Hobby CNC, the rotor way

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Hobbies, Crafts, & Houses > Hobby CNC, the rotor way

babyeatingpsychopath: Oct 28, 2000; Forum Veteran

Dominoes posted:

More like a g-code generator. I don't have a CAD model, and am bad at CAD software. (Was messing with FreeCad earlier this week for a diff proj, but have a long way to go) Maybe that's the answer. Hand-written G-Code seems to be a unsustainable.

Ok, well. CAM without CAD is really, really, really hard. Like, trying to program a microcontroller in assembly with the datasheet. CAD -> CAM tools exist for the same reason compilers exist.

If you're just trying to do a linear ramp from point A to point B, then a G01 move will do that. If you look at a big facing cut as output by Fusion or something, it'll have

code:

(RAMP )
g00 x0y0z0
g01 Feed
x1y1z1
(END RAMP)
(FACE)
x2y2
x3y3
x4y4
...
(END FACE)

# ? Feb 9, 2021 17:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 14:55

Dominoes: Sep 20, 2007

Thank you. I'll explore FreeCad's CNC functionality before pressing with this.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 17:02

insta: Jan 28, 2009

Dominoes posted:

More like a g-code generator. I don't have a CAD model, and am bad at CAD software. (Was messing with FreeCad earlier this week for a diff proj, but have a long way to go) Maybe that's the answer. Hand-written G-Code seems to be a unsustainable.

As somebody who went down this route, it's worth learning a CAD tool. Script-generated GCode doesn't really go all that far. It does have a purpose, but it won't go very far.

I know it's a joke suggestion, but if you're at the point of writing script to generate GCode, step up a level and use OpenSCAD. It's not a CAD, but it can be scripted to create parametric geometry. There's a missing step to go from STL -> GCode, but I'm hoping somebody else chimes in with a way to do that.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 17:08

Dominoes: Sep 20, 2007

OpenScad looks fun on its own! Diving in. I'm suspicious it'll be more appealing than the GUI-based ones, where I frequently fight to find to click the right faces. The mouse feels like a clumsy instrument for navigating 3D space in the way FreeCAD and Fusion operate.

I have a hunch a G-code generating script might be the most elegant solution to my specific use-case here: Making a few linear and circular cuts on the face of an enclosure. I still plan on learning FreeCad's path tool for more-complicated future projects, and in case it does prove better for this case.

Ie, the resulting file will look something like this:

Python code:

cfg = machine.Config(Coord(0., 0., 10.), 5., 100., 100., 1., -3.)

steps = cfg.setup()

steps.extend(cfg.ramp_line(Coord(0, -6, 0), Coord(0, 6, 0), 10.))
steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5, 5, 0), 3.))
steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5, 10, 0), 3.))
steps.extend(cfg.move_to_idle())

machine.make_file(steps, "water_mon_top")

Dominoes fucked around with this message at 11:22 on Feb 10, 2021

# ? Feb 9, 2021 17:43

Sedgr: Sep 16, 2007; Neat!

I've been brushing up on my CAD/CAM lately since its been a while since I did any machining and I've mostly been following Lars Christensen and his Fusion 360 tutorials. He makes it easy enough to follow that its been really helpful.

https://youtu.be/A5bc9c3S12g - Fusion 360 Tutorial for Absolute Beginners - Three parts each 20 minutes goes over basic CAD parametric modelling.

He's got tons of videos; CAD tutorials, CAM tutorials, the works; so if you dig around a bit you'll likely find one that can help.

Anyone have a Onefinity CNC? I mentioned it in the tools thread but I placed an order for the Onefinity Woodworker the other day and Im now anxiously waiting for it to arrive. Backordered till May at the moment. If anyone has used one before I'd love to hear any opinions, gotcha's, that sort of thing.

Machine is pretty new so it's not as common as a Shapeoko or Xcarve but maybe someone here got onboard earlier that I did.

