Fooling the bit plate

[bergerud]

I am not sure I understand the what the designers were thinking when they designed the swinging bit plate. The main purpose must be simply to determine how far the bit protrudes from the chuck. This, however, does not seem essential to me since the machine can also do that when the bit touches the board. There must be some kind of redundancy here to to make the machine idiot proof.

There is even more redundancy: you know how annoying it is to have to put in all of the bits in a multi bit project just to have them touch the bit plate. Then put the bits all back in again as the project proceeds. (I thought they were going to do away with this after the QC was replaced by the CT. I guess not.)

This is annoying since, first all of the bits have to be installed in the right order, and second, all of the bit lengths have to agree the next time they are put in.

Consider this:

If you put all of your collars on your bits so that your bits always protrude, say, 1.25" from the chuck, then the machine would never know the difference from one bit to next. You could let the machine go through the initial bit tally with the same bit installed! You would only need to change bits when you really need to change bits!

(I suppose there are some bits which this might not work with; how often do we use those?)

Does anybody do this?

Further to this idea, one could even do away with collars, and instead have a bit gauge or jig to always install bits at the 1.25".

[liquidguitars]

I just keep the carving bit in place untill after the bit Q. Then I insert the real bit at the promt and it works fine. saves a lot of time.

[bjbethke]

I am not sure I understand the what the designers were thinking when they designed the swinging bit plate. The main purpose must be simply to determine how far the bit protrudes from the chuck. This, however, does not seem essential to me since the machine can also do that when the bit touches the board. There must be some kind of redundancy here to to make the machine idiot proof.

There is even more redundancy: you know how annoying it is to have to put in all of the bits in a multi bit project just to have them touch the bit plate. Then put the bits all back in again as the project proceeds. (I thought they were going to do away with this after the QC was replaced by the CT. I guess not.)

This is annoying since, first all of the bits have to be installed in the right order, and second, all of the bit lengths have to agree the next time they are put in.

Consider this:

If you put all of your collars on your bits so that your bits always protrude, say, 1.25" from the chuck, then the machine would never know the difference from one bit to next. You could let the machine go through the initial bit tally with the same bit installed! You would only need to change bits when you really need to change bits!

(I suppose there are some bits which this might not work with; how often do we use those?)

Does anybody do this?

Further to this idea, one could even do away with collars, and instead have a bit gauge or jig to always install bits at the 1.25".

It’s the Coding that the CW unit uses, normal CNC units use the “G” code. (all the programing is in the “G” code)

The CW unit uses a memory card to set up the programing for the CW Control unit. (The machines Hard Drive) This unit used “ROM” chips and need to be programed for each project. (Like most AUTO type Sewing Machines)

In your “Consider this:” statement;

You can do that now!!! - and you don't need the collars.

Make sure the bits you use have long enough shafts to set them at the 1.25 inch length.

Make an installing block to install the bits you use, drill the hole to 1.25 inches so all the bits will be installed the same length.

I use a ¼ inch steel rod to set up the program in the Control unit. (The normal routine with the bit plate.) Some times I use the carving bit because most of the time, that’s the first bit used to carve, this depends on your pattern program.

It works for me. BJB

[CarverJerry]

I do that a lot since I've got a gage to set all my tools to the same length. And it does save time. As BJB said the CW is not like a common CNC machine that uses G & M codes, I was able to open one of our (CW) files and it is all written in binary code. But what do you expect coming from a couple of guys that used to be Nasa engineers........LOL..... just think, if it were in the G & M codes we could edit the program, change speeds, feeds and actually write our own program as I'm doing in school right now, but we're stuck with using designer. It's still a great program for a hobby cnc machine.

CJ

[bergerud]

Ok, I have another question for you guys. The old QC protrudes below the truck about 1.5 inches (bearing to end of adapter). How far does the CT protrude? In the pictures it looks to be less. I also notice that, in the newer versions of designer, changes do depth finding procedures have been made because of the CT. Do we have to extend bits farther out of the CT than we did with the QC?

[liquidguitars]

I don't even measure the bits just keep the carving bit in then replace when it asks during the carve.

the big issue is the stuff you do not see like removing the depth location for the v bit now the .50" bit adding vague error software prompts about depths and drill holes making the machine more hobby worthless everyday.

[jaroot]

Could you elaborate on this?

Thanks
Jim

"Like the old Dutchman said, 'We learns slow but we learns good.'"


I don't even measure the bits just keep the carving bit in then replace when it asks during the carve.

the big issue is the stuff you do not see like removing the depth location for the v bit now the .50" bit adding vague error software prompts about depths and drill holes making the machine more hobby worthless everyday.

[Digitalwoodshop]

I don't even measure the bits just keep the carving bit in then replace when it asks during the carve.

the big issue is the stuff you do not see like removing the depth location for the v bit now the .50" bit adding vague error software prompts about depths and drill holes making the machine more hobby worthless everyday.


I understand the first part... You just leave the carving bit in the machine as it is normally the first bit when the real cutting starts, leaving it when it does the V60, V90, and 1/8 inch Cutting Bit FIRST LENGTH CHECK. Then when you load the V60 for the Cut and it gives you a RE FIND and you just use CONTINUE as the machine will use THE MOST CURRENT measurement not the History Measurement when you loaded it the first time.

