Great work Manfred, thanks for sending these in!
If you have any photos you can share of the work you’ve done with MeshCAM, please send them in.
]]>The existing waterline code would cut each slice of the part at a time before descending into the deeper parts of the model. This is safer than following a surface all the way down before cutting the current level but it led to much more rapid and retract time.
This new build adds a setting in waterline to control this behavior- Depth First or Level First toolpath linking. I think this is a huge improvement and it comes directly from the end-of-trial surveys that I have received.
This is a major internal change so I had to mark this as an expiring beta so it’s only good for 60 days. I need feedback on this feature so all time-limited betas will now enable the Customer Experience Program so that I know if this feature is being exercised by users. Once the expiration is removed, the CEP option will go back under your control.
To make room for the new setting in the toolpath panel, I hid the adaptive stepdown setting for waterline machining. Adaptive stepdown is likely to be removed from future versions.
Please let me know how the new waterline features work for you. Once I have this one “done” I have another really good upgrade waiting for you.
]]>Feedback on Drilling has been pretty good. I still consider it to be a work in progress but it turned out better than I hoped even in it’s current state.
I also added a Cap Holes command that may require explanation. Once you drill your holes, you do not want a parallel or waterline finish operation to recut that hole it a way that may damage the finish or waste machine time. The Cap Holes command will add surfaces to your model to protect the holes from further machining. For some reason, this is one of my favorite new MeshCAM features in a while.
Both of these features are available in the latest Beta release under the CAM menu.
I will likely promote this out of “beta” status int he near future. It will be a part of Version 5 so it will be free for any V5 user.
I have also been adding more code to make inch/MM conversion more intuitive. This remains one of the largest stumbling block for new MeshCAM users so I am slowly going through the program to do whatever I can to make subtle options very obvious.
The latest release also added support for 2D DXF splines and ellipses. The code works with every DXF I have in my test directory but many of them are generated by Rhino which only uses a few of the possible spline and ellipse types. If you have a failing DXF please send it to me.
The biggest thing to be aware of is that all of these changes were the direct result of customer feedback- either the surveys that trial users get or the Customer Experience Program where command usage in the app is uploaded to my server (with your permission). I get lots of feedback in lots of ways and I try very hard to use it to make MeshCAM into the program that people want.
]]>These problems have had me hung up for a long time now. In the past few weeks I’ve made enough progress that I am sure that I can deliver a good drilling command in MeshCAM. Hopefully it will be better than good- my goal is to make it the easiest drilling command in any CAM software available. (And I’ve spent a lot of time on Youtube to make sure I know where the competition stands)
It’s tempting to work in a vacuum until I have it ready for release but that has led to surprises on my part in the past. It turns out that users view things very differently than I do. Things that I expect to be self-evident turn out to be anything but.
I’m going to do things a little differently this time; I’m going to get the automatic hole detection working well and then release it as a beta. Know that when you look at it for the first time, it will be incomplete and that I have lots more to enable if the feedback shows that I’m going in the right direction.
If no big problems appear then I expect to have a beta in a week or so.
]]>I’ve recommended the hobby version of Alibre for a long time because it gives you massive functionality for $199- from a value point-of-view, nothing can touch it. I think that changed with the announcement of Cubify Invent.
From what I can tell in the videos, Cubify Invent appears to be a reskinned version of Alibre, possibly with some features removed. What is amazing is that Cubify Invent is only $49. A commercial parametric CAD program for that cost is totally unbelieveable.
Invent can export STL files so it should work very well with MeshCAM. If you’re looking for a good CAD program then you should try the 14 day demo and see what you think.
]]>Great work Manfred, thanks for sending these in!
If you have any photos you can share of the work you’ve done with MeshCAM, please send them in.
]]>For a few years I’ve been using Macbooks for my MeshCAM development. I usually just skip OSX and install Windows using Bootcamp since I’m only on the Macbook for the better display and keyboard. I just got my new Retina Machbook Pro and I finally have to stay on OSX to take full advantage of the new display so I’m installing Windows 7 under Parallels. MeshCAM and all of my development tools work really well under Parallels, the only problem is Solidworks 2012- it insists on using software OpenGL which slows everything to a crawl.
After a lot of tweaking and Googling I found this page . At the bottom of the page you can find the registry tweaks I used.
To summaraize, I opened Regedit went to
\HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\SolidWorks\SolidWorks 2012\Performance\Graphics\Hardware\
and went into each graphics adapter listed that started with Parallels and changed the
Workarounds:10
to
Workarounds:4000480
(as a hex value). In my case, I did this to four adapters that were combinations of Parallels and ATI/NVIDIA.