Was going to pull the trigger on a Shapeoko before I found this and ended up going with the Onefinity. https://www.onefinitycnc.com if anyone hasn't seen it before.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 18:33

Ambrose Burnside: Aug 30, 2007; pensive

openSCAD is not an adequate replacement for legit GUI-based CAD/CAM programs for anything but the most rudimentary CAM tasks and you basically never directly interact with gcode unless you're learning the basics of CAM, are troubleshooting sth mid-program, or want to execute something so simple that it's faster to write the script than it is to wait for fusion to boot up. you should understand gcode and know how to troubleshoot a program, but much more than that is time poorly-spent. if you want to do much CAD/CAM work you should make peace with clicking on stuff, i promise you it's actually very quick and intuitive once you figure out the interface and the intended workflow, and ultimately much more powerful wrt producing designs of any complexity. modern CAD software even has openSCAD roundly beaten at stuff like parametric design, openSCAD's home turf

# ? Feb 9, 2021 18:55

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

Sedgr posted:

Anyone have a Onefinity CNC? I mentioned it in the tools thread but I placed an order for the Onefinity Woodworker the other day and Im now anxiously waiting for it to arrive. Backordered till May at the moment. If anyone has used one before I'd love to hear any opinions, gotcha's, that sort of thing.

Machine is pretty new so it's not as common as a Shapeoko or Xcarve but maybe someone here got onboard earlier that I did.

Was going to pull the trigger on a Shapeoko before I found this and ended up going with the Onefinity. https://www.onefinitycnc.com if anyone hasn't seen it before.

I'm extremely cautious about a portable CNC machine, it just runs antithetical to the things you want, namely rigidity. Really curious to hear how it works out, though, you're not the first person I've seen bringing it up.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 19:07

NomNomNom: Jul 20, 2008; Please Work Out

What about it is "portable"?

# ? Feb 9, 2021 19:52

Sedgr: Sep 16, 2007; Neat!

Yeah wondered about that myself, but people that have got theirs already are saying its very rigid. Less of an issue for myself as well because I've got no intention of actually taking it anywhere, so I'll just be bolting mine down solid. Its still 150 pounds or something so not just a pick up and walk away with it type thing.

Theres video around of one of the beta testers standing on the rails and I think that was when the rails were smaller. They upped them to 35mm now. Part of the reason I jumped on it right now is they've extended their current deal so you get the third top "stiffy" rail free which seemed like a decent thing to have. Supposedly takes it from "plenty rigid" to "absolutely rigid" ymmv.

It was the ball screws that tipped me over the edge really. Going from industrial machines Ive used before to something with rubber belts and v-wheels always put me off so when I saw this thing with nice heavy precision rails and ball screws I was sold.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 19:54

babyeatingpsychopath: Oct 28, 2000; Forum Veteran

Dominoes posted:

OpenScad looks fun on its own! Diving in. I'm suspicious it'll be more appealing than the GUI-based ones, where I frequently fight to find to click the right faces. The mouse feels like a clumsy instrument for navigating 3D space in the way FreeCAD and Fusion operate.

I have a hunch a G-code generating script might be the most elegant solution to my specific use-case here: Making a few linear and circular cuts on the face of an enclosure. I still plan on learning FreeCad's path tool for more-complicated future projects, and in case it does prove better for this case.

Ie, the resulting file will look something like this:
Python code:
    cfg = machine.Config(
        Coord(0.0, 0.0, 10.0),
        5.0,
        100.0,
        100.0,
        1.0,
    )

    steps = cfg.setup()

    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_line(Coord(0, -6, 0), Coord(0, 6, 0), 10.0, -3.0))
    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5, 5, 0), 3.0, -3.0))
    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5, 10, 0), 3.0, -3.0))
    steps.extend(cfg.move_to_idle())

    machine.make_file(steps, "water_mon_top")

If that's the case, just look at how your machine interprets G0, G1, G2, G3 codes, some M-codes, and then just write the g-code by hand.

Like, the minimum program you have is 10 lines of gcode, and you've managed to condense it into 20 lines of python.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 19:54

Sedgr: Sep 16, 2007; Neat!

NomNomNom posted:

What about it is "portable"?

I think people call it portable because most of the components come preassembled and setup time is minimal. People who have done it a few times say they can take it down or put it up in as little as 15 minutes.

That would mean in theory you could take it apart, move it to another shop, etc without too much hassle. Maybe "semi-portable" would be a better description but like I said sort of irrelevant to me at the moment I'm not planning on moving mine much.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 19:58

honda whisperer: Mar 29, 2009

Dominoes posted:

The mouse feels like a clumsy instrument for navigating 3D space in the way FreeCAD and Fusion operate.

https://www.amazon.com/3Dconnexion-...724041547&psc=1

This is what everyone at work uses if they hate using the mouse to rotate the model.

