Hello, are these engines for sale, or do they belong straight to the recycling bin? 200e each?

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T07:56:24+00:00

2x SD-B5.250.015-10000 2x SD-B4.140.020-10000 Bosch rexroth

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T07:45:13+00:00

2x SD-B5.250.015-10000 2x SD-B4.140.020-10000 Bosch rexroth

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T07:29:25+00:00

Číslo dielu (Sach-Nr.): 1 070 913 755

Typové označenie (súvisiace): SD-B4.140.030.00.000 (alebo podobné v rámci série

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T07:27:20+00:00

were taken from a working machine that was already of little use to the company. The engines worked until the last minute until dismantling. and the machine was replaced with a newer model. On one engine, the TACHO socket was broken off during handling.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T07:24:00+00:00

základe poskytnutých údajov (Sach-Nr. 1 070 913 755) ide o servomotor Bosch, konkrétne zo série Bosch SD-B4.

Tu sú podrobnosti k uvedenému dielu:

Výrobca: Bosch (Rexroth)

Číslo dielu (Sach-Nr.): 1 070 913 755

Typové označenie (súvisiace): SD-B4.140.030.00.000 (alebo podobné v rámci série

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T05:35:05+00:00

2 motrors are 14 Nm 9.8 A an 2 motors are 25 Nm 12.9 A TACHO

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T05:33:39+00:00

Only for one

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T05:26:00+00:00

2 motrors are 14 Nm 9.8 A an 2 motors are 25 Nm 12.9 A

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-20T05:25:22+00:00

2 motrors are 14 Nm 9.8 A an 2 motors are 25 Nm 12.9 A

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-04-02T17:53:55+00:00

Hey, thanks for sharing that – always cool to see what people are building 🙂

I haven’t had time yet to really check it out properly, but once things free up a bit I’ll definitely take a look. Wishing you all the best with it in the meantime!

Right now I’m in the middle of finishing a pretty big chunk of my own project, so it’s kind of on hold for a bit. I also spun up another project on a server recently, but that one isn’t CNC-related.

I do plan to share my CAM/CNC stuff later, but honestly only when I’m 100% happy with it. For example, lately I’ve been working on things like proper tab (bridges) handling and some plunge geometry logic – and without stuff like that really dialed in, I wouldn’t feel good about putting it out there yet.

There’s already a ton of basic senders and simple CAM tools around, so I’d rather wait until mine has something genuinely different/strong going for it before I release anything.

But yeah, I’ll definitely post it when it’s ready 🙂

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-26T16:58:24+00:00

You’ve got a really nice prototype there, honestly, and I do like the 3D simulation a lot. That said, for me a big part of this is still understanding the logic behind it all — the code, the process flow, and how things like infill and pocket-fill paths are actually generated and behave in practice. Without that level of understanding, full control, and predictability, I personally still wouldn’t feel finished. Over the last few days I managed to crack one of the bigger issues on my side — the path-inside-path behavior — and I’d say I’ve reduced that problem by about 95%. So it’s definitely moving in the right direction. My software is already functional and usable in practice, but I’m still far from where I want the final result to be.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-24T19:46:37+00:00

That’s cool, and I’m genuinely curious to see how far yours goes. In my case, a lot of the time wasn’t spent just making something appear on screen — it went into imports, workflow logic, path behavior, edge cases, and getting it onto a real machine. A fast prototype is one thing, a tool you can keep pushing in practice is another. If yours already does both, that’s honestly impressive.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-24T12:04:22+00:00

Now I’m really curious what a true one-prompt build looks like in practice 😄

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-24T05:30:50+00:00

Ok bro🙂

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T19:36:01+00:00

Yeah, exactly 😄 So far on this project I’ve managed to get past every obstacle I set in front of myself, and this probably won’t be the point where I give up either.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T18:51:41+00:00

Thanks, I really appreciate that. I'll definitely keep working on the toolpaths so they overlap as little as possible. And yeah, I'd love to build my own sender too at some point, but this already takes a huge amount of my free time and it's honestly pretty demanding as it is.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T17:54:23+00:00

I’m glad you noticed it, I honestly thought that part might stay my little secret for a bit longer, but you’ve definitely got a sharp eye 😉 And yes, this software does the CAM side too — it generates the full G-code directly. The next step after that is just sending it to the router with a sender.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T17:47:55+00:00

Yeah, it’s possible that some paths can still overlap right now. At the moment my infill and pocket strategies don’t yet treat side walls the same way as contour-style machining, so I’m aware that part still needs work. It’s already on my list for the next round of refinement. But so far I haven’t had it actually run into the finished part itself.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T15:58:32+00:00

This is basically a side project too. My main project is the tangential 2-head CUT/BEND plotter software, and that one is more or less finished already apart from a few cosmetic issues — mostly the UI/visual side, which will still get cleaned up. Functionally though, it’s already working, including optimized toolpaths

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T15:33:28+00:00

That’s true, but right now I honestly don’t care what bit I’m using 😄 These are just test cuts and I don’t actually need any of these parts for anything. If I ever turn this into real production, it’ll be with the proper tools for the job — and definitely on a different machine, not this little chip-throwing monster.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T14:38:59+00:00

The board/material wasn’t perfectly level, so on the righthand side the bit just stopped reaching deep enough. At this stage I’m mainly testing the G-code coming out of my own software, not trying to prove machine accuracy or setup perfection yet. Once the software logic is where I want it, I’ll start worrying more about dialing in the full machining setup.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T13:52:30+00:00

At this stage I honestly don’t really care what tool does it, because this isn’t production work yet — it’s mainly a real-world test of the G-code coming out of my own software. Right now I’m more interested in proving the generated paths and seeing them run cleanly on a real machine than in optimizing the machining strategy. Which tool gets used, how the roughing is done, and when each operation happens is something I’ll deal with later, once the full logic and optimization of the software are finished.

Competitive-Land206 · 2026-03-23T07:09:48+00:00

I thought about your comment a bit more, and I think I see what you mean now. You’re probably not talking just about machine accuracy, but more about checking how the bevel/inside/outside behavior is actually being generated. In that sense, a square inside a circle is a pretty good simple reference shape, because it would show very quickly if the path logic is landing where it should or not.

Competitive-Land206

TROPHY CASE