I’m wondering if something like this exists, as I’m finding it difficult to keep up with myself.
While I was using all the Carbide tools, I had no issue designing in my office, then cloud-transferring the file down to the garage and starting the operations. But now that I’m looking at 1) using multiple copies of Carbide Create, 2) using additional CAM software, and 3) purchasing additional tools from places other than C3D, I see an opportunity for a software title to make life a little easier for everyone.
Let’s start with a spreadsheet. We export all our tool databases (or create our own) and merge all the data in the spreadsheet. Ideally, we would save that spreadsheet, or export a CSV file. The “Magic Tool Database Manager” would be able to read that CSV, and process or export files for various programs to use.
Essential Workflow:
I get a new tool.
Open master database, enter/import tool info.
Either save file, or export CSV.
MTDM would process the CSV, and export updated file formats for various software.
Bonus workflow.
5. Processing and exporting the updated database would also trigger an archive of previous databases (to roll back to in case of a problem) and replace the file that the software itself uses.
6. This would mean that It would be a two-three step process to have all your software updated at once: Enter new tool info, Export CSV, Process CSV and save to directories.
Bonus features:
You could mark certain tools as owned. This would end up reflected in your software databases either by A) only displaying owned tools or B) displaying all tools, but adding an asterisk or some identifier next to the tool to designate it as being in your shop.
Would be nice as a background utility: Update your spreadsheet, it executes the updates automagically.
Backing up the previous tool database files would be a good feature, even better if you could go into a recovery tab and roll back individual softwares.
What are the community’s thoughts on this? Does something like this exist, or Is anyone interested in a new project for 2025?
If this is a new endeavor, what features did I get wrong? What other features would be needed? Would this even work (that is, developing software that can speak the languages of the myriad of tool databases and update them with a click)?
Oh man, was that over two years ago? I hate to see what that code looks like
The basics of conversion to and from tool definitions should still be petty straightforward. I’m inclined to just buy the relevant standards and model the core definitions to it. (Assuming licensing allows)
With a good core definition it should be possible to wrap up the logic for each unique software in a self contained plugin of sorts.
I’d only be interested in writing the import/export for Carbide Create and Fusion 360 if I’m being honest…but hopefully the core interface could be clean enough to encourage contributions from others.
The central database and conversion functionally is valuable enough to get working without considering the “stretch” goals too much. (Things like automatic syncing and such are nice but they can easily kill a project like this…I don’t envy real developers that have to account for every OS, network configuration, and level of user proficiency. The hardest parts unfortunately offer the least value)
I’ll take a look at the relevant standards for tooling over the next few days and report back.
If anyone else has other ideas or wants to roll something completely different, by all means go for it! If 10 different projects spin up, that’s 10x the opportunity for something to grab the community and really take off!
A long while back I was looking at using a Jupyter Notebook for tracking this sort of thing, and I also considered pyspread.
That said, the great thing about the Carbide 3D eco-system is “it’s in there!” and one doesn’t need anything else if one uses just the Carbide 3D machines, software, and tooling.
That said, I’ve pretty much moved all of my notes on this sort of thing in either my current project on github, or posts such as:
If everyone will post about everything they do we’ll all be able to look it up at need.
I’ve thought about this and considered seeing if there would be enough value to build it out for the community. Some simple client/server approach with a shared db and client could export sync to any app needed. And yeah, clearly some simple plugin approach like @HeuristicBishop mentions would be the logical. Worth the effort for a niche community? No. A fun hobby effort? Sure!
Wintool was started by a Swiss dude in 1980 and has been in operation ever since. That pedigree coupled with the “request a quote” only pricing tells me two things:
It’s probably an excellent piece of kit.
It’s probably an exorbitantly expensive piece of kit.
