Russ,
How about instead of rules we change the verbage to guidelines / whatever .......
There is a section / appendix, currently called Practical Machining Considerations, that will try and talk
about what you said in reply above. I am thinking this section would be same as the drawing one but different subject.
If you have any more, just post your thoughts in any manner,   and will question for understanding of them later.
BTW, That section hasn't been worked on for some time.

Thinking out load on RULES.......There are going to be some for sure, I am thinking that a rule will be
something that just needs to be done because of say some limitation or restiction in the software.

----------------
I am still playing some with the roughs and finish passes....
Let me try to explain, larger profiles are easier, small ones can be more difficult i think, as the inputs become small in value
 verses the profile the calculations approach very small  values and then passes are affected. It could also be influenced by the number value combinations.

On a convex or concave curve the pathing seems to struggle  with that small remaining volume.

Now from a practical point of view, maybe it's insignificant, in that the machine dosn't have the capability to do or maintain  the number passes anyway.

One last ramble.....
A user dosen't read anything, just uses nonsense or improper tools against a crappy profile and wonders why something dosen't work,  but sometimes that is exactly what finds a bug.......

Hacking away when in the mood, 
RICH



  

Sure Rich....whatever you wish as you're likely to be the one ritin' it. 
I understand what you are doing, I tried some files with settings that were...lets say... Not appropriate for the job at hand and got some pretty wacky results as well.
I credit myself with that fault and don't expect the SW to do everything for me. 
It's great that you are stressing this "ARTwork" to the limits, it really makes it show its true colors and certainly can point to underlying problems.
However, I will continue to test the best I can here by just using what I have come to consider more conventional approaches.
Together, maybe we can corner them bugs and head em' off at the pass.

Here as a simple turning,  ROUGH, right to left, then left to right.
                                    FIN,              "       ,            "
All is good except the first FIN.   right to left (see pic)
Same tool (just flipped)...same settings for both roughs....and FINs.
DXF too.   (next reply)


Thanks Rich,
Russ

 
For previous post.

Hi All,

I have been watching this form for a while and the work you are all doing look great!  I was curious if you had plans to make LazyTurn create gcode for ID parts instead of only OD parts?

Thanks,
Andrew

Andrew,
 Goes back along time, but Art said inside wouldn't be done until Lt replaced the LazyCam lathe module totally.
Maybe he'll give us an update on what he expects for now and the possible future development.
See section 3.0 in the manual.
RICH

Hi Guys:

  The errors in the messages above this one turned out to be the Tolerance setting. The offsetting proceedures I use are a
solid modeling library from open source. It seems to fail when the lines are too coarse. Ill come up with a solution eventually,
but settin the tollerance lower on the finish makes the path proper. I may have to dictate the toelrance internally, but I resist that for time sensitivity
reasons. Ill give it some thought.

 As to the last letter on future plans...

   I have quite a few internal projects Im working on, and several just in my head. They fight each other for time slices, and Im known to often swap
about so projects DO take time in my "retirement".
  My original plan was to have a button which rotates the work 90 degrees, to become a facing and internal cut engine. Most of the code would still work.
But Im not sure when Ill get there. SO my current plan is to get finish paths posting then work on the following schedule of desires.

1) Undercut repair so we can do files wih undercut.

2) An editiing mode to draw or create /save as dxf/ profiles. that way no cad is required except for complex work maybe.


     Thats all I really plan ahead to, we'll see after that how it goes. My plan is to release this as freeware for the general community. Hopefully
after the finshing is done.

Art

ART,
So will lazyCam just be left as it is?
RICH

That's good to know, thanks Art.
Been experimenting with long tapers and having various problems with FIN, Rough is perfect.
.01Tolerance is as expected (current problem posted earlier), but .001 does unexpected path down the centerline of the part.
Please try this dxf and see what FIN will work.
Thought it might be the needle point, so I redrew it with a small flat on the end and get the same results.
Thanks,
Russ

Rich:

  No, the plan is to remove the turn section from it eventually, and make it mill only with the new import code that I use in LTurn.
I wont do that until LTurn basically replaces LCam's functions.

  I wont be real fast though, I have another project coming up shortly in the 3d printing world..

Art

ART,
Just took a look and LT has been 2 years in the making. Maybe just need to clean up the finish and let her post.  That way you get possible
involvement of a lot of users on real applications. If the song is too long sometimes the audience may be lost.
RICH