On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:44:57 -0600, you wrote:
> I see a problem with using "gcode generating" software languages to >machine complex geometries. In my world all "gcode generating" software >languages will undercut or gouge the material deemed to be the desired >material to include in the desired part. This happens at random times. >Usually only when a complex geometry is modified. Sometimes the >modification is so minor it is insignificant or so you would think. Simple >shapes are hardly ever a problem. Complex shapes may need to have the >cutting strategy altered to allow generation of clean g code. Seeing the >undercut on the screen or in some verification software is not generally a >problem. Discovering the undercut in the machined part can be frustrating. > I remember running a Mazak mill with the M2 control. The control had 3D >surface cutting capability. You needed to watch the cut on the screen prior >to turning the mill loose on the material. Hi Stuart, as I said previously, I regularly use two CAM programs, by far the best of those is FeatureCam. You can simply manually define the stock size and material, (which could also be a 3D object), import your 3D solid and tell it to machine the features. It will pick the appropriate tools from a huge built in library and machine it using various strategies within the capabilities of your machine. (Axis, feed, speed, power, limits etc.) It runs a 3D verification/simulation and outputs code in the language of the post processor you have selected. Sometimes the code is convoluted but there are never any undercuts or gouges. Very occasionally it will simply fail, telling you you can't machine the part completely with your machine configuration. Problems only seem to occur when you manually select tools and operations. It will work this way, fortunately it will warn during simulation and shows those areas highlighted in a different colour. Often you can avoid by simply changing tool diameter or type. Sometimes it's more hit and miss and you need to also change machining strategy altogether. Part of my income comes from consultancy work with CAM. Even using the best CAM, I can always manually shave time off the "as produced" code. Time is money. One thing that is never a problem commercially is tools - tooling cost is always priced into the job and if they have to buy unusual tools, for instance, custom taper mills, so be it. Expecting to do complex CAM using just words is a non starter. > I see value in using a language to cut simple parts but complex 3D >surfaces could yield some unwanted results. I don't even see a value with simple parts. Much easier to fill in some values in an on screen "wizard" (as in Mach) or something like ngcgui. Steve Blackmore -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
