Non flat material setup- can it be done in Aspire?

[johnwebb332]

Hello everyone,
I am wanting to know if Aspire will allow you to define a dome shape as your material setup? I like to work with odd shapes of wood and would like to be able to carve on a non flat surface without cutting a bunch of air. Think a half round piece of firewood.

[Adrian]

Depends on exactly what you're trying to do. If you want to v-carve a design or letters into an existing shaped piece of wood then if you can create a model that matches the piece of wood by scanning, probing, virtual machining etc you can do it with no air cutting.

[4DThinker]

Each piece of firewood would likely be a different shape. Scanning each one to make a 3D model that you can map toolpaths to would be time consuming at best. You could compromise a bit and make a quick close 3D shape that matches the general shape (length/width/taper/height,etc.) of the piece. You are still stuck with only 3 axis cuts to approach, and not all toolpaths map to 3D models.
If your plan is to cut/carve a 3D shape from the 3D model you can't map the 3D cut to a 3D surface. Reducing air time at best would be by skipping the roughing toolpath and letting the finish toolpath deal with reducing the log down to your desired shape.
I generally use a larger endmill to do the roughing pass for quickest reduction before using a smaller ball end bit for the finishing pass. Tapered ball noses are a bit more stout than straight ones and can usually deal with remaining rough cut material as it takes small stepovers and has a cutting edge all the way up the tapered bit sides.
4D

[jfederer]

Hello everyone,
... define a dome shape as your material setup?

In a way, yes. For my "Harsh Mistress" project -> viewtopic.php?f=29&t=40675 I wanted the lunar topography to map to the diameter of the moon. That way the short Lunar horizon would be obvious. I did it by creating 2 Components in the Modelling tab. The first was done by creating a circle in the 2D panel with the desired diameter. Then I created a Dome shape in the Modelling tab based on that circle. I moved the Base Height down in Z until I got the spherical section I wanted above the Zero plane. This was by trial and error. Then I created a second Component with the topography, and did a simple Combine - Add operation to meld them. The end result is as you see in the Gallery.

I'm currently finishing a similar second project based on "Land", the single continent in Robert J Sawyer's "Quintaglio Ascension" series. I'll be posting that to the gallery later this week.

[ZipperHead55]

I think that the replies given thus far aren't what the OP was after.

I think that they want to set up the work area to NOT be a plane/cube, but to be a shape of their choosing (ie the log shape he mentions, so half of a tube, split lengthwise, flat side down) so that Aspire doesn't machine the non-existent "shoulders" on the roughing pass.

Other's (including myself) have asked about a similar feature (I can't remember the technical term... adaptive machining, maybe) to reduce the amount of machining time on oddly shaped blanks. Some (very) highend CAM programs apparently have the capability, but it appears to a bridge too far for Aspire (at the moment, anyway).

I suppose if people keep asking, and it's feasible (and cost-effective), Vectric might implement such a capability.

Allan

[scotttarnor]

Like in this post?
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=38704

[johnwebb332]

I think that the replies given thus far aren't what the OP was after.

I think that they want to set up the work area to NOT be a plane/cube, but to be a shape of their choosing (ie the log shape he mentions, so half of a tube, split lengthwise, flat side down) so that Aspire doesn't machine the non-existent "shoulders" on the roughing pass.

Other's (including myself) have asked about a similar feature (I can't remember the technical term... adaptive machining, maybe) to reduce the amount of machining time on oddly shaped blanks. Some (very) highend CAM programs apparently have the capability, but it appears to a bridge too far for Aspire (at the moment, anyway).

I suppose if people keep asking, and it's feasible (and cost-effective), Vectric might implement such a capability.

Allan

Hi Allan,
You hit the nail on the head. That is exactly what I was trying to ask.

I have figured out that if I start out with a block, then create my first model as the actual shape of the workpiece, I can create the first roughing tool path to cut it to the actual shape I want to start with. I then create my "real" roughing tool path to actually start making my cut.

By creating the first roughing cut, essentially fools the system into thinking it has already cut it into that shape.

[ZipperHead55]

Hi Allan,
You hit the nail on the head. That is exactly what I was trying to ask.

