Andrew wrote: >>AlanK wrote: >> >> Also start thinking now about two >>electrodes. Could cut both sides with >>a 2 tooth tip, but independent control >>would be better. >> >> > >I don't understand why independant control >would be advantagous. The EDM was going >to be done raster not vector. > > > I didn't really read every word of the rest so may have missed something about raster, but raster would take a tremendous amount of time vs vector, and the single wire CNC setup doesn't really have a reason to go over areas that aren't etched, if it's following the cut line and in different directions it's vector regardless of being an XYZ table and keeping most of the paths X or Y.. Raster's more a fixed format scan of everywhere, not really needed for this type of thing normally. Little reason to travel uncut areas with a CNC. And you almost always have to cut the other side of the trace, whether it's an isolated trace or simply the cut between this trace and the next. Wasn't clear, that was independent control of the feed rate of both wires not different XY control, fixed or simple distance relationship. You have to control seperately anyway for different erosion rates, simpler to just back one or the other wire off where you don't want to cut than control the supply too.. Really this would be simple, and do 90% of things well with an easy enough system: o x o All three the same size, x is just the main electrode. 3 seperate feeds, two power supplies, the second attached to both of the secondary wires. Main one cuts and does the tracing, upper cuts the other side of horizontal traces, right one cuts the other side of vertical traces. Keep most of the cuts horizontal and vertical and this will let you isolate both sides of a trace at once without requiring rotation, just a second supply and seperate feed mechanisms for the three wires. Just back one of the two secondaries off or both for curves or diagonals with only the main wire.. Generally double the linear cutting rate of a single wire, with only a second power supply and 3 feeds so still not too complicated. Don't care about the width change and you could do 45 deg diagonals too, they'd just be more narrow with a fixed system. Just two supplies and 3 feeds on a CNC, may just have to try it out myself. If it can be taken down to cutting pads and traces for SOIC pitch devices it'd be great, that'd do enough for most prototyping. The real work will be automatically controlling the feed rate for erosion. With just drilling a hole, you simply look at the spark frequency and when it gets too low you feed, it's in the direction of feed. With this you have needing XY direction feed and erosion away from the board that both reduce the spark rate. No doubt figureable but not as easy.. >However - I agree that extra wires would >be cool. > >Make it like a 24 pin dot matrix printer >(pins offset so they dont inter-pin-spark) > > > Would be nice for other things even. But with differing discharge rates or on or off control that will take either or both of 24 feeds and supplies, depending on how you want to do it. Could probably hack a few motors to do it all, like a vending machine selector, but getting it all to work would probably still be not so easy.. Alan
Message
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: PCB EDM MILL Initial Tests
2006-05-03 by Alan King
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.