# The future of the "engine kit"



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 5, 2015)

Just wanted to get some feedback on an idea i have. Most engines we build are from drawings and sometimes casting kits. I was considering offering "CNC kits" that would be all the drawings and Gcode for an engine build. Also would include detailed instructions for setup of each operation. Unlike castings, the setup is easier because you would be starting with square blocks with edges to locate. Sometimes castings can be a little hard to figure out where to start.

The down side is that you would be stuck with the tool choices and feeds and speeds that would most likely be slow with smaller cutters so that small converted mills could be used. Also the code would be posted as Mach3 code because the vast majority of hobby operators use Mach3.  

Would there be interest in something like this or am i the only one who would buy something like this.

Your thoughts please


----------



## michael-au (Jul 5, 2015)

I like the idea
It would depend on price and if the code can be loaded and run without to many problems
I don't have a lot of experience with CNC, I did convert my mill and put together the electronics
It does run on Mach3
View attachment ImageUploadedByModel Engines1436109923.313741.jpg

View attachment ImageUploadedByModel Engines1436110084.814639.jpg


----------



## Scott_M (Jul 5, 2015)

Hi Steve
Interesting idea. However as you noted, not everyone has the same machine so feeds and speeds would vary greatly as would the size of roughing cutters.
Also, I am very leery of running someone else's code ( No offense intended ) and would likely go through it line by line in my backplotter just to be sure. I think I might be more interested in nice clean solid models in a universal format such as iges or step so I could do the cam work myself making it more suited to my machine. And saving me all the CAD work.
I realize that not everyone has good cam skills and this may be an attractive solution to many, but for others maybe not so much.

Maybe offer it both ways ?

Just my thoughts.

Ps. The mini bike engine is looking real good !  

Scott


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Jul 5, 2015)

michael-au said:


> I like the idea
> It would depend on price and if the code can be loaded and run without to many problems
> I don't have a lot of experience with CNC, I did convert my mill and put together the electronics
> It does run on Mach3
> ...



Love your set up Thm:Thm:
are you using one power supply per stepper driver board??
what Interface board are you using looks familiar :wall:

cheers
Luc


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Jul 5, 2015)

Hi Steve
great  idea. However as you noted, not everyone has the same machine so feeds and speeds would vary widely. If codes were submitted with g41 then the offset would be easier to figure out. 
Or use the smaller cutter possible then people with experience could change the value depending of the mill the have.

It's  more fool proof to change Gcodes from a Sherline to a Monster then the inverse . :fan:
.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 5, 2015)

I have decided to scrap the idea. Should have another one any minute.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 5, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> I have decided to scrap the idea. Should have another one any minute.



Lol.  Even just supplying the cad drawings would keep 51% of us happy.


----------



## RonGinger (Jul 5, 2015)

I would suggest the CAD files, with some setup and process documentation.  If you look at Jerry Howells V4 he shows several pages of the steps in making the block. The first step is a rectangular block where he shows the holes to drill, progressively cutting away until the block is made. I think these steps with the CAD and include your G code, with documentation of the tools used. For some that may be ready to run.

I think you ought to work on this idea, we are past the days when a design was serialized in ME magazine and guys built from that. CAD files and gcode is the future, lead on!


----------



## picks27t (Jul 5, 2015)

I would second that


----------



## michael-au (Jul 5, 2015)

canadianhorsepower said:


> Love your set up Thm:Thm:
> are you using one power supply per stepper driver board??
> what Interface board are you using looks familiar :wall:
> 
> ...



Hi Luc
I am using one power supply per stepper driver
The interface board is from here https://oceancontrols.com.au/KTC-205.html

Michael


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 5, 2015)

RonGinger said:


> I would suggest the CAD files, with some setup and process documentation.  If you look at Jerry Howells V4 he shows several pages of the steps in making the block. The first step is a rectangular block where he shows the holes to drill, progressively cutting away until the block is made. I think these steps with the CAD and include your G code, with documentation of the tools used. For some that may be ready to run.
> 
> I think you ought to work on this idea, we are past the days when a design was serialized in ME magazine and guys built from that. CAD files and gcode is the future, lead on!




I'll email the document that would come with the code and see if you think im on the right track.


----------



## RichD (Jul 6, 2015)

This may be a dumb suggestion since I have no Gcode experience, but in most program languages you can assign values to variables. Couldn't you substitute variables in the place of feed rate numbers?

This would allow global changes to movement commands just by reassigning a new value to a variable.

Just a thought.


----------



## RonGinger (Jul 6, 2015)

Feed rate and spindle speed are fairly easy to deal with- most controls offer feedrate override so you can easily adjust it.  For model parts like this there is little choice in tool size- it will mostly be dictated by the part size.

I encourage Steve to follow up on this idea- Id love to make that engine, but I am way to lazy to do all the CAD and CAM work, so getting the files ready to run for $50 is a bargain that I would buy.


----------



## toolznthings (Jul 6, 2015)

Having CAD files in dxf or other formats would be great. Saving the time to re-draw for CAM or just being able to figure out things even for manual machining. The challenge would be what format would be the best. DXF usually works for most. For me the CAD would be the most useful. I really would not like to run code from another source on my CNC.

Brian


----------



## chrispare (Jul 6, 2015)

Hey Steve I think it's a great idea with a few bugs to work out. 
I would be interested in testing and helping you out. 
I have a fully homemade cnc that I have used your code on before ( although I believe I hade to chamge a few things but can't remember what) 
Even just the cad work would possibly work if the format is compatible. 
If I can be of any help just let me know.
[email protected]

Chris


----------



## michael-au (Jul 6, 2015)

Steve
Im a novice at cnc I am willing to help if I can
It may also help me learn more about milling with cnc
I had a mill that all Gcode was typed in, it was all done in Dos, rather slow process 


Michael


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 6, 2015)

Let me put some thought into it. I'll get back to you.


