Meteor Assessment

A place to talk about anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
steckmeyer
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 5:20 am

Meteor Assessment

Postby steckmeyer » Wed May 18, 2016 1:05 pm

We have had our Meteor for six weeks. We bought the basic machine with the puck, Atlas, air cooled spindle and a set of collets. The incentive to buy a CNC router came from my son. He is a good mechanic / woodworker and has computer expertise including the Linux operating system. He did all of the research and recommended the Probotix machine. I became interested when I realized that this machine can be used to produce parts for heirloom quality furniture. I would classify us as discriminating hobbyists.

Once we had the machine uncrated we started to poke around. Initially we set it up on our assembly table to check basic functions. It became clear that we would have to have a permanent location for the system. We ended up building a steel table with a cabinet to hold the computers and VFD. We added a Ridged vacuum, Rockler Vortex separator and a Rockler antistatic hose.

It works. We have machined some simple items but have had a chance to test the capabilities. First let me say the Len and Melissa are very reasonable to deal with and patiently worked with us through some shipping hiccups and initial start up confusion. We did have some loose spade connectors on the Z axis and have had some problems with the Atlas. That seems to be caused by our lack of understanding of some G code functions and is probably resolved. We think that the Atlas is a worthwhile extra.

Once we had the machine set up in its permanent location we did some basic tests. Using a V carving bit with the DRO we spot marked four corners near the maximum X. Y range. We taped the diagonals. Even young eyes could not find any dimensional difference. Using a dial indicator we measured the actual movement in the X, Y, Z axis. In manual mode with the resolution set at 0.001" we observed 0.001, 0.001, 0.0005, 0.0015 sequences repeated in all three directions. When the resolution was changed to 0.005" all three direction moved 0.005" without deviation. We set up two dial indicators, one on each end of the gantry to see if there was any racking. Our instruments indicate that both ends move identically. We trammed the spindle and found it to be slightly more than 1/10 of a degree out of plumb. We did not try to correct this misalignment because we doubt that this will cause any problem.

We believe that this machine is a very good value. It is accurate and precise enough to more than hold woodworking tolerances. The design is sufficiently robust and ridged to handle a 2.2KW spindle. Time will tell how well it holds up.
Attachments
IMG_7224.jpg
IMG_7224.jpg (60.18 KiB) Viewed 4634 times

4DThinker
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 10:57 am
Contact:

Re: Meteor Assessment

Postby 4DThinker » Wed May 18, 2016 1:10 pm

Nice setup you have there. Nice write-up as well.

4D

User avatar
probotixmissy
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:54 am

Re: Meteor Assessment

Postby probotixmissy » Thu May 26, 2016 9:06 am

Thank you so much for the unboxing write up and picture - your setup looks great! :D

Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any further issues or questions.

Thanks,
>Melissa

“Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine.”
― Alan Turing


Return to “Open Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests