A little feedback: I found a video of this in action in the forum link, but it should be on the landing page. Also, photo examples of larger completed projects to judge accuracy are necessary. If none of your kits include the 3d parts (not the best choice IMHO), you should at least have a link to uploaded 3d files on a site where they can be ordered.
Great feedback, thank you. The video is indeed on the landing page, but as people have mentioned it's hard to see (which is obviously a problem hahah).
I am working on putting out more videos! Definitely aiming to address the accuracy and answer some other FAQ. As far as 3D printed parts go, tbh I'm just going that route for now because it's easier. Less hassle to deal with another manufacturer (or build out my own print farm, which is a whole other thing) and have to go through all the quality control that comes with that. Definitely planning on incorporating 3DP parts in the future, but saving that for when other stuff is more dialed in. Good idea to include a link to 3DP supplier.
It's probably worth noting that a commercial version of this exists (Shaper Origin). It's a bit pricey but is remarkably nice for a variety of tasks that can't be handled by a stationary mill. And because it's hands-on, it's also easier to catch mistakes as you go.
On the flip side, it's just much, much slower than a stationary setup. You can't really push it quickly while retaining enough control to stay in the narrow range it can compensate for. Further, because it's less rigid, high feed rates produce nasty finish.
A big difference between this and that is that this appears to determine relative positioning through multiple mouse-style optical sensors, rather than visually checking relative to patterned tape.
The reason Origin uses tape is to maintain precise, absolute registration over large distances - so that you can for example machine a pattern the size of a kitchen table.
I am very skeptical you can have that level of registration with mouse-style sensors that can only measure relative motion. I might be wrong, but it seems unlikely.
The Origin also talks about repeatability. They sell a fixture that has an image of the tape fixed along with positive stops. The idea is that you can batch out parts quickly by setting up a workspace and swapping parts in. No idea if these sensors would be able to do something similar.
Yeah mouse sensors actively throttle update frequency at slow speed to mitigate drift, as they appear to suffer pretty much random walk steps of sort each time they generate an update. Exceptions are probably limited to zero-motion deltas.
Mouse sensors also only output x/y displacements, not rotations-- even though their mechanism of operation would allow it. I assume that's why this device uses four of them.
There are inexpensive mouse sensors which are made for long distances for use on drones. Sadly they're also still limited to x/y... might be useful for compass to have some upward facing sensors to track the ceiling, but maybe losing track isn't that big of an issue in practice.
A CNC router with a work area suitable for typical woodworking projects is definitely not $300 - you're probably thinking about 3018 kits, but with 18 cm of travel, that's really not enough for the usual scale of woodworking projects. Not even enough for a typical cutting board.
A ready-made unit in "woodworking" size will likely set you back $2-$4k.
Handheld router != CNC. A fixed-base 2.25hp DeWalt handheld router runs about $370. The 1.25hp Makita 700 in the Compass' glamour shots and assembly instructions runs about $130. Most fall in that range.
The tape is also like $20 a roll, I realize this pales in comparison to even medium tier wood, but was sorta immediately off putting for me since it reminded me of all the stuff with inkjet printers.
I wonder why not use those simple laser rangefinder things and instruct the user to put CD-tracking like servo steering suitable retroreflectors at fixed-relative-to-workpiece locations. 2 should suffice for planar work.
Probably "tape money" reasons for that engineering trade-off...
Beautiful. I made few CNC's in my previous life, started a CNC company and bankrupted. Bankrupt because I tried to make everything myself, including electronic circuits. Your work looks great, congrats.
I suggest you keep a small video on the homepage(maybe youtube video). Also your site took a little time to load because of huge images (especially github image is 11mb).
It looks like you're selling your own control board PCB design as part of the kit. I'm guessing that it doesn't have Wifi by itself, so that would make it an unintentional radiator under FCC rules. How did you deal with EMI testing and certification? Can you recommend any services or labs? Would you be willing to share how much it cost? I'm asking because I am considering publicly selling prototypes of my 3D sound hardware, but the regulatory stuff has so far prevented me from doing it.
Interesting project. I am sure it was a lot of work (and fun as well).
I was introduced to the general concept when the Shaper Origin came out a while back. Here's my problem with the idea:
What's the use case?
Any xyz gantry router will run circles around this approach, by far. They will be much faster, more accurate and, more importantly, hands off. There's a lot to say for clamping the material and mashing the "go" button. The pattern shown in the video on the YT channel literally takes three seconds to cut on a gantry router. And you can swap material and push go again, very quickly (or cut as many as possible out of one piece of material.
For around $1K you can have a much more capable machine. Unless the use case is cutting/engraving on items that cannot be cut on a traditional router, I am not sure what these would be used for. Then the question becomes: How many of those projects do DIY hobbyists have?