----------



## kjk (Jul 6, 2015)

Don't abandon the idea Steve - it's an idea whose time has come.

Ken
aka Woodguy


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 6, 2015)

Steve 

It is an excellent idea. Try it on something simple  like a flywheel and put it out there and then wait for the complaints/compliments.
Don't stop please. 

Buchanan


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 6, 2015)

Have to agree, a sample part would be a great idea as proof of concept. Might also be good for wetting the appetite as well.


----------



## ScottB (Jul 7, 2015)

Steve,   I agree with the others to press on with your idea.   I believe you have a great concept and if this can be done and sold within a reasonable price range I am sure it will be good.  I would be interested, I am not sure why so many are posting their concerns with Feds and speeds?  They are so easy to change within the program to meet the needs of their particular machine.   I also agree that using G41/G42 would make tool offset diameters easier to work with.    What type and size of engine were you thinking of offering?   I have a Taig mill at home that has been converted to CNBC and runs on Mach and I also have full access to Haas  cnc vert mills.


----------



## jschoenly (Jul 7, 2015)

Best to follow the evolving hobby for sure!  I think a CAD based "kit" would be the way to go.  Could be offered in a few formats possibly to match users formats.  DXF, Parasolid, and IGES or STEP would probably cover everyone's needs.  Obviously DXF is different from the 3-D options, but could give options.  

The logical first step to me would leave out the actual CAM, but maybe have detailed setups and construction notes for how the designer opted to make the parts.  I feel like most CNC guys have their preference for tools, tool paths, and obviously different posts to deal with.  The option of a full CAM "kit" could come later that might be detailed to users needs in a few options (Posted to Mach 3, Generic Fanuc, Etc) and have the tools listed for use.  Hell, the kit could be designed around a few sized tool bits and they could be the only "casting" type hardware that would be received rather than metal and castings!  

Someone's going to do it.  Eventually in today's world it could even be evolved into a website allowing the purchaser to input options such as tools and controllers and have a fully customized kit!  At work here (well in Switzerland) they were producing custom plates for ankle fractures where the doctors could chose the length, number of screw holes, and a few angles which fed into a macro based CAM system that spit out the code and produced the customized plate.  Really cool stuff out there (which is obviously far off for hobby use!).  

Looking forward to seeing where it heads.  Seems like a sample part (HMEM Logo medallion of something) would be a logical start for judging interest and workability.  Good luck!


----------



## LSEW (Jul 7, 2015)

Y'all, I have been peeking in on this discussion and find it in line with where the hobby is 
progressing. As a builder/designer/seller of scale model engine kits I am in contact with a wide
variety of folks in the hobby. I have had several requests from customers for CNC help with 
some of the parts.As anypone who has built a casting kit, there are always a number of bar stock 
parts to make also. This is where I would like to help out builders, but have been struggling
with exactlu how to do it.

For folks who want to build authentic scale models, I don't see castings going away.For example, 
I did the pattern work for my Forest 1888 Marine Engine on my CNC. THe head pattern alone was a 23
hour run, and the material was Cherry wood. In metal I can see it taking twice that. And yes, 
I have a fairly large CNC converted machine: the rough cuts were done with  5/8" endmill.

So, what to do? There was a suggestion to just throw a part out there and let foks hack on it, see
what they run into. I think this is a good idea, but it won't go far unless we all contribute our
issues and solutions. Also, I'd like to see some discussion on how to make the G code more generic.
This is an unfmaiiar area for me. I use BobCam for Solidworks. THey help their cistomers with 
post processors, and I expect other CAM companies do too. Perhaps there is a way to post 
generic code with a special post processor....?

If anyone is interested, I wil prepare a simple part and post the code and some kind of drawing.
I won't be posting my Soidworks models, there are just too many foks who don't respect the
value of intellectual property.

maury
www.lonestarengineworks.com


----------



## Stenerso (Jul 7, 2015)

I think it is a great idea also. I just converted a rf45 clone to cnc (mach3) and would be very interested I this concept. I have been fascinated by your mini bike build particularly the engine. I think it would be a lot of fun to make one of the engines on my machine. so I guess I could see a market for the cad work you did, the G code program, and probably some would want to purchase some of the parts semi-machined - almost like castings.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Maury, if you had something you wanted to try out I have Sprut cam and have been toying around with it some and would not mind taking a crack at something for you. Im still new to cnc, but the only way to learn is to do it.
  Ive also printed up a couple of Elmers plans and am surfing thru them thinking that they may be a good start for some simple cam work. The wobble plate engine (#14) looks to be an easy candidate, and so does the grasshopper (#37)


----------



## jschoenly (Jul 7, 2015)

Some of Elmer's Engines would be a great place to start.  I don't feel they are particularly saleable (maybe it would be, seems grey...) but they're are some great designs there that have parts with easy CAM, but make great examples.  I rarely have a lot of time to contribute, but I'm really interested to see where this goes!


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Oh No,  it wouldnt be something to sell. Just something to put together and post on the forum for others to try out. Something simple and fun to cut ones teeth on.....


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Hmmm,   Team cam build maybe?  could be interesting


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

Hello Gents!

After much thinking about it I am stepping out of this one. I think if i proceed only about 10% of you would be up to running "someone else's" code and everyone else wants to do the cam and this guy wants this and that guy wants this. I really don't see a good way to do something like this. Way to many directions to go. It's just one of those things where nobody will be happy unless they do it there way. Nothing wrong with that, I get it. This is why i asked the question, to find out what everybody thinks.

Cheers men! 

Steve


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Steve,  you would not make a good used car salesman. Lol.
  IIRC there is a free cam simulator out there somewhere that may put some fears to rest about running someone elses code.  What other things have you run into??


