1616 vs 1610 practical performance

Hello,
I’m considering having my X50 woodworker installed with 1610 ball screws instead of the 1616 they ship with and I confirmed with Onefinity that this is possible.
I did some calculations on thrust force of the installed steppers vs rpm vs projected accuracy. The number point to the 1610 being a better choice for the majority of machining feed requirements of wood and aluminum(under 5000mm/min) in terms of thrust force and accuracy at speed. Of course, rapids are sacrificed by about 40% or so with the 1610 ball screws.
Just some background on the planned use of the machine: I mainly purchased the X50 to machine larger aluminum stock in addition to wood. I’m also planning an all steel+aluminum extrusion base for the machine to minimize deflections as compared to an MDF work table.

Looking for some advice/opinions on the choice of ball screw pitch.

I am nearing the end of my 1F rebuild, and it sounds like we have similar use cases.
I upgraded my X35 to a X50 Woodworker, caring less about speed and more about improvements to rigidity - this will need to be evaluated. I am also adding an ATC 2.2Kw spindle. I also have an aluminum extrusion table I built and a 1/2" cast aluminum plate as a top. Another difference is that I am using a different controller and also upgraded to larger steppers.

I asked myself the same question as you regarding ball screw choices - it can get complicated - and I will wait and see how my new system performs before deciding to make any changes.

Things I have considered:

The 1610 ball screw would provide 5 microns of resolution (10mm/200 SPR = 0.05mm/Step)
This compares to 0.08 for the 1616

My increasing the motor torque may help drive the 1616, providing more force at the cutter

How accurate/repeatable is the overall machine given the sum of the linear motion components used?

What if any backlash will there be? (there was little to none measured in the short time I had my X35 running)

Most steppers can only be counted on being within +/- 2 full steps (from several sources explaining the science of stepper motors). I do not plan to invest in closed loop hybrids or servos at this time.

Am I being unrealistic in my expectations of the machine I am putting together?

Will micro-stepping work to improve real-world resolution and part quality? Will the reduction of torque become an issue?

Will my work benefit from increased acceleration/velocity or resolution? Is the 1616 a good compromise, or is it intended more for the X50 application of the wider Journeyman?

Would differences in torque/forces through the ball screw have any real impact at the tool/material given appropriate feeds, speeds, chip loads, etc…?

This is why I will wait and see what happens after I start milling again. I will be sharing my recent updates soon, and will certainly share my feedback on performance in the future.

Perhaps others who have the X50, and who like us plan to use it for both aluminum and wood, will join the conversation with their experiences and recommendations.

Thank you for raising awareness and the discussion.

1 Like

@TMToronto all the same questions I’m also asking!
My order is supposed to be ready for pickup around the second week of June so I guess I still have time to let the Onefinity team know. When are you expecting your X50?

But still sounds like the 1610’s could be a safer bet on the woodworker with open loop steppers for accuracy and force while sacrificing the rapids.

One question would be - are you planning to run a 2.2kW spindle kit (adding the 80mm mount) so you can use up to 1/2 diameter shank bits? From a force perspective the 1616 ball screw with the default stepper has no issue snapping a 1/4" endmill in two :wink:

If sticking with 1/4" bits only I think the primary tradeoff consideration is going to be speed for rapids vs precision. Rarely do rapids come into play for most of what I do, facing stock in one direction is about the only time I even realize Fusion is using them (controller acceleration could be limiting short rapid moves). If you don’t anticipate large amounts of rapid movements or can tolerate some additional machining time the 1610 might be the better option.

1 Like

For me if I plan to change the ball screw the cost is minimal - if similar to the website part list of ~$60US.
Although, I can’t seem to find the specs for it on the order page (?).

I look forward to us sharing some quantitative and qualitative results, even if our builds are somewhat different (i.e., spindle, table, motors, controllers,…) in the end.

Agree and yes I have the spindle already and the 80mm mount is part of my order. Pending @TMToronto tests I’m also thinking the 1610 are a safer bet because rapids during machining occur over such short distances that I don’t believe the loss of speed would be an issue…I’d rather have the force and the accuracy

1 Like