We touched on this briefly in this post and the few following posts.
If you want/need to stay with CC, the (only?) option we were discussing that would work for pockets to “emulate” the benefits of helical ramping for cutting at large DOC, would be to:
define a much smaller profile (1) in the center of the large pocket you want to cut
create a conservative/small depth per pass toolpath for that inner pocket, to cut that area down to full depth in small increments (i.e., the “usual” way). That would emulate the helical ramping to full depth.
then create the narrow & deep toolpath you want for the main pocket (2), with depth per pass set to full depth (or whatever large DOC you want to use) and a small stepover, AND make sure CC generates a pocketing toolpath that will start in the center, where the first toolpath removed material already
That way, when running that second toolpath, the endmill will plunge to full depth (into air), then it will take a few turns in the air, avoiding any slotting/full tool engagement because by the time it starts actually cutting material, it will only be using the small stepover (low RDOC at full DOC) to cut into the walls.
Now, since CC adapts the toolpath to the shape of the pocket profile, for a rectangular pocket you would need to adapt the shape of that inner pocket accordindly, in fact it would need to match the trajectory followed by the endmill during those first few moves of the endmill in the second/main toolpath.
Now that I think of it, the “offset profile” feature would be perfect to do this for any arbitrary rectangular pocket. I’m not sure I’m being clear here, and this is all theory as I have not tested this (I mostly use VCarve and Fusion by now). If you are willing to test this approach and if it works for you, I could then include this tip in the ebook. Who knows, we might even convince the CC developer(s) to automate that behavior (though that would be a very convoluted workaround to just implementing…ramping )
But also this highlights why people move away from using Carbide Create once they have learnt enough about good machining toolpath strategies that simply cannot be done easily with CC.
Less experienced people stick with Carbide Create and unwittingly, prematurely and extensively wear out their end mills and have a less than stellar experience.
IMO, there is so much basic stuff that Carbide3D (@robgrz) needs to fix or put into Carbide Create Basic before they launch the “PRO” version. Indeed, without these basics it could not be a “PRO” version anyway.
Getting good toolpath strategies with workable F&S is essential for newbies, occasional users and serious hobbiests alike as well as the other functionalities that have been requested and are still not here. I know they are working hard and have made some headway with CC but there is a long way to go to convince a serious hobbiest to spend money on it. Hopefully they will be up to this serious challenge!
If they could get CC Pro to have most of the functionality of V-carve Desktop without the 24”x24” limitation (to run on the XL and XXL ) and with true 3D capability at around $300 or so then they would have a winner.
Unless I’m missing something, even the latest Vcarve Pro 10 doesn’t have the desired HEM strategies that Fusion provides and @Julien’s eloquently explained work-around addresses.
Fusion 360 is free for hobbyists, but has a bit of a learning curve. @wmoy has some nice videos showing how to use it with Shapeokos - here’s one of them.
True, but it does have a variety of ramping options, so even though you don’t get adaptive clearing, you can still adopt the “narrow & deep” approach for (regular) pocketing, without resorting to the manual workaround described above.
So, to each his own, it’s doable in CC (and looking at what @WillAdams can pull off in CC, I would say pretty much anything is technically doable in CC ), it’s easier in VCarve (but $$$), and it’s easiest/built-in in Fusion360 (learning curve + evil Autodesk corporation etc…)
While VCarve Pro does not have many capabilities that Fusion has like adaptive clearing, it also has many that Fusion doesn’t. A circular saw and a jigsaw are both useful in your shop, while each will cut wood they have their place just like these software, they each have their strengths and weaknesses.
Do you trust Autodesk to provide Fusion 360 free to hobbyists forever? To me it seems like the drug dealer who gets you hooked and then starts charging you for the drugs. F360 is very powerful and I like using it, but I am just waiting for the day it is no longer free. A similar thing happened with Onshape, and I’m glad I didn’t get too far along with it before they changed the policy.
Even competent “evil” corporations probably try to do what they perceive is best for their bottom lines. I can see where offering Fusion for free to hobbyists could do that.
It was a joke really, to summarize in three words the concern that some people have with cloud-based software. Me, I’ll enjoy it as long as it lasts, which may very well be for longer than my CNC addiction lasts anyway, and as you mention they may have an interest in keeping youngters/sutdents hooked for ever with the free model, as long as it brings business down the line when they are in charge at work later on.
And if they do pull the plug, I’ll learn the next popular free one, a few tens of hours of learning every 10 years in not something to worry about
I just realized that the “advanced” (e.g. helical) ramping strategies in VCarve are only available in the Pro version, and I have the Desktop version (that only has linear ramping at an angle), so no easy way to show what I meant. With linear ramping only, it may look something like this:
Initial ramping (light blue) down to full depth (in that case it would still be slotting during that ramping phase, but at arbitrarily shallow DOC if you make the ramp long enough), and then full DOC passes round and round up to reaching the outer perimeter of the pocket. I would use a slow “plunge rate” (in that case, not so much a plunge than a gradual descent), and then a much faster feedrate for the cut after the ramp is completed.
But this is all theoretical, in real life I would long have closed VCarve and fired up Fusion360 for this scenario
@julian : my trial version of Vcarve Desktop V10 has Ramps with smooth, Zig-Zag and Sprial just like the Pro version. Are you sure about what you said ? - because :
I wrote to Vectric about two weeks ago and had them confirm to me that Desktop and Pro were IDENTICAL (other than the differences in their chart on the web page). They confirmed that all the Design tools, toolpath options etc were exactly the same.
Since I only have the SO3 the 24"x24" limitation does not worry me and the rest I can happily live without as I am not a commercial user.
Hey you’re right, it does have all of that. But at least on my version, only for 2D profile toolpaths. For pocket toolpath, I only get what you see in the screenshot. Weird.
Yes - only on 2D profiles. I just confirmed that in both the Desktop and Pro trial versions - which indeed seem exactly the same so far in all other respects.
Better than nothing - and actually very useful IMO !
Autodesk has a history of discontinuing free tools, such as 123D Design and 123D Catch, and even paid ones such as ArtCAM. I’m sure these moves were best for their bottom lines, but they caused me to need to find alternatives. 123D Catch was a really nice photogrammetry phone app. Support for Meshmixer also seems to be less than it used to be.
I’m not saying this would happen with Fusion 360, because it seems to be the CAD/CAM architecture Autodesk is betting on for the future, just that I don’t expect anything good to last forever.
Well I have pro and as @Hooby Hooby said my ramping strategies do not include zigzag and spiral for pockets, 3D or molding toolpaths, zigzag and spiral ramping is only available for profile toolpaths.
Was not aware this book was out, let alone that version 2 is out there. Looks good–just the right amount of detail.
Was wondering if you considered putting anything in about vertical work holding? I managed a fairly simple affair on the front of the machine that takes advantage of the overhang you can get on the y axis. I’ve used it to make some very simple but solid finger joints and mortise and tenons.
Even if you simply mention the capability and link out of the book to some of the very well-thought out examples by Will Adams and others, it could affect some decisions that people make early on when getting set up if they want to add the function later.
)
), it’s easier in VCarve (but $$$), and it’s easiest/built-in in Fusion360 (learning curve + evil Autodesk corporation etc…)