Attempting to use CW as cross-section 3D printer, but plagued by X-axis issues

[fwharris]

Based on your picture it looks like your machine has the A907 upgrade. I see lots of rust on the bit adapter and bet the inside of the chuck looks the same. Time for a deep clean and lube on the adapters and chuck. Start saving them pennies to upgrade to the new chuck. That being said these have nothing to do with your size problem.

Is it just the one piece (the one you show the measurements) that has the size problem? Is this piece cut out using the outline and cut path tool? If so did you use the "flip cut" to cut on the outside of the path?

[mtylerfl]

Based on your picture it looks like your machine has the A907 upgrade. I see lots of rust on the bit adapter and bet the inside of the chuck looks the same. Time for a deep clean and lube on the adapters and chuck. Start saving them pennies to upgrade to the new chuck. That being said these have nothing to do with your size problem.

Is it just the one piece (the one you show the measurements) that has the size problem? Is this piece cut out using the outline and cut path tool? If so did you use the "flip cut" to cut on the outside of the path?

Yes, the old Quick Chuck should probably be replaced alright. Good point on the flipping of the Cut Path to the outside - however, if he uses the Pierced function, a Cut Path would not be used at all anyway for the slices (i.e., the Carving Bit will perform all the "cut-throughs" and manual tabs will be employed instead).

[DickB]

IT looks like all of your parts are made with a single pattern, is that correct? (It would help if you posted the mpc.) If so, I would suggest that you rotate the pattern that you posted 90 degrees and test carve. If the error is still in the x dimension, then it points to an x mechanical or calibration issue. If it moves to the y dimension, it points to a pattern issue.

You may have already answered this, but is the x error consistent e.g always short and always the same amount or percent?

[fwharris]

Yes, the old Quick Chuck should probably be replaced alright. Good point on the flipping of the Cut Path to the outside - however, if he uses the Pierced function, a Cut Path would not be used at all anyway for the slices (i.e., the Carving Bit will perform all the "cut-throughs" and manual tabs will be employed instead).

It is not clear (well at least to me ) that he was using the pierced function. From his picture it looked like a cut path on the part he is having problems with the size.

[bergerud]

In fact, he said he did not know about the pierced function. Also he said y was ok not x, so cutout flip may not make sense. He may be making full depth cuts and having the common tracking issues. Way too much information here. Cut out a simple rectangle!

[mtylerfl]

It is not clear (well at least to me ) that he was using the pierced function. From his picture it looked like a cut path on the part he is having problems with the size.

Hi Floyd,

He did not use the Pierced function on his example. I'm simply pointing out that when he DOES use it for slice carving, that the "cut-side flipping" will not apply.

[IHaveThatPower]

I think you are doing a very good job at asking questions and methodically checking everything you can think of, etc. I hope you'll be able to get the machine and your sliced projects working to your satisfaction, without having to ship the machine to CarveWright for a thorough going over. Lots of help available here (as you can tell), so your chances are better than good.

Thanks for the words of encouragement!

I think you are biting off more than anyone could chew. You need to do some simple cut outs to trouble shoot. Forget the Blender gray scale stuff until you can cut out a rectangle the right size. Are, for example, you doing full depth cutouts? Maybe you are asking too much from the x drive and something is slipping.

Way too much information here. Cut out a simple rectangle!

One of the first things I did after noticing the X-axis issue was to create a very simple test pattern that was a sloped square and a sloped circle. These exhibited the same dimensional "squashing" along the X-axis that I saw in my more complex carves. I haven't tried doing this test pattern again since delving into manually calibrating, though, so maybe that's worth a try.

Based on your picture it looks like your machine has the A907 upgrade. I see lots of rust on the bit adapter and bet the inside of the chuck looks the same. Time for a deep clean and lube on the adapters and chuck. Start saving them pennies to upgrade to the new chuck. That being said these have nothing to do with your size problem.

Yes, the old Quick Chuck should probably be replaced alright.

It's certainly something I'd like to do in the future. As it stands right now, I only have the one 1/16" carving bit, so I don't need to change bits or anything. I've kind of had it in the back of my mind that if/when that bit breaks, I'll need to look at doing the chuck upgrade. I just keep hoping it doesn't break!

Is it just the one piece (the one you show the measurements) that has the size problem?

It's most noticeable on that piece, but it shows up on every piece. Curiously, the smaller the piece, the less trouble it seems to have. The other pieces on that particular carve all came out with ~1-2mm of error (always too small, never too large) on both axes and allowing for the carve not having gone wholly through the board that actually seemed "hand-fudgeable" to correct by simply being clever about how I extracted the piece from the board. If the big piece had exhibited a similar small amount of error, I would have simply rolled with it. Ideally, none of the pieces would have even that much error, but that may simply not be realistic.

Is this piece cut out using the outline and cut path tool? If so did you use the "flip cut" to cut on the outside of the path?

Good point on the flipping of the Cut Path to the outside - however, if he uses the Pierced function, a Cut Path would not be used at all anyway for the slices (i.e., the Carving Bit will perform all the "cut-throughs" and manual tabs will be employed instead).

It is not clear (well at least to me ) that he was using the pierced function. From his picture it looked like a cut path on the part he is having problems with the size.

In fact, he said he did not know about the pierced function. Also he said y was ok not x, so cutout flip may not make sense. He may be making full depth cuts and having the common tracking issues.

Hi Floyd,

He did not use the Pierced function on his example. I'm simply pointing out that when he DOES use it for slice carving, that the "cut-side flipping" will not apply.

Thus far I have cut all of the pieces out "by hand" using a Dremel tool. That's the reason they have such larger borders around them, in fact: to make it easier to cut out with a Dremel. Now that I know about Pierced, I might be able to skip that step in the future.

IT looks like all of your parts are made with a single pattern, is that correct? (It would help if you posted the mpc.) If so, I would suggest that you rotate the pattern that you posted 90 degrees and test carve. If the error is still in the x dimension, then it points to an x mechanical or calibration issue. If it moves to the y dimension, it points to a pattern issue.

Yeah, I have tried that. I've tried arranging other slices in various ways on various different carves in the hope of minimizing error by favoring a longer or shorter axis, but they X-axis is consistently the one that exhibits the issue.

You may have already answered this, but is the x error consistent e.g always short and always the same amount or percent?

It is always short, yeah. It's never carved larger than expected. It's also different amounts each time, but that could be due to using different length boards for different carves/pattern arrangements/etc. The most disheartening carve I did to date was one where I thought I had solved my issues with a test carve and proceeded to carve out something like eight or nine slices over the course of eight hours, only to realize at the end of the carve that they still had the shortened X-axis problems. I stopped carving for a few months after that (basically, most of fall and all of winter).

[fwharris]

Thanks for confirming how these were carved and that your problem is not related to the cut path offset. I asked because it was not clear on how you cut the parts out of the board, an assumption on my part and was making sure. Some times the not so obvious is part of the problem.

I also think it would be a good idea to a test carve of a simple shape, rectangle or square to compare your size issue. I think you can even draw a square and just assign the 1/16" bit with a shallow carve depth.

[scootertrash]

Call me crazy, and perhaps I missed it being said, but are you using some masking tape on the board so it engages the roller better? I had tracking problems and a strip of tape the length of the board cured 'em. Sometimes I use two layers.