One more test.
A while back, P22 updated their Goudy Initials font w/ a complete re-drawing by Miranda Roth:
it poses a good example of figure-ground reversal, so…
The default appearance would be:
but we want this reversed, so we convert to curves:
and delete one of the pieces of border geometry and it now previews as:
For the mirrored inlay we mirror horizontally and add geometry:
to arrive at:
Hopefully will manage to get these cut and glued up presently.
Advanced vcarve rest machining: It is not so tricky to implement: take design, create an outside offset path. cut this as pocket with rest machining. Use original design with advanced vcarve and the smaller of the end mills used for pocketing earlier, but delete the Gcode for that end mill before running the V bit part. tested and works. So this workflow adds no new underlying complexity to Create, just needs to have the operations chained together in the UI to implement it.
Extremely interested to see how this turns out.
CC Pro might be my future endeavor with the new feature.
Question: For deep inlays with a 6.2 ball nose, do you have to perform any edits for the tool itself?
Please correct me, but shouldn’t there be cases where an outside offset removes small features, that would otherwise survive when using the original geometry with depth-offset?
It needs an interface, and it needs to work reliably and create toolpaths which are efficient enough to justify its existence. In my experience, the designs which are used for V carving are such that it is extremely difficult to create an efficient REST machining toolpath for them.
We do not have support for tapered ball-nosed tooling in Carbide Create at this time — all of our V carving algorithms require a sharp V endmill.
The offset should be small enough that small, delicate features are preserved — if anyone encounters a file where fine details are lost please send them in to us at support@carbide3d.com and we will try to look into them.
Though not strictly related to inlays, we just uploaded a new 754 to Carbide Create Beta Downloads that includes the ability to change the order of the Advanced V-carve toolpath to cut the pockets before or after the V-cutter is done.
Check it out and let us know if anything broke.
looks like a step towards using two pocket tools (rest machining) with Advanced Vcarve!
Cutting the design itself went well:
and here’s the file if anyone else needs an A:
A - Center Top 0_25.nc (231.2 KB)
When you check the Inlay Mode box, it might be useful to see if a flip was recently performed and pop up a warning if not. Or put a button or checkbox to do this as part of enabling the mode. I seem to be a serial “forget to flip” person and have wasted more stock than I like to admit by forgetting to flip.
@robgrz, what is the thought process on vCarve or pocket first? Is the theory that the fragile bits on design may fare better of the vcarve is done first since the wood is better supported?
Good question.
The software side of V carving before pocketing worked fine for the V carving:
Next up, the pocketing operation.
It’s purely that some people want to minimize tool changes and they may want to do all of the V-carving prior to any pocketing or cutouts.
In theory, I’d probably prefer to pocket first but if it’s in wood, I think the V-cutter will probably be OK either way.
Which was successful, save for having been a bit too aggressive about minimizing the material left behind:
Hopefully nothing too important was under that one spot.
Next up is cutting things free and gluing up.
and the G-code:
A-inlay - Center Bottom 0_25.nc (1.8 MB)
Clamping delicate inlays can be challenging — fortunately, I had a spare piece of foam to distribute the pressure:
Will, which vee bit are you using for that detail.
I tried the coaster I posted above after making a few changes such as increased the scale and max depth but I still lost some of the finer details. I am using the 60 degree bit in maple for the insert. Would a 30 degree be better?
I’m using a #302 (60 degree) for both. I’m pretty sure I’ll lose some details – that’s the point of this test cut — a test cut has to be designed to test to the point of failure, so you’ll know at what point things still work.
Not sure how you would have changed the “A” though, since the files I uploaded are G-code which was hard-coded for V endmill angle and depth — did you buy the font and make your own?
Sorry, I wasn’t clear.
I did not try the A. I was retrying the coaster I posted earlier in the thread with the Fleur-de-lis looking symbol. The left and right are actually horse heads and when the new cut was done I am pretty sure that the part above the horses face (forelock) is too small to survive the gluing and flattening process.
Maybe I went the wrong direction with the depth of cut? I increased it from .15 to .185. Ignore that hole plunged through the left of the insert, stupid user error that luckily I could recover from.
The contour circle is 4.25 diameter and the material is 5x5x.25.
Maybe my bits need replacing or sharpening, I bought my setup used including all the bits so I don’t know what results from a new bit should look like. However, I have a couple of those Downtown Jenny bits arriving today that I am eager to try. Maybe your A would be a good test for them.
Post the file — we’re discussing the geometry of inlays and are trying to work up test/edge cases now.
Here they are.
I made that diamond shape to minimize the pocketing time with the 1/8 end mill. I would cut the rest away with a bandsaw before gluing.
Also attached is a sign I made with the same logo. It is 18x18 and gives a better idea of what it should look like.
Oh, and I did use the 754 build for the cc files for the coaster.
SW_CoasterInlay.c2d (84 KB)
SW_CoasterBase.c2d (88 KB)
