CNC x2 Mill
- Thread starter Rndmann9
- Start date
Help Support Home Model Engine Machinist Forum:
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,330
- Reaction score
- 445
Looks good. Keep us posted.
You may want to consider replacing the solid coupling between the motor shaft and the lead screw with a flexible coupling at some point. It reduces any problems with shaft misalignment and keeps the motor bearing and the lead screw bearings from fighting with each other. Not that the solid won't work. Just makes life easier and often increases available power. Easy to obtain on Ebay to suit shaft sizes. Inexpensive if you shop around.
Gail in NM
You may want to consider replacing the solid coupling between the motor shaft and the lead screw with a flexible coupling at some point. It reduces any problems with shaft misalignment and keeps the motor bearing and the lead screw bearings from fighting with each other. Not that the solid won't work. Just makes life easier and often increases available power. Easy to obtain on Ebay to suit shaft sizes. Inexpensive if you shop around.
Gail in NM
Unfortunately Gail, the only type of coupling to give total out of line control (within reason) is the Oldham Coupling.
These couplings automatically realign themselves by offsetting the acetyl disc whilst turning and cut out any side loads onto the bearings at each end.
I have been using them for many years with no problems at all.
In the UK you can easily purchase them from here, but you might also find them on auction sites.
http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Stepper-Motors/Oldham-Couplings
The type you have shown, will still allow side loads to the bearings even though they will allow you to connect to the two shafts, it is the deflected bend that does it, with the coupling trying to straighten itself out all the time.
If you are up to it, you can make Oldham Couplings yourself, but taking account of the time involved, it pays to cough up the cash and buy them.
BTW, if you can't get the correct sized ends for the shafts you are using, you can enlarge the centre hole, BUT ONLY BY BORING, otherwise if you just open them out with a drill, the holes can wander anywhere.
DAMHIK
John
These couplings automatically realign themselves by offsetting the acetyl disc whilst turning and cut out any side loads onto the bearings at each end.
I have been using them for many years with no problems at all.
In the UK you can easily purchase them from here, but you might also find them on auction sites.
http://www.arceurotrade.co.uk/Catalogue/Stepper-Motors/Oldham-Couplings
The type you have shown, will still allow side loads to the bearings even though they will allow you to connect to the two shafts, it is the deflected bend that does it, with the coupling trying to straighten itself out all the time.
If you are up to it, you can make Oldham Couplings yourself, but taking account of the time involved, it pays to cough up the cash and buy them.
BTW, if you can't get the correct sized ends for the shafts you are using, you can enlarge the centre hole, BUT ONLY BY BORING, otherwise if you just open them out with a drill, the holes can wander anywhere.
DAMHIK
John
Last edited:
Just two cents worth - I snapped a couple of the spring type couplers with table direction changes - Got the little spider type coupling - So far it's Me Proof . . . That, or I'm not trying hard enough to break it .
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 2,330
- Reaction score
- 445
John,
You are correct. The Oldham type coupling is far superior to the spring type that I showed.The spring type is OK for VERY MINOR misalignments and is a definite improvement over having a rigid type coupling. I showed it because it is inexpensive and very available in my world. But I agree the Oldham is a superior coupling.
Gail in NM
You are correct. The Oldham type coupling is far superior to the spring type that I showed.The spring type is OK for VERY MINOR misalignments and is a definite improvement over having a rigid type coupling. I showed it because it is inexpensive and very available in my world. But I agree the Oldham is a superior coupling.
Gail in NM
Rndmann9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2016
- Messages
- 148
- Reaction score
- 27
I'm also not showing the thrust bearings that I will add between the mill body and motor mount block. Haven't decided how I want that yet. I need to get some in my hands to see so I know how I want to add them in. I have an idea but it resides in my head for now.
Gail,
You are quite correct about the spring type couplings, they are much cheaper. The 1" Oldham ones cost me, in your money, about $30 for each complete one. But I always look on them as being good insurance, never need to be looked at again.
R,
If you follow the link I gave to Arc Euro, on that first page, it gives the general sizes of the component parts for each size OD.
John
You are quite correct about the spring type couplings, they are much cheaper. The 1" Oldham ones cost me, in your money, about $30 for each complete one. But I always look on them as being good insurance, never need to be looked at again.
R,
If you follow the link I gave to Arc Euro, on that first page, it gives the general sizes of the component parts for each size OD.
John
Last edited:
Rndmann9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2016
- Messages
- 148
- Reaction score
- 27
Another milestone perhaps more important than the mechanics. Got the brains working I'll get it all tuned up once I get everything put together hopefully soon. Turns out there is a free cam generator add on with one of my drafting programs I use for work so that is an awesome thing (autodesk inventor- with hsm). I work in construction and use revit on a daily basis but inventor is part of my software suite and I use it a lot at home. If your not familiar with it it's awesome for mechanical design. You can model stuff and then make it work before building it. What I did the above models in. ^
Rndmann9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2016
- Messages
- 148
- Reaction score
- 27
Actually I'm kinda leaning towards an angular contact bearing now since it would act as a mix of thrust and roller bearing. 5201 I think is the size I'm looking at at least for the y axis. I would just have to bore the diameter and depth in the end of the t shaped. Piece pictured above.
The Y has me thinking . For the X I used a couple of thrust bearing on the right side [might be overkill] - Bored into the existing retainer, each side leaving a web in the middle - Hand crank lock nut does the holding. Other end (stepper end) has one of the regular bearing types to keep shaft and stepper aligned. The Y . . . Only one end has bearing support and not a lot of room to work with . . .
Something will come up . . .
