Anybody hear about Tingle Tensioning System

Can't find any reference to David Tingle on the web apart from SPAM. Ooznest have been using a tension system on the V2 workbee leadscrews for a while - I guess SPAM are trying to catch up with Ooznest's design (without giving any credit to Oozenest of course! they even give the impression in their description that the workbee is their design).
Alex.

 

Bull ryan lock didnt know jack about it till about 2 weeks after i designed the system. Your full of it.

 

Yeah me.

 

Me.
A guy named sean i believe placed a video out showing how to tension the workbee. It was a good idea but placed tension on 688 bearing that were designed to take a rotational force but not the pulling force tension would place on them. So by adding the thrust bearings and collars it placed all that tension on bearings specifically designed to take that force while leaving the 688 bearings to take the rotational force. Sean had a very good idea it just lacked those thrust bearings and collars to lock it all in and make it work really really good. You lose the whip and double your speed capability. As for later posts about this ooznest used seans idea which i hope you have back up 688 bearing cause that idea will distroy those 688 bearings over time. Hopefully the failure doesnt occure during an expensive cut. Placing the screw under tension was all seans idea and a good one but placing the 688 bearings under tension is not wise.

 

Lol. Yeah get where your coming from. You deffinately want the tingle tension system. N no i dont make anything off promoting or sales. I designed the system to to seans really good idea work properly without distroying my machine. I gave it SPAM and anybody else that wants to sell it with only the condition that i get credit for the design. But it litterally eliminated leadscrew whip and doubled the speed i could run. But without seans idea of placing the lead screws under tension the idea would have never been thought of. Alot of us on the forums were looking for exactly this and all the seasoned guys agreed that putiing the 688 bearings under tension was a really bad idea. One guy designed these plastic pieces to get rid of the whip and i was trying to redesign them for him. I was looking for bushings on ammazon when those thrust bearings poped up in the search. One of those halo over the bearing pic n chorus of angels singing moments. Lmao. Within a couple days i had parts to prototype and test and sure enough. It works and it works really good. Seeing my machine go fro 40mm/second to 85mm/second had me convinced enough to contact SPAM and oozenest. SPAM listened and ryan from oozenest blew me off. People wouldnt even know their machines could be that good if it wasnt for a designer named harrison at SPAM who listened to my idea and made it a reality for everybody.

 

I didn't give the bird to anything. I made tensining your system without distroying it possible. Seans idea was good and bad. the idea of tension was good. the idea of swapping those plates and putting all that tension on bearings not designed to take that tension was extremely bad.

 

oh and to answer your question. no i do not believe it is part of the version 2. Harrison at SPAM was saying they were considering adding it to the v2 and including it with the v2.2 which i do not believe they have released yet. He had a couple other ideas to add to v2.2 before they released that. But SPAM does not own the idea it is open for anyone to sell as long as they sell it as Tingle Tensioning System and give me credit for the design. For lack of better terms it is limited open source with that one requirement.
Even though Ryan Lock of oozenest blew me off. He did say he would review it and see if they could incorporate it into their design. so don't be too surprised if oozenest puts out a workbee version with the same system.

 

Are thrust bearings for pre-tensioning a screw drive supposed to be a new idea? Before we start throwing around new names and credits, it should probably be noted that it's fairly standard in industry for reducing simple mounting-based backlash, overcoming compression-load design limitations (where spec'ing larger diameter screw is impractical), eliminating compressive-tensile variations in length (would also show up as lash-under-load), and various other precision-performance factors along similar lines, in some systems in addition to Belleville washers in order to maintain consistent tension throughout thermal cycling (I'd guess this depends on how much additional tensile stress the screw can take up if cooled and if it has to be offloaded).

Because ball screws come standard with a threaded end and (at least at the hobbyist level) circlip ends, it's fairly straightforward to hard-mount them to their end bearing mounts which can then be easily tensioned in mounting, eliminating the need for continuous-stall-level motor activation(!!) or ratchets or any of those other less-than-ideal and kind-of-unmeasurable methodologies in terms of machine performance and service life. It would be a sensible option on this T8*8 leadscrew; turn down the ends and thread them maybe M6 if possible. Well, it would be more sensible to go to 10mm or 12mm screw first, but past that, some kind of plain-end sourcing would be great. If not, a simple circlip groove on both ends would still allow for simple shimmed duplex tension mounting.

In terms of "tightening everything up" at the motor end, I hope that doesn't include the coupler and motor itself, which would result in also axially preloading the motor's internal bearings within the extent of the play available in the thrust bearing triplet's mounting, notoriously not a best practice. This method also seems to either also preload the deep groove ball bearings (something it was purported to avoid?), or leave them completely floating and unloaded at all, it's a little hard to tell, but neither of which is particularly good for the motion system as a whole.

In general, it seems that taking a leaf from the ballscrew manufacturers' books and switching to tapered roller bearings or maybe at lighter loads angular contact bearings, which can be installed as a duplex or a triplex (more typical of ball screws; a duplex in the motor end independently loaded against each other, with an additional singlet at the free end loaded against that duplex) with a method of tensioning that avoids any use of motors or machine frame at all beyond the actual mounting points would be a much better idea.

One slightly easier-to-implement option (ie. doesn't require a swiss lathe or a centerless grinder) than the plain-end circlip groove is flats on the screw or through-holes, for grub screw collar or roll pin collar mounting respectively. Hard-milling has come a long way into the hobbyist mainstream in the last few years. That would be relatively minimal manufacturing overhead whilst still allowing the individual screw systems to be properly tensioned via simple shimming at the mounting bearing flanges (probably the most common method in general). Thinking about it, you could even perfectly match dual-y-axis average screw pitches via asymmetric installation tension as long as the machine's dynamic loading wasn't going to be enough to mechanically test it, if you really wanted to.

Looks like simple Google searches like "ball screw pre-tensioning" and "ball screw stretch" show a lot of discussion on the topic. It would be interesting to see how it varies with the lighter-weight machines.

 

Rick? Where's Rick? *JohnTravoltalookingaround.gif*

Sure... But the system itself isn't great, and I can see a lot of machines getting damaged by inexperienced users. Plus, I'd argue, what really matters is coming in with a bad attitude and insulting OB forum staff because they had the sheer gall to... Comment based on their experiences thus far? When a claim is marginal at best, community standing counts for a lot.

See that's a much better system already, purely working within the screw channels and ensuring that bearings are uniformly tensioned in order to fully engage the grooves. Is this the Carew Tensioning System now? Or was it a rephrasing of what I'd already said above? The Taylor Tensioning System? Hmm... Tormach might have some concern about our new TTS system over here. Maybe it needs a cool name like OBTENSE

 

I suggested that Openbuilds put bearings and collars outside of end plates like Ooznest did a few months ago. I bought new lead screws from ZYLtech and found out that they were slightly thicker than those from Openbuilds.

 

Their Ooznest OX clone came with an Ooznest name plate.

 

And I'll be trying this. Thanks, David, for the video.

 

I presumed. Thorough copying, I have to say.

 

Yes! The most important thing when it comes to culture, sharing, and taking down broken copyright.

Obligatory: