Messages

1051

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 04, 2009, 11:02:13 AM »

Hi:

 Excellent! Thanks for the photos, nice to see the translation from drawing to part.
I suspect it will cut much better with a roughing , then a fine, then a finish( when I figure that one out! )

Art

1052

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 04, 2009, 08:51:34 AM »

Chip:

 Thx, I think your right, Ill look into why. I hadnt noticed because I dont offset that way myself. In the end ,
while I think the depth per pass shoudl be less on each path, the clearance shoudl stay the same really, that saves the most time.
It doesnt make sense to me to have a 1" offset for roughing, then a  .5 for next rough..etc.. I woudl think the most efficient is to
have the clearance the same for all passes up to the finish. That will statistically cut the time of cutting to its minimum. Though your
method does make better and easier to read displays.

Rich: thx..noted.

Art

1053

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 03, 2009, 11:13:13 PM »

Hi Guys:

  I have some testing to do for some of this, but the LH side I can explain. Imagine the whole piece, left to right is first expanded by the clearance, so it grows , this is done to make to tool cut
only to the clearance + Tool radius to the part. But the LH side expands to the left when this is done as well as the rigth expanding to the right. So the initial rough pass tries to cut to the expanded left side, which makes it cut further. This is actually helpfull if th etool has to step to the right each pass ( on the left hand side..). It means if a profile is say 100mm long, the initial ough can be say 120mm after expanding the profile. ( Imagine a tool offset comp in mill applied to the profile.. ).

  Its hard to explain what I mean, Ill see abotu showing you the actual usage of the subtraction and clipping masks to make it clearer..

 Is that dxf from Chips example posted? I think I need to run that, the offset is definitely wrong, looks way short..

Art

1054

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 03, 2009, 10:02:50 AM »

Hi:

 Yup, if as Rich described thats the problem its just due to me gettig ready for a finish pass algorithm, though Im still considering exactly how to do that best.
The rest of the discussions seem to be more about HOW material is removed on the secondary ro further passes. Allot of it has to do with the way the remaining
stock is calculated. The first pass is allowed to remove as much as it can, after that, the passes incrementally remove from a database of material left over, so the rules
are completely different in terms of what gets removed, so overhangs and underhangs may work differently from the first passes methods.

  Im still playing and thinking about hwo to best do a final pass, its allot more complicated than the rest of what Im doing. Just how to do a finish pass that is safe no
matter what the user has done previously is the holdup. The material left databasedoes help with letting me know the limitations of what to removed, but Im still
a bit flumoxxed in terms of how to do it all safely and most efficiently. A bit more thought needs to be done on my end.

 Im pretty happy so far though, I think a bit more tinkering with leftover limits will make the toolpatsh better, though I thnk there pretty close now in terms
of allowing multiple tools to do their job. We've come a long way this winter, and as spring starts to set in, I d liek to get at least a rudimentary finish pass going before
the summer sets in , I wont stop during the summer, but as you all know I slow drastically as things pop up to do in my personal life more and more in the summer.

 Youve all be great in testing and its really a testament to you that we've come this far. Id be interested in any experiences actually cutting any of these toolpaths,
what you had to modify and what looks like failure vs success. I suspect if I add a finish pass and let you post all the paths, that it will be time to remove Turning from
LazyCam and call the profiling in it replaced by LazyTurn, which seems much safer and easier to use than LazyCam's turn section at any rate.

Thx
Art
 

1055

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 03, 2009, 09:23:45 AM »

Hi Chip:

 When you say "Not working as described.. " how so?

Thx
Art

1056

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 02, 2009, 08:16:00 PM »

Chip:

 I take it both passes used different clearances? Or where they identical?

Art

1057

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 01, 2009, 11:06:03 AM »

Hi Guys:

 Havent fixed the arrow functions yet, but heres an interim April fools day release of the current code.
The simulation simulates any selected toolpath on the tree, and allows for the Feedrate to be modified to see its effect.
Pressing SET on the simulator will set a new feedrate and/or spindle speed if entered. If you have varyed the feedrate
for the simulation, and press set, the new feedrate will be entered in that toolpath. The rdering of the path has been modified but
still needs work as the secndary paths can do a bit of air time, but they are better clustered than before.

  The undercut issue still needs more investigation, its not so much an error as a matter of how the additional material left/cutting
algorith does its job to ensire as little is cut as possible, ironically this makes it cut more in the case of overcuts.. but its all a function of the
math that is used to try to make the path as optimal as possible, I havent seen any real issues with gouging the stock so thats an upside.

  Still no post output of secondary paths, I hope to do that shortly now that the clustering is better than before.


Have fun..

Art

1058

LazyTurn / Re: LazyTurn

« on: April 01, 2009, 09:12:46 AM »

Chip:

 Thx, Ill fix up the arrow functions. I have no real preference for rad/dia/mm/inch , all of them in the end need to work so any pointers of errors are fine
in any mode. A new version is close to being ready and Ive changed a bit of the functions, and have made the simulation variable speed forward and backwards
so one can see how the tool will move around.
  Ill kill the autosplit and make it work simply on the button now that I dont need the removal anymore in diagnostics.

Thx
Art

1059

General Mach Discussion / Re: Problems threading on the lathe

« on: March 29, 2009, 04:16:12 PM »

Rich:

  Actually, what Stev is getting on a 4 inch or so thread, when cut shallow, and can easily be seen, is the crests at the middle all look pretty much the same, but the first 4 or 5 crests shows a narrowing of the crest, then it stabilizes to a set width to just about the end of the thread. I was wondering if others are seeing the first 4 or 5 crests showing a narrowing.. As the enclosed shows..

Art

1060

General Mach Discussion / Re: Problems threading on the lathe

« on: March 29, 2009, 09:09:23 AM »

Hi Guys:

  For any of you using the PP for theading, can you try one cut only shallow and show us a pic, Id like to see the
size of the crests on it across the thread to just the consistancy of them.

Thx
Art