Logitech makes a fancier more expensive version too.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 21:34

sirbeefalot: Aug 24, 2004; Fast Learner.; Fun Shoe

honda whisperer posted:

https://www.amazon.com/3Dconnexion-...724041547&psc=1

This is what everyone at work uses if they hate using the mouse to rotate the model.

Logitech makes a fancier more expensive version too.

Hell, 3dConnexion makes a fancier more expensive version.

I bought the basic wireless one a couple months ago and it is such a nice addition. It basically only works in 3D CAD software though. Otherwise it's a giant scroll wheel with a couple extra buttons. But not having to stop and orbit/pan/zoom with the regular mouse cuts out like half the actions.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 23:08

honda whisperer: Mar 29, 2009

Yeah so they do.

I do remember reading about someone trying to make it work in elite dangerous too. Can't remember if they got it working.

# ? Feb 9, 2021 23:35

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

Sedgr posted:

I think people call it portable because most of the components come preassembled and setup time is minimal. People who have done it a few times say they can take it down or put it up in as little as 15 minutes.

That would mean in theory you could take it apart, move it to another shop, etc without too much hassle. Maybe "semi-portable" would be a better description but like I said sort of irrelevant to me at the moment I'm not planning on moving mine much.

That makes sense - I thought it was going to be some weird full disassembly thing.

Those ballscrews are really interesting - beats the hell out of belt drives on a lot of less expensive machines.

# ? Feb 10, 2021 04:08

Dominoes: Sep 20, 2007

Ambrose Burnside posted:

openSCAD is not an adequate replacement for legit GUI-based CAD/CAM programs for anything but the most rudimentary CAM tasks and you basically never directly interact with gcode unless you're learning the basics of CAM, are troubleshooting sth mid-program, or want to execute something so simple that it's faster to write the script than it is to wait for fusion to boot up. you should understand gcode and know how to troubleshoot a program, but much more than that is time poorly-spent. if you want to do much CAD/CAM work you should make peace with clicking on stuff, i promise you it's actually very quick and intuitive once you figure out the interface and the intended workflow, and ultimately much more powerful wrt producing designs of any complexity. modern CAD software even has openSCAD roundly beaten at stuff like parametric design, openSCAD's home turf

Thank you. It's good to hear a no-bullshit claim that traditional CAD software has a leg up on SCAD - internet-search comparisons whitewash this aspect. I'll focus on FreeCad, including it's Path Workbench.

babyeatingpsychopath posted:

If that's the case, just look at how your machine interprets G0, G1, G2, G3 codes, some M-codes, and then just write the g-code by hand.

Like, the minimum program you have is 10 lines of gcode, and you've managed to condense it into 20 lines of python.

I'm adapting a working hand-written G-code script. Perhaps I missed some coding optimizations, but it was more lines. More to the point: LOC is a bad metric here: The manual G-code involved DRY, manual calculations done outside the code, and overconstraints - especially for the circle cuts. This made it a pain to modify, or determine how it would behave. A comparison would be helpful, but it's on a computer I don't have access to ATM.

honda whisperer posted:

https://www.amazon.com/3Dconnexion-...724041547&psc=1

This is what everyone at work uses if they hate using the mouse to rotate the model.

Logitech makes a fancier more expensive version too.

Nice. Although I suspect this may be a UI issue that eases with experience.

Of note, the CAD CNC guides I've found are oriented to machining whole parts, vice making targeted cuts.

# ? Feb 10, 2021 09:33

Dominoes: Sep 20, 2007

edit: Got it working

G-code to drill a slot and 2 holes:

code:

G01 X0.0 Y0.0 Z10.0
F100.0
S100.0
G01 X0.0 Y-6.0 Z5.0
M03
G01 Z1.0
G01 X0.0 Y6.0 Z-0.2
G01 X0.0 Y-6.0 Z-1.4
G01 X0.0 Y6.0 Z-2.6
G01 X0.0 Y-6.0 Z-3.8
G01 Z5.0
M05
G01 X5.0 Y7.0 Z5.0
M03
G01 Z1.0
G02 Z0.3717 J-1.0
G02 Z-0.2566 J-1.0
G02 Z-0.885 J-1.0
G02 Z-1.5133 J-1.0
G02 Z-2.1416 J-1.0
G02 Z-2.7699 J-1.0
G02 Z-3.3982 J-1.0
G01 Z5.0
M05
G01 X5.0 Y12.0 Z5.0
M03
G01 Z1.0
G02 Z-0.2566 J-2.0
G02 Z-1.5133 J-2.0
G02 Z-2.7699 J-2.0
G02 Z-4.0265 J-2.0
G01 Z5.0
M05
G01 X0.0 Y0.0 Z10.0

