Standardized test shapes
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
-
- Posts: 991
- Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:45 am
Re: Standardized test shapes
Hello everyone,
Given that we're opening the can of worm labled machine accuracy, here is a little bit of basic reading material i found interesting, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... gIyScZQTYK
Perhaps it fits the conversations.
At any rate it feels to me like any or a subset of the shapes used for CAM testing will necessarily fit the bill of machine accuracy testing.
J.
Given that we're opening the can of worm labled machine accuracy, here is a little bit of basic reading material i found interesting, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... gIyScZQTYK
Perhaps it fits the conversations.
At any rate it feels to me like any or a subset of the shapes used for CAM testing will necessarily fit the bill of machine accuracy testing.
J.
Re: Standardized test shapes
Herbert:
Where do I find this icon? I hovered all the icons in Path WB and I don't see anything like that.
[EDIT] I think you are referring to the Post Process icon, which I was doing from the menu. This does NOT produce an output file, though it seems it should because if I do not configure output it prompts with a dialogue.
If I change your T4 in any of the paths it breaks them and even reverting to T4 does not clear it. If I change even the speeds on your T4 it breaks !
I'm starting to realise this is too flaky to be of much use at this stage.
Thanks for the detailed reply Herbert. Dog bone seems to have done that nicely but it throws out a few wide paths off to apparent infinity. I can no longer drag the object using scroll wheel.Use only the "Export" Icon to export to g-code, the way File -> export don't work
Where do I find this icon? I hovered all the icons in Path WB and I don't see anything like that.
[EDIT] I think you are referring to the Post Process icon, which I was doing from the menu. This does NOT produce an output file, though it seems it should because if I do not configure output it prompts with a dialogue.
Well that's exactly what I'd expect to do but it did not work.Select the wall of the hole and use the Pocket OP
Code: Select all
Pocketing Select Mode
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 170, in updateData
self.panel.updateData(obj, prop)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 961, in updateData
page.pageUpdateData(obj, prop)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 242, in pageUpdateData
self.updateData(obj, prop)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 325, in updateData
self.setExtensions(obj.Proxy.getExtensions(obj))
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 302, in setExtensions
baseItem.appendRow(self.createItemForBaseModel(base[0], sub, edges, extensions))
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 244, in createItemForBaseModel
ext0 = _Extension(self.obj, base, sub, label)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 70, in __init__
self.switch = self.createExtensionSoSwitch(self.ext)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 82, in createExtensionSoSwitch
wire = ext.getWire()
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 199, in getWire
return self.extendEdge(feature, edges[0], direction)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 161, in extendEdge
return extendWire(feature, Part.Wire([e0]), self.length.Value)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 121, in extendWire
l0 = (ePts[0] - endPts[0]).Length
<type 'exceptions.IndexError'>: list index out of range
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 98, in setEdit
self.setupTaskPanel(TaskPanel(vobj.Object, self.deleteObjectsOnReject(), page, selection))
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 109, in setupTaskPanel
panel.setupUi()
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 953, in setupUi
self.panelSetFields()
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 925, in panelSetFields
page.pageSetFields()
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathOpGui.py", line 224, in pageSetFields
self.setFields(self.obj)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 215, in setFields
self.setExtensions(self.extensions)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 302, in setExtensions
baseItem.appendRow(self.createItemForBaseModel(base[0], sub, edges, extensions))
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 244, in createItemForBaseModel
ext0 = _Extension(self.obj, base, sub, label)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 70, in __init__
self.switch = self.createExtensionSoSwitch(self.ext)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShapeGui.py", line 82, in createExtensionSoSwitch
wire = ext.getWire()
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 199, in getWire
return self.extendEdge(feature, edges[0], direction)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 161, in extendEdge
return extendWire(feature, Part.Wire([e0]), self.length.Value)
File "/svn/freecad-build/Mod/Path/PathScripts/PathPocketShape.py", line 121, in extendWire
l0 = (ePts[0] - endPts[0]).Length
<type 'exceptions.IndexError'>: list index out of range
ControlSingleton::showDialog: Can't show Gui::TaskCSysDragger since there is already an active task dialog
I'm starting to realise this is too flaky to be of much use at this stage.
Re: Standardized test shapes
OK, I'd better dump this here in case it goes tits-up again.
This is a working model with paths. I reduced the step height to 2mm to test on ply wood before risking metal. If your parametric CAD is in order this should be simple enough to scale back to 10mm later. ( I won't be betting on the paths no falling apart completely though ).
This is a working model with paths. I reduced the step height to 2mm to test on ply wood before risking metal. If your parametric CAD is in order this should be simple enough to scale back to 10mm later. ( I won't be betting on the paths no falling apart completely though ).
- Attachments
-
- diamond-circ-sqr-2clean.FCStd
- (77.88 KiB) Downloaded 78 times
Re: Standardized test shapes
It's not completely clear to me: did you finally succeed to create GCodes?
