On 05/03/2014 12:02 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: > > I think you can make arguments both ways Jon. You are looking for accuracy > that exceeds the machines accuracy in most cases, and the depth of field of > those ranges downward from 2mm or worse depending of the F-stop of the > lens. Over relatively small distances, my Bridgeport is surprisingly accurate. I often mike stuff out to +/- .001" with no special effort. There is some wear on the saddle so that the X and Y axes follow shallow curves, but it still does quite good work. I do have high-precision ballscrews on it.
Since I plan to permanently mount it in an R-8 end mill holder, I can move it up and down with the quill, so a long depth of focus is not that important. A confocal lens would be great, but look up the price at Edmund Scientific and then you'll be back to reality. Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available. Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
