3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:28 pm
3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Hi. I am trying out FreeCAD since somebody has suggested that it could be used as a toolchain for our CNC knee mill running LinuxCNC. I am having trouble getting Pocket 3D working.
The problem is that selecting the bottom of the pocket and clicking the Pocket 3D tool produces a trivial tool path consisting of just one G0 command. Obviously, this does not do any cutting. I am using the 0.19 appimage that comes from the download section of the freecad website.
I did a search of the forum, and although there are a lot of problem reports, oddly enough, only one seems to match mine. I performed the suggested operations (set OCL support in preferences, set up a expermental boolean flag in Mod, and use Surface 3D instead). This does produce something. It creates a huge flood of cutting paths, most of which are superfluous. When the simulator is finished running, it only cuts part of the pocket. There are far too many operations and it would take an extremely long time to run on the mill. It was unclear if the OP got his project running. Does anyone have a clue about what could be going wrong?
OS: openSUSE Leap 15.1 (KDE//usr/share/xsessions/plasma5)
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.19.24291 (Git) AppImage
Build type: Release
Branch: (HEAD detached at 0.19.2)
Hash: 7b5e18a0759de778b74d3a5c17eba9cb815035ac
Python version: 3.8.8
Qt version: 5.12.9
Coin version: 4.0.0
OCC version: 7.4.0
Locale: English/United States (en_US)
The problem is that selecting the bottom of the pocket and clicking the Pocket 3D tool produces a trivial tool path consisting of just one G0 command. Obviously, this does not do any cutting. I am using the 0.19 appimage that comes from the download section of the freecad website.
I did a search of the forum, and although there are a lot of problem reports, oddly enough, only one seems to match mine. I performed the suggested operations (set OCL support in preferences, set up a expermental boolean flag in Mod, and use Surface 3D instead). This does produce something. It creates a huge flood of cutting paths, most of which are superfluous. When the simulator is finished running, it only cuts part of the pocket. There are far too many operations and it would take an extremely long time to run on the mill. It was unclear if the OP got his project running. Does anyone have a clue about what could be going wrong?
OS: openSUSE Leap 15.1 (KDE//usr/share/xsessions/plasma5)
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.19.24291 (Git) AppImage
Build type: Release
Branch: (HEAD detached at 0.19.2)
Hash: 7b5e18a0759de778b74d3a5c17eba9cb815035ac
Python version: 3.8.8
Qt version: 5.12.9
Coin version: 4.0.0
OCC version: 7.4.0
Locale: English/United States (en_US)
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Hi and welcome to the forum!
I am not sure, if the simulator handles 3D pocket correctly, so you better look at the paths. Can you upload the file and mark somehow what goes wrong and what you expect?
I am not sure, if the simulator handles 3D pocket correctly, so you better look at the paths. Can you upload the file and mark somehow what goes wrong and what you expect?
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
-
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2020 9:16 pm
- Location: Bargara, Queensland, Australia UTC+10
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Could you attach your " .FCStd " file , it allows forum members to troubleshoot your problem. ( Attachments Tab below the text entry window)ericcsforge wrote: ↑Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:40 pm Hi. I am trying out FreeCAD since somebody has suggested that it could be used as a toolchain for our CNC knee mill running LinuxCNC. I am having trouble getting Pocket 3D working.
In the case of the simulator, it has a limitation when displaying 3D paths. Only the leading half of the tool shape is removed from the stock, so the final display can look very wrong for some shapes although the code is correct.
I see chrisb has also posted while I was previewing my post, so you get the same answer twice
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Not really twice, yours was more precise. (Besides that I know the problem )
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:28 pm
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Hi. I am attaching the file with the NULL 3D pocket operation. I suspect that this is already a known problem, and the solution will be to use 3D surface. I can also attach the failed 3D surface file to a later post.
- Attachments
-
- millclmp2poc.FCStd
- (416.59 KiB) Downloaded 42 times
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:28 pm
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
I checked the Gcode output. It had only one rapid G0, which did no cutting.bmsaus4ax wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 4:35 am ...
In the case of the simulator, it has a limitation when displaying 3D paths. Only the leading half of the tool shape is removed from the stock, so the final display can look very wrong for some shapes although the code is correct.
I see chrisb has also posted while I was previewing my post, so you get the same answer twice
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
I am not sure what steps you are using. I loaded your file, inspected the g-code, and it looked quite reasonable.
This is the screen shot of the paths generated.
I believe you will need to be more explicit in exactly what you are doing that leads to "nothing of consequence".
Gene
This is the screen shot of the paths generated.
I believe you will need to be more explicit in exactly what you are doing that leads to "nothing of consequence".
Gene
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
You can't use a drill for 3Dsurface. I changed it to the 6.35 endmill.
And I changed the boundary adjustment to nearly the diameter of the mill.
Besides: Please remove the artefacts from the simulation before uploading. It reduces the size of the file to less than 1/10 here.
And I changed the boundary adjustment to nearly the diameter of the mill.
Besides: Please remove the artefacts from the simulation before uploading. It reduces the size of the file to less than 1/10 here.
- Attachments
-
- millclmp2poc_cb.FCStd
- (39.13 KiB) Downloaded 43 times
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:28 pm
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
Hi Gene. How did you prepare this output??? I used the "Post process" button on the lower tool bar. It produces a bunch of gcode. I am only complaining about the last block, the 3D pocket operation. Here's the copy and paste:GeneFC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 7:50 pm I am not sure what steps you are using. I loaded your file, inspected the g-code, and it looked quite reasonable.
Capture2.PNG
This is the screen shot of the paths generated.
Capture.PNG
I believe you will need to be more explicit in exactly what you are doing that leads to "nothing of consequence".
Gene
(begin operation: Pocket_3D)
(machine: not set, mm/min)
(Pocket_3D)
G0 Z15.000
(finish operation: Pocket_3D)
(begin postamble)
M05
G17 G54 G90 G80 G40
M2
Note that the Pocket_3D operation only consists of a single command: G0 Z15
This is not going to do any cutting. I cannot see the appropriate section in your screen grab. It appears that it is a .png file and is not scrollable.
The second .png file shows the same tool path that my file does. The profiling, slot, and drilled hole worked fine. The nose of the clamp appears not to have been touched.
Sorry about the unclear nature of my post. I should have prepared a file with only one operation, the 3D one.
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2021 11:28 pm
Re: 3D pocket produces nothing of consequence
This is perfect! I take it that you did the job with 3D surface. When you say "artifacts", you mean the cut material?chrisb wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 8:40 pm You can't use a drill for 3Dsurface. I changed it to the 6.35 endmill.
And I changed the boundary adjustment to nearly the diameter of the mill.
Besides: Please remove the artefacts from the simulation before uploading. It reduces the size of the file to less than 1/10 here.
SnipScreenshot-332942.png
By the way, I tried with all of the tools. None worked, even the endmills.