CamBam
News:
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 23, 2019, 12:01:50 pm


Login with username, password and session length


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
  Print  
Author Topic: 'Simulate with CAMotics' plugin  (Read 35480 times)
jk
Wookie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: February 06, 2017, 07:22:05 am »

FYI:  Camotics does not show regular drill operations.  This can cause you issues if you have a drill operation placed incorrectly. 

It does show spiral mill drilling operations. 

Camotics shows G81 simple drill. If there are dwell or peck specified, drill becomes G82/G83. They are  unsupported by Camotics.

I've a pb with camotics because I usually works with Z zero on the table and camotics always starts the simulation with the tool at Z = 0, so the first movement, or the movement just after the toolchange does a mark in the part.

I think this could be fixed with a custom postprocessor, say, insert G0 Z{$mop.first.z} inside the toolchange macro.

But shouldn't Camotics render my machined workpiece properly regardless of where (i.e. in which section) the tool was defined and whether or not it is a library item? Depending on a project, sometimes the simulation works and sometimes it doesn't and I don't know why.

Any thoughts?

Camotics takes diameter only from the tooltable (indexed by the tool number). The real machine do the same for tool diameter and length offset.

So plugin ignores any concrete specified diameters and uses only tool number (possibly inherited from Part or Machining). In case of any mismatch (no tootable entry, tool number == 0, manually entered tool diameter not equal to the table-based one) plugin issues warning.

If custom diameter is specified in mop, there is no way to pass it to camotics except introducing new tool and fake entry in tooltable.

AFAIK Cutviewer has a way to pass this info via magic comments, but Camotics is not, being closer to the real machine. And it helps us be disciplined and keep our tooltables well managed :-)
Logged
Bob La Londe
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3610


^ 8.5 pounds on my own hand poured bait.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #61 on: February 12, 2017, 18:35:27 pm »

The problem is many beginners trying desperately to get past their first stumbling blocks don't use or know any of that stuff.  Tool tables?  Styles?  Etc.  I didn't use any of that stuff for years.  I just custom built up each MOP and made sure there was no conflicts as I went.  I think most beginners start that way. 

Logged

Getting started on CNC?  In or passing through my area?
If I have the time I'll be glad to show you a little in my shop. 

Some Stuff I Make with CamBam
http://www.CNCMOLDS.com
dh42
Administrator
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5514



View Profile WWW
« Reply #62 on: February 12, 2017, 18:49:35 pm »

Hello

not only beginners  Wink .. I alway use the tool lib to set my tools, ... but also I often change the diameter value in the mop after that because I do not have all exotic tool diam in my lib (ex: re sharpened tools) or because it's a file that comes from another person and his tool numbers don't match with those in my lib. (and CB autmatically switch to 'value' in this case.

++
David
Logged
grzgrz
CNC Ewok
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: February 13, 2017, 09:39:07 am »

...I've found out that Camotics works fine when I define the tool library and tool number in the Part section. I don't even need to select any postprocessor.

Grzegorz
Logged
lloydsp
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7914



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: February 13, 2017, 12:06:24 pm »

" I don't even need to select any postprocessor."
---
Quite the contrary!  Even when you don't select a different post-processor than the default, you have "selected a post-processor".

Lloyd
Logged

"Pyro for Fun and Profit for More Than Fifty Years"
jk
Wookie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: February 13, 2017, 18:22:52 pm »

I've tweaked diameters of library tools by a small amount too. It doesn't affect the simulation much, IMHO
simulation is most useful as a coarse check just to be sure all is ok.

But example with third-party files (and tools) is interesting. Maybe support for mop-specified tools is worth investigating after all. Any ideas besides adding 'fake' tooltable entries ?
Logged
dh42
Administrator
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5514



View Profile WWW
« Reply #66 on: February 14, 2017, 00:18:25 am »

Hello,

Quote
I don't even need to select any postprocessor.

Unlike cutviewer, for camotics, the tools and stock datas are not written in the Gcode, so you do not need a specific post processor.

but maybe, it can be another way to create the XML for camotics, maybe simpler:

setting a post pro for cutviewer to do the Gcode, and use the Post Build to call a post treatment code (.exe) that read the Gcode to extract tool and stock data from the cutviewer data strings to creates the XML file. So we are sure that the datas for tool profile and tool diam are those used in the Gcode, no matter if they are taken in the tool lib or set directly in a mop by hand.

in this case the plugin in the menu do not creates the XML file and only run camotics with the right filepath.

++
David
Logged
jk
Wookie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: February 14, 2017, 00:55:44 am »


but maybe, it can be another way to create the XML for camotics, maybe simpler:

setting a post pro for cutviewer to do the Gcode, and use the Post Build to call a post treatment code (.exe) that read the Gcode to extract tool and stock data from the cutviewer data strings to creates the XML file. So we are sure that the datas for tool profile and tool diam are those used in the Gcode, no matter if they are taken in the tool lib or set directly in a mop by hand.


