I’m trying to cut an inverted QR code, and sometimes there’ll be space between two diagonal dots that a 1/8" bit can’t get, but a 1/16" bit will. However, due to the lower chipload allowable with the 1/16" bit, and the only way I can figure to use the CC software, the 1/16" will take 197 minutes, to the 1/8" 42 minutes.
What I’m hoping is that the software would have some mechanism to run the big stuff with the 1/8" as able, then what’s missed could be cleaned up with the 1/16" bit. Is such a thing possible? If not, are there any alternatives that would allow for such a thing? Is there a feature request system for the CC software, bounties, etc? While I’m sure doing QRs like this isn’t super common, I can’t be the only one that would benefit from the ability to use multiple tools with the CC software.
Hopefully the two files should attach if anyone wants a crack at it. Thanks in advance.
That’s called “rest machining”, and CC does not support it it. In your specific case here you could get a similar result by
running a pocketing op with the 1/8" like you did
then running a contour toolpath with the 1/16" selecting every feature: the 1/16" should cut “all around” each dot and other shapes, and go in the places that the 1/8" could not. In the end you should be left with the equivalent of having run rest machining (again, for this specific case only)
This (linked page) may not be the best solution to your need but it’s how I solve the issue with fewer iffy areas. It may be, in your case, that the best solution is to pocket cut with the coarser bit then profile with the finer bit versus working out the pockets for the fine cut in design. I typically use bits even finer than 1/16" so the wear and tear and possibility of breakage is also a factor.
AFAIK there is no mechanism in CC allowing this to be done automatically but what a sweet feature it would be.
@Julien Thanks, I hadn’t heard the term before. A lot of new vocabulary to pick up, I’m sure. Great idea on the joining of the 1/16" contour with the 1/8" pocket, I’ll give that a shot. Looks like you’re part of the carbide team, is that something that a bounty could be put on? It seems like a great deal to get CC for free, I don’t mind kicking in a few bucks for this sort of thing to help offset costs, I can’t imagine I’m alone in that. Beyond this, bouncing off my thought with bpedit below, is there a plugin mechanism for CC? I’m thinking if I made a python script to do such a thing, wondering how hard it would be to integrate into CC.
@bpedit Thanks. I could probably whip up the svg manually for that, just seems like something that could/should be automated. Though now that I’m thinking about it, I’ve done a fair bit of work with cartesian mapping in python, it wouldn’t be impossible to just find those places where the gap was under 1/8", that would greatly assist in such things.
CC development is managed by @robgrz and typically happens in waves, there is no bounty system but you can create a Feature Request post (there is a dedicated category) and hope it gets picked up in the next wave. Rest machining has been mentioned before but I don’t know how likely it is that it would be implemented.
Another twist to the approach I described, which might work better for your demands, would be to increase the line width of the vectors in your design to the coarser mill’s diameter. Where those lines overlap is where you’d need to pocket for the finer bit. Assuming you’re using a more robust vector program than CC for creating the SVG’s.
@robgrz Sounds great. Just curious if you have a ballpark idea when that would be released. I just have the regular version right now, but only see a build number (Mac version), no X.Y.Z versioning.
We’re almost ready for internal testing now so, if all goes well, it’ll be a few weeks for the first public V7 beta. Rest machining should follow after the initial release.