The other question is one of accuracy and repeatability. Having done loads of CNC metal machining, CNC and manual wood routing, I can tell you that nothing beats a rigid xyz machine.
So, if someone has just one or a few odd parts that cannot be cut on an xyz router, well, maybe that's a use case. Other than that, why would anyone guild one of these rather than a gantry?
The workflow on the shaper origin is extremely nice, --- apply tape, swing it around to capture the environment, load svg and position. If you need a regular spacing grid, you just press a few buttons and ram the tool into three non-colinear points on the edge of your object.
You can cut objects in place, including irregularly shaped stuff you'd need to disassemble to put on your gantry. That comes up frequently for engraving but it's not exclusive to it.
The whole device is basically the size of a sewing machine. Yet it can cut parts that won't fit on an gantry you're able to fit in your garage.
It's quite tedious for repeated work. So I think it's really more in the class of manual power tools than in the same class as a CNC setup.
As far as accuracy goes, the tracking tape eliminates some source of errors. Say your clamping is not 100% and the part shifts slightly while being worked-- tape the part moves with it and all is still happy. Of course, it introduces some of its own problems too.
So in summary:
1. Very small device, yet can work with arbitrarily large pieces.
2. Good workflow means very fast setup suitable for one offs.
3. Works in situ, especially useful for engraving things in place.
I imagine that if it weren't a bit pricey that many people who do CNC woodworking would also have a shaper origin like device-- much like you probably have a skillsaw in spite of owning a CNC router.
Plus the simplicity of setup and the size makes it attractive to anyone who only wants a tiny amount of CNC for precision engraving, hole positioning, or cutting an inset for a hinge... and would never own a CNC gantry.
FWIW, I use a Shaper and I think there are four areas where it is better than a gantry. If I was just blasting out flat parts, I'd go for a typical gantry setup. But I very rarely do that.
1.) Cuts that are not easy on a gantry. It would be very difficult to do a tenon on a gantry. You could do one side and then flip the piece. Or maybe you could have a special bed with a void for putting stock in that direction. Either way would be difficult to get just right. With the Shaper and their workstation this is a 60 second operation.
2.) Cuts in the real world. If your stock fits into a gantry, great. But if it doesn't then you're going to have to dismantle the thing to get it into your CNC. With the Shaper I've done inlays on-site, in hardwood floors, kitchen counters, on walls, and on a rough surface picnic table.
3.) Sneaking up on tolerances. Again, if you're batching out a ton of stuff you'll get your tolerances once and everything will be set. But when I use a gantry getting the tolerances just right takes a ton of time. On the Shaper you cut a pocket, test fit, bump the tolerance by a thou or two, recut, and re-fit. This is fast on the Shaper.
4.) Storage space. I don't have a ton of space. I have a small CNC (~15" x 15") for small stuff that I want to batch out, but I work out of my garage. I'd love to drop a 4' x 8' CNC in there, but it isn't going to happen. With the Shaper it all goes into a systainer box and sits on a shelf. When I want to do something big I lay some foam down on the driveway to use as a backer, drop the wood, lay out the tape, and go.
It's crazy pricey. But that's more because it's owned by Festool than any inherent reason. If you're the kind of prosumer who goes for Festool-grade tools then it's probably a decent fit.
Size I assume - this should be able to handle massive projects at the same price, while a gantry router would be much more expensive. Or so I would assume, I didn't dig into this to see how large it can go.
> It automatically adjusts the cutting tool to stay on the programmed design path, enabling a significantly smaller device footprint while still handling large-scale cuts.
I don't know how many people it concerns but the use case is very clear
I've always wanted a Shaper Origin, but the cost and subscription fee required for accessing some features always turned me off. I don't need it for anything other than fun hobby projects and couldn't justify it. Now I get double the fun: building a tool, and getting to use it! Nice work.
Maslow is self-propelled using cables. It's the same goal - expand the work area by getting rid of a rigid frame of the mill - but a fundamentally different way of getting there. Here, you're the one moving the mill to follow your desired pattern, and the device simply corrects for your errors to stay on target.
A little feedback: I found a video of this in action in the forum link, but it should be on the landing page. Also, photo examples of larger completed projects to judge accuracy are necessary. If none of your kits include the 3d parts (not the best choice IMHO), you should at least have a link to uploaded 3d files on a site where they can be ordered.
I am working on putting out more videos! Definitely aiming to address the accuracy and answer some other FAQ. As far as 3D printed parts go, tbh I'm just going that route for now because it's easier. Less hassle to deal with another manufacturer (or build out my own print farm, which is a whole other thing) and have to go through all the quality control that comes with that. Definitely planning on incorporating 3DP parts in the future, but saving that for when other stuff is more dialed in. Good idea to include a link to 3DP supplier.
On the flip side, it's just much, much slower than a stationary setup. You can't really push it quickly while retaining enough control to stay in the narrow range it can compensate for. Further, because it's less rigid, high feed rates produce nasty finish.