Script:

Python code:

    cfg = machine.Config(Coord(0., 0., 10.), 5., 100., 100., 1., -3.)
    steps = cfg.setup()

    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_line(Coord(0., -6., 0.), Coord(0., 6., 0.), 10.))
    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5., 6., 0.), 1., 10.))
    steps.extend(cfg.ramp_circle(Coord(5., 10., 0.), 2., 10.))

    steps.extend(cfg.move_to_idle())
    machine.make_file(steps, "water_mon_top")

Switching from R to IJK circles is much cleaner. I'm posting this partly to see if there's an optimization I'm missing (WHILE loop?) to get it to ~10 lines.

Dominoes fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Feb 10, 2021

# ? Feb 10, 2021 09:33

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

It's 3DEXPERIENCE WORLD this week (nee SOLIDWORKS World), and I thought this was super exciting:

https://discover.solidworks.com/3dexperience-solidworks-makers-available-2nd-half-2021

This includes SOLIDWORKS, and their browser based design tools for parametric and subdivision surface modeling.

CAM Standard on SOLIDWORKS, not their browser based DELMIA app, but still super duper cool, and $10/mo or $99/year, which is pretty excellent.

# ? Feb 10, 2021 15:57

sharkytm: Oct 9, 2003; Ba

By

Sharkytm doot doo do doot do doo; Fallen Rib

NewFatMike posted:

It's 3DEXPERIENCE WORLD this week (nee SOLIDWORKS World), and I thought this was super exciting:

https://discover.solidworks.com/3dexperience-solidworks-makers-available-2nd-half-2021

This includes SOLIDWORKS, and their browser based design tools for parametric and subdivision surface modeling.

CAM Standard on SOLIDWORKS, not their browser based DELMIA app, but still super duper cool, and $10/mo or $99/year, which is pretty excellent.

Striking out at Fusion. Good.

# ? Feb 10, 2021 16:25

Ambrose Burnside: Aug 30, 2007; pensive

Dominoes posted:

Thank you. It's good to hear a no-bullshit claim that traditional CAD software has a leg up on SCAD - internet-search comparisons whitewash this aspect. I'll focus on FreeCad, including it's Path Workbench.

a lot of the discussion about openscad i've found online comes off as completely out to lunch and out of touch with the existing state of 'real' CAD as it exists in industry; i understand it's partially because the people who like it have verrrry different backgrounds, proficiencies and comfort areas than i do, but i don't even like calling it 'CAD' because it's all polygons with no NURBS representations. like, so far as i know true circles don't exist in openscad, just polygon approximations; that's useless to me as a designer. i need circles that satisfy the mathematical conditions of a circle, not straight-line-based approximations. here's two good posts from a programming-informed perspective about openscad from the 3d printing thread, the first a response to me asking why anybody uses openSCAD, the second critiquing it as a CAD platform:

Aurium posted:

A big thing is that when it was adopted there were very few alternatives. Fusion, onshape, etc didn't exist. Solidworks and inventor are either hope you have an educational license or $$$$. Good low cost or free 3d modeling programs existed, but those are very much not cad.

For all it's faults scad lets you make a dimensioned cube with a dimensioned hole going though at a specified spot, and then let you change it easily.

It probably helped that many early reprappers were programmers, so scad wasn't totally foreign, just strange.

Also it's open source so in a community that's built on open source slicers, firmware, and designs, it shouldn't be too surprising that some people are going to edge away from proprietary cad packages.

I think it being the thing behind thingiverse's customizer gives it a boost as well.

So now it's established as a 3d printer thing.

Aurium posted:

I don't like openscad. I've tried it, and done some midsized projects, and found that it has some deal killers.

