extra passes on profile operation

[the_cletero]

Hi,

Just starting to use Freecad to generate gcode and am overall pleased with how it works.

However, I was wondering if there's a way to add extra outside passes on a profile operation to remove material and clear way for the tools' final pass. Imagine you are cutting a circle out of a rectangular stock, for each depth, I would like to do a first pass with a 1mm offset and then a final pass before going down to the next depth.

I used to do this with an AutoCAD script I wrote myself, but can't find an option on Freecad. I was wondering if the "Offset Extra" property works this way, but changing its' value does nothing on the path shown by Freecad (v0.16).

Thanks for any help,

Alfredo

[mlampert]

You could write a dressup or a path operation that finds each loop in a profile and then just duplicates that before moving on to the next plunge.

Out of curiosity, what does the extra pass do for your part?

[chrisb]

You should use the upcoming version 0.17. It contains lots of new and improved features. Dressups is one of them.

[sliptonic]

This is a good point. Libarea has the 'extra offset' property which is now implemented in 0.17 in the contour and profile operations.

HeeksCNC also had an additional boolean option to 'do finishing pass' which would add a final pass at full depth without the extra offset. Using the two in combination would do something similar to what you're asking. It would step down, leaving a bit of material behind, then do a cleanup pass removing that material from all depths at once. The result is a better surface finish.

We haven't implemented this in FreeCAD. I always thought it would be easier to add another profile operation to do the cleanup separately and have better control of the details. For example, suppose you want to do the rough passes uses conventional milling but do the finishing pass using climb.

If people would prefer to have it implemented as a feature of profile/contour rather than a separate operation, we can do it, or as Markus suggests maybe add a dressup. If we stick with the current approach of separate operations, it's another good example of the need for a 'clone operation' command.

Opinions?

[chrisb]

I think this is not a separate path but rather a property of a path. As such it can be implemented as a dressup or some other possibility attached directly to the path.

[bill]

... to 'do finishing pass' which would add a final pass at full depth without the extra offset. Using the two in combination would do something similar to what you're asking. It would step down, leaving a bit of material behind, then do a cleanup pass removing that material from all depths at once...

... I always thought it would be easier to add another profile operation to do the cleanup separately and have better control of the details. For example, suppose you want to do the rough passes uses conventional milling but do the finishing pass using climb.,

and start with a ROUGHING MILL and change the tool diameter removing more/less material, and change the speed and feed, and add coolant misting/spray/flood, and on and on!

Given the current approach, making features/paths/objects/etc. discrete provides a lot of (maximum?) flexibility. The user needs this flexibility to, as they say, "skin the cat". Just as was demonstrated in one of my recent post cutting cooling fins.

... this is not a separate path but rather a property of a path. As such it can be implemented as a dressup or some other possibility attached directly to the path.

Its not a big deal attaching the "functionality" to multiple places. However, it is not prudent to "closely or critically couple" properties/function/etc. as being seen in the PartDesign-Assemblage-Placement-FileCompatibilty issues. Some times, it is inevitable.

If I understand your(sliptonic) meaning of clone:
PATH:CLONE would be extremely valuable for making 1 property change to multiple property changes yielding totally different and useful operation.
Much quicker, less errors, less complication, less dependencies, etc.

+1 Team Clone
Yeah, Stick with the current path and let the CLONEs appear!

Things can be further integrated as the PathWorkbench matures; Besides, there are many more important functions to develop.

[chrisb]

and start with a ROUGHING MILL and change the tool diameter removing more/less material, and change the speed and feed, and add coolant misting/spray/flood, and on and on!

If I understand your(sliptonic) meaning of clone:
PATH:CLONE would be extremely valuable for making 1 property change to multiple property changes yielding totally different and useful operation.
Much quicker, less errors, less complication, less dependencies, etc.

Things can be further integrated as the PathWorkbench matures; Besides, there are many more important functions to develop.

I have to admit that your arguments are convincing (I hate being convinced , I love to be right ):
- Clone is probably a quick, but definitely not a dirty solution
- tool changes in a dressup? No!
- Other things are more important.
- It can be added later, probably wthout any conceptual loss.