2012/6/29 andy pugh <bodge...@gmail.com>: > On 29 June 2012 07:05, Viesturs Lācis <viesturs.la...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Does anyone have something to suggest? > > Have a full-size water table, but have lift-out slats and a > routing/milling surface that drops in in their place. > You would probably leave the machine configured 2/3 slats and 1/3 > milling most of the time (possibly with a board on top), only removing > the milling surface when cutting very large pieces.
Thanks, I like the idea, I just updated a little bit: About 1/3 or 1/2 of the table has milling surface, positioned so that slats are placed above it so that, if water is filled up to the upper edge of slats, then milling surface would be 10 cm or more in the water - I hope that would be enough for the molten metal to cool down and not to stick to the milling surface and to be easy wiped off into the other half of the table. Well, I suspect that mostly I would have the way You suggest - some 2/3 of surface - slats in place for plasma, 1/3 - slats removed for milling. And then just rise/lower the water level to switch from milling to plasma. 2012/6/29 Yishin Li <y...@araisrobo.com>: > > Have you consider build the machine larger? I mean you can use 80% of the > area for plasma cutting and the other 20% for routing. In this way, you can > share most of the electrical parts, and prevent the plasma dust from > falling on your milling surface. I already am considering 2700x1400 mm working envelope :)) I chose that size so that I can easily cut with plasma metal sheets with size of 2500x1250 mm. Although I suspect that vast majority of the jobs would be much smaller. But those rare occasions of bigger jobs always have the biggest money :)) Yes, sharing the same electronics, motors and actually whole construction of machine is the main reason for the attempt to combine both of these technologies (well, honestly, I have ideas for other instruments as well). Building one machine instead of two costs only 2 times less... Plus it would take up only 2 times less floor space. if the machine is built properly, it will be fast enough for the things I need, so I do not expect to run out of the machining time capacity (to need another one) any time soon... 2012/6/29 Les Newell <les.new...@fastmail.co.uk>: > > If you are mainly planning on cutting aluminum I would suggest looking > into oil mist cooling instead of flood coolant. You only need a trace of > oil in the mist to act as a lubricant while the air clears the chips and > cools the part. It works very well. I was thinking that I could use the liquid that is already there, in the watertable. Thanks for the suggestion, I will take a look into it, as I expect that only reason for the spindle to meet steel would be drilling holes/marking hole locations, so not afraid about much of smoke. I guess that having some oil in the water, especially if it is vegetable oil, is nothing I should be afraid of. -- Viesturs If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
