BT48 to 4x8 ?

[gerryv]

Erik, Exactly, I came up with pretty much the same conclusion which is why I asked. They're right about the importance of alignment of course but the process is pretty basic stuff - certainly less onerous than rebuilding or upgrading a milling machine it seems. I've got an extended Z axis on my BT32 so was also looking at buying a stock Z-axis mounting plate with V-groove rollers and adding another set of bishop- wisecarver tracks on the rear of the big gantry extrusion and then rigidly tying the front and rear plates together for additional rigidity. Spacers (washers) would be needed to make room for the steppers depth but nothing much. It's the same extrusion used on the 5' machines so I can see having a 5' wide Buddy with extra rigidity in the X axis for doing some pretty interesting stuff with a scanner and Aspire 2.5's excursion into the real 3D world. That could go a step further if SB goes ahead with the upgraded indexer software they've talked about. I've already got my 3D glasses waiting on the shelf! :-)

[erik_f]

Gerald, I'm a little confused, but I think you're saying...put a mirror image of your Y/Z car on the back of the main gantry extrusion and then tie them together. Maybe this is what you're getting at, but what about a fully functioning Y/Z car on the front and back of the main gantry extrusion with a different tool in each one for "pseudo tool changer"? The Y/Z cars wouldn't be able to be independent on the Y because of the Z motor, but you could tie them together driving them on the Y, but the Z of each could function independently with little problem. Hope I'm not confusing things further.

[gerryv]

Yes, that's what I was stumbling about trying say Erik. Your expansion on that is really a neat idea: drill, milling head, paint applicator, hmmm

Thanks!

[erik_f]

I just edited my previous post. Glad I was getting you...now this is interesting!

[erik_f]

Ok...now this may seem over the top...but I think it would be a great idea for a compact yet larger capacity machine. So I was looking at the BT48 and thinking about a moving gantry, and then the idea popped in...well if the gantry and the table were able to move? Ok now I'm going to bed

[mikeacg]

Erik,

If you split the movement between the gantry and the table, you would have less movement (making it faster) and you would reduce the overall footprint with a PowerStick by half as well. It might be a good concept for them to look at with the new 'small' machine they have been asking about in their surveys. They could test it on a miniature scale and then add it to the Buddy as both a new machine and a retrofit. I like it!

Mike

[gerryv]

I've wondered about pulling the travelling belt table off something like a sander, replacing the motor with a stepper and Voila! a giant, killer CarveWright on steroids that's not a toy. It would need roller type hold downs of course but that seems doable.

Is that nuts? :-)

[erik_f]

I don't think it is nuts...you think it would better than the Powerstick idea?

[gerryv]

Erik, I been distracted trying to choose between a Felder or Minimax combination machine so I've not been on the forum. I always hate situations where the price is high and the knowledge is low (mine that is).

Actually, I'm thinking that the modified Powerstick idea is better because it is more in keeping with the existing operating means and, I think, would require less radical surgery. I like the idea because it still allows for minimal storage space compared to just going to a larger table.

[ghostcreek]

Wow, outstanding thoughts and ideas. I still haven't gotten Shopbot to get back to me about the cost to upgrade. I am backing away from the power stick because of the troubles I have heard about with accuracy and stability. Comments about the powerstick and it use cutting full 4x8 sheets (1/2 ply up to 3/4" ply & HDU. Thanks guys for the ideas.