After this change Solidworks used the hardware OpenGL and is more than fast enough for anything I do. The performance under Parallels is just as good as the performance under Windows natively.
]]>If you’d like to try the part, you can download it here. The one change that I’m making is that he originally posted the file as a STEP file but MeshCAM takes STL. I used Rhino to convert the file but any CAD program that can save STEP can also save STL so this is really a non-issue.
When you load the file in MeshCAM you’ll see the following:
If you’re trying to see how few steps can be involved in generating a toolpath then you can see two important things in the image above.
You are free to change these but most users will have no need.
Click CAM->Generate Toolpath and enter the values below
MeshCAM shows you all of the parameters used to generate the toolpath in one window- no tabs to flip between and no hidden settings that you can’t find. If you’re trying to minimize the number of steps involved then this is a big benefit.
If you’re interested in the reason for the toolpath choices above then you can read more at Machining 2D Parts with MeshCAM
That’s it- just save the toolpath and you’re done.
Note: The holes are profile machined. If you want to drill them then you’d need to use the MDI interface on your mill until the drilling operations make it into MeshCAM.
2D CAM systems are valuable tools to have available but they have a different workflow than what I showed here. 2D CAM packages will generally require you to define each machine operation by picking vectors and telling the CAM software exactly how to machine it.
Because MeshCAM is 3D CAM, it is able to automatically extract all of the pocket and profile boundaries and the depths to cut without you having to specify anything.
The answer to that question depends completely on your intended use. The tradeoff for the shortened workflow above is that you will not have complete control over every entry and exit from the part or the exact order of the machining. If this matters to you, or if you need the absolute shortest toolpath possible because you need to make a lot of these, then you may be better off with a really high-end system that gives you complete control of every aspect of the toolpath. (Check out our MeshCAM vs Mastercam post for more of our thoughts on this)
If you are in a prototype or low-volume machining environment then it may make sense to trade some control to save you time programming the part. If this is the case then MeshCAM may be a perfect fit for you.
]]>You can also video the video directly here: http://youtu.be/jSkfxJLAAwA. Thanks Junior!
]]>The first is the cost of support. About a year ago I added a phone number where users can get a hold of me directly- not a low level guy reading from a prepared troubleshooting guide. This has been well-received but it does have a cost. To be honest, if I could find a way to offload this function to a third-party and maintain the quality of support then I would. Unfortunately I haven’t figured out how yet so I have to factor this support cost into the product.
The second reason is that the features have expanded greatly since the last time I raised the price. I think the last time the price was increased was in the late version 2 or early version 3 era. MeshCAM has gone thru a huge evolution since then and I think it’s fair to say that only thing that MeshCAM 2 and MeshCAM 5 share is the name.
From a competitive view, there’s nothing that offers the features that MeshCAM does for anything near the price. The range of toolpaths, toolpath options, and toolpath accuracy is well beyond all competitors below $500 to $1000.
Finally, price tells a customer what a product is worth. I can go on and on about what MeshCAM has and compare it to competitors but many people will assume that there’s something wrong with MeshCAM, or that it’s not suitable for their application, because it’s “too cheap”. A corollary to this is that I’ve found myself cringing lately when I speak to other software developers and I explain my pricing compared to market norms. I cringe because the next questions is almost always, “Are you selling a substandard product or you just ignoring the market?”
In the end the price is now $250. For corporate customers this is almost nothing; for individuals the cost might be much more siginificant. I’ve always tried to sell software that provides value well beyond it’s cost. I still belive this to be the case and I’ll continue to work to add additional value/features even after you buy.
]]>This release also has new a new change to reduce memory use in the “Offsetting” stage of the toolpath calculation by up to 75%. This is obviously a huge improvement and it should go a long way to reduce out-of-memory errors that can occur when using MeshCAM in larger applications.
If you need a code to try the new release for 30 days then you can go to the download page to get one.
Let me know what you think.
]]>The forum is still on the old server until I know what to do with it. From a security point-of-view, it’s unlikely that I’ll be running anything like that on my main server ever again. VPS hosting is cheap and reverse proxies can hide the fact that you’re running multiple servers so why risk it?
I hope that you’ll find the new site to be faster and with fewer random outages. If you come across anything that’s broken, please send me an email and let me know. Right now the only problem that I know of right now is the video on the MeshCAM Art page.