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

I  guess the fact that no two people want the same thing. My plan would be to package up the code with my parameters that will work for the masses.  If I try to make everybody happy it will turn into a full time job.  I still get questions about the V8 and don't get me wrong I am more than happy to help,  but it takes time to answer,  dig up photos,  that type of stuff.  If I packaged gcode I would get a few questions about setups and stuff like that.  If I try it with code., solid models,  dxf files the help line would be ringing with questions about cad,  cam,  CamBam,  all sorts of stuff and I won't be any help unless it's specific to the software that I use.  Who wants to pay money for something,  need help,  and get I don't know for an answer.  How do you support all that.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Hmm,  i see your points.  Ill have to put some thought into it,  but im thinking that documenting it with pictures may be some help.
   I would still like to see you try it with one part (maybe the head) just to see how it went? 
Im new to cam, perhaps thats a good thing when it comes to purchasing a cam package as i would only  expect it to make the part and not much more.


----------



## Wizard69 (Jul 7, 2015)

RonGinger said:


> I would suggest the CAD files, with some setup and process documentation.


CAD files that use well supported file formats!    


> If you look at Jerry Howells V4 he shows several pages of the steps in making the block. The first step is a rectangular block where he shows the holes to drill, progressively cutting away until the block is made. I think these steps with the CAD and include your G code, with documentation of the tools used. For some that may be ready to run.


If one has the knack for producing good videos that is well worth pursuing.   I've learned a lot via YouTube since I got wise to it.   The problem is not everybody has the Hollywood skills to accomplish a decent video production. 


> I think you ought to work on this idea, we are past the days when a design was serialized in ME magazine and guys built from that. CAD files and gcode is the future, lead on!




This last line is really why I'm responding to your post, I really hope that we are not about to see the end of ME magazines and the articles there in.   Frankly theses magazines got me interested in machining in general and I learned a lot from them.   As good as YouTube videos are, the drawings and text on paper often make for an easier grasp of things.   I might be an old fart, but multimedia is not beyond me, I'd take a little of both.   So what I'm hoping for is that you don't foretell the future here and the ME magazines stay around for a long time.  

As a side note I got a survey from one of the magazines last year I think.    Lots of questions but I did indicate that making CAD drawings available for download is very important for future articles.    I'm not sure how that survey ever went, but if nothing else CAD files can be a great help to somebody that knows their way around the CNC software stack.  These days CAD files are pretty trivial.


----------



## Wizard69 (Jul 7, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> I  guess the fact that no two people want the same thing.


For a businessman that is an opportunity to exploit.  


> My plan would be to package up the code with my parameters that will work for the masses.  If I try to make everybody happy it will turn into a full time job.  I still get questions about the V8 and don't get me wrong I am more than happy to help,  but it takes time to answer,  dig up photos,  that type of stuff.  If I packaged gcode I would get a few questions about setups and stuff like that.  If I try it with code., solid models,  dxf files the help line would be ringing with questions about cad,  cam,  CamBam,  all sorts of stuff and I won't be any help unless it's specific to the software that I use.


This is why I agree with your dropping out.    Far to many would be wanting somebody to "do it for them".   The number of variables is so high that you would have many customers that you could not help at all.    This isn't a good position to be in.   


> Who wants to pay money for something,  need help,  and get I don't know for an answer.  How do you support all that.




Well the obvious answer here is to avoid any support at all.    You could do that by making the basic design available for free.   If someone manages to complete a design make sure an address or Paypal account is available for them to send a donation to!   That might sound silly to some but anybody taking a little pride in their work would be free to honor the guy that made that model possible.   

Please understand my perspective here, I've yet to get a mill much less a mill supporting CNC.   Either way they are big expenses that one can't just pay for out of cash flow.  At least not my cash flow.   However I understand where the hobby is headed, in some ways CNC will actually make the hobby more affordable so there will eventually be demand for the CAD models.   You already see this in the CNC router and RepRap forums.   In fact there is likely thousands of models that one can download for RepRaps.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

Also! 

Understand that the gcode would only be for the big parts that you would get if you bought a casting kit.  Crankcase,  head,  side cover maybe.  All the other parts would still need to me made  any way the builder wishes.  This whole idea started when I tried to get some castings done for the demon blower.  Finding someone who would even take a look at it was a 3 hour drive and very expensive. 

Maybe I'll take your suggestion and do the head.  If I post gcode and instructions would anybody be willing to be a beta tester?


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Id give her a whirl. Might even learn something.
what tooling/ end mills are required?


----------



## michael-au (Jul 7, 2015)

Would this be avalibal in metric as well ?


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

michael-au said:


> Would this be avalibal in metric as well ?



Sorry but no. A metric version would require me to start new doubling the work.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

aonemarine said:


> Id give her a whirl. Might even learn something.
> what tooling/ end mills are required?



Tooling would be listed on the first page of the instructions.  As the code runs there will be times when the machine stops for tool changes.  Look at the code at the stop and there will be a line like this. 

(1/8 ball mill going .750 deep) 

You load a 1/8 ball nose in so there is enough cutter sticking out to clear at a depth of .750.


----------



## michael-au (Jul 7, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> Sorry but no. A metric version would require me to start new doubling the work.



Ok I understand, I do have some imperial cutters.

If you are going to post a program for something small to start with I would like to try it, I am keen to learn more about CNC 

Can I ask what CAD CAM programs you use

Thank you
Michael


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 7, 2015)

Are the instructions ready yet?  Lol.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

michael-au said:


> Ok I understand, I do have some imperial cutters.
> 
> If you are going to post a program for something small to start with I would like to try it, I am keen to learn more about CNC
> 
> ...



CamBam  I will post the code for mach3


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 7, 2015)

aonemarine said:


> Are the instructions ready yet?  Lol.



