Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
I hope it’s okay to start a new thread that is more general in nature.
I am designing a solely horizontal macro set-up, because my primary lens will be the Rayfact VF, with object to image distances of up to about 50 CM. I’ll also use microscope objectives, though unsure of how high in magnification. Unlikely to be more than 20x.
I am thinking of using a horizontal-only design, based on Thorlabs 66mm extrusion, as Lothar used in his two-way solution.
Would a rigid, two-point rear, with, say, a 40-50 CM spread and elastomer feet, offer materially better performance due to increased torsional resistance? I plan on a lower center of gravity for the camera, which will mitigate some of the momentum. What sort of magnification would it take to realize a benefit?
I am going with a THK KR2001 rail, with an idler unit - Ray has made a convincing case for the cost benefit.
Are people aware of an off-the-shelf, single step solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
I am thinking about using a cheese plate for the subject area. They are cheap, offer lots of attachment options and are easily-expanded. The video market has a lot to offer, attachments-wise.
This makes more sense to me that where I started, which was optical bread board, which seemed too costly and heavy for the rigidity, with more holes than needed.
Any other general thoughts, product tips, etc.?
I am designing a solely horizontal macro set-up, because my primary lens will be the Rayfact VF, with object to image distances of up to about 50 CM. I’ll also use microscope objectives, though unsure of how high in magnification. Unlikely to be more than 20x.
I am thinking of using a horizontal-only design, based on Thorlabs 66mm extrusion, as Lothar used in his two-way solution.
Would a rigid, two-point rear, with, say, a 40-50 CM spread and elastomer feet, offer materially better performance due to increased torsional resistance? I plan on a lower center of gravity for the camera, which will mitigate some of the momentum. What sort of magnification would it take to realize a benefit?
I am going with a THK KR2001 rail, with an idler unit - Ray has made a convincing case for the cost benefit.
Are people aware of an off-the-shelf, single step solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
I am thinking about using a cheese plate for the subject area. They are cheap, offer lots of attachment options and are easily-expanded. The video market has a lot to offer, attachments-wise.
This makes more sense to me that where I started, which was optical bread board, which seemed too costly and heavy for the rigidity, with more holes than needed.
Any other general thoughts, product tips, etc.?
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
you are welcome :-)Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmI am thinking of using a horizontal-only design, based on Thorlabs 66mm extrusion, as Lothar used in his two-way solution.
I don`t think so, the system in itself is very rigid. Only problem is that 4 feet can wobble on an uneven table. Therfore I have three oder my two rubber feet can swivel a little and be tightened to adopt to the tabel surface. By the way the third (single) foot makes an excellent handle to carry the whole setup around.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmWould a rigid, two-point rear, with, say, a 40-50 CM spread and elastomer feet, offer materially better performance due to increased torsional resistance? I plan on a lower center of gravity for the camera, which will mitigate some of the momentum. What sort of magnification would it take to realize a benefit?
In my setup I also mount the camera closer to the rail and have added a second rail slider which gives much more stiffness than only a single rail slider. THK also offers this type with two sliders called THK KR2001b or what I would take the next bigger series KR2602b (but these come with 2mm pitch instead of 1mm on the KR2001).
you can bolt two ready available Arca clamps to your THK rail and then fix it on the Thorlabs rail in any axial position without the need of tools. If you take an Arca double clamp you can attach Arca stuff to the rail or connect two rails with each other.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmAre people aware of an off-the-shelf solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
First tighten the clamps on the Thorlabs rail (in order to align them) then tighten the screws in the THK-rail connecting towards the clamps.
For a horizontal-only design you can bolt Arca clamps to a thick piece of plywood (40mm) as a base plate which grab the Thorlabs rail at the underside. Arca clamps work excellent and are available for a few bucks, hard to beat this.
regards
Lothar
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Thank you, Lothar - you have made a very elegant and clever design.lothman wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:04 pmyou are welcome :-)Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmI am thinking of using a horizontal-only design, based on Thorlabs 66mm extrusion, as Lothar used in his two-way solution.
I don`t think so, the system in itself is very rigid. Only problem is that 4 feet can wobble on an uneven table. Therfore I have three oder my two rubber feet can swivel a little and be tightened to adopt to the tabel surface. By the way the third (single) foot makes an excellent handle to carry the whole setup around.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmWould a rigid, two-point rear, with, say, a 40-50 CM spread and elastomer feet, offer materially better performance due to increased torsional resistance? I plan on a lower center of gravity for the camera, which will mitigate some of the momentum. What sort of magnification would it take to realize a benefit?