]]>If you’d like to get in touch with Michael about having a custom guitar made he can be reached at mikdavhil1 [AT] yahoo.com . Either way, enjoy the photos:
I’ve had a love/hate thing with Wordpress. On one hand, it’s capable of doing almost anything and it’s the blogging standard almost everywhere. On the down side, it’s bad on shared hosting, even with caching plugins, and I never did anything really advanced with it so I never got the full benefit. You also have to worry about security since Wordpress is the target of a lot of hackers.
I could address all of these concerns by going to a better hosting environment and server configuration but hosting websites is not the focus of GRZ is so it would never be worthwhile.
I had been eyeballing Octopress for a while and I finally got it switched over late last night. Octopress is a static site generator so I can write a post and run a command locally to generate the whole site. Now when you view a blog post there is nothing being rendered dynamically on the web server- it just sends down a raw HTML page. This is a huge win for security, speed and backups. And it’s one headache that I don’t have to deal with anymore.
I do need to get the theme more inline with the main site but that’s not a huge priority now.
While my experience with Wordpress was mostly-good, my experience with phpBB, the forum software I use, has been mostly-bad. I was looking for competing software to install locally but I’ve come to realize that I’d prefer a hosted solution to get it off of my server. I haven’t found a good solution to export everything from phpBB to a new system so I may just have to save the current forum as a read-only archive and just move to a new empty forum from here.
Right now I’ve been looking at Ning and Vanilla Forums. Ning is looking like the winner right now but I’m open to suggestions.
There have been a number of V5 updates that have gone out lately that have not been announced here. The big V5 features have not been implemented yet. Unfortunately, they require big UI changes and lots of trial and error. I haven’t had a good idea about how to tackle these in a way that I’d be happy with them.
In the past week or two I’ve had a couple of ideas about how to move forward. Implementing these ideas requires major architectural changes in parts of MeshCAM that I don’t ever touch because they work well. I’ve spent several days cleaning up 8 years of monolithic code into something more modular. I’m not done yet but the progress has been good.
If everything works out as expected then this new setup will enable me to rapidly implement a number of features that I’ve been stuck on for a while. It will also enable a lot of new possibilities.
]]>http://anthromod.com/blog/?p=98
Chris appears to have tried a number of rapid prototyping technologies and has started using the CNC/casting approach outlined at http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/guerrilla_cnc1.shtml . That happens to be one of my favorite pages so I always look for reasons to link to it. You should check out both pages if you’re not familiar with the casting process.
]]>http://www.kwartzlab.ca/2011/08/creating-3-dimensional-objects-taig-mill-rotary-axis/
He’s got a much cleaner work area than I do.
]]>64 Bit Support
A new “Automatic Toolpath Wizard” in the main toolpath dialog
I have been using only this version for about a month and it seems at least as stable as V4 although I’m sure there are plenty of bugs in there. I would like some feedback on the new toolpath wizard if you have some time. The main purpose of it is to analyze the geometry and then enable a “sane” set of toolpaths so new users don’t have to know what the difference between waterline, pencil, and parallel finishing are.
I am already getting upgrade questions so I just want to reiterate the upgrade policy- if V5 is released within one year of your purchase (either a new purchase or an upgrade from a prior version), you will get it as a free upgrade. I can guarantee that it will be released in less than one year from today, hopefully much sooner.
]]>We’ll use the part below to show how we can do a DXF to g code conversion with minimal effort:
This files contains a good combination of arcs, line segments and bezier curves. Also, these is nesting where the rectangle and circle are within the outline curve. MeshCAM will have no problem finding this hierarchy and generating a toolpath automatically.
The first step in the DXF to g code process is the DXF file. The DXF format has suffered a long evolution that makes it a less-than-ideal format to move CAD data between programs. The “most compatible” version of this format was way back in Autocad Release 12, and that’s the one that MeshCAM likes to see. Future MeshCAM releases will probably support newer DXF versions but V12 is the best one to use for wide compatibility with other programs.
Most CAD programs will have a list of DXF options available when you save the file. In this example, we’re using the excellent Rhino CAD program but the lessons apply to almost any CAD program that can save 2D DXF files.
After saving clicking “Save As”, select a file type of “DXF”. You’ll be shown this window:
Select the “R12 Lines & Arcs” option and you’re done.
Click “File” then “Open 2D DXF” and load the file saved above. The file will be opened like any other 3D file with the exception of the new “Extrude” window:
The setting entered here will tell MeshCAM how thinck to make the new geometry. If you’re just trying to cut flat stock then you should make the distance equal to the thickness of your stock. For the example here, we’ll use .125”.
