I would really like some critique here. I am doing my best to design a 3D, septagonal sink mold in CC. I’m aware that CC is only 2.5D, but I just can’t wrap this old brain around Fusion 360® to make exactly what I want. So, in essence, I’m trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
This design would require some grinding and sanding to bring the surfaces to true 3D, but I am hoping that this somewhat convoluted method will get me close enough that the need for that is minimized.
At 32 toolpaths in this project, my question is whether there is an “upper limit” on the number of toolpaths allowed in CC? If there is no limit, I could then triple the number of steps and reduce grinding/sanding further.
I designed the toolpaths to reduce the chances of snapping a mill, but it seems inefficient to me. Is there a “cleaner way” to set up the toolpaths? In a perfect world, the design would smoothly flow from top to bottom without having to sand out the ridges, but 2.5D is my current constraint and I am trying to make the best of it. Being primarily a kinesthetic learner, somethings can be a huge roadblock for me.
Feel free to heap criticisms, I will welcome them with open arms (and try to learn from them). Septa-Sink.c2d (127.1 KB)
I don’t think there’s a limit on # of toolpaths — certainly if there is one, it’s not likely to be hit since it’s likely some sort of power of 2 thing.
One thing which I think would help this would be to do a follow path (Contour | No offset) toolpath at the appropriate depth for each path as a finishing operation, alternately, if you could find a V-bit which is at about the right angle, that should get you very close.
I suspect you could just have someone mathematically model this shape using OpenSCAD, get an STL, then have MeshCAM calculate everything.
Thanks! That is the kind of feedback that really, really helps. I may do a test cut in MDF and check the angle to see if I could set up a V-bit toolpath to chase those terraces.
If you don’t want to risk your production material, try a dry run with some cheap foam and see if it looks like the toolpaths are performing as you expect. The foam is unlikely to hurt a bit if you find it cutting deeper than you want.
$@#! I was going to use MDF and would have snapped a “few” bits. I like the foam idea for prototyping. I’ll steal that idea from you…if you don’t mind.
Thanks for helping by providing a new word, very interesting except I can’t figure it out by the definition, maybe I’ll google youtube for a demonstration from someone who’s skilled at it. Maybe that’s why so many members want to see pictures in the posts. My kids will think I made it up though, as usual…another good help as usual Bob, thanks, Jude
Think batting practice @grumpa. I can tell you the theory or the “idea” of hitting a home run, but getting out and whacking some balls with a bat will get the ball further…at least for me. I need that “muscle memory”.
In my previous life, I was a trainer and training developer for a Fortune 500 company. The goal in development is to attempt to cover all learning styles with a singular didactic and practicum. That is the real challenge.
I was a corporate trainer also, and I used this method without knowing it was a specific method and had tremendous success. Everything was see the picture, think the picture now do the picture 3 times, I would demonstrate the process, have it running on an overhead and they would perform the process as we all walked thru the training session together. I trained 3 people from different diciplines of architecture at once and there was a forth machine that linked the 3 machines together so they copuld see the combination of their efforts in one process. It is a marvelous way to explain something but hard to do when you don’t know what you are talking about. Maybe that is why so many “teachers” are lousy at it because they don’t know "kinesthelic"ally what they are talking about. I am “kinesthetic” too, I always though it was an illness, now I feel better knowing it is an attribute.Thanks Bob, consider one “forward” paid. Jude
Most good trainers do this instinctively. Others must be taught. Sounds like you had that instinct. The greatest secret that I ever taught to my trainers was to eschew those “pretty” shirts and blouses and opt for dark, solid colors. Personally, I always wore black (think). For visual learners, the bright colors and patterns become a distraction. Have you ever wondered why judges and priests wear all black? It focuses all of the attention on the hands and face. Next time that you need to speak to a group, try wearing all black and see the response. It’s pretty amazing.
Anyhow…off thread here. Back to the Septa-sink! Thanks again, everyone, for the excellent input and ideas.
