"Hole" type tool holders

I’ve recently added a cncdepot spindle, (Thanks to Eric and Corbin for the great instructions and software.) and it is time for me to figure out where to hold the tools. I’m a little bit tempted to cut some glorified holes in the spoilboard to hold the tools. It seems like this would allow for lots of clearance between the gantry, the tool, and other tools in the rack. But I’m a little concerned that I don’t see others doing this. Is anyone familiar with the downsides doing it that way? I’m thinking that maybe they have a tendency to get knocked out of place. Or maybe the fork helps reset slight errors.

I’m also curious if anyone uses multiple rows of tool holders, it seems like most opt for either a single row or some kind of fancy carousel.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

The biggest limitation of hole type vs. forks is that you can’t have tools that have larger diameters than a little smaller than the diameter of the tool holder nut because the tool holder has to rest on something. With forks, you can slide it in sideways, so the tool can be huge and you can still come in sideways and stick the toolholder into the fork.

This is also a limitation of ATC’s like the Rapid Change ATC.

Another thing to consider while you’re setting this up is how to handle the dust shoe. If you had holes, you have to park the dust shoe every time.
I’ve set up my forks such that I never have to park my dust shoe. It’s less motion and time wasted, and I’m almost always using the dust shoe for jobs.

In my case, the tool holders act as a “weak link” in case the software goes nuts. I can reprint a holder easier than I can replace a spindle. The tool holder also offers some flex.

That is true, although I was in the also process of designing a dust boot with a pneumatic actuator to lift the shroud. I originally wanted it to be driven by a stepper but I wasn’t really sure how I wanted to do this since there are no free driver slots. I’m a little tempted to have a micro controller on it that receives commands directly from the host PC. But I can really forsee this getting lost or out of sync and causing things to crash, so a simpler thing controlled by a relay might be better.

The limitation of tool size should be fine with me. My only tool that is bigger than .5 inches is the spoilboard surfacing bit, and that isn’t something I use often.

The idea of the holder as a fusible link does sound interesting though. Maybe I want some kind of 3d printed standoff over a hole in the spoilboard.

Thanks for the suggestions, I think I’ll continue to play with things and hopefully find something that works,

There’s a fork style rapid change in the testing phase now too.

I went through the same thing. I used Corbin’s how-to (all of them, and several times, thanks Corbin!) as a starting point, but my issue came into losing so much of my cutting area. I cut a lot of full sheets, the full 8’, and losing 10-11" of area was killing me. I ended up gluing a few sheets of MDF together as a test, and I cut out I think 2" cylinders.

I then went out to just under my soft max, and then I started setting my tool areas. I loaded a tool, put the cylinder around it, then lowered it until it was close to the surface I was gluing it to, through on some superglue, then raised it, over 3.3" (think that’s what it was), set the next and so on.

They are mounted on a couple MDF rails, which are currently just glued down in test fashion with blue tape. But it’s been 5-6 weeks, and it works, so I haven’t changed it to something nicer. I think my cylinder

walls are like 1/4", and what I needed to do is sand an angle on the edge facing the work area, to the point where the top edge is almost gone at that point. This allows me to cut the full 8’ area. However, if I want to cut the full 8’, I have to remove all the tools, as at my spindle mount position, the extrusion would still clip the tool holders when cutting at the back.

I had to adjust the inner step a bit for a couple tools that are 1.5" dia. so I have 3 that the tools sitting a little lower. I adjusted the tool bump in Corbin’s code as well, as it was aggressive for this setup using RM spindle.

The dust show was the reason I went this route over the holes. I actually 3d printed some initial versions (it was fun watching the tool bump destroy that first one), then realized it’s so easy to knock out more as needed with mdf, make tweaks and such, so I went with that. I currently have 8, with room for another few, but will likely use a fork with a side load in the back for my one larger fly cutter at some point.

1 Like

“There’s a fork style rapid change in the testing phase now too.”

ya, they put a video on YouTube about 10 months ago. I haven’t seen anying since then. Not sure if its still in the works or not.

Figure out one that loads from the side of the table if you have an extended gantry. I will buy it since you have me buy so many other things. lol

Lol. I’m not responsible for all your purchases :slight_smile: