Could use a small “prox switch” most work between 9vdc to 32vdc…
1 Like
I fear the stray rapids that would leave them resting in pieces.
How about a non contacting Magnetically Actuated Switch?
1 Like
hi CharesVanNoland… I work @ the USPS as an ET and all of fast moving equipment uses them or photo eyes
1 Like
Why whould changing the type of switch change this? Even worse: an optical, inductive or capacitive switch is more expensive and easier to damage.
There are 2 ways to prevent damaged switches:
- Either mount them close enough to mechanical end stops that prevent them from getting
crushed. - Or use a switch with lever and roll (e.g. something like
this http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/E62-10K/CH114-ND/90967)
that can be actuated and “overrun” from the side instead of getting crushed
frontally.
If your machine gets to the point where a limit switch will activate you are already deep into “Oh, Sh*t” territory and saving a $0.50 switch is probably not the primary goal.
Although, for the perfectionists in our group (maybe me sometimes), a swtich which can be located out of the line of fire could be attractive.
1 Like
There’s a third way - Don’t go there in the first place. Soft limits are your friend. 
Something that doesn’t require contact can be positioned to detect from the side, not directly in the path of. I suppose even the existing switches could be as well.
These are $0.60, that’s hardly expensive:
http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Sharp-Microelectronics/GP1S094HCZ0F/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMvQY0bpacMSoS9azmLf07jL2AzMJPMC9qg%3D
Since the unit runs on arduino you could use Hall Effect sensors. Hall Effect sensors use magnets and the great thing about them is you can set how sensitive they are, That way you “shouldn’t” have issues with them triggering falsely. Just go into the code and replace the line of code for the limit switches with the few lines of code for the Hall Effect switches. There are plenty of examples online to show how to do this.
2 Likes
I just discovered them while googling limit sensors! I think I might investigate further what it would take to get them going. The reason I want limit switches is more to serve for zeroing the machine for homing purposes. Personally, I could go without limit switches entirely but it seems like it would be more convenient if I could use the homing functionality of GRBL, and would prefer to do so without mechanical switches. This is purely a personal preferential issue, not a black-and-white cost/benefit analysis conclusion, similar to how I have blue zip ties and cable shielding on my machine 
- If you have step losses soft limits will not help.
- And a machinist not being aware that his CNC program exceeds the machines travel and workpiece size is… well… a shitty machinist
(I totally agree with you that avoiding collisions is the best strategy.)
However I don’t see too much need for limit switches on machines like the X-Carve or Shapeoko anyways - there is little risk to damage the machine if it just hits the end stops occasionally (and you should never ever leave a machine running unattended anyways - we’ve had a case of a burnt down shed here in Germany just a few months ago because someone left his CNC machine just a few minutes unattended. The result: a high five figures damage that no limit switch could have prevented.)
I just want to use the homing feature of GRBL
I find that having the ability to home the machine is quite useful and I’m a big supporter of soft limits.
One technique that I use is a feature of grbl which works well with soft limits. If I get a questionable G-code file from someone I will crank up UGCS and use the $C grbl command to get grbl to interpret the file without moving the machine. With soft limits on and $C active I can run the G-code to test it to see if the file sends the machine out of bounds without having to risk my machine or damage material.
2 Likes
Yep, if your machine doesn’t work, it doesn’t work. No way around that.
1 Like
If the switch is used for precise homing instead of “just preventing a crash” - and if home is used for more than just roughly establishing a reference for the soft limits (e.g. to return to fixed positions or workpieces after losing coordinates) you also need to keep its repeatability in mind.
A lot of contactless methods and also many mechanical switches will trigger at quite varying positions each time - so home will not always be exactly at the same spot.
Mechanical microswitches are quite good - also most inductive sensors. Switches with levers like the one I’ve posted previously are quite bad for example.
1 Like
Over on the Shapeoko forum there are some great discussions on this subject. Here is one of many that can be found there on Hall Effect switches;
http://www.shapeoko.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6049&hilit=hall+effect
2 Likes
Hall effect sensors seem like a pretty good solution!
I am using rare earth magnets hot glued to the makerslide for my hall effect sensors.
I adjusted mine by shifting the sensor a bit…the hot glue can be popped off with a blade and reglued very easily.
Here is a quick video of me homing the machine…all I have now.
For the X and Y axis I mounted the sensors to the makerslides with the magnets mounted to gantry plates. On the Z-Axis, I had no room to mount the sensor on top, so it is on the moving part of my Z-Axis with the magnet mounted on top. My Z-Axis is no longer the standard X-Carve axis.