That is hard to say. I think one version is ready but this morning we might have come up with a cool option. Not sure yet though.
3 Likes
We like options!!!
3 Likes
I really just want to see it!
4 Likes
Fair enough. Maybe in the weeks verses months range then? Just trying to figure out whether I push forward with LR2 or waitā¦ 
1 Like
From the little bit they have shown i would wait! i am a very impatient person but they have shown some sneek peeks that show to rigidity improvements, and maybe speed since they are asking for race specs.
3 Likes
Itās been a while, but in reference to the first post talking about being able to use a full size routerā¦
Several years ago I redesigned the router plate to accept/accommodate full size Porter Cable 690/693 routers (before I realized, this adds 6 lbs vs the Makita 701ā¦) I also added taper/chamfer (from the 5 axis waterjet cuts) to accommodate a larger hose for dust collection. I donāt think the Nema 17ās are up to the task/torque requirements of the added weight. I could be wrongā¦ but wasnāt willing to risk it.
The conundrum, cheap vs fast vs reliabilityā¦
Sure there are ways to improve some things, but at what costs/trade offs. Ryan really has the customer in mind, especially on the overall cost.
2 Likes
I know you cant give more tease than you already have, but dive us a hint. Is this new version going to be co2 laser friendly?
1 Like
Iāll jump in.
Any machine based anything like a Lowrider is probably not going to be a platform that you would want to use for a CO2 laser.
Anything where an axis can go off square, even if it requires.something to go wrong in order for it to happen presents a very large risk when dealing with something like a CO2 laser emplacement. Because the tube is typically mounted in a fixed location, and mirrors are used to direct the beam to the focusing head, any deviation in angle represents a place where a large amount of power can hit the mechanism or end up going in a random direction. With an independently driven motor pair, like the LR, or even the Primo, this represents a risk. If one motor becomes jammed or one side is obsteucted and skips steps, there is no way for the laser path to be guaranteed.
With the LR2 the option would be a ādouble deckerā and you could mount the glass tube above the moving gantry, having a solid part where there was reference.to the focusing head from the tube. Not ideal, since it means moving the laser tube with the gantry, but much safer. I could say that something similar would be possible with the LR3 as it exists so far, where the laser tube moves on the Y and Z axes with the gantry, but I wouldnāt call it Friendly.
3 Likes
Iām so sorry I know it sucks. I think we are realllllly close. Just want you polish this a bit more.
8 Likes
Iāll add to this.
Moving the tube will add a LOT of moving mass. Not really something you want with a laser. The couple lasers that Iāve seen do this are using much larger motors to cover the gantry around.
1 Like
When you are ready, take another week. 
2 Likes
Bigger motor lowrider is already something that has been done. Nema 23
Oh boy, have you tried to measure the sag in your rails with that beast in the middle.
1 Like
2.3mm.
Will have to upgrade to thicker wall tube. Or maybe solid ā¦
There have been lots of discussions here about increasing stiffness with solid or wall thickness. Long story short itās a larger diameter that will make the most difference. Some good reads in the forum though about the topic and I suggest a small investigation first.
Nah, just fix it in software.
Kidding, but not kidding.
3 Likes
Yeah, I know.
Current wall thickness is 1.2mm, deflection is 2.3 mm
Upgrading to 2mm wall, gives 1.75 mm
And solid would be 0.76mm.
Going from 25.4 x 1.2 to 38.1 x 1.2 goes from 2.3mm to 0.66 mm ā¦
The other option is to have a vertical rib running along the bottom of the tube, but that complicates things on the router plate.
Software is also an optionā¦
A
Or, a smaller routerā¦or, or, an LR3 with a smaller router.
4 Likes
