Most Difficult Part of the Process?

With an app like CNCjs where the camera is already connected and it is made to control the CNC and probe, some great people maybe able to add similar capabilities. I know there are several steps to get there but there is something to start with.

Hello,

I’m not sure it’s possible to solve all inefficiencies in any process. Benchtop is a very small segment of the market, physics limit the possibilities at that form factor although the small form factor machines can benefit from the improvements.

Hello,

Datrons next platform is interesting, they seem to be trying to address some of the impediments to the process. Realistically a neo running that platform is a six figure capital investment plus recurring costs, it’s a specialty machine that fits specific application cases well.

I’m trying to consider long term costs for the customer and ease of repair. Keep it simple and serviceable.

Datron is a really good example but there are others as well. I’m not sure this forum is best suited to pursue this goal? Practical machinist and the like might be better suited, guys that run high end machines/controllers all day long. They have a wealth of knowledge. In any case this is a very big task to shake up the industry as you state. Best of luck!

2 Likes

I was thinking about this thread and there are a number of preventable things that lead to issues with many projects. Here are a few that could be addressed in the future to make CNC easier to use successfully.

Most CAM software do not have the ability to calculate appropriate F&S for the material specified on a given type of machine. When we set F&S for a given endmill we usually set a default that does not apply to all types of material lets say a .25in square endmill in pine is much different to the F&S in aluminum. The values need to be changed for each and this may lead to errors. The information from one successful project is lost in the system when we change the value again. The tool library should add another dimension where we could retain settings for several materials. In fact the optimum F&S should be calculated automatically from the information and values provided in the CAD/CAM like and integration of Carbide Create with G-Wizard. In this case the default values would be adapted to the Shapeoko/Nomad with the ability for the more advanced user to change the defaults. Knowing that would be a long term goal maybe a calculated field should display the effective chipload for a given toolpath. This could be used to compare to the Shapeoko cookbook @Julien is preparing.

Many of the problems reported here are operator induced where errors are made entering parameters can translate into crashes. Entering a DOC of .25in instead of .025in would probably have grave consequences for the project and/or the CNC but it could take time to find the reason for the crash and the typo may not be spotted before a few attempts have been made.

Another problem frequently reported is properly setting the Z0. Stock may be of uneven thickness or there could be issues with placement of the probe. Ideally, the stock would be perfect or the stock would be 3D scanned and the Z0, along with the X0 and Y0 would automatically be set.

1 Like

Hello,

This isn’t a machining knowledge problem, I have no lack of qualified input from loads of experienced machinists. My “goal” was to determine what problematic similarities existed within the same vertical market, the responses provided some good insight.

Hello,

@luc.onthego, there it is. That sort of thinking will lead you to not only a more efficient process but more importantly a safer process for the operator as well.

Thought this might apply to this thread:
https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/blog/fusion-360-cam-g-code/

1 Like

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