CamBam

Support => CamBam help (General usage) => Topic started by: mofosheee on February 10, 2019, 23:38:37 pm



Title: 3D surface, unintended plunges
Post by: mofosheee on February 10, 2019, 23:38:37 pm
Please refer to the attached .cb. 
The profile comes out as intended............ except that the bit makes unintended -z plunges (approx 0.030ish") at both extremes in the x direction.  Tried both the horizontal and vertical 3D profile method with no success.  Waterline method will not work for this part.
Any advice on how I can eliminate this behavior and improve my method is greatly appreciated.  Thank you!
 


Title: Re: 3D surface, unintended plunges
Post by: dh42 on February 11, 2019, 00:27:16 am
Hello

Can you give a picture that show the unwanted toolpaths ?

I don't see what are the "wrong" toolpath on the image I attach. (CB V1.0)

Note that you'll get better toolpath (more accurate) if you use a value of 0.02 for resolution, instead 0.2

also, CB can only manage endmill or ballnose mill but not bullnose. (bullnose give the same toolpaths as ballnose ; if you really use a bullnose, the toolpath will not be right)

edit: picture 2 is done with resolution = 0.02, picture is done with resolution = 0.2

++
David


Title: Re: 3D surface, unintended plunges
Post by: dh42 on February 11, 2019, 00:50:59 am
re

also, in the horizontal mop, you use "selected shape" as boundary but no shape is selected for the boundary.

the result is: on CB 1.0 the toolpaths are cut with an heavy overflow around the shape(*) ;  on CB 0.98, no toolpaths are generated.

(*) bigger than the "Bouding box" or the "Shape Outline" setting

++
David


Title: Re: 3D surface, unintended plunges
Post by: Bubba on February 11, 2019, 12:33:27 pm
To see better here is sample what David is talking about..


Title: Re: 3D surface, unintended plunges
Post by: mofosheee on February 11, 2019, 21:48:19 pm
Hi Guys

This has been a great learning experience.   I should have stated in my original post that a 7.5" piece of wood was the material, but no matter.  I readjusted the resolution and step over which speed things up.    In retrospect, I could have done two convex side profiles.............but nothing would have been learned.

Thanks again for pointing out the error of my ways and responding to my inquiry!