But I will cheerfully support
> any decision the club as a group makes, even if I voted against it.
> - 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 don't know why this machine is being compared to a scratch built
mechmate. This has a 6 hp spindle(s) with a vacuum holddown system. Both
of which you will not touch on a new build of 2-3k. You can disagree with
the cost or sqr footage required, but don't say that a mechmate will be in
any way a compatible replacement.
The fanuc 6m controller is the same as on the powerhawk mill.
On Sep 12, 2012 7:24 AM, "Kenneth Barry" <kennethscottba...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Josh Bridges (My friend the welder/fitter, with all the Tattoos), is
> fabulous as a fabricator. It may make sense to build a Mechmate. They can
> do what this machine can do, are large, and reasonably fast. With his
> connections thru his work, we can get a steep discount on raw materials for
> the build. There was an estimate of the cost of the machine. The estimate
> was generous. I've got a machine that would be a mechmate if i had about
> $1000 worth the upgrades (essentially, if i built my table differently),
> and its cost me $4000 - $5000. The other cool thing is, that a single
> controller/compuer can control multiple machines. Several of my buddies do
> this switching between controlling their router, or their small high
> precision metal-mill. Instead of this machine, (not that i have donated
> more than foo money on Fridays), it may be nice to consider building 3
> units with the cash we might spend on this machine. Namely,
> A mechmate
> An Automated Metal Mill and
> A Foundry (Because the mechmate can be used to create patterns for the
> foundry to pour large parts.) The overall footprint would be much smaller,
> giving room for close workspaces (in the room used for this one large
> machine, the router, foundry supplies, and the mill, and probably a small
> work area could live)
> my 2 cents.
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>> > And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks
>> > who don't want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but
>> > there are some folks who want this to happen and are willing to
>> > pitch in and make it work.
>> I am a Negative Nancy and will probably stay that way but I am perfectly
>> willing to pay and do my share if the decision of the club is to obtain the
>> machine. I am against the *decision*, yes. But I will cheerfully support
>> any decision the club as a group makes, even if I voted against it.
>> - 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.
> --
> 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 might help formalize the issue in a neutral manner. @Jeremy the
mechmate can't be compared to the industrial cnc. Although the descision
should not be based on the fact one machine has a higher hp motor. The
descision should be made on which machine or solution provides the intended
function, and if both provide the intended function then which does it at
the best value. Remember that the cost isn't only cash. The cost includes
space and time to build/alter/fix/move and learn to use.
If all you want this machine for is to work on wood and small metal pieces
then the mechmate is likely the better solution. If you want to work on
large metal pieces then the industrial cnc is better.
My opinion (which doesn't matter): I think the industrial cnc is sexy, but
it will likely end up being a toy we show off that only 1 or 2 people
actually use. The space it takes up will eventually be a big limiting
factor in what the space can do. It will be like commuting to work on a 18
wheeler every day. It gets you there but is the added cost of gas worth
it?
Rolando
On Sep 12, 2012 8:29 AM, "Jeremy Van Grinsven" <jv4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know why this machine is being compared to a scratch built
> mechmate. This has a 6 hp spindle(s) with a vacuum holddown system. Both
> of which you will not touch on a new build of 2-3k. You can disagree with
> the cost or sqr footage required, but don't say that a mechmate will be in
> any way a compatible replacement.
> The fanuc 6m controller is the same as on the powerhawk mill.
> On Sep 12, 2012 7:24 AM, "Kenneth Barry" <kennethscottba...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Josh Bridges (My friend the welder/fitter, with all the Tattoos), is
>> fabulous as a fabricator. It may make sense to build a Mechmate. They can
>> do what this machine can do, are large, and reasonably fast. With his
>> connections thru his work, we can get a steep discount on raw materials for
>> the build. There was an estimate of the cost of the machine. The estimate
>> was generous. I've got a machine that would be a mechmate if i had about
>> $1000 worth the upgrades (essentially, if i built my table differently),
>> and its cost me $4000 - $5000. The other cool thing is, that a single
>> controller/compuer can control multiple machines. Several of my buddies do
>> this switching between controlling their router, or their small high
>> precision metal-mill. Instead of this machine, (not that i have donated
>> more than foo money on Fridays), it may be nice to consider building 3
>> units with the cash we might spend on this machine. Namely,
>> A mechmate
>> An Automated Metal Mill and
>> A Foundry (Because the mechmate can be used to create patterns for the
>> foundry to pour large parts.) The overall footprint would be much smaller,
>> giving room for close workspaces (in the room used for this one large
>> machine, the router, foundry supplies, and the mill, and probably a small
>> work area could live)
>> my 2 cents.
