FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better tool changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much will it add to the price?
See my comments and FADAC's response here:
formatting link
Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.
I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to discu ss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence whatsoever th at a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic parts.
There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and co nverting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.
jon_banquer fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
Show us an example of what you call "3D surfacing".
Even the low-priced UK CamBam (primarily targeted to hobbiests) can do 3D surfaces, roughing to approximate shape with flat end mills, and then, if you have the time, pretty good surfacing at small stepovers and small depth increments, using ball and bull-nosed cutters.
So, I'm not sure what you mean when you say most CAMs can't do it, unless I don't understand what sort of 'surfacing' you're referring to.
jon_banquer fired this volley in news:2c291939- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
Jon, As played in that light, Delcam has features that look pretty handy and advanced, like the comparison check 'model to as-cut'. It also seems to have MORE strategies for milling 3D surfaces than simpler packages. The UI appears to be pretty smooth (can't say how 'intuitive').
All that said, much simpler, lower-cost 2.5D CAMs have much of that capability. Again, I'll refer to CamBam, as being the one I'm most familiar with.
At $300 (including the price of a bundled 3D cut simulator), CamBam can do almost all of what I saw DelCam do _in_that_demo_. It has region-fill and waterline 3D methods, just as those shown in the DelCam vid. It has the ability to see the finished cut in 3D, and freely rotate it. It can use different roughing and finishing strategies.
It is NOT 'feature based', but relies on the whole 3D volume for its cues about how to approach surfaces and cut strategies.
So: Although what I saw of DelCam makes it very attractive in terms of capabilities, you're not entirely correct that there aren't lower-end 'hobby' softwares out there that can do good 3D surfacing.
I won't drag him into this discussion unless he wishes to join, but there's a frequent CamBam user here on r.c.m. who uses it to design molds for casting commercial fishbaits. He uses CamBam's 3D methods extensively, and they really seem to turn out nicely... his molds AND his finished baits are successful.
jim fired this volley in news:5aednftfWIQU3y3PnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:
I don't know that CamBam _can't_ do that. I know it has the mathematical precision to manage it, but have never learnt enough of its 3D features to know with what accuracy it mills 3D parts. But I have to ask this, "Will FeatureCam do that?" If so, what's the cost per seat?
A lot of what the intelligent 2.5D user does is to plan parts for 3D space and volume functionality, and 2.5D fits. That is, prismatic surfaces are employed for fit-ups. And, of course, pretty much any CAM can do that precision of work on prismatic surfaces.
jon_banquer fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
I just forgot to respond to that. Why yes; it does have a feature like that, although it wasn't name ReSt. It's called 'finishing MOps' in CamBam.
Only stock that was not removed in prior Machining Operations is removed in a finishing pass. The 'roughing' phase can be as fine as you wish, with finishing removing as little as a fraction of a tenth, if you've got the tools and machine to handle it.
It's not a dumb piece of hobby-soft, just low-priced, and missing many of the 3D visualization tools that would be very nice to have.
Again... what's the price for a seat of FeatureCam? CamBam (alone, not bundled with other software) is $149.
One thing I don't understand about the demo you showed us is why FeatureCam would leave stock you wouldn't already know about? In CamBam, if you specify a 'roughing' clearance, you can be certain there's exactly that much material left for the Remaining Stock removal pass, except, of course in corners that aren't over-cut, in which case the remaining stock is a function of tool radius.
It almost appeared in the demo that one has to go FIND areas that aren't finished in FeatureCam (using the model-check tool) ???
I don't think anyone has claimed FeatureCam can produce arbitrary 3d shapes to .0001".
The Cam system is only one factor that contributes to how accurately arbitrary 3d shapes can be reproduced by the milling process. The average CNC milling machine can't hold that level of accuracy in cutting arbitrary 3d shapes.
From the documentation, CamBam only works with imported 3d meshes or 2d curves. That alone tells you what sort of accuracy to expect. So whatever you mean by prismatic, its not a concept that CamBam recognizes.
Anyway, prismatic surfaces are not generally used for mating surfaces. For example, irregular shaped parting surfaces.
It sounds like you've never done any 3d surface milling.
You end up with stock left over that the finish tool can't reach (because the radius is too large). A rest milling (or sometimes called pencil tracing) routine will find those areas and allow for cutting them with a smaller radius tool.
jim fired this volley in news:ItydnZ_UiK- VyC3PnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:
Yes, Jim, I know the limitations of the machines and the tooling. I was only commenting on the ability of the software to follow an arbitrary curve. And if you weren't only trying to find fault with every comment, you'd have to admit that an STL _can_ be as precise as you'd like to make it. That introduces other overhead, but isn't by itself a factor that limits accuracy. (time, yes; accuracy, no)
I already affirmed that 2.5D software can't (easily) do complex 3D mating surfaces. Your comment was only a goad, to no purpose.