It’s worth noting that this extrude command was added in MeshCAM V4. V3 users will not have this command available.
The stock in MeshCAM is used to define the area in which the tool is allowed to move. By default it is set to the size of the geometry you load (you can see it as the white box around the part). In this case, the stock is touching the geometry so the tool would not be able to move completely around the part to cut it out. We’ll enlarge the stock using the “CAM->Define Stock” command.
Since we just need to add a little room around the part, enter “.2” for the “Right” and “Back” values under the “XY Position” area. All other defaults are fine.
In the screenshot below, you can see that the white box representing the stock has been enlarged.
The current settings would be fine if you’re going to hold the stock down with double-side tape or something similar. What if you need to add tabs or other supports to hold the parts in place for machining? Use the “CAM->Set Geometry Supports” command and enter the settings below:
Click at a few spots around the part to automatically place supports. Don’t worry if you get one or two of them wrong, you can right-click to remove the last support. When you’re done it will look something like this:
The only part left is the toolpath, and there’s not much to that. Since we’re just looking to cut out a profile, we can skip the normal roughing and parallel finishing passes. We’re going to use the waterline and pencil finishing only. As a quick refresher on those two, waterline makes a series of profile passes around the part, each a little deeper than the last. The only thing it does not do it attempt to find the “final depth” of the part to take a last cutout pass. The pencil toolpath is used to trace the outline of the part one file time a full depth and ensure that nothing remains around the part.
We’ll use a .125” endmill for both toolpaths and a stepdown of .03” for the waterline pass. The rest of the settings can be seen below:
Click “OK” and after a couple of seconds you’ll have a toolpath ready to go:
After you do this the first time, I think you’ll be agree that this is “way faster” than a traditional 2D CAM program that requires you to select vectors to cut or one that just does a straight DXF to g code conversion where no tool offsets are calculated.
A couple of other options for advanced users:
1) If you want to plunge to full depth and cut the whole thing in one pass then skip the waterline and use only a pencil pass.
2) You can tell MeshCAM that the waterline tool is a little bigger than it really is. This will cause it to offset the tool more than it should leave a little extra material around the part. This lets the pencil pass cleanup the final surface in a single pass with a better finish. For example, if you tell the waterline pass that your .125” endmill is actually .135”, MeshCAM will leave .005” for final cleanup. This is one way that lying to MeshCAM can get you additional features that were never programmed into it. Don’t worry, it’ll forgive you.
]]>All of that being said, it’s worth noting a few “quirks” about SW that make it slightly trickier to get a file out of than a program like Rhino.
MeshCAM Accepts 3D files as STL or DXF (using 3D Faces). Of the two, STL is preferable since it is a more robust format and it is faster to read into MeshCAM.
STL is a file format originally developed for the 3D printer market that represents your models as a bunch of triangles. Some users worry that some accuracy will be lost in the triangulation but this is not really the case. As shown below, you can create the STL file to almost arbitrary accuracy- generally well beyond the accuracy of your mill. Second, most CAM programs that take SolidWorks files natively do this triangulation in the background, it’s just hidden from you.
The first thing that many users note when taking the output from SolidWorks to CAM software is the orientation of the parts. As someone planning to machine a part after designing it, it’s tempting to build the part by extruding out from the “Top” plane.
When you load the resulting STL file into MeshCAM you’ll see the following:
Obviously, this will require a rotation before machining it. Within MeshCAM you can use the “Rotate Geometry” command to get the correct orientation. You can enter an X rotation of “-90” or, if you’re running MeshCAM Version 5, click the face button below:
The simple option is to always extrude from the “Front” plane in SolidWorks. If you do, you will always be able to load the STL directly into MeshCAM without rotation.
[EDIT] Randy just filled me on another technique that I never knew about- reference coordinate systems. Under your Insert->Reference Geometry menu, select Coordinate System. Place it in whatever location you want but align it so that the Z axis is parallel to the Z axis of your mill. When you open the STL Options window, pick that new coordinate system using the pull down shown here:
Your STL will now have the proper orientation without any need to rotate it within MeshCAM. Thanks Randy!
Here’s a really frustrating thing in SolidWorks (if you don’t know about it)- the units of the STL are not necessarily the same as your part.
After you click “Save As” and select STL as the file type, click the “Options” button shown below.
