Messages

221

LazyCam (Beta) / Re: What settings do I need to fix to get efficient code

« on: August 21, 2008, 02:31:26 AM »

David

if you are just getting started with l-cam and a cad program you did pretty good.your dxf was pretty nasty and had a lot of trash in it ,but that will get better as you learn how to draw.this comes with time.the same goes for the l-cam.
the clean and optimize buttons are your biggest helpers to get good chains.then when you have good chains you can mess with cut order and rapids.

bill

222

LazyCam (Beta) / Re: What settings do I need to fix to get efficient code

« on: August 20, 2008, 12:45:28 AM »

Hi, DAVID

i really do not know what you are after .took a look at your dxf and your tap file so i gave it a shot. i could see all the Z moves in the tap file and i guess you
wanted to clean them up. here is a new tap file , is this kind of what you are after. if it is still to many Z moves you can delete them out of the g-code.

bill

223

LazyCam (Beta) / Re: Adding another Layer or Entity from file?

« on: August 19, 2008, 05:41:18 PM »

Hi, ED

try this ,process each dxf into a finished tap file. then with mach3 open use the text editor to combined the two files using the copy/paste function. make sure to remove the M30 end of file command that will now be in the middle of the new file and do a G00 move
to connect the two files, then do a save. open up lazycam then import from mach3 ,they should now be combined so you can finish it the way you want. do what CHIP ask you to do and post your DXF and we will see if we can put them together for you.

bill

224

General Mach Discussion / Re: Version 3.042.003 Ready for testing.

« on: August 18, 2008, 06:56:26 PM »

Chip

thanks for the info Chip. I loaded 42.04 on the machine today and did some actual cutting. I could tell what Hood was talking about. even though the part did not look right on the screen it ran the numbers well.
setting up SS now and going to play with that a little bit.

thanks bill

225

General Mach Discussion / Re: Version 3.042.003 Ready for testing.

« on: August 17, 2008, 07:25:46 PM »

Hood

I loaded 42.4 on the office comp to look at it ,did not load it on the mill. i was just looking at a set of files and doing dummy runs. the other 5 files loaded and reported properly on the x-range but that one did not, just thought it was worth reporting. all the stuff i am cutting is still done with 2.02 while waiting for the upgrades. Gary at SS has been steady doing stuff right along with Brain to get all new software done. it will be sweet when it is all done.

bill

226

General Mach Discussion / Re: Version 3.042.003 Ready for testing.

« on: August 17, 2008, 05:50:44 PM »

Hood
i attached the tap file and a copy of my xml. this tap file is 1 of 6 in the set. the other files to the set load and report properly. this file when loaded should report x-range -0.6100 to +0.6100 instead it reports -0.6100 to +0.7846 ... ver 42.004 is looking pretty good but i did not find any hairs in it, Brian must have changed barber's.

bill

227

General Mach Discussion / Re: Version 3.042.003 Ready for testing.

« on: August 17, 2008, 03:28:02 PM »

Brett

what is the prefered way to report to Brian and how to report it.i have found an issue and was wondering how to package the info for him.

thanks bill

228

Show"N"Tell ( What you have made with your CNC machine.) / Re: Afew things I have made

« on: August 03, 2008, 10:40:26 PM »

what camera did you use to take your pictures with.

229

Show"N"Tell ( What you have made with your CNC machine.) / Re: some mach3 inlay work

« on: July 19, 2008, 11:28:16 AM »

Perfo

everythig is done with the same milling machine including the threaded pin using differant setups. no V carving used. the rubber bumper is from an outside source.

thanks bill

230

General Mach Discussion / Re: Setting up a 4th axis?

« on: July 06, 2008, 05:29:13 AM »

HI CHIP

Budman want's to do a rotory and i believe he said that his experiance with this is slim to none. he also mentioned that he is going to work with dia from .250 to 2.0 .which we both know is bogus, because as soon as he gets it working well
he will put somthing bigger in it the first chance he gets. we all do! but .250 to 2.0 is a good place to start. plus Budman has not mentioned if he has microstepping available. if he does it will be better for him. he also needs to know that larger
dia needs more resolution and more resolution means less speed. he just needs to have some info for his first build. how he plans to build and with what is his choice. i just want to give him something to think about.

Chip i diddled with your doodles.
6000=16.66(20 more)7 steps per
7200=20 
1440=4  i built one of these works pretty slick
144000=400 that's good

what i was trying to show budman about a good base setup and mach3 and if he has microstepping how it works out
if he builds with the 30-1 does the 1.5-1 gearing and 200 full step pulses, he will get 360 in 9000 pulses. that is 25 pulses per degree.
these numbers will be available as degree's on the DRO'S without rounding  1.0 2.0 3.0 etc.
now lets microstep.
F step 25=1.0 2.0 3.0
H step 50=1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
1/4 step 100=1.0 1.25 1.5 1.75 2.0
1/8 step 200=1.0 1.125 1.25 1.375
1/16 step 400=1.0 1.0625 1.125
1/32 step 800=1.0 1.03125 1.0625  (mach3 DRO will round 1.03125 to 1.0313) but the number is still good.
these numbers show without rounding as the pulses increase.
doing big resolution with microstepping is kind of phony anyway,but it makes the DRO look good. big solid resolution is done with gearing.

P.S. my cornbread comes in round pie pans.

bill