I have figured out that if I start out with a block, then create my first model as the actual shape of the workpiece, I can create the first roughing tool path to cut it to the actual shape I want to start with. I then create my "real" roughing tool path to actually start making my cut.

By creating the first roughing cut, essentially fools the system into thinking it has already cut it into that shape.

I think I am following what you are saying and will have to try this out. I think I tried it in the past but went about it the wrong way. If I recall the problem I had was that I didn't allow for much tolerance between my 2 roughing passes (the "fake" one and then the real one) and I didn't want to risk damaging a smaller tapered ball nose bit. If I substitute a larger bit (1/4" ball nose, for example), and minor discrepancies (deeper than anticipated cut due to real world conditions) the larger bit will deal with it easily.

Thanks for the idea, and I'll have to try it out when I have time.

Allan

[dealguy11]

John - Can you explain what you mean by your "real" roughing pass? As far as I know, none of the Aspire toolpath types remember what was cut before, so making 2 roughing toolpaths would not result in the second one only cutting what the first didn't cut. Is your "real" path actually a finishing toolpath with a large bit? In that case you don't need the first roughing pass, as the finishing path has no idea what was or wasn't cut before.

[adze_cnc]

Depends on exactly what you're trying to do.

I have figured out that if I start out with a block, then create my first model as the actual shape of the workpiece...

I think Adrian's question still stands. It may well be that you won't need to model the material and can get by with a rectilinear material block in the software—and a smaller one than the actual material at that.

As dealguy mentioned Roughing toolpaths don't remember any thing. The only 3D toolpath that remotely "remembers" what has been cut is the 3D Finishing toolpath when using "rest" machining.

[ohiolyons]

On the odd shapes of wood comment there is a work around.

Say you material is L shaped.
Make you material big enough to fit the its shape.
Draw a vector on the material that corresponds to the actual shape of your material.
Position your model within that vector.
Now on Machine Limit Boundary, pick Selected Vector(s).

Doesn't help much with your dome issue, but does on odd shaped materials.

[johnwebb332]

John - Can you explain what you mean by your "real" roughing pass? As far as I know, none of the Aspire toolpath types remember what was cut before, so making 2 roughing toolpaths would not result in the second one only cutting what the first didn't cut. Is your "real" path actually a finishing toolpath with a large bit? In that case you don't need the first roughing pass, as the finishing path has no idea what was or wasn't cut before.

I am currently using VCARVE Pro, I am asking about Aspire in hopes it will provide these abilities and if so would be worth the price.
That said, I was able to create a second roughing path to apply a rough cut my dome shape (cut using the first rough cut virtually) and then a finish cut applying much greater detail.

If the program does not remember what it cut previously, how do you account for not having to remove all the rough cut material in every toolpath with sequencially smaller tools?

I am going to try and prove this out shortly but the day job keeps getting in the way.

[adze_cnc]

If the program does not remember what it cut previously, how do you account for not having to remove all the rough cut material in every toolpath with sequencially smaller tools?

If we are strictly talking about the two 3D machining toolpaths “Rough Machining” and “Finish Machining” then:

Finishing Machining has the ability to specify multiple bits and within the running of that specifically created toolpath each bit “remembers” the material that was removed before it. But, if you create a Finish Machining toolpath with, say, a 1/2” and a 3/8” bit then create a second Finish Machining toolpath with a 1/4” and 1/8” bit then the 2nd toolpath will have no idea that the first toolpath removed any material.

Rough Machining toolpaths only have one bit available. And again if you create two Rough Machining toolpaths netiher of them will know what the previous one did.

What I think might be happening here that is confusing others is that you are creating a Finish Machining toolpath with mutliple tools and calling the first tool or two a “virtual roughing” toolpath. Whereas others hearing the term roughing toolpath are associating it with a Rough Machining toolpath.

[tonydude919]

I have done a couple on a log. Take couple pics of log, the length, width, side view and measure it. Bring it in aspire create a model of it and take a 3D mode and add to it, or add lettering to it.

Tony

[tonydude919]

A few more pics on a log.