shape out of vector - disable height with width

[davecol]

I think I confused my last post by using letters as an example - and asking two questions. Not very good forum etiquette

I'm struggling to do very very simple tasks such as a circle/dome and simple shapes form vectors.

It seems I've got to split a circle in half and do a two rail sweep just to get a user defined profile?

How on earth can I get the attached shape to be a uniform height all round? If there was a way to disable the 'height vs width' relationship it might work the same as a two rail sweep. How can I two rail sweep such a shape though!?

This is just random shape - try doing it with a letter F - don't treat it as text though - just a shape.

[JamesB]

Hello davecol,

I am not 100% sure exactly what shape your hoping for but am pretty sure it cannot be created automatically in Aspire. The Create Shape function is limited to one controlling angle so will always vary the height as the area between vectors varies. About the only ways to limit this are to use the limit to height option and flatten the top part of the shape. I have attached a file which you can hopefully open that shows a few variations of these for your outline so you can see how they might work.

If I understood more about the exact shape you are trying to build (can you sketch it) and possibly more importantly the application for it then myself or someone else may be able to make a suggestion for a different approach to achieve it. It may be though that the tools in Aspire are not suitable for what you are trying to do.

Thanks,
James

[Mike-S]

I couldn't open James' example, so may be repeating here, but there's a lot you can do with the create shape and 2-rail sweep tools. Give us a little bit more of what you'd like to be able to do.

[davecol]

Now we're getting somewhere!
I'm on a different computer just now so cant check the other file.

If you can imagine those shapes you made but in a more organic form - rounded edges - no straight sides.

Essentially - all I require is for everything to be the same height without flattening the tops. I don't want to increase the base height as I'll just end up with vertical sides.

If the automatic process didn't scale the height in relation to the width it would be fine?

[davecol]

Right - had a look at that file - I can do all that but it's not quite what I'm trying to do.

Have a look at the small section I've done as a two rail sweep and you'll see what I'm after - nice smooth curves.

I have absolutely no idea hoe that could be done on a larger scale though.

[tmerrill]

The file you posted is from the trial version and only you and Vectric can open it, so it does nothing for the rest of us.

I think you missed James' reply above and it contains the information you are looking for. Specifically he said:

The Create Shape function is limited to one controlling angle so will always vary the height as the area between vectors varies. About the only ways to limit this are to use the limit to height option and flatten the top part of the shape.

Which only leaves the 2 rail sweep and as you have found out this would be impractical for large applications.

He also said something very important and it separates Vectric from many of their competitors:

It may be though that the tools in Aspire are not suitable for what you are trying to do.

Vectric will be the first to tell you that one of their programs is not suited for your needs. That helps to keep all customers happy.

So, if the samples in James' file don't apply to what you are trying to do, there isn't much left for us to suggest.

Tim

[rscrawford]

I find Aspire is capable of doing 95% of my designing, and will do it faster and easier than the more complex programs. I do have another CAD program (Rhino) that I do some of the more complex designing in, but then I import the model into Aspire so that I can toolpath it. As I get more experience in using Aspire, I use Rhino less and less. Mostly because I'm using more 2D toolpaths for things that can't be designed in 3D. Which is another thought. You can always draw up 2D vectors and then get your shapes cut out by using different tools rather than drawing up a 3D model (2D is WAY faster anyway, and gives much sharper, cleaner lines).

[tmerrill]

You can always draw up 2D vectors and then get your shapes cut out by using different tools rather than drawing up a 3D model

Perhaps if you provide him an example, using his vector shape above, it would help him understand and see if it would do what he needs.

Tim

[rscrawford]

Here is an example using a roundover tool and a profile toolpath. This cut would take about 30 seconds, as opposed to 30 minutes for a 3D toolpath.

[davecol]

Thanks for all the replies. They all help in in one way or another. DIdn't realise you couldn't open that file - apologies.

Maybe this is one for the Vectric team in the next update then - an option to disable height v's width when making a shape from a vector. Seems pretty obvious to me - I'm not the programmer though

Here's a small section of the original design - exactly what I'm looking for -

[tmerrill]

Here is an example using a roundover tool and a profile toolpath. This cut would take about 30 seconds, as opposed to 30 minutes for a 3D toolpath.

OK, but he specified a uniform height in his first post. It looks like your height varies based on width, which he also wants to avoid.

Give it another go?

Tim

[tmerrill]

The two rail sweep gives the exact result I'm looking for but can't even begin to figure out how I'd do a large design.

Is there any information you can share as to the exact application you will be doing?

At this point I am interested and someone may just have another approach once we understand more about the end product.

Tim

[davecol]

I can see it in my head

I'll have a look at google images and find a few examples. It could range from jewelry to wall plaques - organic shapes.

[rscrawford]

Here is an example using a roundover tool and a profile toolpath. This cut would take about 30 seconds, as opposed to 30 minutes for a 3D toolpath.

OK, but he specified a uniform height in his first post. It looks like your height varies based on width, which he also wants to avoid.

Give it another go?

Tim

Depending whether he wants a flat top with a roundover edge, or a domed top. Just use a smaller radius roundover bit and you will get a flat top (as long as the width is greater than double the radius of the roundover bit).

For something like he is showing, it can only be done with a 3D toolpath. For that shape, I'd design in Rhino and import the mesh file into Aspire to toolpath. But usually, I'd redesign my part so that I could use 2D toolpaths

[tmerrill]

it can only be done with a 3D toolpath

I guess your previous statement that it can always be done with 2D toolpaths confused me. I was hoping to see a great tip or trick

Tim