PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Post here if you have re-based and finalised code to integrate into master, which was discussed, agreed to and tested in other forums. You can also submit your PR directly on github.
pauluzs
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 7:48 pm
Location: Netherlands

PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Postby pauluzs » Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:00 pm

To make life easier while creating toolpath's for laser, plasma or waterjets, in 3 steps

Beamcut is added under the engrave menu.

Select Beamcut from the Engrave Menu:
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-10.png
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-10.png (146.37 KiB) Viewed 665 times
Select the top face:
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-20.png
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-20.png (168.23 KiB) Viewed 665 times
Set extra offset and toolcompensation
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-49.png
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-49.png (158.39 KiB) Viewed 665 times
And that should be all, now apply optional dressups and then postprocess

Enjoy
Attachments
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-20.png
Screenshot from 2019-03-09 22-37-20.png (168.23 KiB) Viewed 665 times
Alexandr Parkhomenko
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:35 pm

Re: PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Postby Alexandr Parkhomenko » Sun Mar 10, 2019 11:28 am

Thanks. Interesting.
This is mod PathDeburr.py
I am not work now with plasma or laser.
# Qt tanslation #//Need R!
Why you hold "Depth" in code?
Attachments
PathBeamCut.patch.txt
(4.91 KiB) Downloaded 16 times
pauluzs
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 7:48 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Postby pauluzs » Sun Mar 10, 2019 12:03 pm

Please Put on Hold
Thanks. Interesting.
This is mod PathDeburr.py
I am not work now with plasma or laser.
# Qt tanslation #//Need R!
Why you hold "Depth" in code?
This is indeed based on PathDeburr, only there was no way i could get it to behave like needed.
So i created this.

Depth is in there for offsetting toolpaths above the surface, laser focus-height would be negative depth.
Just fixed for the moment, it should actually be step-down that doesn't belong in there IMO

This post was on GitHub comment request.
The PR was actually only to see if build-checks would pass
If there is more interest in this, i'll keep the PR open and look into the translation issues
User avatar
sliptonic
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Postby sliptonic » Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:53 pm

Thanks for contributing. I think you're definitely pointing to a weakness in our Profile capability that needs to be fixed but I'm not convinced that this should be a new operation. Introducing a new op will be confusing since a user has to know when to use one versus the other.

Is there a reason you implemented an entirely new op rather than fixing Profile?

BTW, I also agree that we need a much improved startpoint dressup but that's a separate discussion.
pauluzs
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 7:48 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: PR: #2009 BeamCut Toolpath

Postby pauluzs » Mon Mar 11, 2019 10:16 pm

Thanks for contributing..........Is there a reason you implemented an entirely new op rather than fixing Profile?
Yes, this was actually just me learning the FC Code and getting into the development process.
Just trying to put all the wiki and forum info together.

This PR was mostly meant to figure out gitkraken, testing the CI process Travis and appveyor (no windows here) and to be closed.
Then there was a request on github about for a topic. So asked for a hold meanwhile. Not a pre 0.19 release.

Have found the wiki's about developing,building and committing, yet the exact workflow and which versions to use (pyhon Qt etc) is still a bit vague.
Any useful info or links are much appreciated
I'm not convinced that this should be a new operation.
True, found the "magic" settings that work with the deburr toolpath as is,
They are just not very user obvious. Simplified Tool and Gui would be useful there

Excuse the noise all this brought on github and here, closed the pull request like intended in the first place

startpoint discussion here