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Mark Sullivan <m...@marksullivan.net>wrote:
>>> > And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks
>>> > who don't want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but
>>> > there are some folks who want this to happen and are willing to
>>> > pitch in and make it work.
>>> I am a Negative Nancy and will probably stay that way but I am perfectly
>>> willing to pay and do my share if the decision of the club is to obtain the
>>> machine. I am against the *decision*, yes. But I will cheerfully support
>>> any decision the club as a group makes, even if I voted against it.
>>> - 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.
>> --
>> 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.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Rolando Quintanilla <
quintanilla.rola...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My opinion (which doesn't matter): I think the industrial cnc is sexy, but
> it will likely end up being a toy we show off that only 1 or 2 people
> actually use.
> Rolando
Nope. I personally am really excited about a machine that can rip through
full-size sheet material. The vacuum table is a big plus. I've got plans to
make some furniture once we have a machine that'll handle 4x8, and I'd
imagine others would follow.
10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser chainsaw router with a heated bed.
Forrest your functional requirement is to cnc 4x8 plywood piece which both
can be configured to do. The plasma does metal sheets. Having an
ability that no one uses is silly. However, my opinion is irrelevant.
Find reasons the capability is needed or useful, otherwise it might be an
imprudent descision. A use case would be if you could make money for the
space with the machine. Because general use of the capability to cut big
metal pieces is very unlikely. It's sole purpose will be a measurement of
libido, not function. Further using it as a metal cutter might influence
people to not allow it to be used for plywood. Then you will have a
capability very few use, that prohibits other capabilities people would
use.
R
On Sep 12, 2012 11:42 AM, "Forrest Flanagan" <solenoidcl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Rolando Quintanilla <
> quintanilla.rola...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> My opinion (which doesn't matter): I think the industrial cnc is sexy,
>> but it will likely end up being a toy we show off that only 1 or 2 people
>> actually use.
>> Rolando
> Nope. I personally am really excited about a machine that can rip through
> full-size sheet material. The vacuum table is a big plus. I've got plans to
> make some furniture once we have a machine that'll handle 4x8, and I'd
> imagine others would follow.
> 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser chainsaw router with a heated bed.
> I want a shitty watercolor of this.
> --
> 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.
Just curious, but does anyone familiar with cnc vacuum hold down systems
think it would be plausible to fit a frame for vacuum forming work? It's
kind of overkill unless someone wants to make a lexan kayak, but a lot of
folks seem to be interested in multiple duty.
Just the vacuum table is exciting enough to elevate the machine over a
scratch built mill. Not having to deal with clamping or thinking about how
side-forces would effect small parts being machined would be a boon to
reducing complexity of a job and getting more people to use the machines.
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Rolando Quintanilla <quintanilla.rola...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My opinion (which doesn't matter): I think the industrial cnc is sexy, but it will likely end up being a toy we show off that only 1 or 2 people actually use.
> Rolando
> Nope. I personally am really excited about a machine that can rip through full-size sheet material. The vacuum table is a big plus. I've got plans to make some furniture once we have a machine that'll handle 4x8, and I'd imagine others would follow.
> 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser chainsaw router with a heated bed.
> I want a shitty watercolor of this.
> -- > 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 can get a blackfoot that handles 4x8 for under $3k
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 11:42 AM, Forrest Flanagan <solenoidcl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Rolando Quintanilla <
> quintanilla.rola...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> My opinion (which doesn't matter): I think the industrial cnc is sexy,
>> but it will likely end up being a toy we show off that only 1 or 2 people
>> actually use.
>> Rolando
> Nope. I personally am really excited about a machine that can rip through
> full-size sheet material. The vacuum table is a big plus. I've got plans to
> make some furniture once we have a machine that'll handle 4x8, and I'd
> imagine others would follow.
> 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser chainsaw router with a heated bed.
> I want a shitty watercolor of this.
> --
> 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.
