demonx

I've got a Triton router in a Triton table. I don't recommend either!

Being that I can fret an entire board accurately with my slotting jig in around a minute, the only reason I'd be even looking at doing it on the CNC is for blind slots as you call them, where the slot doesn't break out the side of the board and the ends aren't visable, or down the track for fanned frets.

Making the blank beforehand as per usual to put under the CNC.

Yesterday: Testing truss rod and Carbon Fiber slots. Yesterday: Testing the neck carve. After yesterdays neck trials, I came to the conclusion it needed a redesign as it didn't feel that great. So today I reshaped both the body and the neck models. Not only will it be more comfortable to play, but it looks much better as well.

The CAM package I'm using has all sorts of options, I can select areas to tough out and leave tolerances between the area clearance and the surface so I can come back and profile with a different type of pass for a neater finish.

I'm glad I asked, as the tangs you're using are wider than mine, not heaps wider, but enough to make just make that bit of difference. I'll still run some test cuts to be safe though. I've stumbled across something else that is a bigger priority to work out at the moment so the fret slots will be on hold for a week. Turns out the jigs I made to do the neck wont work how I planned, so I have to rethink and make them again. I allowed for the scarf joint angle etc, but I didn't allow for the crease to be in a different place when I flip the neck, in that error, it also creates other issues with varying depth of neck blank with different heel angles etc, so I need to come up with a new plan to flip the neck on the bench.

Interesting, I thought the spinning bit would have the opposite effect. What is the tang width on the wire you're using as that could make all the difference?

Out of curiosity, have you broken many bits? Your ramp speed is a touch faster than I was planning, you're around 380mm and I was thinking of going around 300mm to play it safe, but your depth of cut surprises me I've been led to believe that it's best to try cut no deeper than half the router bits width,you're cutting at its full width, which in guessing would put a lot of stress on such a small bit. Like I said in the op, I haven't used these small bits yet, Im just painting a picture in my head before I do. I know that Ive broke enough of the tiny stewmac bits in my dremel to have given up using them, so I want to play it safe on the cnc!

The endmills I've purchased are .56mm, which is virtually the same size as the stew Mac saw blade I've been using for the last couple years (.58mm) and the same size as the stewmac fretsaw that is now as blunt as a butter knife. The fretwire I use has a tang width of .508mm and I've never had an issue with frets being too tight. Im also going to make the assumption that slotting with the endmill with several passes won't br exactly .56mm and it'll be very close to the .58mm anyway.

A couple more snap shots from yesterdays session.

An action pic from today: Testing rear tool paths and tool changes. Then making adjustments in CAM so it'll run smoother next time.

Using the remote I can change feed speeds, spindle speeds etc as it's running and it will over ride whatever is in the G-Code.

Playing around with feed rates on the CNC to see how much it effects the accuracy. One of these pickup pockets was cut at twelve hundred millimeters per second, the other pocket was cut at twelve thousand millimeters per second. As you can see, the faster tool path didn't allow time for the router bit to perform the cut correctly and the detail is lost, it also put ridiculous stress on the cutting piece!

If you were judging only by this thread you would assume I've been reasonably inactive. A few people here may know I've been working fulltime getting my CNC up and running. The last week has had lots of issues with getting breakout boards working, the tool changer changing and the rest of the time is spent learning CAD, CAM, G Code and all the other stuff that goes along side owning and operating a CNC. That also includes constantly testing tool paths and making adjustments etc. It's a VERY time consuming and laborious task that I'm slowly getting progress on.

I've bought the end mills and have a bit of an idea, but before I go breaking any in trials I thought I'd ask how others are going about using these half millimeter bits successfully? How deep pass? 0.25mm? What's an average without breaking? How slow feed speed? Drill or ramp? I can see both methods would put different strain on such a fine bit, the ramp would flex it, but then the drill would apply pressure when the x or y movement begins Curious to hear your experiences. Thanks.

Start by reading and filling this out: http://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-32.pdf Ten boxes down: Guitars http://www.fws.gov/permits/faqs/FaqFGH.html

A quick reference for Joseph (Psychoticsnoman): I bought a couple of the tops, they're better than I was expecting, Joseph was easy to deal with and items were well packed and received promptly. Thanks mate, it was a pleasure.

I've spent the last few days trying to work out CamWorks, yes, it's awesome, yes, there's feature upon feature, menus inside menu's inside menus! I'm sure it's all great once you know the program inside out, but trying to learn it from scratch is a giant undertaking. It has some feature recognition features that you can pre save strategies for, I'm trying to get these sussed out at the moment but the program keeps overwriting my settings with defaults and keeps choosing its own tools as opposed to the ones I've selected from my own tool crib. Once I get over these hurdles I can move onto bigger ones, like getting the Post working properly. At the moment it's working and I'm able to use the machine, but there are few things I'm not happy with still, for example it isn't turning the spindle off before it returns to home, now on my machine returning to home is something like 3 meters of diagonal travel, I'd rather the spindle be turned off! Take this for example: I want the spindle to lift up 50mm when I hit start. At the moment I set the workpiece zero and hit start and then it moves dragging the bit across the workpiece. I added this z50 to the "init tool change" section (whilst creating the Post Processer in UPG), however when I run this code on the machine it lifts the Z to the limit (which is about 300) rather than just 50mm - in G-code to lift the z 50mm I just write z50, but how do I write it in the UPG code? :T:<N><TOOL_COMMENT><EOL> :T:<N><T><M:06><EOL> :T:<N><G:00><Z50><EOL> :T:<N><S!><M!:SPINDLE_DIR><EOL> Next question, because I've added it here, I think it'll do it at every tool change, so where should I actually be adding it, I want it to lift at the beginning, just before the spindle starts. Here is my default "start of tape", should I have it in here? :T:O<"%4LT": program_number><EOL> :T:<N><G:17><G!:ENGMET><G!:40><G!:80><EOL> Next question, I've added this M:05 to the end of tape to turn the spindle off - at the moment when the workpiece is finished, the spindle lifts, moves to the machine zero and then the spindle turns off, I want the spindle to turn off before it returns to zero (safety first) :T:<N><G:00><G:91><G:28> Z0<EOL> :T:<N><M:05><G:28> X0 Y0<EOL> :T:<N><M:30><EOL> It looks like it should work, but it's not! So why isn't this working? Or do I need to add it somewhere else? All the G-Code still looks cryptic to me. Is there anything else I need to add to a Post Processor that I haven't thought of yet that is just good machining practice or things that are advisable?

