| Peter Daniel |
| Anybody still arguing that making PCBs is better? I don't see a better way to built this circuit. Of course it's still work in progress but the end is near. Any idea what this might be? |
|
|
| till |
I can´t understand why i should spend same amount of money for a PCB as for parts needed for a hole amp. (OK, a small amp like the ZEN ones.)
I built bride of ZEN that way, took 2 hours and maybe 20Euro for parts. |
|
|
| HarryHaller |
Say are those aqua colored caps ceramics?
Hurry please, the peace and well being of the forum may depend on it!
H.H. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by HarryHaller
Say are those aqua colored caps ceramics?
H.H. |
I couldn't find a better cap for 10pF value in parallel with 100k ohm in a feedback loop.;) |
|
|
| Vince Maida |
I have to agree with H Potter that point to point wiring is a fine way to build something in small quantities. I've worked in the microwave field for 30 years and have prototyped tons of designs
using point to point (albeit very short distances) wiring over a continuous ground plane. The technique works well up to about a couple of gigahertz where the transition from lumped elements to tranmission lines starts to become necessary.
In fact when comparing the performance of designs implemented on a PCB to the point to point technique (especially when the circuit impedances are high), the point to point technique usually results in superior performance. This is mostly due to the higher loss of the PCB dielectric and built in stray capacitance
. At audio frequencies I suppose the additional capacitance inherent in PCB runs can contribute to some signal degradation. Looking at it another way the dielectric constant of air is 1, Glass epoxy=5, even teflon is 2.2. A Lower dielectric constant yields a smaller capacitance for a given trace to ground plane spacing. |
|
|
| Jocko Homo |
Looks like we are up to 2 microwave types now. And we are both Italian.......hmmmmmmm.
Jocko |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| I have just finished prototyping Grey's Aleph X. Everything is mounted on big heat sink. I used 12 output devices per channel and Expect the rails to be +/- 20V. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| That's the close up of front end. I mounted differential mosfets on metal plate and current source mosfet is suspended above. Two green power resistors are the outputs to ground 30 ohm. You can also notice that I used 0.1ohm Caddock resistor at the output. It's 16W and it compact size really fits my setup. I also thin it souns much better than the bunch of parallel resistors. Everything could be so close together that signal traces are practically not existant. I'm really curious about the sound, but still second channel and PS have to be done. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| And the final picture shows how the output mosfets are connected. You really don't need the PCB for that stage, everything fits together and locks in place. By using PCB I would introduce unnecessary connections and longer signal paths. You can see the sensing circuits hanging between the rails. I had pretty hard time puting current sense circuit together but finally I manage to make it compact. That's the place for those circuits, beside output devices and not on the front end board. Grey, you can see that I'm also using Panasonic blue power resistors. With so many of them in the output I would be hard pressed to spend money on anything more expensive. And thank you for the Aleph X circuit.:) |
|
|
| Elso Kwak |
Hi HPotter,
It very strongly reminds me to the Jadis amplifiers, known for excellent sound quality.
For even small production I prefer PCB's as making mistakes is very easily done and a major disaster in a poweramp.:) |
|
|
| tiroth |
Swapping components and some minor circuit changes are much easier with a PCB.
Hpotter, your amp is one of the cleanest complex P2P implementations I've seen. Without a lot of care (and a simple enough circuit) P2P can quickly become such a mess that even identifying which part of the circuit is what is a real pain.
I always use P2P wiring in PSU where large currents are flowing, and I've certainly built many other circuits that way, but all things being the same I'd much prefer a board. Sometimes it just takes too long to design and etch one, or the compromises required to obtain a planar mapping are too great.
Stray capacitance on PCBs is a problem, but not of great effect on a well designed PCB at audio frequencies. The impedence of a trace with Cp=100pF at 100kHz is 16M. Where stray capacitance has a chance to cause great harm (feedback loop, miller effect) extra steps can be taken to reduce crosstalk (guard traces) or trace-to-ground capacitance (unfilled or no ground plane). Sometimes stray capacitance can be exploited for HF rolloff, as it is nearly an ideal capacitance. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
With PCB I wouldn't achieve such tight component spacing which led to very short signal paths, especially in the input and sense circuits. Period.
My intention was to make a circuit superior to PCB, that's why it also looks organized and pleasing. Took me two days to do it, but taking into account that my previous amps stayed in my system 7 years it's not such a big effort or waste of time.