In my setup I also mount the camera closer to the rail and have added a second rail slider which gives much more stiffness than only a single rail slider. THK also offers this type with two sliders called THK KR2001b or what I would take the next bigger series KR2602b (but these come with 2mm pitch instead of 1mm on the KR2001).
you can bolt two ready available Arca clamps to your THK rail and then fix it on the Thorlabs rail in any axial position without the need of tools. If you take an Arca double clamp you can attach Arca stuff to the rail or connect two rails with each other.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmAre people aware of an off-the-shelf solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
First tighten the clamps on the Thorlabs rail (in order to align them) then tighten the screws in the THK-rail connecting towards the clamps.
For a horizontal-only design you can bolt Arca clamps to a thick piece of plywood (40mm) as a base plate which grab the Thorlabs rail at the underside. Arca clamps work excellent and are available for a few bucks, hard to beat this.
regards
Lothar
As I was writing, I noted a partial anagram - LOTHAR THORLAbs.
John
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
but the secret is, that my brother works for Thorlabs and as they moved I had the chance to grab some stuff.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:04 pmAs I was writing, I noted a partial anagram - LOTHAR THORLAbs.
John
-
- Posts: 3439
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Peter at @mjkzz sells the components to mount onto the carriages of KR20 and KR26 rails. I started my work with these rails using the conversion components from @mjkzz so can recommend them highly. I don't see these listed separately on his site, but I suspect he can supply the components if requested. He has a nice adapter that mounts to the carriage, and wraps around the dust cover(if one is present) to give two flat mounts either side of the cover. From there he has a cheese plate that mounts to the adapter, and from there you can mount an Arca clamp or whatever you want. He also offers flat mounting plates that attach to the backside of the rails. Here is a link to the complete conversion kit including motor mount, motor, etc:Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmAre people aware of an off-the-shelf, single step solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
https://www.mjkzz.com/product-page/thk2 ... system-usb
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Thanks, Ray.ray_parkhurst wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 4:35 pmPeter at @mjkzz sells the components to mount onto the carriages of KR20 and KR26 rails. I started my work with these rails using the conversion components from @mjkzz so can recommend them highly. I don't see these listed separately on his site, but I suspect he can supply the components if requested. He has a nice adapter that mounts to the carriage, and wraps around the dust cover(if one is present) to give two flat mounts either side of the cover. From there he has a cheese plate that mounts to the adapter, and from there you can mount an Arca clamp or whatever you want. He also offers flat mounting plates that attach to the backside of the rails. Here is a link to the complete conversion kit including motor mount, motor, etc:Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 1:22 pmAre people aware of an off-the-shelf, single step solution that allows the attachment of either an Arca rail, or Arca clamps to a THK KR2001 rail? The bolt pattern is M6, 18mm on center, @ 60mm spacing.
https://www.mjkzz.com/product-page/thk2 ... system-usb
I should have been clearer - I was referring to the bottom of the KR20. I have a kit that Peter installed in a surplus rail a few years ago.
edit: I will probably order some of the kit parts to make adding the idler as painless as possible.
Here is the link to the KR20-ready Arca rail.
https://www.mjkzz.com/product-page/200m ... wiss-plate
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
KR26 is "much" wider and much higher compared to a KR20 and therefore stiffer, a KR26 can handle 3x higher vertical loads than a K20. Think of the lever arm your camera setup has to such tiny sliders of a K20, especially in vertical setup. And with microstepping a 2mm pitch spindle is sufficient for 50x lens.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:07 amLothar - do you prefer the KR26 for the travel or the build weight?
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
MJKZZ has already designed a new rail based on THK KR26 but with a 1mm pitch screw, and longer travel distance of 130 mm. It's the Ultra Rail MINI V2. I'm testing it right now, and it works really well. I think even better than its top version, MJKZZ Xtreme Pro
https://www.mjkzz.de/collections/ultra- ... 1425701047
https://www.mjkzz.de/collections/ultra- ... 1425701047
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
THK does not offer the KR26 with 1mm pitch screw and since the ball screw nut for the spindle is integrated in the slider block such a modification would be very difficult. I think it is a smaller rail may be KR20.
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Error.
Last edited by Doppler9000 on Wed Sep 22, 2021 1:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
I am sketching out a design using side-by-side KR2001 units, one as an idler, similar to some schematic images Ray has posted. Does the idler unit have to be a “B” with two carriages, with the active carriage tied to the idler on the second rail ?(Ray posted some image diagrams seem to indicate this, but may have been just an example).
The side by side arrangement might make me reconsider the Thorlabs 66 system.
I am planning a potential stitch axis, which would be manual at first, and where the camera might be to the far left and far right of the rails, so I have been thinking about joining the two rails with 20 series V-Slot extrusions at 90 degrees, to give strong resistance to torque.