I am very skeptical you can have that level of registration with mouse-style sensors that can only measure relative motion. I might be wrong, but it seems unlikely.
There are inexpensive mouse sensors which are made for long distances for use on drones. Sadly they're also still limited to x/y... might be useful for compass to have some upward facing sensors to track the ceiling, but maybe losing track isn't that big of an issue in practice.
https://handibot.com/
You can get a very nice router for $300-ish; the Shaper Origin is 3k.
A ready-made unit in "woodworking" size will likely set you back $2-$4k.
Probably "tape money" reasons for that engineering trade-off...
I suggest you keep a small video on the homepage(maybe youtube video). Also your site took a little time to load because of huge images (especially github image is 11mb).
I was introduced to the general concept when the Shaper Origin came out a while back. Here's my problem with the idea:
What's the use case?
Any xyz gantry router will run circles around this approach, by far. They will be much faster, more accurate and, more importantly, hands off. There's a lot to say for clamping the material and mashing the "go" button. The pattern shown in the video on the YT channel literally takes three seconds to cut on a gantry router. And you can swap material and push go again, very quickly (or cut as many as possible out of one piece of material.
For around $1K you can have a much more capable machine. Unless the use case is cutting/engraving on items that cannot be cut on a traditional router, I am not sure what these would be used for. Then the question becomes: How many of those projects do DIY hobbyists have?
The other question is one of accuracy and repeatability. Having done loads of CNC metal machining, CNC and manual wood routing, I can tell you that nothing beats a rigid xyz machine.
So, if someone has just one or a few odd parts that cannot be cut on an xyz router, well, maybe that's a use case. Other than that, why would anyone guild one of these rather than a gantry?
You can cut objects in place, including irregularly shaped stuff you'd need to disassemble to put on your gantry. That comes up frequently for engraving but it's not exclusive to it.
The whole device is basically the size of a sewing machine. Yet it can cut parts that won't fit on an gantry you're able to fit in your garage.
It's quite tedious for repeated work. So I think it's really more in the class of manual power tools than in the same class as a CNC setup.
As far as accuracy goes, the tracking tape eliminates some source of errors. Say your clamping is not 100% and the part shifts slightly while being worked-- tape the part moves with it and all is still happy. Of course, it introduces some of its own problems too.
So in summary:
1. Very small device, yet can work with arbitrarily large pieces. 2. Good workflow means very fast setup suitable for one offs. 3. Works in situ, especially useful for engraving things in place.
I imagine that if it weren't a bit pricey that many people who do CNC woodworking would also have a shaper origin like device-- much like you probably have a skillsaw in spite of owning a CNC router.
Plus the simplicity of setup and the size makes it attractive to anyone who only wants a tiny amount of CNC for precision engraving, hole positioning, or cutting an inset for a hinge... and would never own a CNC gantry.
1.) Cuts that are not easy on a gantry. It would be very difficult to do a tenon on a gantry. You could do one side and then flip the piece. Or maybe you could have a special bed with a void for putting stock in that direction. Either way would be difficult to get just right. With the Shaper and their workstation this is a 60 second operation.
2.) Cuts in the real world. If your stock fits into a gantry, great. But if it doesn't then you're going to have to dismantle the thing to get it into your CNC. With the Shaper I've done inlays on-site, in hardwood floors, kitchen counters, on walls, and on a rough surface picnic table.
3.) Sneaking up on tolerances. Again, if you're batching out a ton of stuff you'll get your tolerances once and everything will be set. But when I use a gantry getting the tolerances just right takes a ton of time. On the Shaper you cut a pocket, test fit, bump the tolerance by a thou or two, recut, and re-fit. This is fast on the Shaper.
4.) Storage space. I don't have a ton of space. I have a small CNC (~15" x 15") for small stuff that I want to batch out, but I work out of my garage. I'd love to drop a 4' x 8' CNC in there, but it isn't going to happen. With the Shaper it all goes into a systainer box and sits on a shelf. When I want to do something big I lay some foam down on the driveway to use as a backer, drop the wood, lay out the tape, and go.
It's crazy pricey. But that's more because it's owned by Festool than any inherent reason. If you're the kind of prosumer who goes for Festool-grade tools then it's probably a decent fit.
> It automatically adjusts the cutting tool to stay on the programmed design path, enabling a significantly smaller device footprint while still handling large-scale cuts.
I don't know how many people it concerns but the use case is very clear
Maybe I'm a complete dumbass but I could not find a video at any of the URLs on this post using Chrome under Sonoma.
It’s on the compass home page. Admittedly the Play button does blend into the background image of the router a bit.
I’m curious why Jupiter Notebook is involved.
I'm not seeing that --- sounds interesting! Link?
Very cool project.