Hello Guest it is December 08, 2019, 06:05:29 PM

Author Topic: MACH 4 screen contrast  (Read 236 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2019, 12:23:43 AM »
Quote from: joeaverage
To be honest if I really want to view a toolpath, say for verification before committing the job, I use a standalone Gcode viewer. Mach4's toolpath display will never be a highly resolved and richly featured display like you would expect from a dedicated viewer.

I would not agree with that. Visualization is very useful. Seeing how the lines move in relation to the spindle is a big advantage and can help prevent crashes. In my opinion the gcode viewer of mach4 should be expanded even more as it is too rudimentary. Like adding 3D models of bed/spindle/vice etc to it. Maybe even a visualization of the workpiece and how the tool machines it. A simulation of entered gcode would also be nice. Computers are powerful enough these days i don't see why Mach4 could not do that.

Ok, I installed the newer version now too. You must now go to Operator > Edit Screen. Then click the large gray area designated to the paths. Scroll the box in the bottom-left down until you see the colors. By clicking them three dots apper. Click them and select a new color.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2019, 12:38:48 AM by brandonb »
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2019, 01:46:41 AM »
Hi,

Quote
Visualization is very useful. Seeing how the lines move in relation to the spindle is a big advantage and can help prevent crashes.

You are misconstruing what I said, I have nothing against visulaisation at all, but rather find that it can be too cluttered and
therefore obscure that potential 'crash' situation. For that reason I like to turn off or make invisible G0s so I can focus on
the G1s. You may chose otherwise but having too much on the smallish toolpath screen is a pain.

Quote
In my opinion the gcode viewer of mach4 should be expanded even more as it is too rudimentary. Like adding 3D models of bed/spindle/vice etc to it. Maybe even a visualization of the workpiece and how the tool machines it.

That's what a Gcode viewing program does, and because such programs specialize is displaying complex 3D visualizations they do
a much MUCH MUCH better job than Mach4. Further Mach4 is a machine control program, not a toolpath simulator and
I would rather the developers enhance machine control and allow the user to 'socket' in their favourite toolpath simulator.

Quote
You must now go to Operator > Edit Screen. Then click the large gray area designated to the paths

And I said:
Quote
Go to screen edit mode and click on the toolpath window.
Aren't they the same?

Craig

My wife left with my best friend...
     and I miss him!
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2019, 02:17:16 AM »
Hi,
I have not used it myself but there have been favourable reports from those who have:

https://www.machsupport.com/software/3d-cutting-simulator-moduleworks-plugin/

My understanding is that it is written by a third party company and they sell it to enhance Mach4. The cost is $50.
I suspect it would go a long way to satisfying your requirement of a more sophisticated toolpath simulator.

I am still happy with my two freeware viewers despite not being integrated into Mach.

Craig
My wife left with my best friend...
     and I miss him!
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2019, 02:27:54 PM »
Craig,

 I have tried playing around with different colors/line weights  and cannot get something that is very appealing. What I'm looking for is something like the attached photo.

This photo was in the background of a photo posted by Brandon a couple of days ago.

Brandon, if you're listening please do a screenshot of your settings.

Thanks,
Chuck
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2019, 02:44:55 PM »

[/quote]
Hi,
I have not used it myself but there have been favourable reports from those who have:

https://www.machsupport.com/software/3d-cutting-simulator-moduleworks-plugin/

My understanding is that it is written by a third party company and they sell it to enhance Mach4. The cost is $50.
I suspect it would go a long way to satisfying your requirement of a more sophisticated toolpath simulator.

I am still happy with my two freeware viewers despite not being integrated into Mach.

Craig
Hi,
I have not used it myself but there have been favourable reports from those who have:

https://www.machsupport.com/software/3d-cutting-simulator-moduleworks-plugin/

My understanding is that it is written by a third party company and they sell it to enhance Mach4. The cost is $50.
I suspect it would go a long way to satisfying your requirement of a more sophisticated toolpath simulator.

I am still happy with my two freeware viewers despite not being integrated into Mach.

Craig

Craig,
I use the simulate function within Fusion 360 to visualize my cuts.

I'm basically looking for a  well-contrasted tool path of the part I'm cutting and so far I have not found the proper combination of colors and line widths.

I would be delighted to have the same contrast/ functionality that the basic  MAC H3 screen set provides.

Chuck
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2019, 05:00:03 PM »
I can't get the line widths to change, any idea on what am I doing wrong?
Chuck
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2019, 04:48:49 AM »
You may not be increasing the widths by a big enough increment. I usually start at increasing by 50 each time and then fine tune from there
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #17 on: December 03, 2019, 07:19:46 AM »
Thanks, most likely my problem,

8 was  highest I have tried

Chuck
Re: MACH 4 screen contrast
« Reply #18 on: December 03, 2019, 01:45:31 PM »
Thanks, most likely my problem,

8 was  highest I have tried

Chuck

Swifty,

That did it, solved my problem.

I would’ve never have thought line width change increments would be 50 when the initial default number was 1

I ended up using 100 for the toolpath and 200 or the axes, looks great

Thanks,
Chuck