Also, that amp is based on the current production design from Pass Labs and I thought that making PCB would be inappropriate.:cool:
I thanked Grey already, but I'd also like to give my thanks to Mr. Pass for providing him and everybody else on this forum with inspiration.;) |
|
|
| GRollins |
I, too, tend to use large gauge copper wire when doing point to point wiring.
Good luck. Report when you can. At the rate things are going, you'll be the first to actually hear music out of one of these things.
Grey |
|
|
| HarryHaller |
You go for it..... PC boards are for sissies and mass production. Vectorboard works great also and is a little friendlier for the less adventurous. Point to Point sounds better. Carefull with those scope probes and VOM leads though.
H.H. |
|
|
| paulb |
| This is indeed a beautiful thing. I'd like one in plexiglass in my living room, but SAF might be a problem. |
|
|
| promitheus |
| what kind of screws do you use ? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| Output devices are with brass screws #6-32. Differencial pair mosfets with plastic screws, same size. I didn't use M3 screws because the thread is to fine. SAE works better here. |
|
|
| promitheus |
Are these screws normaly for metal sheet ?
If so, do you use first a smaller hole and then just screw them in ?
this part troubles me because I don´t want to damage my heatsinks with bad holes. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| No, those screws require the threaded hole. You can drill straight holes on table drill or you can use the drill guiding blocks like I'm using. Two of them are commercial pieces, used in aircraft industry, the third one is home made. I also use them for tapping the holes. As I said before cordless drill gun with a clutch works the best here.:) |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| This is what I was talking about: |
|
|
| trigon |
| Peter you are the genius. |
|
|
| Nednai |
| I’d recommend using a self-reversing Tapmatic with a drill press instead of a drill gun with a clutch. I’d even suggest using drill guides with a drill press instead of drill guides and a drill gun. |
|
|
| ALW |
Whilst I've often used p2p for RF and microwave prototyping with excellent results, when doing critical analogue electronics at lower frequencies I have no doubt whatsoever that a good PCB layout will outperform p2p.
My own recent work in ultra low noise PSU's has shown me that physical connection points are critical, I can guarantee absolutely the position of a track on a PCB, and exactly where it connects, but the only way to acheive the same result with p2p, is a hot soldering iron, and moving wires and then measuring the result (or by doing something much more messy).
Those bus-bars in your photo for example aren't true summing points for the current flows in them - does that affect performance in any way? Each o/p device sees different potentials, related to the current flow in the finite impedance of the wires. It may not be relevant, but I doubt, if all else were optimized, that would be the case.
I personally like the inside of the case to look as good as the outside - p2p will never achieve consistent results - you cannot control the stray parameters in the way a PCB can, I'd go for a PCB every time, despite the aggravation.
A. |
|
|
| HarryHaller |
For really serious high audio I do not agree.
1. It is probably easier to get better quality wire than the quality of copper used in printed circuit material. Particularly for large conductors. I believe for four ounce copper PCBs they often plate up 1 or 2 ounce copper base material to four ounce. This leaves plenty of chance for contamination. I know. I have spent plenty of time in board shops. Solder mask over bare copper, the board are often plated in then the plating chemicaly stripped.
2. Dielectrics.... Go ask for teflon and if the guy running the board shop doesn't throw a fit, proceed to your bank to check your balance cause you are going to pay big time. Teflon insulated wire... real common.
3. There are many high end products that use point to point wiring or a hybrid of PCB boards and wire. Think they enjoy paying for the extra labor. Maybe there is good reason to do it and price the product to take account of this increased labor cost.
4. Flexibility... it is easier to change wiring routes and guage than spin a new PCB. Same goes for circuit changes. And I have modified hundreds of PCB based designs so I speak with experience.
5. PCBs are great for mass production, but some of us build race cars and not Toyota Camerys around here. Try both methods on your next serious audio project and you may be suprised. I have cut traces to run long and or critical signals with wire many times with good results. I think hand wired circuits look just as cool as PCBs.
H.H. |
|
|
| JasonL |
I dont think that the cat that dares to lay on the amplifier wil like his / her supprize.. i prefure pcb's because of the lay out but humm
that would look good in a plexy glass case..
J' |
|
|
| bob12345678 |
I am surprised no one has mentioned the picture of MR. Passe's
A-40 prototype....
Speaking of pets and hifi my pet bird desided one day that my
soldering iron looked like a good purch ....