The problem is the people keep on making the perfect the enemy of the good. You can't sit around all day looking for the perfect solution unless you want to be a mathematician, and most of us do not have infinite time or infinite money. People also keep talking about how they know this guy or that guy who can make a better solution, but as I found out working with Wes is that people tend to say they are going to do something for you, but they may never come through. You just can't count on other people sometimes to make things into a reality. I waited a year and a half for Wes to get me a code dump for the flip-dot sign project, and after about a month it was my fault for not coming up with a workaround as it was clear he wasn't going to contribute. You guys should really move forward with this machine, and if the negative nancies want to prove that they know better, then let them replace it with something better, and brag about how clever they are when they do it, but that could be six months from now. Any space in the shop that isn't being used is just wasted rent. Talk to Pattrick or Roland about moving the project forward. They will come up some reasonable compromise. Especially if you start with Patty.
On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:43:28 PM UTC-5, Jeff wrote:
> David,
> Several things here... yes, it is a very sexy machine... and it will come > with at least 1000' of plenum rated cat 5 if you want (I've got the cable > in KS, no problem adding it to the shipment)
> And then the important part - this should not be funded by folks who don't > want it. The negative nancies have said their piece, but there are some > folks who want this to happen and are willing to pitch in and make it > work. The folks who want the machine may also want the other things you > mention - I know I do. For me, making this happen doesn't make me any less > likely to chip in for a car lift, or a 10 gigabit, 3D, 9 axis, water laser > chainsaw router with a heated bed. > Best regards to all, including the negative nancies,
> Jeff
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:34 PM, David Nielson <napt...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> That's an awfully big investment for something we're not sure of. We do >> also already have the smaller CNC machine that does amazing things with >> both wood and metal.
>> I'd like to spend 1/7 of the proposed cost of moving this machine in >> order to have very generous runs of all-new ethernet cable throughout the >> lab, and basically guarantee that we'd never outgrow it. Or 1/4 that amount >> to get one of the really nice 3D printer kits with the heated beds. Or some >> DIY CNC routing machine (kit?) that's more than 3 axes. Or a car lift. Or >> better insulation so we can air-condition the quiet area.
>> I'm not against the idea--that is a sexy machine--but I question the >> wisdom of using our limited resources to obtain it.
On Friday, September 14, 2012 10:46:34 AM UTC-5, Pk -Blue wrote:
> You just can't count on other people sometimes to make things into a > reality. I waited a year and a half for Wes to get me a code dump for the > flip-dot sign project, and after about a month it was my fault for not > coming up with a workaround as it was clear he wasn't going to contribute.
Holy. Freaking. Shit... You want to go there? Do you *really* want to go there? You want to talk about being unable to count on other people Mr. Victim-of-Others-Non-Contribution?
Tell me. How many hundreds of pounds of the previous tenant's crap did *you*clear out of the space? How many of those flesh-ripping tetanus-inducing coil things did *you* cut, grind, or pull off the columns in the shop? How many times did *you* pressure wash or de-grease the floors? How much concrete did *you* break with a hammer and chisel or grind off so the floor would be level? How many cracks, holes, and divots did *you* patch? How much tar did *you* brush, scrape, dissolve, or grind off the floor? How many feet of old-unused conduit and gas pipe did *you* cut off the walls and ceiling of the sop? How many times did *you* put on heavy rubber gloves and boots and a respirator to acid etch the floor? How many gallons of primer and epoxy did *you* put on the floor while begging the looky-loos to keep off of it? How many hours did *you* spend on hands and knees with a paint brush making sure that paint made it into all the little pock marks and cracks in the floor? How many walls have *you* cleaned, primed, and painted? How many other people's paint brushes have *you* re-cleaned because they did a crappy job the first time? How many walls have *you*framed? How many Tap-Cons have *you* driven? How much sheet-rock have *you* hung? How many windows did *you * re-putty (correctly)? How many mornings, days, or evenings have *you*spent at the new space surviving on stale left-over bread, cupcakes, and pastries because you are either too tired and/or busy to go to a store and get real food?
> Any space in the shop that isn't being used is just wasted rent.
Do you actually think we are going to have any wasted or unused space even without this behemoth router? There are already plans for every square foot of floor space. The increase in area from the old shop will be used for an increase in the variety of our capabilities, not simply a slight increase in the size of working area of one particular activity (wood routing).
I still think this router is a bad move on technical, power, and space principles. While I can certainly appreciate the generosity of the offer and don't really like looking a gift horse in the mouth, I just don't think it's a good idea.
Do any of you realize how much work, me, Justin, Roland, Tristan, Ozzy, Cliff and the rest of the (disappointingly) small Core Build Team, have put into this new place to make it a world-class hackerspace? We have sweated, bled, and worked our asses off day after day, week after week, juggling, jobs, job hunts, and personal lives (what's left of them). Are you even aware that Cliff ended up in the hospital (with no insurance) due to a fall from a ladder while removing old, unneeded wiring? The very same old, unneeded wiring that we asked, weeks ago, dozens of people who were just standing around at a Friday gathering to remove.
I, personally, find it insulting that while I and the rest of the CBT have painstakingly prepared *every freaking square inch* of that shop we have this many people who have done next to nothing to help (and making excuses as to why), ready to come in and just start claiming area willy-nilly.
And, now, this "negative nancy" is off to the space to continue contributing, in every way I can, regardless of what is decided.
-Chis K. Core Build Team - Officium et Labore sine Gratia
Are you even aware that Cliff ended up in the hospital (with no insurance) due? I just visited Cliff in the hospital today. I broke only about 10 pounds of concrete with the chisel, because I didn't know what I was doing and we wanted to just remove paint and stuff. I lifted about maybe a ton of crap over the time period I was there . I never ground anything off the columns, but I did prep the windows between the shop and the main area to be glazed. I pressured washed the floor only once. I only glazed about 30 windows. I am not very good at that job either. Roland most likely stripped off some of my work, but it was better than nothing. As for scraping the floor, I actually did that with the scrapper. That was one of the jobs I was good at. I loaded the army truck full of trash once, I moved most of the electronics stuff during one of the meetings while people were arguing about stuff ................ and so on.
Can we please not go there where there is? I don't want to fight about things, but if someone wants to move a decent tool into the hackerspace and the work out a rational plan on how with the leaders of the origination, then I don't think it is my place or the place of any other of the members to prevent them.
One thing I should say before we get any further into this is that you are not Justin, Roland, Tristan, Ozzy, or Cliff. You cannot speak for them, and I think name dropping them because you think this idea is bad policy is poor form. If the issue is so contentious that we have to vote on it then let us vote on it, and then all of the people who worked on the space can have a voice. Also I would respectfully ask that you try not to take my statements personally, as I do not intend to be offensive.
On Saturday, September 15, 2012 1:49:53 PM UTC-5, Chris K. wrote:
> On Friday, September 14, 2012 10:46:34 AM UTC-5, Pk -Blue wrote:
>> You just can't count on other people sometimes to make things into a >> reality. I waited a year and a half for Wes to get me a code dump for the >> flip-dot sign project, and after about a month it was my fault for not >> coming up with a workaround as it was clear he wasn't going to contribute.
> Holy. Freaking. Shit... You want to go there? Do you *really* want to go > there? You want to talk about being unable to count on other people Mr. > Victim-of-Others-Non-Contribution?
> Tell me. How many hundreds of pounds of the previous tenant's crap did * > you* clear out of the space? How many of those flesh-ripping > tetanus-inducing coil things did *you* cut, grind, or pull off the > columns in the shop? How many times did *you* pressure wash or de-grease > the floors? How much concrete did *you* break with a hammer and chisel or > grind off so the floor would be level? How many cracks, holes, and divots > did *you* patch? How much tar did *you* brush, scrape, dissolve, or grind > off the floor? How many feet of old-unused conduit and gas pipe did *you*cut off the walls and ceiling of the sop? How many times did > *you* put on heavy rubber gloves and boots and a respirator to acid etch > the floor? How many gallons of primer and epoxy did *you* put on the > floor while begging the looky-loos to keep off of it? How many hours did * > you* spend on hands and knees with a paint brush making sure that paint > made it into all the little pock marks and cracks in the floor? How many > walls have *you* cleaned, primed, and painted? How many other people's > paint brushes have *you* re-cleaned because they did a crappy job the > first time? How many walls have *you* framed? How many Tap-Cons have *you*driven? How much sheet-rock have > *you* hung? How many windows did *you* re-putty (correctly)? How many > mornings, days, or evenings have *you* spent at the new space surviving > on stale left-over bread, cupcakes, and pastries because you are either too > tired and/or busy to go to a store and get real food?
>> Any space in the shop that isn't being used is just wasted rent.
> Do you actually think we are going to have any wasted or unused space even > without this behemoth router? There are already plans for > every square foot of floor space. The increase in area from the old shop > will be used for an increase in the variety of our capabilities, not simply > a slight increase in the size of working area of one particular activity > (wood routing).
> I still think this router is a bad move on technical, power, and space > principles. While I can certainly appreciate the generosity of the offer > and don't really like looking a gift horse in the mouth, I just don't think > it's a good idea.