Give me a day or two.  I'll have to make another head so I can include photos in the instructions.  I will send them out in pdf.


----------



## Capt,n John (Jul 7, 2015)

Sounds good...keep good work up....go for it.


----------



## michael-au (Jul 8, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> CamBam  I will post the code for mach3



Thank you Steve


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 8, 2015)

Ok Gents!  Here is what is going to happen. In the next day or two i will post files to make the Techumseh cylinder head. If you want to give it a whirl, please do. For your efforts you get a cool keychain and conversation piece. What I need to know is.

Did you have enough information to make the part?
Did you have the information well in advance? (no surprises about needed tooling Etc.)
Proper setup information.

That kind of stuff.

I'm going to do it the way I have it in my head and post it. After that, let me have it. I have thick skin so don't worry about hurt feelings just let me know what you think. Comments, questions, positive or negative are all welcome. Keep in mind that this is not intended to teach someone how to operate a CNC machine so that information will not be in the instructions BUT if you are a new operator post up your questions. No matter how dumb you think it is, the bottom line is that we are here to see what others are doing and to learn from it. The only dumb question is the one you don't ask.


----------



## jschoenly (Jul 8, 2015)

I don't know if I'll have time to do this, but I'll try.  Either way I think this is great and I'm excited to see feedback.  I think it's PERFECTLY legit to make it how it works for you (key work - Works, not a guess) and make that available.  People will want other things and options, but that's not the idea of the game.  The ideas are great for tooling notes and all that.  Seems like it will be a good time!


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 8, 2015)

Looking forward to it.


----------



## RiekieRhino (Jul 8, 2015)

Although I'm still busy sourcing parts to build my cnc mill (parts hard to get in SA for a reasonable price) I think this is a great idea. And as I see it. The intent is not to create cnc for dummies but rather to create something that can save you a lot of time. Because it would create a platform to start from which would take a item that would take weeks even mounths to create and give you something that would do the same by changing it a little for you're cnc and do that same part in less than half the time.  And for people who don't have a lot of spare time. This would help them to finish their build much faster


----------



## Ken K (Jul 8, 2015)

Bar stock engines, may be the way, to go, as the as less kits, are for sell, today, compared, to 10-15 years ago. I have purchased 43 different kits, over the years, and looking at the list, found 19, of the kits are no longer made.
I have made some of Jerry Howell kits, and found they have very good drawings, and directions. Finding where to get some of the parts needed, to make the kit, has been a problem, like with the gears, for the V twin. As Jerry is gone, we need some body to take his place!
Ken K


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 8, 2015)

I would be very happy to run a test for you on your engine head.   I have a home build CNC (Modified Harrison horizontal mill and Mach 3) in Metric so could check conversion from Imperial as well. Keep going,and start a thread in  a forum  for each part or file for everybody to go to for answers. If anybody has a problem and finds a solution, then post it so that no back up required. I would be very happy to run somebody else's g code on Mach 3 ,especially if you run it through a simulator, but careful looking at the tool path screen in Mach 3 will give a very good idea if there are any problems with a particular machine/ driver/code  combination problem.

Buchanan


----------



## Stenerso (Jul 8, 2015)

I would love to try it also. I have a rf45 clone I converted to CNC and use mach3. I think you may have the start on a pretty good idea for a business. 

thanks for your efforts.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 8, 2015)

Buchanan said:


> I would be very happy to run a test for you on your engine head.   I have a home build CNC (Modified Harrison horizontal mill and Mach 3) in Metric so could check conversion from Imperial as well. Keep going,and start a thread in  a forum  for each part or file for everybody to go to for answers. If anybody has a problem and finds a solution, then post it so that no back up required. I would be very happy to run somebody else's g code on Mach 3 ,especially if you run it through a simulator, but careful looking at the tool path screen in Mach 3 will give a very good idea if there are any problems with a particular machine/ driver/code  combination problem.
> 
> Buchanan



I'm not simulating anything,  I'm actually cutting another head.  I ran the top today and got the directions typed up.  I will run the bottom tomorrow  and finalize everything. If all goes smoothly I should have the files posted tomorrow.  If I hit a snag it will be the day after but who knows.  I'm not going to send out code that I physically didn't run all the way through.


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 8, 2015)

I am sorry Steve 
I meant "if i ran it through a simulator" not you.  Bad South African English!I look froward to what you produce.

Thanks 

Buchanan


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

Houston, we have a problem!

The site wouldn't allow .TAP files to be attached so I changed the extensions to .DOC. After you have the files on your computer change the extensions back to .tap and all will be good.


The worst part will be step 1. The cutter speed and steps are conservative but I had a 1/16 inch cutter survive for well over an hour without breakage or problems of any kind.

What I need to know is, like i posted above, do you have all the information you need and without surprises. I don't want someone to get in the middle of a run and need something they didn't have warning prior to turning on the machine. I want to focus on is, can the part be made with the information contained on the instruction sheet? I am assuming the person knows how to setup and run a machine but if you need help to understand something, post your questions as well. 

View attachment CylinderHeadInstructions.pdf


View attachment Step1HeadTop.doc


View attachment Step2HeadFixture.doc


View attachment Step3HeadBottom2D.doc


View attachment Step4HeadBottom3D.doc


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

Buchanan said:


> I am sorry Steve
> I meant "if i ran it through a simulator" not you.  Bad South African English!I look froward to what you produce.
> 
> Thanks
> ...



Cool beans man. Give these files a try.


----------



## chrispare (Jul 9, 2015)

I will be trying this out an the weekend for sure. 
Actually when I get home I'm going to load up the code and se if I get any difficulty. 

The pdf write up is well done Steve, I have worked with experienced cnc programmers that couldn't tell you how and wher to set up like that

Very well done!