Regards,
Woody |
|
|
| JasonL |
That is funny eeheh ... sorry had to laugh..
where is the link to this prototype
jason |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nednai
I’d recommend using a self-reversing Tapmatic with a drill press instead of a drill gun with a clutch. I’d even suggest using drill guides with a drill press instead of drill guides and a drill gun. |
I tried Tapmatic with drill press and I will never use it again on heat sinks and small amplifier parts. Forget about that thing when tapping 7/64" holes. You don't need drill guides when using drill press. When your part is on the table the drill is always aligned properly. Drill guides blocks are designed to be used with hand drill guns. If you never tried cordless drill gun with a clutch for tapping I recommend you try. You will not believe the results and forget about Tapmatic.:eek: |
|
|
| fcel |
| Peter: I know I've seen your pictures and description of clutch for cordless drill for tapping purposes. Can I get the clutch that you mentioned from Home Depot? Part #? Is there different sizes? Thanks. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by ALW
Those bus-bars in your photo for example aren't true summing points for the current flows in them - does that affect performance in any way? Each o/p device sees different potentials, related to the current flow in the finite impedance of the wires. It may not be relevant, but I doubt, if all else were optimized, that would be the case.
A. [/B] |
I don't quite follow what you are trying to say here. Whould you make better bus-bars with PCB? You cannot say that they don't have the same potential if you don't see where the power supply is connected and it is not connected yet.
Actually what you see on the photo is a prototype which will be tested and optimized depending on performance. What I probably would do is to provide ea. output device with it's own capacitor bank connected directly to the device. On the other end ea. capacitor bank would be connected to the rect. bridge and that's where the main buss is going to be. I know that the best way would be star connection with separate wire from bridge to ea. capacitor bank. That way I will not have a buss as such between devices. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by fcel
Peter: I know I've seen your pictures and description of clutch for cordless drill for tapping purposes. Can I get the clutch that you mentioned from Home Depot? Part #? Is there different sizes? Thanks. |
This is what I'm talking about. Both those pistols are available from Home Depot and they have build in clutches. I don't think you can get a clutch separately. For construction work I prefer Makita, for fine metal work on amplifiers I chose Bosch, 12 V should be enough. And don't listen to people who tell you that Tapmatic tool is better.:) |
|
|
| fcel |
| Thanks Peter .... I'll check it out at Home Depot. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| But remember use a drill guide. You can make one out of two plates connected with spacers and dilled through on a drill press ( as you can see on my previous picture). |
|
|
| ALW |
| quote: | | Whould you make better bus-bars with PCB? You cannot say that they don't have the same potential if you don't see where the power supply is connected and it is not connected yet. |
Whether PCB or p2p is better for the bus-bars is irrelevant. You can only connect the power to one point on each bar and it matters little where that is, the original statement holds true. Simple ohms law dictates it must be so.
Wherever you connect it the different devices will see different potentials, and modulations theroeof, effects can be minimised with care, something I'm sure you've already thought about.
As I said it may not matter, but have you tried alternatives, or examined the effect?
As for your other comments: -
1. It is probably easier to get better quality wire ...
This is relevant if you consider it to be important to the final result. PTFE dielectric PCB is not cheap or pleasant to work with, but I do not believe that FR4 is going to have a serious detrimental effect. It's used in just about every high-end product I can think of. In p2p the dielectric is primarily air (unless laid in contact with a chassis, I'm not convinced the dielectic's electrical properties are relevant. Mechanical - maybe.
2. Dielectrics.... see above
3. There are many high end products that use point to point wiring or a hybrid of PCB boards and wire. Think they enjoy paying for the extra labor. Maybe there is good reason to do it and price the product to take account of this increased labor cost.
OR maybe need a justification for the often exhorbitant price ;)
One will always need a limited amount of wiring, and I can think of loads of instances where it's easier to get a desired result using mixed technology, so no real disagreement there.
4. Flexibility... it is easier to change wiring routes and guage than spin a new PCB. Same goes for circuit changes. And I have modified hundreds of PCB based designs so I speak with experience.
There is one big proviso to this though - that is the original PCB designer got it wrong!
If the PCB was right and optimized in the first place, there would be no need to mod. I now spend inordinately large amounts of time designing and simulating real models of my work - I can usually get most things right first time then. Mods only then come from technology improvements.