How wide a gap makes sense?
I am still puzzling with various other details.
My other question is regarding the StackShot controller - can I use it with 0.9* steppers?
The side by side arrangement might make me reconsider the Thorlabs 66 system.
I am planning a potential stitch axis, which would be manual at first, and where the camera might be to the far left and far right of the rails, so I have been thinking about joining the two rails with 20 series V-Slot extrusions at 90 degrees, to give strong resistance to torque.
How wide a gap makes sense?
I am still puzzling with various other details.
My other question is regarding the StackShot controller - can I use it with 0.9* steppers?
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Yes, absolutely. That's what I have in my rig. You might also check with Cognisys (the company that makes the StackShot) to see if they have on hand any stepper motors with 0.9 degree steps. Last time I asked about this--quite a while ago--they did. Before that, when I built my rig, they were kind enough to special order two 0.9 degree stepper motors that I had found online, terminate and test them, and send me the better of the two units. This for a very reasonable charge.Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:01 pmMy other question is regarding the StackShot controller - can I use it with 0.9* steppers?
--Chris S.
-
- Posts: 3439
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
I did something similar with my first S&S system. I used a pair of KR15 rails, one for X and one for Y. I "triangulated" the idlers, ie I placed an idler about 4" from the bottom KR15, and that idler had two carriages spaced about 1" apart. I mounted a rectangular aluminum plate on top of this arrangement. This alone would make an excellent single-axis system if you want to move a surface about. The spacing between the idler rail and the KR15 stabilizes the "roll", while the two spaced idler carriages stabilize the "pitch". The second axis is essentially an orthogonal duplicate. Here's my original concept drawing:Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:01 pmI am sketching out a design using side-by-side KR2001 units, one as an idler, similar to some schematic images Ray has posted. Does the idler unit have to be a “B” with two carriages, with the active carriage tied to the idler on the second rail ?(Ray posted some image diagrams seem to indicate this, but may have been just an example).
The side by side arrangement might make me reconsider the Thorlabs 66 system.
I am planning a potential stitch axis, which would be manual at first, and where the camera might be to the far left and far right of the rails, so I have been thinking about joining the two rails with 20 series V-Slot extrusions at 90 degrees, to give strong resistance to torque.
How wide a gap makes sense?
. .
This arrangement would work well for a horizontal setup, but using in a vertical setup would introduce stress on one of the driving rails in the "yaw" dimension. Is this why you're considering two driving rails? If so, then I'd just recommend "triangulating" them in a similar way with an idler whose carriage is offset to provide support against pitch stress. I can make a quick drawing of this if you would like.
Edited to add: if used vertically, only the Z dimension would require a second driven rail.
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:56 pm
Re: Stand-alone Horizontal Macro Unit Design Questions
Hi Ray,ray_parkhurst wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:14 pmI did something similar with my first S&S system. I used a pair of KR15 rails, one for X and one for Y. I "triangulated" the idlers, ie I placed an idler about 4" from the bottom KR15, and that idler had two carriages spaced about 1" apart. I mounted a rectangular aluminum plate on top of this arrangement. This alone would make an excellent single-axis system if you want to move a surface about. The spacing between the idler rail and the KR15 stabilizes the "roll", while the two spaced idler carriages stabilize the "pitch". The second axis is essentially an orthogonal duplicate. Here's my original concept drawing:Doppler9000 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:01 pmI am sketching out a design using side-by-side KR2001 units, one as an idler, similar to some schematic images Ray has posted. Does the idler unit have to be a “B” with two carriages, with the active carriage tied to the idler on the second rail ?(Ray posted some image diagrams seem to indicate this, but may have been just an example).
The side by side arrangement might make me reconsider the Thorlabs 66 system.
I am planning a potential stitch axis, which would be manual at first, and where the camera might be to the far left and far right of the rails, so I have been thinking about joining the two rails with 20 series V-Slot extrusions at 90 degrees, to give strong resistance to torque.
How wide a gap makes sense?
.
Picture1_3.JPG
.
This arrangement would work well for a horizontal setup, but using in a vertical setup would introduce stress on one of the driving rails in the "yaw" dimension. Is this why you're considering two driving rails? If so, then I'd just recommend "triangulating" them in a similar way with an idler whose carriage is offset to provide support against pitch stress. I can make a quick drawing of this if you would like.
Edited to add: if used vertically, only the Z dimension would require a second driven rail.
Thank you tor this - a quick drawing would be very helpful.
I was going to use a undriven KR20 for the idler just for ease of fabrication, but wanted to check it was low enough in resistance.