X-Carve Pro bench build w/ cabinets and improved control box

Hello all,

I wanted to share with you my completed X-Carve Pro bench with cabinets and secured (and improved) control box)

The bench was made from a pair of off-the-shelf stackable shelving units. I did not build it (the bench) out of wood and instead went with shelving units because I wanted it to be modular and removable. I envision outgrowing this current shop, and wanted any future move to be as painless as possible,

Following the suggested 6’ x 6’ design recommendation from Inventables, and needing a top and bottom shelf, this required two four shelf break-down shelving units (I needed all of the side rails to be 6’ in length - PLUS a 6’ beam running down the center of each shelf - so that I could use 3’ x 6’ panels for the top and bottom shelves AND have it structurally reinforced).

I cut the four ‘legs’ to height (34"), and welded brackets to the ends of two of the ‘rails’ which run from front to back on both ‘shelves’ to allow then to connect to the frame at the front and back. There are 2"x2" strips screwed to all corners running the full height. This ads rigidity (the whole bench was racking as the machine was carving, these reinforcements completely eliminated that).

There is a 4" x 4" leg in the center at the bottom and another connecting the bottom and top shelves. I also made legs from the cut-off waste of the other legs, and they are placed mid span of the front and side rails (although I believe that these are just over-kill).

All of the cabinets were made using cabinetmaker in Easel, and you can see my multiple posts along the way with the limitations that I found with that software (many of which the good folks at Inventables have already rectified, others are on the build list, and others are head scratchers - like how does one make a dado all the way around a drawer to hold drawer bottoms when the front and back of a drawer box is carved from the BACK side of the material ??? - my solution was to grab my 100+ year old Stanley #50 and cut the dados like Grand-Pa used to). As with anything the learning curve on this build was a killer. I could have made these cabinets in less than half the time had I used the good ol’ tried-n-true cabinet building methods, but that would not have afforded me the opportunity to learn Easel and Cabinetmaker. So, no regrets.

I did not want to spend the $$$ for the expensive Blum self-closing drawer slides and figured that is decadence in a workshop. Instead, I used the inexpensive side-mount slides available from multiple sources online. This as you may know is not an option in cabinetmaker. This put my math skills to the test, as well as forcing me to learn all of the nuances of editing in Cabinetmaker to get the drawers right. Sometimes success, sometimes failure. But learning all the while.

It was an absolute necessity that I make these cabinets because, like many of you, my shop is small, and losing 6’ x 6’ of footprint meant that there would be no ‘home’ for many of the tools that I NEED to have in my shop. Now that the drawers are built, I am in the process of building out nesting for all of those tools within the drawers. Like this bench/cabinet build, it will have to be done in between a million other more important projects and will likely take nearly as long as this bench cabinets - which took nearly a year and a half (I’ll post more in the future).

Overall, I am very pleased with the cabinets. I have a love/hate relationship with the Cabinetmaker software, and see many areas where it still needs improvement, but I am a one-man-shop and will not be going into the cabinet making business, so my opinion in that arena likely doesn’t count for much.

Regardless, it is sure nice to be able to walk through the shop again, now that I have cabinets to hold my tools that were stuck in crates once the X-Carve Pro took over their home.

Attached are some photos. I welcome any questions.





Here are some photos of the new and improved control box. I moved the cords that stuck out the front (ALWAYS in the way) and put them where they belong, out the back. I also put a hole in the bottom and bolted the box down to the bench, so that it doesn’t fall off the bench or get in the way any longer)



1 Like

You can also notice the blue hose hanging from the ceiling. I discovered very early on - as you likely have as well - that no matter how good the dust collection, there is always debris left over on the wasteboard after a carve. Having that hose at the ready is SUPER HANDY for cleaning up after a carve.

Look great! I agree on having a second hose on-hand for cleaning up dust.

Regarding drawers for future projects, if you are OK with ignoring the Easel-generated ones, I have a simplified alternate design that allows for proper drawer-bottom that I use for all my CNC drawers. You have to figure out the dimensions yourself, but it’s rather easy as the side drawers are just made of 4 shapes, and the front and back 1 or 2 shapes.

Thankyou Phil!!

you’ve got me intrigued.