Extracting tool data from MOP in plugin is trivial, no need to parse cutviewer magic comments.
The real problem is different.

Camotics read G-code, see T<number> M6 and loads tool definition from tooltable in XML (indexed by number).
AFAIK there is no way to pass tool specs except by the number.

If tool diameter is overridden manually, there is no such tool in tooltable and no valid tool to load.

I see just one hacky solution - collect all manual tools, create temporary entries in tooltable, assign temporary tool numbers for manual MOPs, export g-code, revert the MOPs back. A little too dirty for my taste.
Logged
dh42
Administrator
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5514



View Profile WWW
« Reply #68 on: February 14, 2017, 01:18:41 am »

Hello,

Yes, but if you use the same way as to do the comments for cutviewer, you can do the major job with it because you can write what you want in the Gcode, CB do the job to associate a tool number and a tool diam even if it is not the same than in tool lib.

so you just need to read this data in the Gcode and do some adjustment because CB talk with diameter and camotics with radii.

an example of what I can get in the Gcode with just adding a macro in the toolchange property

G0 Z5.0
(length="20.0")
( number="6" )
(diameter="3.0" )
(rad="1.5" )
(angle="0.0" )
(shape="BallNose" )

T6 M6
..
..

G0 Z5.0
(length="22.0")
( number="5" )
(diameter="3.0" )
(rad="0.0" )
(angle="0.0" )
(shape="EndMill" )

T5 M6
...
...
( Gravure3 )
G0 Z5.0
(length="4.0")
( number="60" )
(diameter="3.0" )
(rad="0.0" )
(angle="60.0" )
(shape="VCutter" )

T60 M6
M3 S12500
G0 X59.0 Y31.0

so you have all the value needed to do the xml without the pb of the source of the data (lib or hard coded in the mop)

its done with the toolchange macro of the pp


Code:
{$clearance}
{$comment}length="{$tool.length}"{$endcomment}
{$comment} number="{$tool.index}" {$endcomment}
{$comment}diameter="{$tool.diameter}" {$endcomment}
{$comment}rad="{$tool.radius}" {$endcomment}
{$comment}angle="{$tool.veeangle}" {$endcomment}
{$comment}shape="{$tool.profile}" {$endcomment}
T{$tool.index} M6

of course, you can do the same for the stock with the following macros in the header

{$stock_width},{$stock_length},{$stock_height},{$stock_x},{$stock_y},{$stock_z}

++
David
« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 01:25:47 am by dh42 » Logged
jk
Wookie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: February 14, 2017, 02:50:18 am »

dh42, think I get an idea, thank you for examples.

I've supposed CB allows same tool numbers with different diameters in one G-code. Just tried - it gives a loud warning.
Different tool shapes do not give warnings, though.

So I just could give a priority to MOP diameters then generating xml tooltable - numbers and diameters
will match, sim tooltable will be specific for the concrete G-code. CB should  catch diameter conflicts for same numbers (if any).

This should handle the third party files and sharpened tools too.
Logged
dh42
Administrator
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5514



View Profile WWW
« Reply #70 on: February 14, 2017, 03:05:50 am »

Also, playing with the data, I also see that we can define an endmill with an angle in CB tool lib, so in addition to the conical tool ('Vcutter' with no flat tip), we can also add conical tool with flat tip (snubnoze in camotics), by using the tool.lenght + tool.veeangle + tool.diameter data and calculation.

++
David
Logged
jk
Wookie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 262


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: February 15, 2017, 04:48:42 am »

Made a small changes to support non-library tools.
Tool number in MOP can't be zero (since no toolchange is generated in this case), otherwise should be working.

If everything is ok, I'll update first post with this version. Imperial users are especially welcome for testing.

dll is attached below.


* cb2cm_1_5.zip (7.93 KB - downloaded 87 times.)
Logged
EddyCurrent
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3965



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: February 15, 2017, 10:04:11 am »

jk,

It worked as described for me  Grin
The only thing it did not do was to report the 'Tool Profile' for MOP specified tools.
I also noticed that Camotics sorts the tools in ascending numerical order rather than the order they will be used in.


* Image2.jpg (61.89 KB, 1000x500 - viewed 150 times.)
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 10:07:49 am by EddyCurrent » Logged

Made in England
driedeker
Droid
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: February 15, 2017, 21:07:26 pm »

CAMotics v1.1.0. is now available
Logged
dh42
Administrator
CNC Jedi
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5514



View Profile WWW
« Reply #74 on: February 16, 2017, 09:05:17 am »

CAMotics v1.1.0. is now available

Hello

I just install it .... and now, nothing is working ; when I run Camotics it say that it is not a valid win32 application

(I checked twice, but no error, I installed the right version: camotics_1.1.0_x86.exe)

unfortunatelly I do not have the previous version to reinstall

Edit: Ok, I retrieve the version 1.06 that is working

++
David
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 09:12:06 am by dh42 » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
  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 0.177 seconds with 19 queries.

Copyright © 2018 HexRay Ltd. | Sitemap