Oh i'm sorry, that was Jelle :(  Sorry about that.

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Dave Cowden <dave.cow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Thomas, thanks!
>
> The target machine is a rapid prototyping (RP) machine-- RepRap.  Thus, the
> infill for a slice is not necessarily a 'machine all material away' path.
>  Ultimately it still uses Gcode, but it is additive rather than subtractive.
> I use EMC for machine control.
>
> The ideal is actually to offset all of the wires on the face inwards to
> create a user-configured number of 'shells' around the exterior boundaries,
> but then inside fill with a hatch pattern. For the offset I can use
> BRepOffsetAPI of course.
>
> The unusual variation that an RP machine has is that the interior hatching
> is ideally not uniform or 100% coverage.  Sometimes a honeycomb is desired,
> and other times, a 'sparse' hatch is desired to save material.
>
> I thought about looping over the surface parameters, but then again
> realized it would not create points along a uniform grid.
>
> Is there a function that will test whether a point is on the surface? Maybe
> it would be easiest to make my own discrete x-y- grid, and then simply test
> each point for membership on the surface.
>
> I'm quite excited about this project.  The main reason is that nearly the
> entire RP community ( including commercial ) still relies on STL files for
> production.  This is a pain because it results in all toolpaths being little
> line segments. So for curves there end up being a billion little G01 moves.
>
> Using OCC represents the only way i know of to use STEP representations of
> solids, which when sliced still preserve the ability to generate Gcode arcs
> ( G02/G03 ), which result in much smaller Gcode and much smoother motion
> than having all arcs represented by tiny line segments.  This would be the
> first tool that can prevent a triangulated approximation during the
> fabrication process.
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Jelle Feringa <jelleferi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > I'm getting back to using pyOCC after a while.
>>
>> Welcome back Dave, we've missed you!
>>
>> > I am hoping someone can point me the right direction. After reading
>> documentation and samples for a few hours, I'm still not sure where to
>> start.
>> >
>> > Previously, I have written a slicing application ( samples--> slicer ),
>> and I would like to continue that work.
>> >
>> > The next step is to create toolpaths that fill in the faces created from
>> the slicing operation.
>>
>> Wow, so a g-code export?
>> Have you seen pycam?
>>
>> >  There are a number of general approaches that could be used:  One is to
>> use BRepOffset to offset the wires inwards.
>> >
>> > However, the approach I would rather take is to use a 'grid' approach,
>> in which I first compute a grid of points on the face, and the fill them all
>> in afterwards.  I feel like this approach will be more tolerant to
>> degenerate geometry.
>>
>> Yes, dekskproto of delft spline systems has that algorithm for instance.
>>
>> > So, to my question:  I think looking at the SMESH sample, I could use
>> smesh to generate a set of points on my surface that are spaced evenly.
>>
>> Or just loop through the U,V domain of a face?
>> And than offset via the normal of the face?
>>
>> >  Looking at the sample I can see how to create the mesh, but I cannot
>> see how to extract the points from the mesh.
>>
>> You could do something similar ( if you decide polysoup is the way to go )
>> to just look up the triangles that represent a surface ( we always look at
>> triangles in OpenGL, you don't get to see the actual nurbs but just an
>> approximation )
>>
>> > I am also unsure how to instruct the mesher to generate a grid that has
>> a fixed space between the points in a particular plane.
>>
>> No way a mesher will generate equidistant points uh uh...
>>
>> >  In my case the face will always be a planar face in the x-y plane: what
>> I want is an array of points at a fixed spacing that cover the surface.
>>
>> Right, abscissa points…
>> So, what about dividing up the contours of your slicer by n-points or a
>> distance?
>>
>> For what machine are you writing the slicer exactly?
>> Do you need an offset ( like we need when milling ) to the surface?
>>
>> Happy to see you back on this list ;')
>>
>> -jelle
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pythonocc-users mailing list
>> Pythonocc-users@gna.org
>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pythonocc-users mailing list
Pythonocc-users@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users

Reply via email to