it occurred to me that we may be able to get away with an absolutely trivial frame
since we can just use holes in a concrete floor as anchors, what if you just have a simple rectangle of 2x4s with bolts in the corners and the wasteboard/workpiece resting on the ground?
I don’t know if you could have the 2x4s on edge or if they would need to be flat to keep the belts from angling up.
another option would be to have a 3d printed corner piece, along the lines of the image below and socket boards into and then attach belts at the appropriate height.
in either case, you want to keep the frame from racking, which could be a small brace across the bottom corners (could be 1/4" material), or it could be sandbags or other heavyish things against the outside. I don’t the the forces the maslow applies are going to be likely to rack the frame from belt tension, but the acceleration of the sled could pull a corner if there is nothing keeping it from moving
I was definitely thinking along with your idea, but my significant other nixed the idea of having holes in the concrete . This seems like it would be a great solution to my problem , usind 2x4s and your brackets for the anchor frame.
I still like the idea of having the respective 22mm (at least thats what i measured) offset between each anchor point. There again, I know it hasn’t been tested, but your option offers the opportunity to adjust the anchor points.
This is what I had came up with before drilling concrete was a no go.
I think that is a BRILLIANT idea. I wonder if the straight parts could disconnect for storage?
The latest firmware release also exposes the offsets for the heights of the anchor points relative to the height of the arms so if we want to start experimenting with higher anchor points that is supported in the firmware.
I was thinking of the same kind of idea (with metal) but was concerned that the “floating” frame could move when the bit is engaged if any of the belts are not completely taught.
If one belt is loose, then when the belt in the opposite direction pulls, the frame could move instead of the Maslow. I could not get around having something keep the frame from moving (in my head).
Are those mounts screwed down to the dining room table? Maybe if you proposed that as an alternative, she would change her mind about the concrete?
Here is a serious idea - install mounts in the four corners of your garage, even though they may be too far for the Maslow to reach with its belts. Then make extensions out of 3/16" stainless cable that run from the mounts to the ends of the belts, to which they attach with small shackles. This will put the anchors far enough away that the maslow should have no problems milling accurately near the corners of your 4x8, and the anchors are in the corners where they are out of the way and no one can trip over them.
Or, how about two anchors on the ridge of your house’s roof, and two others hooked to the gutters? You can entertain the neighbors and the sawdust will wash away into the gutters next time it rains. Of course getting everything up there may be a challenge. Don’t forget the spoilboard or your wife will get really mad when you mill the shingles off the roof…
I think that is a BRILLIANT idea. I wonder if the straight parts could disconnect for storage?
that was the idea. I didn’t bother modeling screw holes in it yet, I figure you
would want to print it with enough perimeters that the edges are solid, so you
could drill your own holes, but I can easily model holes through it so you could
have bolts and repeatable holes.
The latest firmware release also exposes the offsets for the heights of the
anchor points relative to the height of the arms so if we want to start
experimenting with higher anchor points that is supported in the firmware.
That comment was not about the height of the anchor. It was about the frame not being attached to anything and the waste board/project not being connected to the frame.
Those conditions could create a circumstance in which the frame could move during a cut and throwing off the cut.
ahh, yes, but the frame has more surface area to the ground than the sled has to
the workpiece, and you can pile ‘stuff’ up against the outside of the frame to
keep it from shifting.
As long as “something” is preventing the frame from moving it would likely be OK. The surface area becomes less of a protection when you add a bit grabbing into the material to the equation.
If you live in the right kind of densly packed neighborhood, you could mount two anchors to your house, two to your neighbor’s house (with permission, of course) and cut on the driveway.
What’s the largest width that you could place the anchors without extensions? I am thinking of using my one-car garage, perhaps anchoring to the walls because that’s easier than drilling in concrete.
If the offset from the 4x8 to the anchor points is the same all the way around in absolute terms, then 13’ of belt extension gives you 2.97’ offset or a frame that is 9.94’ H by 13.94’ wide. You might fit it in your one car garage if the long direction of the frame goes across between the two walls (perpendicular to the car’s line of travel) and the short direction is along the walls, parallel to the line of travel.
For anchors on the wall, you could attach with lags a short section of unistrut, oriented vertically. You can then mount brachets to the unistrut and attach the mounts so they can be adjusted vertically.
My little garage is still 15’ wide, so it sounds like I can’t just anchor to the walls.
Thinking about this option now. However, I’m trying to figure out if this would actually work. If the Maslow is using the lengths of the belts as a measure of the distance to the fixed anchor point, then the fact that the anchor points the Maslow knows about are not stationary seems like it would mess up the calibration. I can think of a few workarounds: 1) add an offset to the firmware for the length of the cables; 2) use two cables attached to different places on the walls for each anchor point (8 cables total) to make a more-or-less fixed anchor point. Might work.
Good point about not being able to retract the cables into the Maslow and know their length - I had forgetten about that.
I suspect that it would be difficult to measure an offset accurately enough, and a set of cables to produce a temporary anchor would not be rigid enough.
However, a 15’ x 8’ ‘frame’ would just barely work with 13’ belts, and that would give you 2’ offsets on two sides and 3.5’ offsets on the other two sides. I think that is your best bet.
That should work great. Also keep in mind that the full extent of the belt is at the exact corners of the sheets so if you’re willing to sacrifice a little bit of the 4 x 8 work area, you can get a bigger frame.
. This seems like it would be a great solution to my problem , usind 2x4s and your brackets for the anchor frame.
no indeed!