Now the 2nd part went over my head... Did a new version of Designer remove Depth Control for some bits?

AL

[liquidguitars]

Now the 2nd part went over my head... Did a new version of Designer remove
Depth Control for some bits?



It's been like that for sometime the idea is that you could have a lot of separate depths for complex parts that do to the nature of wood, the part could sit slightly higher or lower in the sled.
because someone said that independent indexing was not needed we lost a ton of precision on the machine defiantly a down grade in my book.. now it looks like the .50" has lost.

[jaroot]

Still over my head! I guess that I've not reached a point in proficiency with the machine for this particular limitation to effect me. Or maybe I'm just too dumb to know that it is effecting me. Or maybe.......

[bergerud]

I must admit, I spend more than half of my carving time experimenting. I love to experiment but I should not have to experiment so much to find out how the machine works. It would be nice to have clear explanations of what the programmers have programed the machine to do. Obviously, many of us have no clue as to the "flow chart" of bit measurement. How can we know what is possible with the machine? For example, the bit is first measured by touching the bit plate. This must tell the machine exactly how long the bit is since the vertical position of the bit plate is fixed relative to the z motor. Now when the bit touches down on the board, there must be some allowed error since the position of the z motor relative to the board depends on the variable roller compression (and/or sled height). If this allowed error was, say 0.50", then one could use this to carve deeper with one bit than with the another. If I touch the second bit down on a lower part of the board, then it can carve deeper than the first bit did.
I do not know if this is what liquidguitars was referring to but it is an example of being able to push the envelope if you understand how the machine is programmed. How annoying if these things are changed after you experimented so hard to discover them! These measurements must have been messed with to handle the new CT:
* Fixed depth find issues with the CarveTight chuck
* Fixed measuring board depths > 1.25" using CarveTight spindle

Why would the CT make any difference whatsoever to depth measurements? No one answered my question about the height of the CT chuck. I think they made it too high. Maybe they had to compensate by taking liquidguitars 0.50" of freedom away.

Total, wild speculation, but, that is all I can do unless I spend a day experimenting!

[liquidguitars]

The bits that do not jog to place are loosing the ability to compensate for wood thickness within .125" a problem if your parts sit higher or lower in a sled. This is were is logic of tolerance is over looked and was substituted for absolutes that do not jive in real world construction.

[RMarkey]

If you have a specific question, ask, as I won't explain the exact details of "everything". Suffice to say thousands of hours of experimentation go into this machine to see what it can or can't do.

The machine doesn't measure the length of the bit. Those values are programmed into the software. The machine measures WHERE the bit is and WHERE the board is, and it does it in a way the tiny processor and memory on the machine can handle. Differences between the WHEREs exist from QC to CT, and the changes you showed compensate for that.

I understand LG's gripe. We've talked about it in the past. It's not something the normal user would concern themselves with.

[much stuff cut out]


Obviously, many of us have no clue as to the "flow chart" of bit measurement. How can we know what is possible with the machine?

[bergerud]

I can understand using the bit plate to determine where the bit is and then using the bit to find where the board is.


In a multi-bit project, why is the machine programmed to check all of the bits before the carving starts? (Why can the program not just check the bits as they are used in the project?)
Given that there is a reason to check each bit twice, what is the tolerance? How close do the two measurements have to be before the re-find error is returned?
As each bit determines where the board is, what is the tolerance there? How close do these board positions have to be?

[liquidguitars]

I understand LG's gripe. We've talked about it in the past. It's not something
the normal user would concern themselves with.


Back in the 70's the word normal was not a good thing.... I guess i never been that normal, however I used tools that where normal the CW is far from normal as the software it's more like phenomenal in a way.

[AskBud]

I can understand using the bit plate to determine where the bit is and then using the bit to find where the board is.


In a multi-bit project, why is the machine programmed to check all of the bits before the carving starts? (Why can the program not just check the bits as they are used in the project?)
Given that there is a reason to check each bit twice, what is the tolerance? How close do the two measurements have to be before the re-find error is returned?
As each bit determines where the board is, what is the tolerance there? How close do these board positions have to be?
One must remember that the Bit-Checks have been there from the start.
They were a handy tool when using the QC and Bit adapters, as it avoided many improperly seated adapter problems. True, it is not as much of a necessity with the CT or Rock chucks. The "Re-Find" is to give you the chance to check again, after you reposition the bit in the chuck.

However, the preliminary check is also a very good tool when using an MPC designed by someone else. It helps make sure you understand, and have the necessary bits to complete the MPC prior to the carve of the project.

AskBud

[RMarkey]

In regards to the questions:
1. AskBud is correct.
2. 10/1000"
3. The board surface is only found once, by one bit. The machine determines the "best" bit to find the surface with.

[bergerud]

Thank you for answering some of my questions. As for question 1, I understand what Bud says and I agree, the double checking made some sense with the old QC when it was not so hard to switch the bits. But now, it seems like too large a sacrifice in time and effort for such a small benefit. Now we need collars for no apparent reason. My question really was: Is there a fundamental measurement based reason for the double bit check. The answer appears to be NO.

(The reason I started thinking about these questions was because I am experimenting with a different idea in dust collection and the bit plate is in the way! I may have to remove it and replace its function with a truck stop. This seems ok as long as the bits are always chucked to the same length. (plus or minus 0.01))