The first is the awful way it evaluates code. To quote the manual. Variables are set at compile-time, not run-time.
code:
// The value of 'a' reflects only the last set value
   a = 0;
   echo(a);  // 5
   a = 3;
   echo(a);  // 5
   a = 5;
The manual says that this allows for interesting things, like overwriting constants in shared libraries, and is "Very flexible." The devs say it's intended to encourage a declarative style where you describe what you want, not what you're doing. I say it's awful.

It has lazy "clever" design. My biggest example here is the cylinder, which actually gives you some prism with some number of facets. If I wanted a prism, I'd have asked for a prism. Sure, I can specify a large number of sides, or a small fragment angle, or a small fragment length, but other programs get this right without any intervention on me. This is the developers passing on some work and going wouldn't it be clever if we could just combine n-gonal prism and cylinder, and it'll be fine.

You can't do anything with the geometry it calculates. Lets say I want a sphere at a corner of a cube. I can't tell it to put something at the corner of a cube, I have to calculate a point that's coincidentally at the same point as the corner. It's not hard if it's at the origin and still orthogonal to the axes, but if you translate and rotate it a bit you've got yourself a math problem. That's just a cube, it's even worse if you've gotten some kind nontrivial geometry. Scad knows where these features are. It calculated them, now let me use them. I admit it wouldn't be trivial to uniquely describe them. It can be done, and other programs do it.

It just has bad performance. The preview has fine performance, of course, but it only stays accurate for simple things. Getting the actual model is slow, and you'll be doing it a fair bit. Again, other programs get this right, or at least better. I admit that if you go back half way into a large project in fusion it'll have to recalculate a bunch of things, but for the incremental work it's fast. I'll also admit that there's probably more of a challenge avoid recomputing when it's equally easy to insert anything anywhere.

nowadays i just don't see the justification for doing much of anything with openSCAD unless you're specifically developing free/open-source parametric parts where accessibility is critical, but you can always do those things *better* via any number of CAD alternatives

Ambrose Burnside fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Feb 11, 2021

# ? Feb 11, 2021 03:47

Ambrose Burnside: Aug 30, 2007; pensive

Ambrose Burnside fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Feb 11, 2021

# ? Feb 11, 2021 03:56

babyeatingpsychopath: Oct 28, 2000; Forum Veteran

Ambrose Burnside posted:

a lot of the discussion about openscad i've found online comes off as completely out to lunch and out of touch with the existing state of 'real' CAD as it exists in industry; i understand it's partially because the people who like it have verrrry different backgrounds, proficiencies and comfort areas than i do, but i don't even like calling it 'CAD' because it's all polygons with no NURBS representations. like, so far as i know true circles don't exist in openscad, just polygon approximations; that's useless to me as a designer. i need circles that satisfy the mathematical conditions of a circle, not straight-line-based approximations. here's two good posts from a programming-informed perspective about openscad from the 3d printing thread, the first a response to me asking why anybody uses openSCAD, the second critiquing it as a CAD platform:

nowadays i just don't see the justification for doing much of anything with openSCAD unless you're specifically developing free/open-source parametric parts where accessibility is critical, but you can always do those things *better* via any number of CAD alternatives

I agree with this entire post and use OpenSCAD a lot for making little doohickeys for the 3d printer.

If it's gotta have tolerance or geometries more complex than cubes and stuff, then off to Fusion I go.

edit: one final complaint. When previewing, openSCAD takes advantage of any graphics hardware you've got, and appears to be multithreaded. When rendering, it's multithreaded, but doesn't take advantage of your GPU. I know for a fact my GPU can render a STUPID number of polygons, intersect them, and produce a solid geometry. Preview of some stress-test designs takes ~a second. Rendering can be over 20 minutes.

babyeatingpsychopath fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Feb 11, 2021

# ? Feb 11, 2021 15:01

Dominoes: Sep 20, 2007

Ambrose Burnside posted:

a lot of the discussion about openscad i've...

Those are some telling quotes! This is an example of a more general problem with comparisons online. Forums, reddit etc tend to be better than articles, but still suffer from that community's biases.

# ? Feb 12, 2021 06:57

Stultus Maximus: Dec 21, 2009; USPOL May

This thread's focus seems to be mostly on machining parts but maybe you can help or point me in the right direction.

