3 ms·

I expect it would be easy to compensate position (closed loop is already table stakes in the professional tier) and extremely difficult to compensate chatter. W

I expect it would be easy to compensate position (closed loop is already table stakes in the professional tier) and extremely difficult to compensate chatter. What would it take to drive the motors of a 5 axis CNC to responses well into the kHz? You would need that, to compensate chatter. You would also still need to handle the same peak force, whether or not you do it with negligible deflection.

prova_modena 5y ago
There are some industrial machines that compensate for chatter by slightly varying the spindle speed when chatter is detected. However machines so equipped are fundamentally very rigid and usually experience chatter occurs when pushing end mill performance to its limits. I suspect the adaptive spindle speed strategy would be much less useful on a machine like the Polar Bear.
- jjoonathan 5y ago
  Right, resonance dodging and deflection compensation aren't going to cut it here, not by a long shot. I still think a sufficiently good 5 axis control loop could damp acoustics: for one, the (fractional) millisecond timescale of the acoustic oscillations are geological by compute standards, and while I'd expect limitations from sensing, actuation, and power electronics, I don't see anything fundamentally prohibitive. I'm pretty sure this is an engineering problem, not a physics problem, and that eventually someone is going to crack this nut. It won't be the Polar Bear.
londons_explore 5y ago
One way to compensate chatter is to have a small mass (say 50 grams) on an X-Y-Z voice coil on the cutting head. Then you can use that to apply large brief forces in whatever direction is needed to stop chatter for a few milliseconds with each turn of the cutting tool. It's the same mechanism used in iphones "taptic engines" to make 'clicks'. The same mechanism can be used to actuate the head at far higher frequencies, allowing cutting fine detail at high speeds.

prova_modena 5y ago

There are some industrial machines that compensate for chatter by slightly varying the spindle speed when chatter is detected. However machines so equipped are fundamentally very rigid and usually experience chatter occurs when pushing end mill performance to its limits. I suspect the adaptive spindle speed strategy would be much less useful on a machine like the Polar Bear.

jjoonathan 5y ago
Right, resonance dodging and deflection compensation aren't going to cut it here, not by a long shot. I still think a sufficiently good 5 axis control loop could damp acoustics: for one, the (fractional) millisecond timescale of the acoustic oscillations are geological by compute standards, and while I'd expect limitations from sensing, actuation, and power electronics, I don't see anything fundamentally prohibitive. I'm pretty sure this is an engineering problem, not a physics problem, and that eventually someone is going to crack this nut. It won't be the Polar Bear.

londons_explore 5y ago

One way to compensate chatter is to have a small mass (say 50 grams) on an X-Y-Z voice coil on the cutting head. Then you can use that to apply large brief forces in whatever direction is needed to stop chatter for a few milliseconds with each turn of the cutting tool. It's the same mechanism used in iphones "taptic engines" to make 'clicks'. The same mechanism can be used to actuate the head at far higher frequencies, allowing cutting fine detail at high speeds.