Aluminum truss beam cut on a hobby-class CNC

Oct 12, 2026 Last reply: 4 hours ago 2 Replies
Jump to replies (2)

The idea behind this piece comes straight from the maker's robotics team, since the beam is meant for FRC use. The path there was not a straight one. The machine spent roughly a year mostly cutting plastic, and earlier attempts at aluminum ended with several snapped bits and a long break from the material. Returning to aluminum with fresh eyes finally produced a result worth calling a success, and I think that persistence deserves credit as much as the part itself.



The setup behind the cut is a Genmitsu ProverXL 4030 V1 with the 6060 extension kit added, spinning a 710w Genmitsu router with a digital RPM LCD. The bits are Spetool o-flute upcut carbide, and workholding is a vice bolted down to the frame so it stays square. Calibration relies on nothing fancier than the stock Z probe that ships with the machine. The stock itself is Peanut extrusion, a 1x1 aluminum profile sourced from Andymark.



The details in the finished beam are what stand out to me. Triangular cutouts run along the sides and give it a truss-like appearance, the interior is hollow with internal ridges or slots, and the profile includes two inward-facing C-shaped tracks on the top and bottom walls. Elongated slots on the top surface run parallel to the beam's length. How those inner details were actually cut has not been explained, and that is a question I would love to see answered.



The maker is upfront about the limits: speed and machine size are the main drawbacks, and for parts needing good accuracy the setup still leaves room for improvement. Spindle speed and depth of cut were never shared either. For more serious aluminum work, the team plans to move up to an Altmill eventually.


Bolting the vice straight to the frame so it stays square seems like the smartest single call in this whole build. In aluminum, any shift in workholding shows up immediately in the part, and a rigid fixed setup removes that worry. The trade-off is that it locks you into one position on the table, but for repeatable test pieces like this beam that seems like a fine price to pay.

Given that the maker lists speed and machine size as the main drawbacks, splitting the workload between two machines might be the cleanest fix. Keep the ProverXL for plastic and lighter jobs, and let the planned Altmill take over the serious aluminum parts. That way the accuracy gap for precision work gets closed too, without the current setup being pushed past what it does well.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required