I looked around a bit and the only figure I could find for WinTool and similar systems is…$30,000…starting price
Whatever homebrew we end up rolling will be about 100 times worse to use but it’ll be infinitely cheaper. So we got that going for us
I take offense to that! lololol. I would say, it will have an INFINITELY smaller feature set, but will be a delight to use and be free. If a few people are willing to help clearly define a very modest MVP set of features that would be worth using, i’m happy to spearhead the dev side. Thats my area of expertise.
I have full faith in you and the rest of the community
I’ve been working on visually communicating new project specs. Diagramming and such. (Building this skillset out has paid dividends already…and I still kind suck at it!)
I’ll put some time towards this over the next few days. Hopefully I can provide you with a clearly defined straightforward mvp. I think I’m well positioned to come up with a set of basic requirements, I’ve spent a fair bit of time thinking about this over the years
GPT is suprisingly capable when it comes to spitting out boilerplate MermaidJS charts
I’m a Data Storage Engineer by trade and reading that statement just caused a visceral non-voluntary response
It’s like I just saw someone get the wind knocked out of them. That feeling you get way deep down in your core, when your your body just knows something is wrong.
Anyway, that’s probably an exeedingly niche trauma response. At the end of the day, it works…sigh and that’s why it’s still a thing
CC uses a very limited set of parameters to define the cutter and the cutting data.
There are “dead” parameters in the CSV records.
The balance of parameters used to create Gcode are hardcoded.
The unique ID is the Tool number ( first item in the CSV file ). That is what needs to be unique for use within a session of CC and CM.
A “Tool database”, in the CC context is merely having either a single “mother” listing or a set of “project”, “material type”, or whatever organization you want listing for the session you are in.
Those CSV files would be in the CC folder.
Unless C3D takes a different approach to cutter and cutting parameters a Tool database effort is not worth the effort.
Since the CC data is so limited you can import from Fusion or TinyDB files and get the parameters need to run CC/CM.
Without a global body in the CNC space, you have little chance of getting some kind of standard created across products. You can try to grow a standard in a grass roots way, but that’s not usually very successful…you need representation from most of the big players in the space.
The actual technology is easy…Spreadsheets are not as easy to standardize around as XML files, which eliminate the need for ordering of field/values - and enable support for nesting and hierarchy of objects.
I would love to see Carbide3D engage other vendors, academics, & professionals in the space to start a consortium (unless one exists and I just don’t know about it) with the goal of standardization. But without that, I don’t see how a standard is really possible.
FWIW, I looked into this sort of thing a bit ages ago:
Since then, Carbide Create has added Notes, and I’ve started in on a personal programming project, and Jupyter Notebooks have been updated to JupyterLab files or some such…
I think this perhaps overstates what the intended goal was, as least from my standpoint. Sure, a standard amongst all vendors would be great, but i was thinking something incredibly modest just to assist in a personal pain point. And Markdown is a reasonable analogous example imho of a modest grass roots format leading the way vs waiting for some grand consensus on something too modest to need one.
Yeah unfortunately there’s an xkcd for that: Standards
The best outcome I could think of in this community would be a centrally agreed upon and maintained general approach. We don’t need to solve the problem for anyone else, as long as we get some value out of it, that’s a win🙂
I just want to make sure we’re informed on whatever we decide to use as our core definitions. How do we position ourselves to play best with the widest variety of those n other diverse standards.
I feel that sentiment as well. I’ve spent a lot of time developing my go-to core tool library.
That said, I started my learning by purchasing every interesting looking clearance tool I could find…so I’ve got quite a variety on hand. There’s also the occasional job specific tool that gets ordered.
My biggest problem actually comes from exactly what you said: how long do they have to be clickable?
The longer my tool isn’t clickable, the less likely I am to reach for it…even though I already own it.
To me, if it’s not clickable, it might as well not exist.
(I’ve actually put a lot of these tools into the various softwares but the occasional major update or computer issue tends to eat away at them over time. A stable, easy to back up, stand alone tool library solves that problem for me )
)