Posted a new video of the CNC profiling a test core blank (9mm Baltic Birch plywood)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EJ_-mC1nCs
This test cut had 3 steps with 2 tools changes. It took approximately 25 35 minuets and I had to filp the blank between steps one and two.
Step 1 - Routing a shallow rabbit for the steel edges and boring holes for the inserts. Both parts of the stepped hole is too large need to re position the vertex on the file.
- turn off vacuum, turn blank over and re-align -
Step 2 - Switched to a 3/4" dish cutter for thicknessing. Profiling was also done in two steps, a roughout and finishing pass.
Step 3 - The blank ddn't need flipped again but the bit had to be changed back to the 1/4" cutter. Here is the final outline shape cut.
To save wear and tear on the tools and bits this blank wasn't thicknessed to final dimensions. That is why the holes don't go all the way through. Still it was a good test.
After this the process was refined to 2 steps with one tool change and flip.
Mike
http://www.wedmfg.com
Test Core Profiling Video
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
The plenum under it all is divided into 4 gridwork sections with a 2" diameter suction port in the center of each. All 4 ports dump inot a single line.
The plenums grid work is repeated on the underside of the spoilboard creating a larger diameter network of airflow channels. On the original spoilboard we put a hole in all corners and every intersection ( every 2").
It worked very well but practically there were many more hole than really needed. It was a chore masking off exposed holes.
Since this machine is for snowboard and ski work in particular, we made a new spoil board with a reduced area of thru holes. The new holes are better placed for two snowboard cores side by side or 6 to 8 individual ski cores. Depnding on the overall length of the core blank ther are way fewer exposed holes to contend with.
So after all of that...to answer your question. By trial and error : )
MC
The plenums grid work is repeated on the underside of the spoilboard creating a larger diameter network of airflow channels. On the original spoilboard we put a hole in all corners and every intersection ( every 2").
It worked very well but practically there were many more hole than really needed. It was a chore masking off exposed holes.
Since this machine is for snowboard and ski work in particular, we made a new spoil board with a reduced area of thru holes. The new holes are better placed for two snowboard cores side by side or 6 to 8 individual ski cores. Depnding on the overall length of the core blank ther are way fewer exposed holes to contend with.
So after all of that...to answer your question. By trial and error : )
MC