Chris


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 9, 2015)

I have to order some 1/16 end mills.  I will run it next week when they get here. The documentation looks good though.


----------



## jschoenly (Jul 9, 2015)

I've been looking for an excuse to clear off the CNC and check it all out again.  It might just have to be this!  Well done, I really like the writeup!


----------



## mu38&Bg# (Jul 9, 2015)

Steve, are you really running the spindle at 1000 RPM?


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

dieselpilot said:


> Steve, are you really running the spindle at 1000 RPM?




I will include this in the documentation but Mach3 does not have control of my spindle speed. Cutters are maxed out at 3500RPM and drills are about 1/3rd of that. You will have to override the mach controls to suit your taste.


If you guys would like I can put spindle speeds in and repost the code. How do you calculate a spindle speed for a specific size drill bit drilling at 5 IPM


----------



## mu38&Bg# (Jul 9, 2015)

That's definitely something you have to work out in the code. If somebody ran it as is, it would likely break all the tools. Two or four flutes, HSS or carbide? The instructions don't specify, does it matter?  Manually changing the code for speed and feed wouldn't be a big deal, but it could also be done with variables. This is the tricky part, some will know what to change, some won't.

All feeds should be based on feed per tooth, including drills. Surface speed will be limited by spindle speed in virtually all cases. This means you have know spindle speed to set feed rate.

Greg


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

Cant that be reversed engineered. If I know cutter size and feed rate can't the spindle speed be calculated?

Spindle speed on most small mills is 3500-4000 max


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

dieselpilot said:


> That's definitely something you have to work out in the code. If somebody ran it as is, it would likely break all the tools. Two or four flutes, HSS or carbide? The instructions don't specify, does it matter?  Manually changing the code for speed and feed wouldn't be a big deal, but it could also be done with variables. This is the tricky part, some will know what to change, some won't.
> 
> All feeds should be based on feed per tooth, including drills. Surface speed will be limited by spindle speed in virtually all cases. This means you have know spindle speed to set feed rate.
> 
> Greg




Most people set spindle speed manually and wont have any problem. I have to get "safe "numbers in the code for those who don't.


----------



## mu38&Bg# (Jul 9, 2015)

The question is, can your customers do it? If not, you need to do it. Get my thinking? I looked at the code and when I saw S1000, the feed rates looked ridiculous. Who else noticed or even checked? Reading this thread, that is the major concern, setting feed and speed that works for any customer or teaching them to do it.

How do you do it now? I calculate for every tool/material I use. It's simple math. Any major brand tooling supplier will have it in their catalog.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

dieselpilot said:


> The question is, can your customers do it? If not, you need to do it. Get my thinking? I looked at the code and when I saw S1000, the feed rates looked ridiculous. Who else noticed or even checked? Reading this thread, that is the major concern, setting feed and speed that works for any customer or teaching them to do it.
> 
> How do you do it now? I calculate for every tool/material I use. It's simple math. Any major brand tooling supplier will have it in their catalog.





I plan to do it. Up til now I manually adjusted my spindle speed for the feeds that I put in the code. That is what most people "have to do" in the hobby word. If i move forward with this I need to learn to calculate these things. Where do I find this simple math?


----------



## Scott_M (Jul 9, 2015)

I use HSMadvisor, it used to be a free download and is also available online here http://zero-divide.net/?page=fswizard  oh here it is, if you want it as a download. http://hsmadvisor.com/index.php?page=Download 

It works very well , and for drills too, it also has a rather extensive "material" list.

Scott


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

OK Everybody Stop!

I have overlooked a very important aspect of the code. I set my spindle speed manually with a speed controller. It's not something I have ever had to do and it is something that must be done. I'm asking everybody who does not have manual control of your spindle not to run the code until I get this situation taken care of.

Thanks! & Sorry!


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

I just downloaded a calculator and I found out that at the depth of cut and other things considered, i am dam close with my feeds. The problem here is i never setup the spindle speed in the cam because I just dont ever do it and it was overlooked. According to this calculator I should be at 24.40 IPM with the 1/8 inch cutter at the depth of cut im taking. I was set for 25.00.  I checked a few cutter sizes and they were all in the ball park.

Were good. Let me post new code for the guys who have mach set the spindle. If you do it manually drill at 2500 and mill at 4000 RPM

Carbide end mills
HSS drills


----------



## kjk (Jul 9, 2015)

I get those numbers for a 4 flute carbide cutter. Halve that for 2 flutes. That's for  roughing - halve again for finish cuts.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 9, 2015)

Since were on the speed and feed thing, i have a question for everyone who has a cnc mill and would be considering running other people's codes.
  Whats your max spindle rpms?
Unfortunately  my g0704 is limited to 2300 rpms.  Maybe it would be best to limit the feed rate to whatever the slowest mills can handle by thier rpms?  Doesnt matter much to me, i manually set my spindle speed and would just set the feedrate in mach3.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 9, 2015)

aonemarine said:


> Since were on the speed and feed thing, i have a question for everyone who has a cnc mill and would be considering running other people's codes.
> Whats your max spindle rpms?
> Unfortunately  my g0704 is limited to 2300 rpms.  Maybe it would be best to limit the feed rate to whatever the slowest mills can handle by thier rpms?  Doesnt matter much to me, i manually set my spindle speed and would just set the feedrate in mach3.



If I were in your shoes I would just override your feed rate down to about 60 percent


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 9, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> If I were in your shoes I would just override your feed rate down to about 60 percent



Yes, thats what i meant i would be doing.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 10, 2015)

OK heres whats going on. I have tried a few of the calculators and my feed rates were not out of line. The problem I had was I did not set a spindle speed so anybody that has the spindle speed set automatically would have been set to slow. Other than that, unless you see anything I missed, here are the new files with the spindle speeds. Guys with spindles that cannot achive 3500RPM will have to lower there feed rates accordingly.

Thanks for your patience. It's real hard to think of everything so things will improve as time goes on. 

View attachment CylinderHeadInstructions.pdf


View attachment Step1HeadTop.doc


View attachment Step2HeadFixture.doc


View attachment Step3HeadBottom2D.doc


View attachment Step4HeadBottom3D.doc


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 10, 2015)

I have been giving this a try. Every thing works fine so far except I did not have Mach 3 set to stop for a tool change. You might want to mention that in your instructions. 

I have the basic shape of the head finished,and am starting the fins. 

The basic concept is awesome. Far better than trying to fit dimensions into a casting.A waster is not a disaster and the fun part of machining starts immediately. I find the drawing/ G code part is still daunting.

Please don't stop now.

Buchanan


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 11, 2015)

Buchanan said:


> I have been giving this a try.
> 
> Buchanan



So how did it go so far?   Other than the tool change did you hit any snags?


----------



## kjk (Jul 11, 2015)

Steve:  Looks fine. I note that the sizes of the #28 and #32 drills are both annotated as being 0.116 rather than 0.116 and 0.1405. 

I'll run the part as soon as I can put my hands on some 1/16 carbide endmills.


----------



## michael-au (Jul 12, 2015)

I run the code today, being new to cnc and a bit nerves, i for got to lower the feed speeds in mach3
The holes drilled fine and the tool change was ok ( a bit more on this latter) then I had to change to the 1/8th milling cutter, this is where the feed became to fast
The spindle cam down to fast and hit the top of the stock just hard enough to make the stepper loose its place, I hit the stop button in mach3
I then realised I forgot to lower the speed 
So I set the speed over ride down to 25% and because the X,Y axis was still in the right place I reset the Z o 0 on top of stock and set mach3 to run from the 1/8 tool change 
This worked out ok, except that the stock must have moved down slightly when hit with the Z axis, anyway the program run with out any problems until i cam to the tool change for the 1/16, I don't have a 1/16 mill so I used a 2mm instead , next problem the z came down and seem to go full depth of the cutter and it broke (bummer)

All tools were set to the same length so that end of tool would be 0 on top of stock

It seems to me that on the tool change the Z wants to move up around 3.5 inches, not sure if thats been set in the code, I assume it is

So I am wondering if the z height for the tool change can be set at around 1 or 1.5 inches, not sure if it is posible to do this in mach3 or it can only be done in the code before post processing

It was a good learning curve regardless of breaking a new cutter (lucky it was a cheap chines one)

Will give it another go when I get a new milling cutter

This was as far as I got, time to go to work will try again


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 12, 2015)

Z height should be set every time a new tool is put in.  

When a tool change occurs,  the tool pops up to the clearance height of. 125 or. 250 depending on which program you have loaded.  You should then have to raise the tool to a comfortable height manually.


----------



## michael-au (Jul 12, 2015)

It's all a learning curve, I will try a gain and make double sure the set up is right

This could be the first dumb question: is it right that on the tool change the mill goes to the home switches?
And the waits for the cycle start to be pressed
So before pressing the cycle start I can move the piece back under the spindle and then reset the z and then press cycle start from there?

I'm leaning toward something I did wrong when I set it up

Thank you for make the code available for us to try, I have drawn parts in mastercam and machined the parts, but I have never had tool changes it the code, just used the same cutter for the whole job

Anyway thank you again 

Michael


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 12, 2015)

Going home for the tool change must be an option in Mach. At my tool changes my tool just pops up to the clearance height.  Then you can move any where you want to change and setup the tool.  After the change and cycle start is pressed my machine returns to the spot where it stopped for the change.  Z will not move so after I set my tool to its height I need to raise the tool to a safe height so it won't crash on the return to last spot.


----------



## michael-au (Jul 12, 2015)

Ok I think I know the difference, I set everything to home before I started because I thought the code would send it there 
So next Tim I will just load the code and I should be able to do the same as you do


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 12, 2015)

What I do is locate the center of the stock and zero out X and Y.  Then I load the tool and l locate the surface of the work piece and zero Z.  I don't deal with home position switches or anything else. I just setup and go.  I would imagine they have there place if you ran parts in a fixture day after day.  Most of  what we do are one off pieces so I just don't bother.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 12, 2015)

Oh yeah.  If you start a part don't stop in the middle of the run.  Trying to locate  X and Y again on a half done piece is a little tough but not impossible.  Your best chance at a great outcome is to see the program through from start to finish.  The second side you will need to see all 3 programs through without stopping.  Says so right in the directions.  Hahaha hah!


----------



## littlelocos (Jul 12, 2015)

Ron,
I would be in the dissenting crowd in the "make the CAD files available" debate.  After spending on the order of 300-400+ hours on producing a professional set of drawings, and another 500+ on a prototype, handing over the CAD file to a buyer and then seeing it posted all over the Internet for free just isn't what I have in mind.  It's a NO for me for either CAD or pdf.

Also, the serialized articles in ME, HSM, MEB (and the subsequent books that follow) most certainly still have their place.

Call me what you will, but that's how it is with me.

Thanks,
Todd.


Todd Snouffer
Littlelocos Model Engineering
www.littlelocos.com
www.facebook.com/littlelocos




RonGinger said:


> I ...
> 
> I think you ought to work on this idea, we are past the days when a design was serialized in ME magazine and guys built from that. CAD files and gcode is the future, lead on!


----------



## kvom (Jul 12, 2015)

On my mill for a tool change it stops at the clearance height, and like Steve I just raise the spindle for a change.  I use a 1" gauge block to set Z0.  Substituting a tool with a different diameter won't result in a good part since tool radius compensation isn't being used here.  A 2mm tool is smaller than 1/8 and larger than 1/16, so feed rates would be off in either case.

