Has anyone seen this site

Thanks for the link. There's a lot of useful information on the site.

I'm convinced that if the clever engineers of the 18th & 19th century had access to linear bearings, stepper motors, and computers, they would have used them rather than cams and chains. I'm fascinated with the fine workmanship and intricacies of the historic machines. But my engineering background encourages me to explore any new materials or techniques that can make the task easier.
What a great site!

There is a ton of info on this site, ive always had a bit of an interest in the cnc ot. just dont have all the experiance / info that it takes.
I looked around most all of the site , but i didnt see any kind of gallery of
work produced with this software. Did i miss it somewhere? Anyone else see it?
Thanks Chad
Re site

I must confess to being the creator of the site. I am fairly new to OT and have just nearly finished building my rose engine mark2. The software is an ongoing project that still needs much work to give it all the functionality I want. The gallery does not yet exist, I am a beginner to OT and my rose engine is only now in a complete enough state to allow me to use it to create something. So no articles yet to speak of only a couple of simple test pieces. But as I produce stuff I will upload it.



Did your choice of the name "Mark 2" have anything with the Mark 2 rose engines made by Fred Armbruster? Were they your inspiration or somesuch?

Re name Mark2

David, Larry

Sorry for the long delay in replying I have no excuse I just haven't logged onto this site for a couple of months. Just looking through it again I realize I should have.

To answer you question, I just called it Mark 2 without any thought because my wood lathe + stepper was mark 1. But giving it some thought I think I was inspired by the Rambling rose engine mark 2 created by Fred Connell & Roland Hege. At one time I was looking at the MDF based Rose engine created by Jon Magill, but came across The Rambling rose 2 in aluminum whose design I liked. So made a decision to go for ali and like the rambling rose use round bar for the bed. I was aware that Fred Armbruster had produced a rose engine as I had heard about it at SOT meetings here in the UK but did not know anything of its actual design.

However for my own design I was certain that it would be stepper motor based. I was (still am) sort of aiming for a 50/50 modern traditional mix in that the rosettes and thus headstock motion would be software defined but there would still be a craft element when it came to positioning the cutter. Also moving the cutter for depth feed etc could either be manual or under cnc control.

At present I rely on a PC running Emc for the movement but sometime in the future aim to produce a little stand alone processor to run the engine.

I have no plans drawn for the engine, I started with an idea of just being able to transfer my chuck between my wood lathe and the rose engine and sizes followed from that. I freely admit that things went astray a bit and that a mark 3 (which is not in the pipeline) would be slightly different. The main problem is that I can turn an 18 inch bowl on my wood lathe but the rose engine will only hold a 14 inch bowl. I should have made the distance between the bed bars a little wider or the headstock a little higher. As it is I am thinking of adding 2 inches to the height of the headstock some time in the future. At present I am happy to accept the 14 inches limit and try some ornamental turning where I admit I am a complete beginner and build some more essential equipment such as a cutting frame and overhead drive etc. as at present I am using a milling head and cutters.

Thanks for you interest I shall try to remember to log in a little more often in future.

Thanks to Alanb for pointing me in the direction of this section of the forum and discussion.
I am a recent convert to OT also a long way behind you fellows but with the help of the members at Ornamental Turners Australia and the web i am picking things up very fast.