I've been pretty familiar with Autocad in the past, so I'm used to using it to design mechanical parts. What I want to do as a home hobbyist though is use CNC routing to do relief designs in wood. Like, carving a relief image on the top or sides of a jewelry box I make.
I don't know how to make relief designs. I want to be able to take a 2d vector image, say something I made in Illustrator, and extrude it into a 3d relief by selecting paths and push/pulling them. Like what this guy did using Vectric Aspire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzMSFE0etQI

However, I a) am using a Macbook and b) don't have a couple thou to spend on a piece of software just to make some gift stuff now and then.

Can Fusion do that kind of extrusion or is there another option? If there's a really good and cheap option for Windows I could run it on the Macbook but would prefer not to have to do that.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 00:19

Sedgr: Sep 16, 2007; Neat!

Technically there's a few different ways to do it but yes you can do 3D relief in Fusion 360.

Quick YouTube search should get you some tutorials.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 00:34

sirbeefalot: Aug 24, 2004; Fast Learner.; Fun Shoe

Stultus Maximus posted:

Can Fusion do that kind of extrusion or is there another option? If there's a really good and cheap option for Windows I could run it on the Macbook but would prefer not to have to do that.

MeshCAM is decent, made by one of the guys that joined the Carbide3D team. It works on Mac and Windows. The $250 version can take image files and generate relief cuts. It works best if you make your image grayscale, then you can tell it that black=Z0, white=Z100 (at whatever max height you set), or vice versa, and it makes a 3D relief. Could be a faster way to get from a shaded illustrator file to gcode than manually modeling it.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 02:10

Ambrose Burnside: Aug 30, 2007; pensive

Stultus Maximus posted:

This thread's focus seems to be mostly on machining parts but maybe you can help or point me in the right direction.

I've been pretty familiar with Autocad in the past, so I'm used to using it to design mechanical parts. What I want to do as a home hobbyist though is use CNC routing to do relief designs in wood. Like, carving a relief image on the top or sides of a jewelry box I make.
I don't know how to make relief designs. I want to be able to take a 2d vector image, say something I made in Illustrator, and extrude it into a 3d relief by selecting paths and push/pulling them. Like what this guy did using Vectric Aspire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzMSFE0etQI

However, I a) am using a Macbook and b) don't have a couple thou to spend on a piece of software just to make some gift stuff now and then.

Can Fusion do that kind of extrusion or is there another option? If there's a really good and cheap option for Windows I could run it on the Macbook but would prefer not to have to do that.

This is sth I've struggled with too for producing artistic/decorative metal stamping tools, the conventional mechanical design-oriented CAD I'm familiar with is actually pretty bad at this sort of loosey-goosey, tolerance-free organic forming; it takes forever to do and is very resource-intensive b/c the full dimensions of an organically-embossed complex 2d outline are nuts. Mastercam Art seems laser-focused on producing natural, organic, CNC-friendly embossing from vector files, I've never actually tried it but it seems like the perfect solution to this problem: https://www.mastercam.com/solutions/art/ not cheap to get a hold of, though

# ? Feb 16, 2021 02:57

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

I'm be curious to see what you think of xShape if you ever end up throwing around $10/mo for 3DX, Ambrose. You can pull the subdivision surface models into parametric CAD just pressing X. Pretty fluid back and forth, but I haven't spent much time really messing with xShape.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 03:27

Ambrose Burnside: Aug 30, 2007; pensive

I went and took a look at what Mastercam add-ons I have a license for through work, and what do you know, we actually do have Art. Having given it a spin: yeah this poo poo rules, the whole package is built to take raster images, vectorize them, and then apply any number of artistic effects to them with an eye towards jewellery/art design. Not just organic embosses (which it does marvellously), but freeform push-pull sculpting, all sorts of textures like stone/woodgrain/peened-metal dimpling and hammer-marks, and even has dedicated tools for common motifs like ropework/twists, Celtic-style meandering-line designs, etc. All the surface tools can be very tightly defined if you want a very specific output, or you can just one-touch let it generate bumpmaps based on contrast like was described above. This gets my enthusiastic endorsement, if you can snag yourself a copy.

NewFatMike posted:

I'm be curious to see what you think of xShape if you ever end up throwing around $10/mo for 3DX, Ambrose. You can pull the subdivision surface models into parametric CAD just pressing X. Pretty fluid back and forth, but I haven't spent much time really messing with xShape.