5. PCBs are great for mass production, but some of us build race cars and not Toyota Camerys around here. Try both methods on your next serious audio project and you may be suprised. I have cut traces to run long and or critical signals with wire many times with good results. I think hand wired circuits look just as cool as PCBs.
I wouldn't let p2p anywhere near a race car ;)
My PSU's are pretty much as good as it gets (Jung-based). I know for a fact it would be impossible to get consistent and almost perfect results without a PCB. Of course there's plenty of wiring to the PCB's. A wire though, 1mm out of place, even along a heavy low-impedance connection gives measurable and audible degradation!
My over-riding comment is that you simply cannot consistently control any of the parameters needed for good, performance using p2p, mechanical and electrical properties will change in every unit you build.
None of the above is a personal criticism, p2p is a great way for most people to do DIY, something I'd never discourage, and for 1 off's you may get great performance, but try building a batch and getting exactly the same performance from each unit.
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but in p2p I just think 'rats nest' :) .
A. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ALW
[B]
Whether PCB or p2p is better for the bus-bars is irrelevant. You can only connect the power to one point on each bar and it matters little where that is, the original statement holds true. Simple ohms law dictates it must be so.
That could be avoided with star wiring where you run separate wire to ea. device from power supply point, same for all devices. Something that could be practically impossible with PCB and really easy with p2p, even with 24 output devices.
Any thought on that?;)
We are not talking about repeatibility here also, because ea. amp is more like piece of hand made art with a unique value for its owner.:cool: |
|
|
| Nednai |
| Those heat sinks are huge compared to the small parts I had to tap using a Tapmatic. We always used a clamped drill guide and a drill press. Without a mill, it was the quickest, easiest way to get accurate drilled holes, which was required to get FAA certification. After drilling/tapping 10’s of thousands of holes using drill guns and drill presses, I’m surprised you had difficulty with a press, even at 7/64”. I guess the ease came with experience. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
Whenever possible I always use press drill to drill holes. Even size 70 drill doesn't present any problem. I never use clamps and guides on drill press because I'm not required FAA certification and it slows my work. When not using drill guides, clamp is actually not recommended because without it a drill centers better on a piece you are drilling.
Remember that we are talking here about DIY and most of the people don't have access to Tapmatic and drill press. Even mine is only 8" and some of the holes on that big heat sink I couldn't drill on drill press. The only alternative is using hand drill (alhough for that purpose I don't recommend cordless one because the speed is too slow, use electric one) and a guiding block I showed in a picture before. Most of the people don't have access to commercial ones but one can be easily made as I also show in a picture as well.
I tried Tapmatic before and didn't like it. Used to tap everything by hand. Just recently tried to use a cordless drill and I am surprised with results. And it also much faster. Ever tried tapping M2 on Tapmatic? |
|
|
| Nednai |
| Actually, you clamp the guide to the piece you’re drilling. I didn’t notice any built in clamp on your guides. When a guide costs $10-15, why make one at home? As for certification, I’ve never known an FAA certified driller/tapper. It’s the parts that get certified. M2 on a Tapmatic? No problem. When a press&Tapmatic costs less than a new Weller, why not have them? Easy, precise, fast, who would want less? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
When you use hand drill do you also clamp the guide to the piece you are drilling? Because you really don't have to. I'm using mine on aircrafts and it's impossible to clamp them to the skin. That's why you don't see them on my guides.
Would you mind leting everybody know where those cheap guides can be obtained? I guess they might be handy for everybody drilling holes in heatsinks.
I also don't understand your argument. I presented here something very simple and it works so why make it more complicated? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
I've read again through your post and I begin to understand what kind of guides you are talking about. The holes I'm mostly drill when working on amp are marked with a punch so I cannot clamp a guide before starting to drill because it wouldn't be at the spot marked by a punch. The drill locks itself on that spot when drilling. It's the only way and I don't see how a guide might be helpfull here. FAA is not required here as well so why making your work more complicated then required. Lubricating a drill helps a lot when drilling deep holes.
The guides I'm showing on my pictures are not the same thing you are using. They are required when working on aircrafts with hand (air) drill guns and help in positioning the drill at 90 deg. towards drilled surface. No clamps here. They also have removable inserts with different hole sizes. I don't think they come as cheaply as you said.
What you do when your piece is too big to fit the drill press?
What is a current price of a Tapmatic? |
|
|
| Nednai |
The guides we used were the same as yours. They slipped into the jig, allowing different sizes.
