Am I being too ambitious

[Fred Trevvett]

I've had an idea. A quick bit of googling reveals that other people have had the same idea, but nobody has actually done it properly (happy to be proven wrong on that)

The idea is a multifunction CNC machine. Something which resembles a 3d printer, but with an improvised quick change tool holder on it, where you can mount an extruder head for 3d printing, a spindle for milling/routing, a laser cutter, heck maybe even a plasma cutter. From a hardware point of view I don't think it would be hard at all. Mostly plug and play, might get a bit expensive but hey.

However I think the software might be more of a challenge. Do all the processes I've mentioned use g code? Or is there some other 'language' (probably the wrong word) that one of the processes uses. I'd like to control it from an Arduino, maybe a pi if necessary. Maybe I can have a few separate Arduinos running different firmware for each process?

You can probably tell I don't know what I'm on about. Which is why I'm here you tell me what I need to know before launching into it

Cheers

 

[Onoff]

My mate has been on about building a multi function machine for ages. Think I enquired about it on here but travel speeds between say a 3D printer and plasma are vastly different.

 

[bricol]

I would think anything built strong and rigid enough to perform as a mill, or even a router, is over the top for something to hold a plasma torch or 3D print - and increase the cost significantly compared to a 3D printer?

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Yep you would need to be able to customise settings depending on what process you were using, ideally have preset modes

 

[Fred Trevvett]

I would think anything built strong and rigid enough to perform as a mill, or even a router, is over the top for something to hold a plasma torch or 3D print - and increase the cost significantly compared to a 3D printer?

Yes I realise that, bit who doesn't like a bit of good old over engineering

 

[Maker]

In principle it should work but there's a good reason why they all exist as separate machines. You say it'll resemble a 3D printer, but it'll have to be much heavier built to withstand the cutting forces of a mill, and it won't have a very practical table area for a laser/plasma. You'd also have to change the table as well as the head, a printer has a smooth, heated bed, a mill will need fixture points (Threads, tee slots, a vice), and a plasma/laser needs open air behind the cut, lasers usually have a honeycomb type material and smoke extraction. Also, a laser isn't a "head" which can be swapped out, it's usually a big glass tube mounted horizontally behind the machine and the beam is redirected to the cut with angled mirrors. It'll end up costing more, and performing worse than three separate machines.

 

[Fred Trevvett]

I was aware about the tables being different, should have put that in the original post really as I realise that will be a pretty big disadvantage. Didn't realise that about the lasers, so thanks for the heads up there

Hardware aside, is there anything I would need to know from a programming/software point of view? Is there a single software that can run all the processes or would I need to run them all separately?

 

[slim_boy_fat]

Yep you would need to be able to customise settings depending on what process you were using,

And location too?

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Sorry what do you mean? Like different offsets if the tools sit different distances from the axes?

 

[slim_boy_fat]

Sorry what do you mean? Like different offsets if the tools sit different distances from the axes?

I was thinking more where it'd be used? Presumably in a large workshop setting with enough room around it?

 

[Fred Trevvett]

For me it would be in a small shed, needs to be compact. What would you need room around it for?

 

[stuvy]

Chips? What if they drop off mid print and ruin the workpiece

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Good point

 

[Barking Mat]

It's an interesting idea, but I think there's a reason they don't exist.

I would imagine from a production point of view, it's better to have dedicated units, for various applications, as if one unit fails is less of an issue, than the all production method thing failing.

 

[stuvy]

It's an interesting idea, but I think there's a reason they don't exist.

I would imagine from a production point of view, it's better to have dedicated units, for various applications, as if one unit fails is less of an issue, than the all production method thing failing.

More to go wrong firstly

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Oh well thanks for the advice, I might make a mill, keep the 3d printer and do without laser/plasma

No doubt if I do make it there will be a separate thread full of questions

 

[daleyd]

I think it’s a fantastic idea but there’s a few things which mean it would be difficult (not impossible mind you!) to combine them. A 3d printer and a plasma might work together but a mill needs huge rigidity which I reckon you would find difficult to do with a home brew set up.

You might be able to achieve it with some big castings but they won’t come cheap and then you’d need some serious drives to push it all around. A 3D router might work though? Wouldn’t need anywhere near the rigidity of a proper mill?

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Moving onto just a standalone mill then, casting it would be cost prohibitive, would a knee mill made from aluminium extrusions be any stiffer than just a typical cnc router? Or would I be best just going with a conventional router style, if only for the simplicity/being able to copy other designs online

 

[Onoff]

There are I believe quite a few cheap Chinese combined CNC routers with optional laser modules.

 

[Fred Trevvett]

Yes I've seen them but looks like they are very low power. Most are just engravers I think, rather than cutters