I'm not using 3dexperience/had not heard of this, but this does look great. Freeform organic modelling was always a big weak point for SW so it's nice to see that being addressed with an effective tool.

Ambrose Burnside fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Feb 16, 2021

# ? Feb 16, 2021 03:41

Sedgr: Sep 16, 2007; Neat!

What are people's favorite endmill/bits for doing CNC wood work? Do people just generally run regular router bits? I have some endmills but for metal work and I should probably get some specific to the woodworking side of things.

Cheap tooling off Amazon worth it or do you go for something with a better brand name? A mix?

Tooling is a deep rabbit (rabbet) hole.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 18:40

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

For finished stuff, I've found that up cut bits really help. Checking your final pass load is good, too, I think most wood benefits from 0.025" or deeper.

I think there are some specially coated endmills for wood, but I haven't A:B tested them to know if it's any better at hobbyist/prosumer loads.

# ? Feb 16, 2021 20:12

Sagebrush: Feb 26, 2012

Sedgr posted:

What are people's favorite endmill/bits for doing CNC wood work? Do people just generally run regular router bits? I have some endmills but for metal work and I should probably get some specific to the woodworking side of things.

Cheap tooling off Amazon worth it or do you go for something with a better brand name? A mix?

Tooling is a deep rabbit (rabbet) hole.

Yes, the bolded line is correct.

In general for woodworking you want fewer flutes with a more aggressive cut. Two-flute shallow spiral router bits are generally fine. For a small machine a 1/4" will do. If you're cutting plywood, get down-cut bits to keep the top surface compressed so you don't get tearout. Run at maximum spindle speed with a high chip load; if your machine can't keep up, reduce the depth and do multiple passes rather than slowing down. If you run slowly you'll just set the wood on fire.

If you have money to burn, you can get the wacky nano-coated carbide compression bits. They are an absolute joy to use and rip cleanly through wood like nothing else but $120 for a half inch tool is maybe out of the average hobbyist's budget.

https://www.amazon.com/Amana-Tool-46195-K-Spektra-Compression/dp/B07GSCM4BQ

# ? Feb 16, 2021 20:52

JEEVES420: Feb 16, 2005; The world is a mess... and I just need to rule it

I tried cheap bits at first but were breaking them. I have come to use Whiteside for all my bits. Up spiral, down spiral, bowl bits, V bits, pencil tip. You can import the Whiteside library and adjust as needed. I have found running the router at 18k rpm instead of full 24k get better results.

# ? Feb 17, 2021 01:03

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

Sagebrush posted:

If you're cutting plywood, get down-cut bits to keep the top surface compressed so you don't get tearout.

drat that's going to save me a lot of headaches later on. Didn't know that one!

# ? Feb 17, 2021 01:08

cakesmith handyman: Jul 22, 2007; Pip-Pip old chap! Last one in is a rotten egg what what.

Sagebrush posted:

If you have money to burn, you can get the wacky nano-coated carbide compression bits. They are an absolute joy to use and rip cleanly through wood like nothing else but $120 for a half inch tool is maybe out of the average hobbyist's budget.

https://www.amazon.com/Amana-Tool-46195-K-Spektra-Compression/dp/B07GSCM4BQ

That's a beautiful garish work of art.

# ? Feb 17, 2021 09:35

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Hello everybody I am a new wood worker and I just recently found a discounted micro CNC, I suppose this is the thread to post about it? I got a basic Sainsmart model that I found half price "used" on amazon warehouse deals. It was a fun project to put it together:

It was pretty easy to put together (even with so many parts :v:

) kind of like an adult lego set. I had the axis connected to the wrong stepper motors, but I figured that out by trail and error:

The CNC came with some test programs preloaded into the controller box thing, so I tried out a few on a piece of old scrap wood. This thing is fairly precise it didn't like the slight cup in this board. I'll have to make sure these are more flat in future. But all in all it turned out pretty good. Kind of loud and slower than I expected, but I guess its not a laser printer :v:

Now I need to figure out some good software to make the .nc files this thing uses for some custom cuts!

Rutibex fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Feb 17, 2021

# ? Feb 17, 2021 19:47

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

I have the slightly larger variant of that. I have a couple pieces of advice:

1. The USB cable gets really close to one of the stepper motor cables, and I had random USB disconnections until I wrapped a bit of aluminum foil around the cable.