And yes, I know you don't know what 'prismatic' shapes are, or you'd understand how real-world parts can be planned to part or mate on such boundaries.
You howl like someone who's got 5-axis CNC at his disposal, but you chitter like someone who's only citing what he's read, and never really made any parts in a real shop, with 3-axis machinery.
jim fired this volley in news:cIGdnQLKCulxyy3PnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:
It sounds to me like you don't read anything before you slander.
I mentioned the radius-caused remaining-stock issue. Did you not understand the English parts, or was the Latin-based 'radius' a problem?
I also said CamBam is equipped to do what you blather about. It, too, can sneak into those unfinished corners with smaller-radius tools WITHOUT re-cutting air.
jon_banquer fired this volley in news:ec47b233- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
So, I should assume when I see a FeatureCAM package offered for hundreds of dollars, and touted to be the 'current version', that it's a pirate copy; yes?
I think I remember Andy Payne (CB author) expressing a desire to write a future 'professional' version of CamBam. I know he's in the midst of trying to get back to his beloved Australia from the UK before he launches on a big efforts like that.
Specifics -- well the thing most CamBam users enjoy the most is its built-in 2D CAD facilities, with som limited (but still available) 3D functionality. Drawing 3D within CamBam is mostly a 'trick', but it can be done by creating 2D shapes and translating them about the axes.
I find that I can design more than 90% of my parts (strictly 'prismatic') within CamBam as multiple orthogonal views, avoiding all the importation/interpretation issues that accompany doing the CAD externally with software that isn't specifically CAM-oriented.
It also has a wealth of integrity checks for shapes and milling paths, although those are in the form of text messages from a debugging handler, and not highlighted on the drawing.
It's also relatively bug-free. There are a few known bugs, and Andy faithfully addresses them in each subsequent update, but there are still a number of them outstanding, and updates have become less frequent recently. Generally, though, the bugs are well-known.
CamBam presently has some limited lathe capabilities, with promises of more complete support in the future... maybe even a lathe-only version.
The user forum is about the most helpful place you could imagine for sorting out issues outside your normal experience with the package. I don't know of anyone who's ever been shooed out by 'experts' for not being of their level. That's unlike a lot of other sites occupied by self-proclaimed gods who don't seem to be able to come down from Olympus to help neophytes, except with cryptic references to things beginners wouldn't know, anyway.
I'd say for most users, CamBam is not only their first CAM, it's probably their first foray into CNC machining, so there are lots of beginners there. It's targeted at the small hobby shop. It has utility that extends past that market, and a price that makes it fun to experiment with, even if it doesn't suit your needs.
The mesh data can be made accurate, but it won't be tailored to produce accurate toolpaths. And its still a huge leap from having an ideal mesh model and making an accurate part.
The use of the term 2.5D in CamBam refers to the type of tool path (all surface cutting motion is restricted to 2d).
2.5d as used in CamBam does not refer to the shape or complexity of the 3d surface. All it means is that the software only supports 2-axis surfacing moves. CamBam may be able to handle 2.5D geometry better than 3d geometry, but I doubt it is much better at it because it has no way of telling if the geometry is 2.5d
I said I don't know what you mean by prismatic because there is no point in guessing. As far as i can tell, you believe CamBam is accurate under some very limited conditions.
That description sounds more like you. I haven't made any claims. We are talking about your claims, which seem to evaporate whenever they are examined.
jim fired this volley in news:b9SdnXyt98up8C3PnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:
Really? You're a regular CamBam user, then, and know all this?
In "waterline" cutting of 3D meshes, it does follow only 2D cutting paths. It has other strategies that can follow surfaces in 3D, moving in all three axes at once. I know this from doing it, not merely reading about it.
Are you a regular user of it? C'mon! It's NOT professional CAM, but it's a whole lot more capable than you give it credit for being.
jon_banquer fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
Yeah, I know... and if I weren't so busy that I could spend time "getting addicted", I probably would. But I was brought up in the paper-drawing era, and it works for the simple parts I *usually* do. I struggle with full-3D packages, for lack of experience with them.
I read the documentation. Are you claiming there are undocumented features? Or are you just spouting more bullshit?
I don't have to be a user to read the documentation. Apparently, you think that being a user entitles you to make up bullshit about what the program does?
The documentation makes it clear what it does. It has 3 surface machining strategies. Each holds one of the 3 machining axis constant.
It also has an engraving toolpath. That tool path can move in all axes at once but it is not really a surfacing tool. It will cut a curve that lies on a surface. That is not an accurate method to cut the entire surface.
Is there any other toolpath not included in the software documentation?
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" wrote in message news:XnsA29868C31853Elloydspmindspringcom@216.168.3.70...
I do a fair amount of 3D with CamBam, but to be fair anything I can do with
2D (2.5D) I do. For me its about the price. I tried a lot of different free and low price CAM software, and CamBam was the only one I could afford that does do 3D ok.