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Re: Standardized test shapes
Yes, having re-asserted the tool speeds, I have what looks like useable GRBL Gcode. I have not cut the part yet because it was throwing errrors but I suspect that is Universal Gcode Sender messing about. [ Confirmed there was a 50 char line length set in UGS, not sure why. Set to 127 fine. ]
Re: Standardized test shapes
OK a clean run produces quite credible results. A few notable defects:
1. Big gouge from central hole before face-milling the top 'diamond' face. Why didn't it lift clear before moving ?
2. Remaining material at edge of top face and circular face. Am I testing my h/w or the s/w : too many variables.
3. Remaining fluff in centre of one of circular segments. Again h/w or s/w ?
4. Slight machining marks on top surface due to compromise in choosing path. A spiral cut produces a nice finish on wood but fails to work at 45 deg.
First impression is that it's pretty good but maybe still too experimental for daily use.
Unless the gouge is me not using FreeCAD properly, I can't afford that to happen when cutting metal !
Not much help cutting a test piece to test the machine when I don't know whether defects come from the CAD.
Can anyone comment on that gouge?
Thanks.
PS not that different path tools were used intentionally to cut the circular segments to compare results. Some better than others.
1. Big gouge from central hole before face-milling the top 'diamond' face. Why didn't it lift clear before moving ?
2. Remaining material at edge of top face and circular face. Am I testing my h/w or the s/w : too many variables.
3. Remaining fluff in centre of one of circular segments. Again h/w or s/w ?
4. Slight machining marks on top surface due to compromise in choosing path. A spiral cut produces a nice finish on wood but fails to work at 45 deg.
First impression is that it's pretty good but maybe still too experimental for daily use.
Unless the gouge is me not using FreeCAD properly, I can't afford that to happen when cutting metal !
Not much help cutting a test piece to test the machine when I don't know whether defects come from the CAD.
Can anyone comment on that gouge?
Thanks.
PS not that different path tools were used intentionally to cut the circular segments to compare results. Some better than others.
- Attachments
-
- diamond-circ-sqr-3.FCStd
- (78.9 KiB) Downloaded 61 times
-
- test_piece.png (901.76 KiB) Viewed 4206 times
Re: Standardized test shapes
Hi freman.
if i use "keep tool down" i have had some errors like that at the past, not actuall, - but i don't use keep tool down very often.
Look at the gcode you get, last move of each operation should be a move to "Z save hight", the gauge looks like it's missing at the end of the Op for the hole.
The left material looks a bit like caused by backlash
The fluff im in mind its caused by a wrong tool for wood and a to low spindle speed (wood wants rpm's)
if i use "keep tool down" i have had some errors like that at the past, not actuall, - but i don't use keep tool down very often.
Look at the gcode you get, last move of each operation should be a move to "Z save hight", the gauge looks like it's missing at the end of the Op for the hole.
The left material looks a bit like caused by backlash
The fluff im in mind its caused by a wrong tool for wood and a to low spindle speed (wood wants rpm's)
Gruß Herbert
- sliptonic
- Veteran
- Posts: 3457
- Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:46 pm
- Location: Columbia, Missouri
- Contact:
Re: Standardized test shapes
You have material left at the top probably because your stock was configured larger than your part and you didn't add mill face operation to clear down to it.
The center gouge is troubling. Are your clearance and safe heights high enough?
The center gouge is troubling. Are your clearance and safe heights high enough?
Re: Standardized test shapes
thanks for the comments.
"left hand " =? , it if is the outside edge of the base contour it's not a problem that's just the cut out path, the outside is gash material. What concerned me more was the edge of the cylinder which has a fine slither of material not removed.
400Hz = 24000 rmp tool speed , HSS four flute end mill. More a tool for metal I admit.
Could be more of a gotcha than a bug.
"left hand " =? , it if is the outside edge of the base contour it's not a problem that's just the cut out path, the outside is gash material. What concerned me more was the edge of the cylinder which has a fine slither of material not removed.
400Hz = 24000 rmp tool speed , HSS four flute end mill. More a tool for metal I admit.
I had a look at the paths and the face mill op for the top is the last operation. It had "use start point" checked. Not sure why? I maybe because that was initially the first operation. I gave some more thought to cutting order and more or less reverse the op. order.The center gouge is troubling. Are your clearance and safe heights high enough?
Could be more of a gotcha than a bug.
Re: Standardized test shapes
I tried increasing the level of each slab from 2mm to 3mm. I went fairly well and the model of the part body remains coherent.
However, some of the paths don't work. Some do. I went through the offending paths to reset the depths to the new positions but there is still residual material on the four corners and the circular segments.
The sim shows about the same thing as I see on real cut.
I have tried to totally remove the offending paths, and recreate them from scratch. I still seem to get the same problem. It seems that there is still some hangover from the 2mm version of the model.
However, some of the paths don't work. Some do. I went through the offending paths to reset the depths to the new positions but there is still residual material on the four corners and the circular segments.
The sim shows about the same thing as I see on real cut.
I have tried to totally remove the offending paths, and recreate them from scratch. I still seem to get the same problem. It seems that there is still some hangover from the 2mm version of the model.
- Attachments
-
- diamond-circ-sqr-2-resid.FCStd
- (1000.01 KiB) Downloaded 72 times