I’m still on my journey to fix-up the Shapeoko 3 I purchased used. Just yesterday I got the machine square by adding washers behind the two rear v-wheels on the right-hand of the gantry. The right-side gantry plate was bent slightly, adding 1-MM behind each wheel (in addition to the stock washers) brought the machine into square. Awesome.
I was pretty certain the belts had some stretch, milling acrylic and polycarbonate parts was resulting in undersized components. On the X-axis, for instance, an expected 3.5" was coming in at 3.486". And on the Y, an expected 4.5" was coming in at 4.486".
I know deflection can contribute to undersized (or oversized) parts, so I didn’t want to rely entirely on the parts to determine my adjustments to $100 and $101.
So I mounted a cheapy digital dial indicator (from HF, with a button tip sourced from McMaster I think some time ago) to the table, and compared the DI to the values from CM.
An expected 23mm move was coming in at 22.91mm on the X-axis, and 23mm was 22.92 on the Y-axis. If you take this as a ratio, and multiply the actual part width, you get: (23/22.91) * 3.486 = 3.49969 (3.5 in the real-world). Awesome.
Doing the same for the Y-axis, I get (23/22.92) * 4.486 = 4.502, also pretty awesome. I am still getting a rougher finish on these edges so .002" oversized is not surprising to me at all. That is my next “issue.”
So I thought it was interesting how the two methods to calibrate/adjust for belt stretch correlate with one another quite closely, and figured I’d share my results.
I did use the values I measured via DI to adjust my $100 and $101, and then re-tested with the DI. Over the 1"+ of travel of the DI, I was never off by more than .03mm and was often within .01mm or spot-on. I don’t think these indicators can truly resolve to .01mm (that would be .0004"). So every few moves of the router by 1mm, the Carbide Motion #'s would be spot-on with the DI #'s again, over the full 25mm travel. I don’t think I can do any better than that.