Another thing to be aware of is tool stickout, which should be as little as possible.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 12, 2015)

littlelocos said:


> Ron,
> I would be in the dissenting crowd in the "make the CAD files available" debate.  After spending on the order of 300-400+ hours on producing a professional set of drawings, and another 500+ on a prototype, handing over the CAD file to a buyer and then seeing it posted all over the Internet for free just isn't what I have in mind.  It's a NO for me for either CAD or pdf.
> 
> Also, the serialized articles in ME, HSM, MEB (and the subsequent books that follow) most certainly still have their place.
> ...



  There should be a way to code it to the bios serial number of the computer it is opened on so it cant be shared. Doing this would only allow the file to run on the computer that the file has been saved on and activated with an unlock code. Im not sure how this would work though once the file is loaded into mach 3 or what ever post processor, But im sure some *super* "Geek" out there knows how to do it
   I really like the idea of selling the cad and cam files, I also understand the concerns of piracy.  Just need to explore some options for protecting your investment


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 12, 2015)

I think I just gave away a million dollar idea....LOL


----------



## kjk (Jul 12, 2015)

For the CNC'd parts I see no need to supply cad files or printed/pdf drawings beyond general assembly drawings. Those, plus builders notes should suffice. For the non-cnc'd parts drawings would of course be necessary.


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 12, 2015)

Here are a few photos of the final article and my mill. 
The concept from the builders point of view is excellent. The ens result is looks really cool. Is there any chance that we will have the importunity to test a few more components for this little gem? if the security issues could be fixed this must work. 

Buchanan


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 12, 2015)

Buchanan said:


> Here are a few photos of the final article and my mill.
> The concept from the builders point of view is excellent. The end result is looks really cool.
> 
> Buchanan




After going through the entire process, 

Did you run into any problems with the directions?

Did you have advanced notice on material and tools so you could gather everything before you start? 

I just want to make sure that everything was clearly presented.


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 12, 2015)

Steve. 

There were no problems at all. It was an absolute pleasure.  I was not sure which tool to load first until I opened the G code and then every thing was clear. Feeds and speeds were good. The holding jig worked a treat, blank sizes were good. I did not realize that the final top face of the block was going to be the head gasket face so did not machine it to a fine finish. You might make the blank a few thou over thick and include a finishing cut on the sealing face. It would make the setting up of the blank less critical. But if I was making an actual engine I would most probably make a spare head or two as it is so easy and correct my surface finish then. I think you did an excellent job on the whole thing.
There was no uncertainty about whether the G code would work as it loaded fine and the tool path was  clear on Mach 3. The preparatory instructions were perfect.  The step 1 to 4 photos were good to as one knew what to expect. I would say it is far easier to make something this way compared to setting up a casting  and if there was a disaster one can start again immediately as long as one had sufficient material for another blank.
Thank you for a very enjoyable trial.

Buchanan


----------



## picks27t (Jul 12, 2015)

Steve got top half done no problem it when real smooth the Taig had no problem speed and feeds were great If I cane do it with my limited CNC any body can. I do think a DXF print would be nice to have just to be able to see were your going.
GREAT JOB thanks


----------



## Buchanan (Jul 12, 2015)

My mill is set up metric. But the G code is in imperial so no change is needed to make the part in imperial. 

Buchanan


----------



## picks27t (Jul 13, 2015)

My Code Gave T1 Center drill T2 .116 32# drill then T3 28# drill .116
I believe this should have been T3 .140


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 13, 2015)

picks27t said:


> My Code Gave T1 Center drill T2 .116 32# drill then T3 28# drill .116
> I believe this should have been T3 .140




I was more focused on the directions aspect so I just made sure the information was correct at the tool changes. That is the kind of thing that would need to be cleaned up if I decide to put out a "CNC kit"


----------



## picks27t (Jul 13, 2015)

Bring the kit on but think DXF file would help maybe some one might want to change something but i would buy this is a great idea


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 13, 2015)

picks27t said:


> Bring the kit on but think DXF file would help maybe some one might want to change something but i would buy this is a great idea




Its a little bit more complicated than that. The DXF files don't even look like the part. They represent the boundries  of the tool paths. The crankcase will be 10 steps of both 2D and 2.5D programs that will take over 14 hours to cut. As a side gets cut and material gets removed and that affects how the next side is done. If not considered you will waste a lot of time cutting material that is not there (cutting air). All these programs will be run and tested to work one after another and be as effective as possible removing material and not cutting air. I'm not sure it would be a good idea to change anything as it might have an unseen ripple effect down the line. 

Here is the DXF file for the left side. I don't think it would be a lot of help to you depending on what you would want to change.

Best bet is to run the code, start to finish, the way it is. It has been tested and refined and known to work. If the intent of the change is to save time it might just be faster to run the code than to spend a lot of time editing or re-camming to save half an hour.


----------



## picks27t (Jul 13, 2015)

Steve I was thinking more like looking at print just to make a measurement and check measured results


----------



## kjk (Jul 13, 2015)

I was thinking, as I searched around for an inexpensive source of 1/16 carbide ballnose endmills, that it would be nice to be able to regen the gcode changing the 1/16 cutter to a 1.5mm one (which I have). It would be easy for me to do this if I had the cambam source, but I recognize the problems inherent in supplying it.

It just isn't practical to produce 2 versions of the code with different tool choices. One could easily gen the code and simulate it, but testing it prior to release would be a huge undertaking, taking this project as an example. 

The way the instructions have been produced should eliminate any problems with folks buying and then not being able to machine for lack of the right tooling. 

The instructions really have been very well done.

Pardon my musing.....


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 13, 2015)

picks27t said:


> Steve I was thinking more like looking at print just to make a measurement and check measured results



OH I got ya.  If this were an actual kit you would have the drawings for all the pieces.


