I was going to reply earlier, but decided wait. The PCB example in the projects page (the thread referenced from the project description page) has lost its images, so is less useful than it might be, but the text is clear.
I will throw in on PCB’s as that is one of my semiregular uses (maybe 1 to 2 dozen a year on the Nomad). The machine is quite good for doing a PCB, but, like any PCB milling process, requires a little setup.
Fast, compared to ordering out. The other day, I ran a medium complexity, single sided board for an industrial controller. Three power busses (so a lot of serpentine traces on a single side, even with through hole components to routing paths), a 20 pin processor, a pile of discretes, power drivers, connectors for sensors and drives, and so on. Size 80X120mm. First shot came out fine, other than two design issues (one a data sheet misread on a pull-up, the other a noise pickup issue you don’t find until until you install. No issues on the bench). Would have been 2 to 6 weeks to order a 4 layer board that would do no better. From firing up Eagle (I have been using it since V2, when it was the only option that was economical and non-proprietary) to the finished board was less than three hours, including drilling. Two of those hours would have been there if I had a commercial service do the fab.
Drilling will be dead on (a challenge with other prototyping methods), and you can choose the appropriate sizes without being bound by the board house (some have… interesting… selections) or paying a lot more for non-rule sized holes.
No silkscreen or conformal coating layer.
Need to prep the board before soldering (clean, tin if desired, and so on).
Two sided requires extra care.
Dust control is needed (this is ANY machine, really)
Overall, the Nomad does a better job than any of the other machines i have used for isolation-milling PCB’s.It is more accurate, more precise, and more repeatable than the other current/recent machines I have used (at work, I have no say in what is purchased, so we have a collection of incompatible machines, none of which perform well), and the one dedicated PCB mill I have used did no better, despite having automatic Z probing/compensation.
I can run traces at 0.15mm, with separation of 0.2mm, consistently. For most things (0.75mm scale, trace plus seperation), I use a 90 degree “mill/drill” bit with a 0.05mm tip, as it is stronger the a sharp point graver (less likely to break, stays sharp longer) at 100000RPM and about 175 to 200mm/min feed. I use a narrow angle (20 degree?, IIRC) for finer work (to the 0.3mm scale), as the narrower angle makes it less sensitive to minor variations in the board surface. I really try to keep at the 0.75mm scale, as the success rate is near 100%. It drops at finer scale, most often due to me doing something dumb (dull tool, bad zeroing, etc)
Using the standard Carbide sender (Carbide Motion) is fine for most things, if the copper clad stock is uniform and the mounting is uniform. You can use an alternate sender (I make no endorsements, but there is discussion in several places on this forum) if you need to do surface probing, and several people have had really, really fine results. I tend to design around the process if I can, to avoid the need for any more involved software.
I generally mill a shallow pocket in the waste board before running PCB’s, with a clean alignment point so I can butt the stock in to location. I use an adhesive to hold stock in place (3M 467MP transfer adhesive) that is very thin, very uniform in thickness and holds really, really well. I typically end up within 0.03mm of dead flat, using good quality FR1 (phenolic type… no fibreglass dust, no texture at the surface). The biggest issue is getting the finished board released from the waste board. I need to take care on double sided, as the adhesive holds better than the bond to the board, so if I am not careful, the copper will be pulled free of the bottom side (really annoying after cutting the second side)
I hope this is the type of information you are looking for. I am not the hardest user of the Nomad, I do use the crap out of it, and have had no significant issues (mine is an early Pro, so there were a few teething issues that C3D worked through with me… A couple were me, one was the machine)