Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

All info relating to the Denford Mirac lathes

Moderators: Martin, Steve, Mr Magoo

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Sat 19 Jun , 2010 13:08 pm

Okay the above code sort of works, I'M just ironing out the bugs at the moment. 1 Weird thing is that I make the stepping 40 steps per mm which doesnt seem quite right considering my drives are 10 microstep. Any ideas?

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Sat 19 Jun , 2010 13:17 pm

No wait Mach3 needed resetting I actually make it 1000 steps per mm by measurement. Still doesnt add up to the figures though

User avatar
Denford Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3632
Joined: Fri 10 Feb , 2006 12:40 pm
Hardware/Software: Go to User Control Panel > Profile
Enter as much information about your CNC hardware and software as you can - it makes it easier for everyone to know what you're talking about then.
Location: Sunny Brighouse
Contact:

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by Denford Admin » Mon 21 Jun , 2010 9:04 am

It could be 1000 steps per mm. Our cast-iron machines are usually 200 steps per mm in half stepping mode, so that's 100 full steps, x10 (microstepping) will give 1000 steps/mm

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Sat 26 Jun , 2010 17:45 pm

Ye, I'm pretty sure it is 1000 steps per mm in my case. I've also worked out that the grey code isn't correct for my machine, I'll post what mine is in a few days but its not the same as what was posted. Also I have made a few changes to the code. I'm having a little bit of a problem with it. Currently I select for example tool number 2 and get tool number 6 every time, yet I have checked the pin outs puts against the code and its all correct, so I still need to work out whats going on there.

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Mon 09 Aug , 2010 16:39 pm

Ihave worked out the problem with the tool changer is Mach3s problem. It seems the visual basic in Mach3 can't be processed fast enough to interpret the tool position. Is there any way of slowing down the motor on the tool changer?

User avatar
Denford Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3632
Joined: Fri 10 Feb , 2006 12:40 pm
Hardware/Software: Go to User Control Panel > Profile
Enter as much information about your CNC hardware and software as you can - it makes it easier for everyone to know what you're talking about then.
Location: Sunny Brighouse
Contact:

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by Denford Admin » Thu 12 Aug , 2010 9:27 am

At first I thought the KEB was for the toolpost motor and downloaded the manual here so you could adjust the frequency down:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2959

Unfortunately, I realise that's probably the spindle drive, and the toolpost is controlled by contactors for CW and CCW so speed will be fixed.
I imagine there are embedded/micro-controller based solutions out there which can control toolchangers quicker than the standard Mach I/O ?

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Wed 29 Sep , 2010 21:29 pm

I'm still trying to suss out the tool changer. I'm just waiting for a reply from KEB to find out whether the speed is somthing programmed into the inverter. I've had 6 collets made up to fit the tool changer. I would attach the drawing for it (solidworks) but the extension isnt allowed, if anyone would like it please drop me a pm. Does anyone know from the home postions what the distance is to the front centre of the chuck. Somone did write it on my lathe but I stupidly got rid of it thinking I didnt need it.

User avatar
Denford Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3632
Joined: Fri 10 Feb , 2006 12:40 pm
Hardware/Software: Go to User Control Panel > Profile
Enter as much information about your CNC hardware and software as you can - it makes it easier for everyone to know what you're talking about then.
Location: Sunny Brighouse
Contact:

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by Denford Admin » Thu 30 Sep , 2010 9:04 am

the extension isnt allowed
If you zip the drawings up, then you'll be able to post them
Does anyone know from the home postions what the distance is to the front centre of the chuck
They will be slightly different on every machine - I'll let you know when/if I find that we ever kept records of it (post the serial number up anyway)

User avatar
Denford Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3632
Joined: Fri 10 Feb , 2006 12:40 pm
Hardware/Software: Go to User Control Panel > Profile
Enter as much information about your CNC hardware and software as you can - it makes it easier for everyone to know what you're talking about then.
Location: Sunny Brighouse
Contact:

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by Denford Admin » Thu 30 Sep , 2010 10:15 am

It appears older machines had a centreline distance of -153mm from home in the X.

CHudson
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue 09 Mar , 2010 9:39 am

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by CHudson » Sat 30 Oct , 2010 1:51 am

I've attached the solid works drawing of the collet.

With regards to the home switches, I have them working but the x axis is around about 76-78mm to the centre of the chuck, does this sound about right? Does anyone have an exact figure?

I am also building a toolpost control board as I have gievn up with KEB.
Attachments
collets 4mm.zip
(112.96 KiB) Downloaded 608 times

User avatar
Denford Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3632
Joined: Fri 10 Feb , 2006 12:40 pm
Hardware/Software: Go to User Control Panel > Profile
Enter as much information about your CNC hardware and software as you can - it makes it easier for everyone to know what you're talking about then.
Location: Sunny Brighouse
Contact:

Re: Denford Mirac Electronics Refurbishment

Post by Denford Admin » Mon 01 Nov , 2010 9:38 am

does this sound about right?
153 divided by two is 76.5 :?

Post Reply