Bit Setter Pro's and Con's

I like the bit setter if you have multiple toolpaths with different bits for a job.

But if you have multiple toolpaths with the same bit its a pain to have to run the bit setter
every time the tool path changes

Why not just disable the BitSetter for simpler tasks, then re-enable it when done?

1 Like

That’s what i plan on doing.
I think i can just uncheck the box in carbide motion without having to resend the GRBL settings to the controller board.

Group all the the tool paths under one tool path and it will take the reading once.

1 Like

I actually intentionally use the same tool, but different tool numbers sometimes. That makes it pause without having to make another program to do something like add workholding bolts or move clamps.

Otherwise, as noted, I’ll use the same tool number to have it keep going from one type of operation to another.

1 Like

That’s a great idea, didn’t know you could to that

1 Like

If you run toolpaths A, then immediately B, and both A and B use tool 100, there’s no prompt to change the tools.

If you run toolpaths A, then C, then B, and C uses tool 101, there is a prompt.

This cannot really be a CON because there is actually no way at all to run A then C then B without changing tools even without a BitSetter.

1 Like

Say you are doing an inside pocket as one tool path with #201. Then you have the outside cut using the same tool as tool path #2. Take tool path #2 tool and drag into #1 under your pocket cut. Delete the empty tool path #2.

Like Gerry said if you are doing different tools in order then you can’t cheat.

Grouping didn’t work. It still asks for bit setter each time.
Think the easiest thing to do is just disable bit setter for multiple tool paths with the same tool.
Looks like i can just uncheck the bit setter enable box without reprogramming the controller

And it looks like Carbide Create prompts for the bit setter even if there are three tool paths and they all use the same bit. Unless i’m missing something.

Perhaps this is an issue with Carbide Create generating unnecessary tool changes.

My experience is different but I generate my gcode differently

1 Like

Can you post an example gcode program and/or Carbide Create file?


I haven’t ever seen it do what you are saying either. If I have three operations in a row all using a #201 bit, there is very little pause in between each operation and it does not go back to the bitsetter unless it’s the beginning of a job, or if say the fourth operation required a #102.

Also, if you disable and then re-enable the BitSetter, you’ll need to initialise the the machine.

1 Like

The program only dictates tool number in the cgode. So make sure you have the same tool number if you want to run a tool for a pocket, then a profile for example.


Here’s an example. Three tool paths all with the same cutter.

MSU Coaster x (67.0 KB)

1 Like

That uses a #112 then a #122 and then #112 again.


OMG I never noticed that. Oops.
User Error. Thanks for pointing that out

I’ve been converting all my designs from an older version of CC and i guess i made a mistake.

That will make my life easier and the bit setter more useful as i have lots of designs with multiple tool paths with the same bit.

You guys are great.


We all need a spare set of eyes every now and again. This community is quite useful in that regard :slight_smile:


This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.