I’m not saying I was FAA certified, I don’t know anyone that is. Our parts were sent in to be FAA certified. All our parts were small enough to be made on a press. Everything larger was sent out. The parts I worked on were small, like your
For cheap drill guides/jigs, I’d suggest your local metal shop. Shipping alone would double the cost.
I see Tapmatics in the $15-35 range at the Rose Bowl Flea Market.
As for fluid, it was used for both drilling and tapping, lots of it. A different kind was used for aluminum and non-aluminum, although I don’t remember what the deference was. |
|
|
| Keld |
| quote: | | As for fluid, it was used for both drilling and tapping, lots of it. A different kind was used for aluminum and non-aluminum, although I don’t remember what the deference was. |
For aluminum: ethanol is the best !
Keld |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
Nednai,
You still didn't answer my question. What method would you use for drilling and tapping if the piece is too big to fit drill press?
The guides might be the same, but the mount for them is different. If my hole is marked with a center punch I am not going to use a jig. This is mostly done in production when the process is repeated thousand of times but not when the part is one of a kind.
I'm not trying to say that either me or you need FAA certification. All I'm saying is that the parts we make for amps don't need that certification.:)
The lubricant I'm using and which is recommended when working on aircrafts is Anchorlube G-771 by Anchor Chemical Co., Tel.440-871-1660 |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
Another good lubricant that I'm using is Boelube. Developed by Boeing and distributed by The Orelube Corp, Tel(516)-249 6500, (800)645-9124, product # 70200-13.
It's like a waxy substance which sticks to the bit and when hot melts. This is actually least messy lubricant I tried and in some aplications very recommended. It works with metal, composites, graphite and wood. Can be applied to drill bits, taps, reamers, files, saw blades, deburringtools, belt sanders, punches. |
|
|
| Nednai |
| I thought I answered your question when I said, "All our parts were small enough to be made on a press. Everything larger was sent out." |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| Unfortunately not all my parts "are small enough to be made on a press" and I have to deal with that problem myself. ;) |
|
|
| Digi |
That's funny that you mention Beolube. My father works a Boeing and I get it for free, I didn't know you could buy it from the retail market. I just dip my bit in and let her rip, also it works great on taps too, highly recommended.
Rob |
|
|
| grataku |
Being that in most situations the truth lies somewhere in between, I would be tempted to say that the best would be to have a small pcb for all the small signal stuff and p2p for power stuff.
I am extremely good at soldering, and yet I think it would be extremely difficult not to have to heat the small components several times with the soldering iron in order to attach the various components together and that can't be too good.
I am working on such a board right now. Will post soon. |
|
|
| Jason Hubbard |
I am in full agreement with Grataku.
Keeping all the high current stuff off board and wired point to point is more flexible (than having everything fixed in place on a PCB) and has far greater current capacity than can ever be accomplished on a PCB. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Digi
That's funny that you mention Beolube. My father works a Boeing and I get it for free, I didn't know you could buy it from the retail market. I just dip my bit in and let her rip, also it works great on taps too, highly recommended.
Rob |
I don't know if you can get it retail. The phone # was on a box. I get mine from aircraft industry as well.:) |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by grataku
Being that in most situations the truth lies somewhere in between, I would be tempted to say that the best would be to have a small pcb for all the small signal stuff and p2p for power stuff.
I am extremely good at soldering, and yet I think it would be extremely difficult not to have to heat the small components several times with the soldering iron in order to attach the various components together and that can't be too good.
I am working on such a board right now. Will post soon. |
When putting together that circuit I used four different soldering irons. I wouldn't worry about overheating small components when using correct temperature. However, I must agree that small board for input circuit (preferrably double sided) wouldn't be a bad idea. Although for my amps I'll stick with p2p.;) |
|
|
| Nednai |
| HPotter: You’re the one that said we’re talking about heat sinks and small amplifier parts. Most of us don’t have the room or feel the need to have a shop like Parker Hannifin. If you take your time and keep your eyes open, you can easily find a Tapmatic and a drill press for the price of a new drill gun. I trained a lot of people how to drill and tap holes in the past. None seemed to have the difficulties you experienced. Unlike you, I’m not telling others how they need to achieve their goal. As a Quality Control Analyst I know there is more than one way to skin a cat. An option was what I offer, not a demand. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
I had a feeling that you would not let that go. You probably make good material for Quality Control Analyst because you are picky about every single word I use. So just to clarify the things:
I never ever had a problem with using drill press, in fact I love to use it and I do it whenever I can.