It's a one man show so forget arguments based on the documentation. The documentation is way behind what it can currently do. I would rather Andy work on bug fixes and new features than spend all his time writing doc files. That being said, my opinion was reversed when I started learning how to use it a few versions ago. I was frustrated by the lack of detailed documentation in some respects.
Somebody was talking about surface accuracy of a tenth. As near as I can tell the limitation here is the processing power. CamBam does 3D machining of a surface in two different manners, and that's pretty much it.
1: Waterline - It does waterline at a depth increment either as a finish (0-X roughing clearance) where it cuts the contour lines of the part only, or it does waterline roughing with (0-X roughing clearance) where it removes all material in the defined area to finishing that depth increment at the contour line. For some reason the waterline method seems to leave material I would not expect sometimes.
2: Vertical or Horizontal (scan line method) This traces the surface either with horizontal or vertical passes, and it can be by depth increment or no depth increment. No depth increment is nice for a finishing pass as it will trace the surface exactly (within the set resolution) on each pass. Using this method with boundary shapes, defined cut areas, or a cut limit based on the surface itself is modestly powerful.
There are some tricks also... For instance you can rotate the surface (and other associated geometry if needed), and then rotate the MOP back to the original position to get diagonal scan lines. The transformation matrix is pretty powerful in that respect, but there are things it gets confused at. Fortunately they are things that confuse me to so we agree not to do those. LOL.
What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation. In a 3D machining operation it calculates the depth of Z based on a percentage of cutter diameter along the scan line. For example with a .0625 diameter cutter and a machine operation resolution of .01 it will recalculate the depth of Z every .000625 inches. With a large operation that can be quite time consuming to calculate tool paths. The higher the resolution the longer it takes to calculate the tool paths, but the cut time is based on the run mode of the machine, and the acceleration rate. Sometimes I generate tool paths that take 45 minutes to an hour just to calculate them on my little dual core processor CAD/CAM computer. As of the last time I checked CamBam can actively use 2 worker threads for a MOP, but that's it. (I seem to think it might only use one worker thread per MOP.) More processors helps to calculate multiple MOPs at a time, but doesn't help speed up a single MOP. It can also be memory intensive. I occasionally get out of memory exception errors, but I am running it on a 32 bit OS that doesn't even address all the memory I can socket on the motherboard. I do wish that Andy had set it up to swap out to the hard drive (or maybe an external memory drive) like we used to do back when memory was expensive and the local computer gurus carried RAM in their fanny pack with their sidearm. LOL.
So in theory atleast you could possibly get scan line resolution calculations to within a tenth for a very simple small operation, but with comparable step over it might take days to generate the tool paths. More processing power, 64 bit OS, and more memory could probably help some, but there really are practical limitations. I've generated code before that has taken hours. For most of what I do with 3D I am happy to be within a .0015 for depth. As somebody else mentioned the fish don't really care. My machines aren't accurate enough to get any better than that anyway. Well, my Hurco mill is fair, but I run in CV mode with a 90 degree mode switch limit and a .003 rounding limit most of the time.
The one thing that CamBam does that also looks like 3D is engrave a polyline. With an engrave MOP the cutter will follow with the tool centered on the line at the whatever depth RELATIVE TO THE LINE you set in the MOP. This is handy for things like engraving a name on a surface. If the polyline is not defined with bulges or arcs it will follow the line using 3 axis anywhere in 3D space that the line goes. It does not have to be on a surface. I used this method to trick it into doing some 3D work before I got a 3D CAD program and learned to use 3D MOPs in CamBam. CamBam also has a nice tool to project lines to a surface. I use that with an engrave MOP as a "trick" to engrave certain types of details into molds sometimes, and its child's play that way to engrave a clients name into a mold that way.
CamBam is the best "affordable" hobby CAM program I have tried and in many respects easier to use than some more expensive programs I've had the opportunity to try.
It does not do "remaining material removal" machining. It would be nice, but I have to figure that out for myself. If it did I would have saved myself a dollar or two on broken cutters when I switch to a smaller cutter for detail work. "Remaining material removal" machining is a fairly complex bit of code to write. Constant engagement tool paths, trachoidal tool paths, etc... HSM tool paths. Those would all be nice, but they aren't in there. To some degree you can do it manually with good planning, but its not powerful enough to do it all for you and take the thinking out of the button jockey.
Gunner Asch on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 10:46:50 -0800 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
A lot of times, it is vastly less work to do it by hand. As long as you only want it the one time. The big selling point for CAD is ease of making changes.
"Ya want it 2 3/4" longer? No problem. "Ya want it with .375 radii on all corner? No problem."
And so on and so forth.
I was complaining of a lot of houses all looking like they came from the same software package. Admitted that before CAD, the houses all looked alike because they were the same set of prints, just flipped or rotated. "But with Computers, we can individualize each one from the same menu of options."
-- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.