2. It comes with some really old versions of the software, don't use any of it and just grab the latest stuff. There's a much more recent version available of Candle, the gcode sender that it comes with.

3. It performs okay with the bits that come with it, but it performs much better with proper router bits. Not even expensive ones like the one shown earlier, but I have a set of "knockoff" (?) ones with the same nano-coated colour going on (unknown if real or paint or something) and it rips through MDF with a high feed rate while leaving a nice finish.

I didn't buy one of these cheapo routers expecting much but I was actually very pleasantly surprised. I doubt it can make precision parts - I wouldn't spend the money on the upgraded high-power spindle and try to cut aluminum with it - but for engraving stuff into wood it's accurate enough that I can't measure any error with my (cheapo) calipers.

Also, I've had success with using Inkscape to make SVG files and then using jscut them into toolpaths.

BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Feb 17, 2021

# ? Feb 17, 2021 21:15

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

BattleMaster posted:

I have the slightly larger variant of that. I have a couple pieces of advice:

1. The USB cable gets really close to one of the stepper motor cables, and I had random USB disconnections until I wrapped a bit of aluminum foil around the cable.

2. It comes with some really old versions of the software, don't use any of it and just grab the latest stuff. There's a much more recent version available of Candle, the gcode sender that it comes with.

3. It performs okay with the bits that come with it, but it performs much better with proper router bits. Not even expensive ones like the one shown earlier, but I have a set of "knockoff" (?) ones with the same nano-coated colour going on (unknown if real or paint or something) and it rips through MDF with a high feed rate while leaving a nice finish.

I didn't buy one of these cheapo routers expecting much but I was actually very pleasantly surprised. I doubt it can make precision parts - I wouldn't spend the money on the upgraded high-power spindle and try to cut aluminum with it - but for engraving stuff into wood it's accurate enough that I can't measure any error with my (cheapo) calipers.

Also, I've had success with using Inkscape to make SVG files and then using jscut them into toolpaths.

Thanks this is all great advice. I have some end mills that a use in my drill press, would those work better than the bits that come with it? I also have tons of Dremel bits that seem about the same size. I guess I might have to experiment, I hadn't considered using different bits :psyduck:

I have no plans to cut any aluminum with it, this is strictly to put nice carvings on the side of my wooden boxes and dice towers. Thank you so much for that link to jscut! I was able to make something with an online tool called Easel, but it spit out a SVG file which the controller didn't recognize. This solves my problem.

# ? Feb 17, 2021 21:34

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

Rutibex posted:

Thanks this is all great advice. I have some end mills that a use in my drill press, would those work better than the bits that come with it? I also have tons of Dremel bits that seem about the same size. I guess I might have to experiment, I hadn't considered using different bits

I have no plans to cut any aluminum with it, this is strictly to put nice carvings on the side of my wooden boxes and dice towers. Thank you so much for that link to jscut! I was able to make something with an online tool called Easel, but it spit out a SVG file which the controller didn't recognize. This solves my problem.

It comes with a collet for a 1/8 inch shank, and Sainsmart sells a compatible set of collets for other sizes: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07P98CKMR/

I have their set of endmills: https://www.amazon.ca/SainSmart-Genmitsu-10Pcs-Router-0-8-3mm/dp/B07P7LGQJ6/

But if you have your own it's likely they're better than that. I got the cheapo set to try them out and make sure I only destroy stuff that is too cheap to matter while I learn before I get anything better.

edit: I use this double-sided tape to hold the workpiece in place instead of the screwy things that come with it: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B004MPRSPY/

A couple strips of that works really well - I was surprised! I wouldn't have expected tape to hold it well enough but it really doesn't budge.

BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Feb 17, 2021

# ? Feb 17, 2021 21:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 14:55

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Now I can make custom patterns!

Still some learning to do, this is very janky

BattleMaster posted:

edit: I use this double-sided tape to hold the workpiece in place instead of the screwy things that come with it: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B004MPRSPY/

After using this twice I am already ready to throw out those lovely screw things :argh:

Rutibex fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Feb 17, 2021

# ? Feb 17, 2021 22:19

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Hobbies, Crafts, & Houses > Hobby CNC, the rotor way

«‹›71 »