> Do any of you realize how much work, me, Justin, Roland, Tristan, Ozzy, > Cliff and the rest of the (disappointingly) small Core Build Team, have put > into this new place to make it a world-class hackerspace? We have sweated, > bled, and worked our asses off day after day, week after week, juggling, > jobs, job hunts, and personal lives (what's left of them). Are you even > aware that Cliff ended up in the hospital (with no insurance) due to a fall > from a ladder while removing old, unneeded wiring? The very > same old, unneeded wiring that we asked, weeks ago, dozens of people who > were just standing around at a Friday gathering to remove.
> I, personally, find it insulting that while I and the rest of the CBT have > painstakingly prepared *every freaking square inch* of that shop we have > this many people who have done next to nothing to help (and > making excuses as to why), ready to come in and just start claiming area > willy-nilly.
> And, now, this "negative nancy" is off to the space to > continue contributing, in every way I can, regardless of what is decided.
> -Chis K. > Core Build Team - Officium et Labore sine Gratia
On Saturday, September 15, 2012 1:49:53 PM UTC-5, Chris K. wrote:
> On Friday, September 14, 2012 10:46:34 AM UTC-5, Pk -Blue wrote:
>> You just can't count on other people sometimes to make things into a >> reality. I waited a year and a half for Wes to get me a code dump for the >> flip-dot sign project, and after about a month it was my fault for not >> coming up with a workaround as it was clear he wasn't going to contribute.
> Holy. Freaking. Shit... You want to go there? Do you *really* want to go > there? You want to talk about being unable to count on other people Mr. > Victim-of-Others-Non-Contribution?
> Tell me. How many hundreds of pounds of the previous tenant's crap did * > you* clear out of the space? How many of those flesh-ripping > tetanus-inducing coil things did *you* cut, grind, or pull off the > columns in the shop? How many times did *you* pressure wash or de-grease > the floors? How much concrete did *you* break with a hammer and chisel or > grind off so the floor would be level? How many cracks, holes, and divots > did *you* patch? How much tar did *you* brush, scrape, dissolve, or grind > off the floor? How many feet of old-unused conduit and gas pipe did *you*cut off the walls and ceiling of the sop? How many times did > *you* put on heavy rubber gloves and boots and a respirator to acid etch > the floor? How many gallons of primer and epoxy did *you* put on the > floor while begging the looky-loos to keep off of it? How many hours did * > you* spend on hands and knees with a paint brush making sure that paint > made it into all the little pock marks and cracks in the floor? How many > walls have *you* cleaned, primed, and painted? How many other people's > paint brushes have *you* re-cleaned because they did a crappy job the > first time? How many walls have *you* framed? How many Tap-Cons have *you*driven? How much sheet-rock have > *you* hung? How many windows did *you* re-putty (correctly)? How many > mornings, days, or evenings have *you* spent at the new space surviving > on stale left-over bread, cupcakes, and pastries because you are either too > tired and/or busy to go to a store and get real food?
>> Any space in the shop that isn't being used is just wasted rent.
> Do you actually think we are going to have any wasted or unused space even > without this behemoth router? There are already plans for > every square foot of floor space. The increase in area from the old shop > will be used for an increase in the variety of our capabilities, not simply > a slight increase in the size of working area of one particular activity > (wood routing).
> I still think this router is a bad move on technical, power, and space > principles. While I can certainly appreciate the generosity of the offer > and don't really like looking a gift horse in the mouth, I just don't think > it's a good idea.
> Do any of you realize how much work, me, Justin, Roland, Tristan, Ozzy, > Cliff and the rest of the (disappointingly) small Core Build Team, have put > into this new place to make it a world-class hackerspace? We have sweated, > bled, and worked our asses off day after day, week after week, juggling, > jobs, job hunts, and personal lives (what's left of them). Are you even > aware that Cliff ended up in the hospital (with no insurance) due to a fall > from a ladder while removing old, unneeded wiring? The very > same old, unneeded wiring that we asked, weeks ago, dozens of people who > were just standing around at a Friday gathering to remove.
> I, personally, find it insulting that while I and the rest of the CBT have > painstakingly prepared *every freaking square inch* of that shop we have > this many people who have done next to nothing to help (and > making excuses as to why), ready to come in and just start claiming area > willy-nilly.
> And, now, this "negative nancy" is off to the space to > continue contributing, in every way I can, regardless of what is decided.
> -Chis K. > Core Build Team - Officium et Labore sine Gratia