Time for some updates. Turns out the CAD software I'm using (Solidworks) doesn't like the CAM software I had (Aspire), so I've had to move over to CamWorks which is a way more advanced system, but it integrates itself into Solidworks which is great. You can see from the pics below the difference the two CAM packages make the way they read the Solidworks file. Exact same file, same cutter, same idiot running it, just a different CAM program generating the code. My biggest issue at the moment is writing the Post Processor, as CamWorks does not supply a P.P. for Mach3, as Camworks is written for 300k machines and Mach3 is generally for hobby use, so I'm using a generic Fenec Post and trying to modify it myself, which when I don't understand G-Code or Post Processor code is quite a chore. I've got one running, but it's very glitchy. Another issue is the proper spindle is not here (this one is faulty) so the tool changer isn't functional at the moment. The spindle works, but the water jacket leaks, so it can only run air for cooling and the tool changer doesn't release. The manufacturer has viewed a video of the fault and is sending a replacement, this one to be returned when it arrives.

Ok, it's here, finally, so now what do I do! Well, actually, yes, it's here, but Mach 3 still needs to be set up completely and some issues with the tool changer not resetting correctly after a power down or reset. The guy who built it is still trying to sort out the codes he wrote to fix that as the code written by the spindle company was not compatible with this machine for some reason I don't understand but I'm guessing the engineer who is building the machine would not spend the time to write codes for nothing when he's not getting paid extra for it. Another major problem at the moment is the spindle is faulty. The tool changer is not releasing and the water jacket is leaking and water dribbles out the bottom of the tool holder area. Spindle company have acknowledged this is a fault and says they're building another one and it'll be shipped in a couple of weeks. Bad news is their "fast service" last time took them six months to deliver the current spindle, so no idea how long they plan to take this time. Lets hope it's sooner rather than later and at the moment we're looking at some temporary spindles just in case. All that aside, it looks like I now need to learn how to use this thing and I'm guessing it'll be a major task. My brain hurts already and I haven't even learned how to turn it on!

renkenstein - Your cannon fodder got my vote. First of all, welcome to the forum. I like that you said you used what was on hand. My advice to fresh builders is always start simple. Too many new builders waste all sorts of coin on sweet timber and highly exotic specs only to throw it all out due to failure, hell, I've been building for years and the odd guitar still get thrown in the fire from time to time. Whats you've done looks like nice clean work and if you're playing it on stage it's obviously functional as well, so congrats. funkymann1 - Welcome to the forum and enjoy your new hobby!

My table saw gets used more than it used to for building, but both my bandsaws are THE most used saws in the workshop. If I was to only pick one, the bandsaw is a no brainer choice.

VERHOEVENC I've really been getting into "relic" and similar styling lately and it's interesting to see someone else's take on the theme. I was also interested to see what you did with the fingerboard end as it's similar to something I've been thinking about doing myself, just styled differently. Looks like you did a pretty good with the whole build, however I'm not convinced the heel would be real comfortable, isn't that point near the lower screw right where it'd dig into your hand? Sometimes it's hard to tell from pics. I'm not a big fan of the "no truss rod cover" look, however somehow you've pulled it off without it irritating me, so take that as a compliment. It's also nice seeing someone else strive to keep the string pull straight. KNIGHTROEXPRESS Looks pretty decent for a first ever build. The work looks nice and tidy from the photos and the simplistic theme certainly looks vintage inspired as I'm guessing it was by the pickup choices! You should be proud and you've now set the standard for your future builds to be launched from. MENAPIA From the pics it looks like an all over good quality guitar. Although the top carve isn't to my personal tastes, I think my favorite part of this build is the way the Ash end grain displays at the edge of the top. That certainly looks tasteful. ORIGINAL Nice, elegant and vintage looking guitar that looks like the build was well executed. Nice work. GEOFF ST.GERMAINE From the pics, it looks like the build was skillfully executed and the result is this stunning masterpiece. Great attention to detail inside and out, the finish looks excellent and the choice of timbers, even though its the good old "bread and butter" selection works perfectly for this guitar, so two thumbs up and congratulations on a beautiful instrument, you got my vote.

Pics dammit!

I cannot remember the final spec as it has been enlarged from the original list, but it's about the size of a small car, the cutting area is obviously less, but it's enough I can lay a house door in and carve it.