Hello Guest it is October 25, 2021, 04:02:04 AM

Author Topic: Lazy Cam suggestion  (Read 3166 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ynneb

*
Lazy Cam suggestion
« on: February 28, 2006, 05:37:52 PM »
Firstly I want to say after seeing the video, I am amazed at the maths and planing all that would take to program that.
You guys must have fantasic brains to work out all that.

Can I make a few suggestions ? ( I will even if the answer is no)

In a perfect world you should not get machine marks on your work when cutting, unfortunately for many of us and our not so accurate machines, this does not happen. Even on some better machines there are still marks.
Would it be possible to also include a elongated cut in and out option. This will remove the annoying bump that is left on the work piece.

Secondly is it possible to have a final pass setting where the machine moved in say .1 mm so that it cleaned off the previous pass marks and made the cutout piece the correct size. In other words, all the previous passes were .1 mm oversized.

EDIT: It could be argued that its the machines problem, and rightfully so, but I note that I have seen these features on very high priced Cam software. They obviously see it as a problem too.

I hope the pictures explain what I am saying.

Oh, ramping in and out would be a good feature too.

You guys constantly amaze me, I truelly wish I could do what you do.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2006, 06:03:40 PM by ynneb »
Re: Lazy Cam suggestion
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2006, 12:37:30 AM »
I do almost all my programming with ger21s autocad plug in, I offset the lines .01" farther so they cut that much too big or too small(depending on direction) then I offset the finish pass so It takes care of that.

in almost all cam packages you can specify a finishing pass.

If worse comes to worse, use tool diameter offsets, if you have the whole thing programmed for an offset, just set it that much too big then run just the final pass again with the right diameter specified.

the other thing I think your referencing is the lead in and lead out, most cam packages will do that for ya too.

Jon
Re: Lazy Cam suggestion
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2006, 04:23:41 PM »
wow, I didnt even see lazycam, I thought it was a ynneb term;)

The leadins that they have do the best job, they shouldnt leave any bumps or anything. A leadin that I would like to see is a tangential lead in. Another thing that bothers me about it is that it appears you cant select an exact origin, its pretty much worthless to not have a specified orgion somewhere. the ability to move geometry is also another thing that is typically not needed unless you can specifiy coordinates.



Jon
Re: Lazy Cam suggestion
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2006, 04:29:19 PM »
Very doable :)
Fixing problems one post at a time ;)

www.newfangledsolutions.com
www.machsupport.com