The parts are rather small but the heat sinks are sometimes big and they don't ALWAYS fit the drill press that I'm using.
You didn't offer any solution for the above scenario and I did present the easiest and quite accurate way to drill and tap the holes off the drill press.
I don't remember demanding anything and I don't see anything wrong with telling others how they need to achieve their goals. They are always free to make their choices.
Now, since you trained a lot of people how to drill and tap, I would like to ask you for advice. In my recent amp I had to drill and tap the following parts. Drilling the holes on the side of the rod is not a problem, however, doing it at the ends might present some difficulties to unexperienced or not creative. I had to make 16 such holes for #10-32 bolts. What would be your recommendation to do that in an "easy, precise and fast" manner. Please notice that I'm using your words and you might treat it as a sort of a challenge.;) |
|
|
| DocP |
Hi all,
ALW, you said in a mail in this thread that
"My PSU's are pretty much as good as it gets (Jung-based). I know for a fact it would be impossible to get consistent and almost perfect results without a PCB. Of course there's plenty
of wiring to the PCB's. A wire though, 1mm out of place, even along a heavy low-impedance connection gives measurable and audible degradation! "
I like what you are saying about PCB. I tend to keep power supplies p2p for simplicity but the rest has to be on a PCB, especially as I want as good a match between channels as I can get. I would also much rather spend the effort getting one right and then just bang them out after that for the bi-amp, tri-amp monstors I dream of.
My real question is that I have seen reference to Jung in relation to PCB before. Who ? What ? and most importantly where ???? Is there a paper or web site or reference for this PCB guru ?
Ta
DocP |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
"A wire though, 1mm out of place, even along a heavy low-impedance connection gives measurable and audible degradation! "
ALW, what do you mean here? |
|
|
| HarryHaller |
Walt Jung is an application engineer for Analog Devices. He is an OP Amp applications "guru" and has written several books on using op amps. He has written several articles for Audio Amateur now Audio Electronics magazine. I don't remeber any references to him being a "PCB" guru.
http://www.audioxpress.com/magsdirx...ex/aabilist.htm
H.H. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nednai
I’d recommend using a self-reversing Tapmatic with a drill press instead of a drill gun with a clutch. I’d even suggest using drill guides with a drill press instead of drill guides and a drill gun. |
Quick search on Tapmatic tools shows following link: http://www.penntoolco.com/catalog/products/54.cfm
The cheapest self-reversing head cost $360. Even my needs for drilling and tapping wouldn't justify that expense. As to flea markets my search didn't bring any results. However Mr. Nednai, I would be glad to buy a used one from you and check it again. Maybe the one I was using initially was defective.
:confused: |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
Since you were so persistant with your Tapmatic I made an effort and found the tool I was using for tapping. While it's not exactly Tapmatic, the price was different as well. I paid CAD$150, used it once and never tried it again. The biggest problem I found about it was that when tapping small holes in aluminum it did not go into reverse and was breaking taps. It was happening probably because there was no torque adjustement.
The other and probably main reason for not using that kind of tool is that YOU ACTUALLY need two drill presses. As you can see that this tool has to be mounted on a drill press in place of a chuck, which means permanent installation. The way I work on my press is that I like to drill some holes, then tap them, put the parts together, mark more holes, drill them and then tap again and this is how it goes. With that kind of installation you either use your drill press for drilling or for tapping. I understand that Tapmatic mounts in similar way, at least for the price they ask it should.
I can only suspect that somebody using similar tool for the first time would experience more trouble than gain. Cordless drill gun is one most popular tool in home use. If used for tapping with a tap guide it can work marvels.
PS. Mr. Nednai, please remember about my challenge and present us with an easy solution to drill those holes at the ends of the rod. Enough time wasted for talk about Tapmatic.
;);) |
|
|
| Nednai |
| HPotter: it turns out that I'm not your personal shopper. To answer your previous question, use PMAI (Plan, Measure, Assess, Improve). A good tool to start with is an XmR chart. Joint Commission's web site has more info if you need it. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nednai
HPotter: it turns out that I'm not your personal shopper. To answer your previous question, use PMAI (Plan, Measure, Assess, Improve). A good tool to start with is an XmR chart. Joint Commission's web site has more info if you need it. |
:)
I guess I should say no more.:) |
|
|
|