I had come to the conclusion that making the cabinets with cabinetmaker was fairly successful (except that I have had and continue to have ‘slop’ when using dados for construction (the tenons are just too sloppy no matter how I adjusted. Not sure if it is in the cabinetmaker side, the easel side, or hardware side, but they just flop around, and are harder to assemble than plain old butt joints)). HOWEVER, making the drawer boxes with Cabinetmaker simply takes too long. First, I have to make the sizing adjustments to use non-Blum hardware (obviously not a problem for those who are willing to spend that $$, but mine are shop cabinets), but secondly there is the unsupported bottom of the front and back (which you mention).
Thus, I have come to the point where I decided that any future cabinets will be made using cabinetmaker, and the drawer boxes will be made the goof-old-fashioned way. But reading your write-up opened my mind to the possibilities.

As you have discovered, completely capturing the bottom of a drawer in dados all the way around makes the most sense in assembly. We are using ‘false fronts’ afterall. I make basic cabinet-style drawers all the time, but I also make fine furniture and intricate boxes with drawers, and in those cases, where everything is seen, the sliding bottom makes more sense (attempting to assemble a dovetailed drawer AND fully capture the bottom is a nightmare). So in short, a full width back with a dado makes the most sense IMO.

The only question that I have is this; it appears that your drawer boxes are made from 3/4" ply. Is that correct (impossible to know for sure by a photo)? if so, do you (we) think that a rabbet joint will be strong enough when using 1/2" ply? I honestly don’t know. To be honest, I usually don’t use the 1/4-1/4-1/4 assembly style for my drawer boxes. Frankly I’ve gotten pretty efficient with my router and dovetail jig that I can knock out boxes nearly as fast and obviously the joint is MUCH stronger. And being machine-made blind dovetails, they still go together easily enough with a fully captured bottom (I hand cut my dovetails on my nicer work).

This brings me to my last though experiment: would it be possible to make box-joints with a surface cut CNC for these drawers? I honestly do not know the answer. A search of the internet shows such joints, but I can’t imagine how it could be done without having the material standing on end (like can be done with a Shaper Origin). IF a box joint could be made, that is obviously the strongest option and ideal for 1/2" material as it triples the glue surface. Someone on here - perhaps you - is smarter than I and can answer that one. Is a box joint over-kill? It would be if you had to cut them the traditional way, but if the CNC can do it, it’s just another minute or two of carve time for a MUCH stronger drawer box.

Just random thoughts bouncing around in my head. Regardless, thank you for your post. It gives me more to think about and ponder. Quite the journey this learning to CNC.

I used 1/2" ply. I don’t have any proof, but I honestly can’t imagine the fully-glued rabbet being weak enough to justify a fancier join. Seriously: our kitchen cabinets (which are fairly nice, built 30 years ago) use butt joints on 1/2" ply. Literally no real joinery at all. And not one of them shows a sign of falling apart.

Honestly if you think about it, for drawers they are not experiencing many forces day-to-day. As long as the bottom is well supported, they aren’t likely to be broken, even if they got dropped.

You can make box joints on a CNC flat, but you have to have add dog bones for the corners, because the CNC cannot cut a square corner (or manually square the corner, I guess). I don’t think this would look very nice for a drawer. It’s fine for a utility box. I’ve used this when I was going to cover up the joint.

I do want to make a pass-through for my X-Carve Pro bed, so I can cut end grain. However, I’m less interested in strength than creating interesting boxes with unique join patterns. For drawers, I’ll probably just stick with the rabbet since I’m not building anything that needs exceptional strength.


I just had a thought: I suppose one option would be to make half-blind box joints? I’m thinking off-the-cuff here, but you could theoretically only cut 3/8" through the sides, so the dogbones would be hidden. Then cut the front and back like normal, since you won’t see those surfaces. I might mock this up.

Did a quick mockup in Easel, and it’s a real pain in the butt to set up without some sort of generator. Technically it could work, but this feels like an exercise in frustration unless you were knocking them out commercially.

Here’s a screenshot of my first attempt (though it’s way too sloppy to work):

At least you get a sense for what I mean. The drawer side is on top, and the drawer front is below. You’d get about a 3/8" x 1/2" overlap for the fingers to glue up, so more than enough strength. I have it configured for a 1/4" bit (my workhorse for big projects), so the dogbones are pretty large.