----------



## picks27t (Jul 13, 2015)

Yes that is it.
Thanks Steve


----------



## john v (Jul 16, 2015)

Hi Steve,

I haven't logged in a long time but felt the need when I saw this.

I and many others I know would be VERY interested if you planned on offering these kits.

I am both a mach3 and cambam user so I would love to purchase the raw files. Even if it was just the gcode it would be good enough for me.

I purchased the engine plans from you and have some rudy engines and have purchased other plans in the past from other vendors and always wondered if there was something like this availiable.

I plan on running your sample this weekend and will post results.

Thanks for offering up something new that could be of great value to many! Do you have a price point in mind? I would say I personally would be willing to spend $$ for plans and code.


----------



## Mike N (Jul 16, 2015)

aonemarine said:


> Lol.  Even just supplying the cad drawings would keep 51% of us happy.


Cad Files would definitely   be best.


----------



## kvom (Jul 16, 2015)

For me getting such a kit along with pre-sized stock as an option would be a big plus.

The other issue is that there are lots of non-US members who are "metric" and less likely to have imperial tooling.  I believe it's impractical for Steve to rebuild an test every part using metric tools, but it would be a good idea to publish in advance a list of all tools needed for the complete engine in advance.  Then builders could decide whether to embark on the engine needing to purchase these tools.  Alternatively, one "partner" could take the CB files, modify them to use metric tools and build the engine to verify, and then supply the metric g-code.  Probably metric stock sizes would be needed as well.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 16, 2015)

john v said:


> Hi Steve,.
> 
> I haven't logged in a long time but felt the need when I saw this.
> 
> ...



Thanks John.  The main focus is to evaluate the information provided with the code and the information contained in the code.  I need to know if you have everything you need ahead of time to successfully complete the part.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 16, 2015)

kvom said:


> For me getting such a kit along with pre-sized stock as an option would be a big plus.



The stock option will never happen. It eliminates the ability to ship through email.  Also who wants to pay 25 bucks for a 5 dollar piece of aluminum after the machining and shipping is considered.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 16, 2015)

My 1/16 end mills just showed up.  I hope to start milling the head over the weekend.  Will let you know how it goes.....


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 16, 2015)

aonemarine said:


> My 1/16 end mills just showed up.  I hope to start milling the head over the weekend.  Will let you know how it goes.....



Thanks you


----------



## chrispare (Jul 18, 2015)

I ran the code, 
The write up is well done. 
The code was flawless
I hade to make one change, and that was to put an optional stop (m1) where the tool changers were.  
If I didn't my machine would just keep going, and that wouldn't have turned out so good.
Steve I would defently be into an engine kit of this sort. 
Even though I s am still working on the demon ( on and off it Is going slow) 

Chris


----------



## RonGinger (Jul 18, 2015)

> I hade to make one change, and that was to put an optional stop (m1) where the tool changers were.
> If I didn't my machine would just keep going, and that wouldn't have turned out so good.



Are you suing Mach3? There is a config setting for tool change and the default option is to ignore tool change. The other choice, that you would likely want, is stop and wait for the start button to be pressed.


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 18, 2015)

Like Ron said, check in the General config and make sure Mach is setup to stop and wait for cycle start to be pressed. You should not have had to edit the code.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 18, 2015)

RonGinger said:


> Are you suing Mach3? There is a config setting for tool change and the default option is to ignore tool change. The other choice, that you would likely want, is stop and wait for the start button to be pressed.



Yep, why in the h#&& do they do that?

  I ran side a or step one today and it went off without a hitch, except for forgetting to tell mach not to ignore the tool change.  :fan:
   My limited spindle speed really hurts as well as no cooling system (time to upgrade).
  With my limited spindle speed (2200 rpm) i ran the drilling and 1/8" end mill at 50% and the 1/16" at 60%. which worked out well 
  I will try and do the next steps soon.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 18, 2015)

I would like to see the #32 drill go another .020" deep


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 18, 2015)

Second side goes much faster


----------



## chrispare (Jul 18, 2015)

So Steve, any thoughts of what engine to kit up yet 
It is looking like you got our interest and willingness.

Chris


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 19, 2015)

It would probably be the  1/3rd Scale tecumseh.  I was thinking about supplying the code for the case,  head,  and side cover with a set of drawings for about 50 bucks.  I also thought about a code set for some of the parts for the Demon. It will be a while before anything happens as I have a mountain of work to do getting a running prototype.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 19, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> Second side goes much faster



Thank God!  That 1/16 end milling was killing me! LOL


----------



## kvom (Jul 19, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> The stock option will never happen. It eliminates the ability to ship through email.  Also who wants to pay 25 bucks for a 5 dollar piece of aluminum after the machining and shipping is considered.



I intended to mean stock for the entire engine, not one piece.


----------



## chrispare (Jul 19, 2015)

stevehuckss396 said:


> It would probably be the  1/3rd Scale tecumseh.  I was thinking about supplying the code for the case,  head,  and side cover with a set of drawings for about 50 bucks.  I also thought about a code set for some of the parts for the Demon. It will be a while before anything happens as I have a mountain of work to do getting a running prototype.



I'm down for both. When your ready 

Chris

Are you ready yet


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 19, 2015)

chrispare said:


> I'm down for both. When your ready
> 
> Chris
> 
> Are you ready yet




Good one!

Keep your eye on the mini bike thread for progress. Warning, it will be slow.


----------



## aonemarine (Jul 19, 2015)

Finished it off today, code and directions are just fine 
I had a little boo boo with my fixturing, so Ill be remaking another one when the rest of the code come out. But all I can say is  "Pretty cool"


----------



## stevehuckss396 (Jul 19, 2015)

If nothing else it will make a cool key chain.


----------

