CamBam
News:
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 22, 2020, 06:05:10 am


Login with username, password and session length


Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Spiral leadin on profiles on non-closed polylines  (Read 7951 times)
Jeff_Birt
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 821


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2013, 16:20:12 pm »

Lloyd, your confusing the answers I gave to the two points KVom made. For his point '1' I responded with A1, for his point '2' I responded with A2.

So for this point:
Quote
1) Mixed cutting direction for a profile on a  non closed polyline should not result in a clearance move regardless of leadin type.

I responded:
Quote
A1) You can make CB do a continuous plunge like you want but it is a VERY inefficient toolpath. The way it does it now is the most efficient way even with the clearance moves in there.

If you set the direction to mixed AND set the lead in angle to 0 you do get a 'zig-zag' type of path this is consistant to how CamBam treats everything else with a spiral lead-in. The 'zig-zag' path is VERY inefficient though. If you set the direction to mixed and set a spiral angle of something other than zero than you get that angle of plunge but it will still back track to clean up the lead-in BUT it will do this from each end of the line. This is also much more efficient than the 'zig-zag' toolpath.


And for this point:
Quote
2) Climb or conventional direction should always obey regardless of lead-in, thus having a clearance and descent for each DOC

I responded:
Quote
A2) Impossible. if you are plunging into the work going in direction A->B you will always have to go in direction B->A to clean up the length of the plunging move. There is no way around this unless you use a tangent lead in as Ralf showed or add a manual lead in as I showed.


Think about it. If you are doing a spiral lead in from A->B you will have to cut both directions, Climb/Conventional would only have meaning for the part of the path not covered by the lead-in, the lead in area will always be cut in both directions.

I should add that I'm not trying to belabor the point but to suggest out that spiral lead-ins are treated consistently throughout CamBam and further that a 'zig-zag' type of toolpath on an open polyline is not the most efficient way to do things.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2013, 16:25:47 pm by Jeff_Birt » Logged
lloydsp
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8138



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2013, 16:47:09 pm »


I should add that I'm not trying to belabor the point but to suggest out that spiral lead-ins are treated consistently throughout CamBam and further that a 'zig-zag' type of toolpath on an open polyline is not the most efficient way to do things.
====
But Jeff, it IS the most efficient.  If it divided the total plunge by half, and spiral-plunged on BOTH routes, rather than just 'cleaning up' on the even passes, it would be more efficient, and do exactly what Kvom wants it to.

LLoyd
Logged

"Pyro for Fun and Profit for More Than Fifty Years"
Jeff_Birt
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 821


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2013, 16:53:58 pm »

Please look at the example CB file I posted above. The 'zig-zag' tool path is not efficient.
Logged
lloydsp
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8138



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2013, 20:13:11 pm »

If you set the direction to mixed AND set the lead in angle to 0 you do get a 'zig-zag' type of path this is consistant to how CamBam treats everything else with a spiral lead-in. The 'zig-zag' path is VERY inefficient though. If you set the direction to mixed and set a spiral angle of something other than zero than you get that angle of plunge but it will still back track to clean up the lead-in BUT it will do this from each end of the line. This is also much more efficient than the 'zig-zag' toolpath.
-------
I'll try once more, then I'm done; no use beating a dead horse.

IF it did not do the 'cleanup' on every 'even' pass, but instead continued to spiral down in EACH direction, it would be efficient.  That's the point I was making, and I think the one Kvom was making.

<shrug>
Lloyd
Logged

"Pyro for Fun and Profit for More Than Fifty Years"
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM
Page created in 0.113 seconds with 20 queries.

Copyright © 2018 HexRay Ltd. | Sitemap