When you get the options window open, note the “Unit” setting:
The unit value selected here will be used in your STL file no matter what units are used in your part file. If they differ, the part will be converted to the STL units when you save it.
The other major setting that affects the STL output is the “Resolution” setting defined in the “Export Options” window shown above. The resolution values define how accurately the STL represents your original part file.
SolidWorks predefines a “coarse” and “fine” resolution and these will be fine for most users. Unless you have a very large model I would usually recommend starting with the “Fine” option.
SolidWorks also gives you the option to define your own quality level using the “Angle” and “Deviation” sliders. ”Angle” defines the maximum allowable angle between two triangles that originate from the same surface. If that threshold is exceeded, smaller triangles are used. The “Deviation” is the maximum allowable error allowable in the output. Put another way, “deviation” is the maximum distance that a triangle can be from the surface that it represents. For both settings, smaller values will give more accurate files at the expense of more triangles generate. MeshCAM can handle very large STL files so you can definately use settings that are beyond the predefined “Fine” values and still have no problems.
Here is my one complaint about SolidWorks- it will not save surfaces as STL files, it will only save watertight solids. To be fair, this is part of the STL standard and they follow that standard carefully. If you have a surface model you will not be able to save it as an STL without finding a way to make it into a solid.
For what it’s worth, most other CAD programs will generate STL files from surfaces and MeshCAM will happily machine them.
Hopefully this is enough to get new users over a few of the difficult starting points to get going with SolidWorks CAM. Be sure to post in the comments in there is anything else that should be added.
]]>
While there is a certain “elegance” if you’re an engineer, it’s a wall of grey numbers to normal people. Below is the new version which retains almost all of the functionality with far fewer buttons and numbers:
I think it’s better but I guess I’ll know for sure once new users begin playing with it. I didn’t delete the old code just in case…
]]>An undercut is an area of a model where one part overhangs another part, creating a void in the middle that cannot be reached by a traditional 3-axis mill or router. That probably sounds like gibberish so here’s a picture-
That “hook” creates an area between it and the back plate that cannot be machined. You’d have to leave a section unmachined or break it into multiple parts and bolt or glue it together.
It’s worth noting that an “undercut” is specific to a direction of machining. The part above only has an undercut if you machine it from the top or the back. You could flip it on it’s side to machine it but that’s not really a cure all- I could easily come up with a part where that is not possible. We’re using a simple part here to illustrate a point.
Special tools are sometimes used to machine simple undercuts. These are sometimes called “slot cutters” or “lollipop cutters” depending on their shape. Both tools feature a tip that is wider than the shaft. This gives the machinist some limited ability to reach into the undercut- but only by the difference between the tip and shaft diameter. For many uses this will be fine but it is certainly not a universal solution.
A big negative for these tools is that most CAM software does not support them directly. Because these special cutters are infrequently used, only the hig-end CAM programs include algorithms that can utilize them. For the rest of us, special cutters require manual gcode, tricking the CAM program, or moving the mill manually. I’ve never had a case where their use outweighed their negatives.
It’s easy to see that the cutter above may not have the reach to machine the whole undercut in our example part. Surely there’s another way…
I spent years as an electrical engineer working with factories in China, ignoring the plastic and mechanical parts of my projects. One day a friend of mine showed me how he modified a part to eliminate a small undercut that would cause excessive wear in one of our molds. It was a common practice for plastic injection molding but it was not something that ever occurred to me- cut a hole in the back of the part for a tool to get in. In retrospect it was obvious but it wasn’t something I ever spent much time thinking about.
This access hole in the back of the part allows you to flip the part over and machine the undercut from the back. MeshCAM has a built-in “two-side job” type that makes this really easy. Below is what the front and back toolpaths might look like:
The red arrow shows where the tool is now able to access the undercut and remove that material.
The same technique above can be applied to more complicated parts that would be much more difficult to machine in their “standard” configuration. Here’s one one of those, half a hinge:
The hinge is now easy to machine from two sides and would be easy to mold if necessary without slides or inserts. It’s not exactly going to work for a restoration job on an antique piece of furniture but it’s still a cool trick.
If you have kids then you’re probably going through toys at a rapid pace, try opening a few up and looking at how they are designed. You will likely be shocked at the number of shortcut and tricks used to make complicated mechanisms that can be produced in simple injection molds without undercuts. Most of these injection molding tricks are applicable to the milling process as well.
Cutting a hole in a part is not going to work every time but it does work more often than you think and it’s one of the easiest ways to machine a difficult part.
]]>