Different run times Shark Pro vs Shark Pro Plus HD

[Consultingwoodworker]

Tim,

So you ARE doing production which means time IS a factor. Good to know.'

The Shark and the Shark HD should probably not be run using the same programs. Again, I apologize if I have the models mixed up, I'm not an expert on the differences, but my machine is a Shark Pro (I think). It has the Colt router. I program for it in a certain way to get the best results out of it. I am limited to 1/4" shank bits as well. If I were programming for a larger Shark that was using the PC 890, I would be running faster feed rates and making deeper passes than I ever could with my Colt router.

THAT is how I would expect to get shorter run times out of a heavier version of the Shark. It is, as I said before, entirely possible that under certain conditions the lighter weight Shark can accelerate and decelerate more rapidly since it has a LOT less mass to control. But removing one or more cutting passes, and cutting faster with the big router would more than make up for it.

If you want to send me the .crv file, I would be more than happy to look it over and give you my opinion on ways to improve the run time. I'd even be happy to chat with you over the phone to discuss it. PM me if you wish and we can schedule a time.

Ralph

[rungemach]

I thought the initial question was why does his HD take longer than the older pro to run the same G-code.
The HD is supposed to have faster rapids, so that should work in its favor.
also supposed to have bigger motors with more power, so that works in the HD's favor.

If the HD was advertised as bigger, stronger, faster. it should not be 28 % slower than the older pro.

granted, you can work around the issue with good practices, but the issue of the HD running slower using the same g-code still remains.

28% slower is a substantial difference, and if the cause is found, it should make a significant improvement..

If you are running that many signs every day, a faster commercial grade machine might have a good payback.

[rungemach]

I ran your Tap file in my modified shark, running mach3, and the run time was 10:17

I have my machine dialed back from max speed so that it will never lose steps. my rapids are at 150ipm.
I believe I saw advertising indicating the shark HD was up to 200 max.

The tap file indicates a time of 7:07 and I am not sure exactly what that means. If it is a run time estimate, it would be with a commercial machine.

As the job ran I noticed that the desired 75 ipm was not occurring that often as the machine slowed down to handle the curves and direction changes.
It seemed like it spent a lot of time in the 40 -65 ipm area. long rapids were at full speed, (150 in my case).

It will help to have some others post their run times as there may be something amiss with how your HD machine is running. As a side thought, you may have the precision set high and the machine is slowing down to exactly follow the G-code.

attached is a screenshot of my run of your file.

[Consultingwoodworker]

It am be a matter of semantics, but if the HD has a "top speed" of 200 ipm, and the Shark's is 150, then the HD is "Faster" by any normal definition. A Corvette is faster than my old MGB was in most cases, but on the twisty back country roads I grew up on, my MG would leave Corvettes in the dust. All curves, no straight and the big heavy engine becomes a liability not an asset.

And now we see that the exact same program runs even faster than either of yours using the same code. Machine parameters matter!

My point was that if you want to make money with these machines, you should not only be creating different G-Codes for them, but even selecting which machine does which work.

A sign with a lot of lettering or shallow v-carves should go to the smaller, more 'nimble' machine. A lot of pocketing or cutting should go to the heavier machine.

I have worked with hundreds of clients that use more than one CNC. Unless they bought two of the exact same model, none of them use the same g-code to run multiple machines.

What you might do is create two "users" on your computer, with one being the Pro and one being the HD. Both user profiles will share the VCarve software, but it think each might retain the last settings use as separate temp files.

[TKWoodCrafts]

Hello,

rungemach, in your last reply you made my point better then I could. Thank you

I uploaded a video to youtube showing my two sharks running a test file.
Here is the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMRvbLK ... e=youtu.be

When you watch the video you'll see that the Shark HD model takes longer to run the same g-code.
The setting for the bit that I used are:
90 deg v-bit
Pass depth .25
Final pass stepover 100
Clearance pass stepover .25
Feed rate 200
Plunge rate 70

Consultingwoodworker, if I understand what you are saying that I have to set higher settings for the Shark HD machine just to get the machine to run as fast as the Shark Pro that makes no sense to me when I already have a feed rate of 200ipm, which is the maximum that Next Wave says that the machine can run. And if you are saying that because the machine is heavier that it has to run slower to make curves then it defeats the purpose of having a heavier and more stable machine, which is why I purchased the Shark HD in the first place.

I have to give credit to Next Wave for making a more stable machine with the Shark HD because with the experience I have on the Shark Pro the Shark HD definitely can run faster then what it is running at now.

Tim

[rungemach]

I think it will be helpful to determine if your Shark HD run times are typical of the Shark HD, or if you have an issue with your particular machine.

If someone with a HD machine can run the file you posted and report the time, it will help determine if you have an isolated issue or if your performance is typical of the HD.

Before we go into work-arounds etc, lets see if there isn't something wrong with your individual machine. If other HDs are posting much lower times than yours, you have something to go on. If the other HD's are posting similar times to yours, you know that you do not have a misbehaving machine.

My machine started life as a Shark pro, but now is as heavy as the HD (if not heavier, as it has a lot of aluminum in it now), and it is running a large Porter Cable router or a 2KW spindle.

Lets hope that other HD times are shorter than yours and there is something that may be easily fixed.

Bob

[TKWoodCrafts]

Update to my problem of run time

Next Ware found that my control box settings were not set right. They had me reset them and now my run time is the same as my Shark Pro.

I want to thank Next Wave for taking the time to solve the issue.

Tim