CamBam
News:
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 22, 2018, 23:54:05 pm


Login with username, password and session length


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
 21 
 on: January 20, 2018, 12:13:33 pm 
Started by Mikolaj123 - Last post by dh42
Hello

Be sure that CamBam is closed when you copy the translation file (the one you have downloaded) to your directory.

++
David

 22 
 on: January 20, 2018, 11:48:19 am 
Started by Mikolaj123 - Last post by Mikolaj123
Hello ;
Im new Smiley
I have installed cambam and choose language to polish.
I have installed polish translation.
In directories and config file everythink looks good.
I have closed cambam and opened next time.
I still have menu in english.
I don't know what is going on.
Can somebody help me ?
I attach some screens.

 23 
 on: January 20, 2018, 10:49:54 am 
Started by jk - Last post by jk
kvom, did you tried the spiral lead-in ? I think I'm happy with it.

Set spiral angle in range 2..7 degrees. First revolution is slotting, but depth is gradually increasing so chips are small and there is a space for evacuation. Next revolutions (if any) have a much less engagement, since a lot of material is already removed. Tool just has to survive the first revolution :-)

 24 
 on: January 20, 2018, 05:55:59 am 
Started by chuckeroo - Last post by dave benson
Hi Chuck
Google this --->      mach3 parallel port epp ecp
Look at the first couple of posts
Dave

 25 
 on: January 20, 2018, 05:47:45 am 
Started by dave benson - Last post by dave benson
Another update:

The new goal of the project, was to make another couple of turrets from  standard  size stock materials and fasteners, and to set up the software (Freecad -->Cambam -->Camotics) work flow so as to make them in a quick and efficient manner as possible with the equipment that I have.

I'm using CamBam 0.98 and Camotics, both of which have worked well together.
I'm using the latest  Freecad binaries of 0.17 13050, like they say on the website these versions are under heavy development so save often.

There's practically no documentation for these versions so if you want a relatively painless (Import/Export) experience and want to use the Assembly workbench's, then these are the way to go however you have to be fairly proficient in 3d parametric modelling to get to grips with these versions.   Although a little persistence is well rewarded.
 
Now I have two turret bodies ready to except the tool holding platterns.

As you know I MacGyver'ed  the first turret together (Scrap Heap Challenge style) over a few weekends from material I found fishing around in the scrap bin. (16 mm plate was a little overkill)

I'd already started machining the second Tool Holding Plattern a couple of weeks after getting the
first turret running, after making some making some improvements to the design, for example
adding a longer toe to the tool rests to support the tools more (see picture), however I found out by using the first turret almost daily for the last 3 months, that I was fixing a non-existing problem.

I did move the mounting holes to the outside of the turret to make it quicker to dismount.
The other thing I did was to move the overload mechanism to the front of the turret so that you could reset it without having to pop the top and one side off the turret. I've only had to reset  the overload  three times crashing into the chuck, (Ezilathe was adding a G28 and I hadn't set mach3 home position as I use G53's.)

I also changed the shape, so that I could affix tools to the periphery of the tool holder and changed the dimensions of the tool rests to accept half inch tools rather than the 12mm ones that I originally
had planned for (this does mean that you have to shim the tools to get the correct centre height) just like the original tool post. see pic 2

The first design took 37 hours of machining time, even though I was using the Troc mops and had
set the code for 10 mm tooling and .5 mm DOC and 200mm Feedrate (on a normal profile mop I use 100mm).
This seemed to work for a few hours, but eventually the spindle motor overheated (it was a hot day 38 deg C  outside, don't know what it was in the shop but a lot more I guess).

The other thing using the Troc mops generates huge files and the mill computer took noticeably
longer to respond. 470,000 lines of code.

So instead of machining away the “Islands” between the tool rests (which was most of the work) I made the tool rests separately and did some hand preparation of the material.

And now the job takes 6.5 hours of machining time, plus the hand prep I'm doing. Mostly baby sitting the mechanical hacksaw. I could do this with the 9 inch grinder to make it a lot faster (but I like my neighbours.)

Dave






 

 26 
 on: January 19, 2018, 21:01:13 pm 
Started by jk - Last post by kvom
Today I was machining some .5" Mic6 aluminum with both trocho pockets and profiles.  Full depth with a .375" 2 flute endmill. .15 stepover.  While the endmill is happy once the depth is reached, I got some chip welding from the initial plunge on my second pocket.  For safety I added spiral drilled hole mops at all the entry points for the trocho mops and had no issues the rest of the way.

If you have toolpaths displayed without cut width, it's each to see the points needed.

I don't have flood coolant, so chip evacuation can be an issue when plunging an endmill.

 27 
 on: January 19, 2018, 17:45:48 pm 
Started by chuckeroo - Last post by Bob La Londe
I'm sorry.  I do not know.  I thought all the 64bit W-OS dropped support for LPT and RS232 hardware.  I do have three machines running W7-64 Pro with Ethernet Smooth Steppers.   I imagine a USB device like the UC100 would also work. 