I’d imagine it would prove to be tricky to get everything fitting nicely without a few trials.

You can see the mess here if you want to try to iterate on it.

Good points all.

Thanks, you’ve got me thinking.

Joe

I use the box maker app for drawers. They always come out perfect.

1 Like

Thanks Bart, I’ll have to give that a try for my next cabinet build (I want to make a few more for under a bench by the wall). I’m an old school woodworker and can knock out drawer boxes FAST, but that doesn’t help me learn the X-Carve Pro and Easel, so that would be a good project.

all my best,

joe

Hey guys,

Just wanted to make an update to share the fact that I ‘finished’ the upgrades to the control box. If like me, you placed your tower in a cabinet so as to keep it free from dust, and like me, you find it frustrating that the power switch in tucked in among all of the wires coming out of it, and feel a bit like Harry Houdini trying to get your finger in there to turn the thing on/of, AND, like me you had tried to plug it into a power-strip conveniently located near where you work, only to find that the surge protector caused conflicts with the ‘real’ surge protector with battery back-up that you used to protect the entire system, than this post is for you.

the other day, I cracked open the control box - again - to take a look around at how I might actually make it… control… the system - AKA, turn the power on and off. There isn’t much room, but I saw that it WAS possible, and so I went for it.

I took an extension cord, and cut it. Not in half, but 1/3 for the female end, and 2/3rd for the male end. I got cord grommets off of Amazon, and set to work. I cut two new holes just offset from the power-kill switch. I also enlarged the hole in the front that was vacated when several months ago I relocated the two plugs that were - for whatever unknown reason - located there by Inventables - to the back of the box (where they should have been all along).

I fished the wired through the two new holes in the back and pulled them through the front hole where I soldered the wires to a lighted toggle switch that I had pirated from an old power-strip.

After snapping the switch into place, I pulled the wires back leaving just a little excess inside for future need, and snapped the grommets into place.

I then reattached the control box to the bench (you may remember that I had mounted a bolt to the bottom to solve the problem of the box being portable (like, why would anyone want the box to be portable??? It is after all connected by wires, so any advantage of portability is lost by that constraint, and the glaring disadvantages of portability are only amplified… But that is fixed now by bolting it to the bench). The tower’s switch now remains in the ‘on’ position.

So now, the control box completely controls my X-Carve Pro. I come into the shop, go to the workstation end of the CNC, plug in the laptop, throw the rocker switch, and… I’m up and working.

I’ll attach photos below.

In the event that anyone from Inventables happens upon this post: "Guys! come on!! these “upgrades” should be standard equipment. They add zero cost to the manufacturing (or near-zero… there is some wiring, a switch, and grommets), but are, IMO necessary changes. Having those two cords hanging out the front of the box is just stupid. They are always in the way (does your keyboard have cables hanging out the FRONT of it???).
Having the box, as light as it is, not attached to the bench is at best inconvenient, at worse, dangerous. And not being able to turn on/off the machine from the work area is well, just a head-scratcher.

Now I am assuming that you are buying these boxes 'off-the shelf- and adapting them to your needs. Fair enough. relocating the one usbc and the z-probe cord to the back is super simple. I still haven’t figured out why you felt the need to run the usbc cord through the box given that it does nothing in there - you could simply eliminate that, and with the recovered space, simply put in the rocker switch. If you are like most successful companies, you are always looking to improve. If not… well… you are not.

Well, there ya are.

All my best,

Joe




I neglected to mention; a few months back I made the little ‘box’ next to the control box to hold the z-probe (and wire), in an attempt to clean-up and organize the work area. You will notice that to the left there are four square holes. They are for the cases of whichever bits that I am using at the time. There are two of each size. Given that Easel is only capable of a 2-part carve, I figured that I only needed to hold two cases at a time… should Easel ever be improved upon and we don’t need to make a dozen work-pieces just to do a true multi-bit carve, I will gladly make a new and improved 'box :slight_smile:
overall, I’m happy with the results as it REALLY helps me keep the work area de-cluttered.