 28 
 on: January 19, 2018, 15:47:03 pm 
Started by Bob La Londe - Last post by Bob La Londe
I recently have been fighting with some steel press dies.  Small details.  Difficult machining.  I've been working on it for weeks.  One of the other members here did the 3D work for me.  He's very good at it.  I paid him for the work, and feel it was worth every penny.  You are welcome to plug yourself if you like, but please do not post the images. 

Anyway, I tackled the smallest ones first and CamBam kind of choked on it.  There are three main issues. 

1.  CB does not do any kind of HSM or constant engagement strategies in 3D.  I broke a few hundred dollars worth of cutters trying to get something that would work.  Not to worry.  Its a hard material.  I planned for that, but after days (weeks) of trying I felt I was getting nowhere.  My only success was to use speeds and feeds that were calculated based on 100% engagement at full depth.  It sort of worked for roughing.  Ultimately the job would have taken about 9.5 hrs for the fastest die.  I tried it anyway.  I still broke cutters on finish passes. 

2.  Boundary limitations are inside boundary only.  Ok, a negative boundary margin of the cutter radius sort of works, but the tool path does not seem to actually account properly for being able to cut at the contact point.  Only at the tip and only if there is clearance.  Not if there is clearance for the diameter of the tool at THAT depth.  I could have played with it some more, but I butted up against so many other problems I didn't have the time to spend with it.  I have used plane slice only to overcut parts before, but this would not have worked here. 

3.  There is no real rest machining operation.  None at all.  This meant with CamBam every successive operations had to be treated like 100% engagement at full depth, and since CB doesn't differentiate between vertical and horizontal in 3D this meant operations that were mostly a skim cut still had to be set for speeds to match full depth at 100% engagement to prevent breaking a cutter every time it came to a corner. 

This lead me to look at Fusion360 again.  Its not perfect.  I ran into plenty of issues.  Not the least of which is that REST is not 100% perfect, and its only available with some types of operations.  Ultimately I had to accept that I could not machine with the smallest cutter I wanted to use for my finish pass.  I never came up with a strategy that didn't break it repeatedly.  It might be runout.  It might be machining tool paths.  It might simply be a limitation of the fact that the material can work harden, and the finish pass with the smallest cutter wasn't going through the work hardened area of the previous operation. 

Anyway... this brings me to my point.  The default Mach3 post processor. It inserts extra code.  Specifically it inserts optional stops and tool change position moves (M1 and G28) at the end and beginning of operations respectively.  This could be both a help and a hinderance to beginners.  An optional stop seems like it might be ok, but sometimes it seems to prevent operator input and Mach3 can already be set to stop when it receives a tool change command.  Its sort of redundant.  You have to press start to get to the tool change command.  Then the G28 takes it to the tool change position, which I no longer use.  I actually use G53 moves in my tool change macro.  Its only a minor inconvenience since my G28 position has been set to something safe on all my machines, but if I recall it was not set to anything useful when I first started CNC machining.  It could confuse the heck out of a new user.  Maybe its safer sometimes, but if safe Z moves is not turned on and a safe z height set you could have a crash caused by this. 

I actually use the default Mach3 Post processor exactly as it comes from CamBam.  My machines are setup so they control their own safe moves for tool changes, and they account for the fact that by default doesn't put out all axis coordinates after a tool change by saving the current position as part of my tool change macros.  I felt like I had to modify the Mach3 post processor from Fusion360 right out of the gate.  Worse, when I installed Fusion on a new computer my modified post was not installed with it even though Fusion is supposedly a cloud based application. 

Be aware if you use it for collaboration that the person working with you is NOT using the same post as you are.  Its ok if they have it setup to be cut on their machine, and you have it setup to be cut on your machines, AND you only run your own code.  If they send you code it may be no good.  I really like to try to setup my machines so that except for feeds and speeds capability all the code is cross compatible.  At this point that is true for my machines.  The last thing I need is another level of confusion. 






 29 
 on: January 19, 2018, 01:33:00 am 
Started by Garyhlucas - Last post by dh42
you can also use NaN instead 0 to force the Z register to undefined value, so you are really sure that a move to clearance is issued.

Quote
$set(x|y|z|a|b|c|f|p|q|r,<value>)
[New! 0.9.8L]    

Sets the current value of the specified X, Y or Z register. No gcode will be output.

Example:

$set(z,5.5)

This may be useful after a custom, controller based tool change macro, to inform the post processor of the controller's new coordinates.

The value NaN can also be used to set the register to an undefined state.

 30 
 on: January 19, 2018, 01:26:39 am 
Started by Garyhlucas - Last post by dh42
Quote
if you remove the {$clearance} just before the {$mop.footer} statement, move to clearance is coming back in the toolchange.

Another way is to force a custom value for the current Z position, saying 0, so the move to clearance is forced.

ex in the toolchange.

{$comment} T{$tool.index} : {$tool.name} {$endcomment}
M25
M6
T{$tool.index}
{$set(z,0)}
{$clearance}

++
David

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM
Page created in 0.126 seconds with 15 queries.

Copyright © 2008 HexRay Ltd. | Sitemap