Build 7242
I just uploaded the latest build to: http://www.grzsoftware.com/files/MeshCAM-Setup.exe . It will also be detected by the "Check for Updates" command. There are a small handful of changes and two big ones- the ZMap memory reduction and the finish pass speedup. I really hope to make this the LAST release before calling V2 done so if no big bugs are found then this is it. As always, let me know what you think.
I’m getting a tool path error:
There is not enough memory available to generate a tool path at the specified tolerance. I was using the same tolerance and the same part I always test with, .001. Changing to .01 did allow the path to be generated. Just letting you know.
Jay
Check for updates using 7141 dosn’t does not find 7142.
–Bob Stack
I`ve got problems with the waterline cleanup function when using a small (3mm) tool. There are a lot of holes drilled into the model in a raster. Got some screenshots of the problem.
Florian
Florian- Send me the screenshots and I’ll see what I can do.
Bob- Does your version show 7141?
Jay- This is something I’ve seen but have not been able to narrow down. It seems to happen only for highly detailed parts and goes away when I run a program I found called “RegToy – Clear Memory” and then run MeshCAM again. It appears that Windows cannot allocate the chunk of memory that I’m requesting even though it claims to have enough free. Can you please send me full information about the STL size and toolpath info?
Robert
>Bob- Does your version show 7141?
Robert,
Yes it was showing 7141. I was on my Vista machine, not my laptop. I’ll try the laptop tomorrow. Also, I may have had the permissions set to administrator only.
I’ll post what happened on my XP laptop.
–Bob
Robert,
Just one test so far (and I haven’t cut it yet)
Nothing seemed to break or do weird things with the tool path. Granted a rather nasty stl even for me… took a long time (30 min, 3 gig X 3gig XP ) but the resulting g-code file is around the expected length.
I’ll have to try harder
JeffD
Robert,
Looking good overall, and toolpaths look good. Top of stock is successfully non-machined on my “tilted” STL, thank you for the tolerance. Program speed for me is irrelevant–I’m not sitting around waiting for the output, and good toolpath generation and linking trumps anyway since that is machine time and wear.
Two things–show/hide geometry is missing from the Accept Geometry dialog, and please please put the MC shortcut in Programs in the start menu, and not directly in the start menu. I don’t know if other people get that, but I’m using XP Pro SP3 and it still doesn’t go in the right place and every flipping time I update the program I need to move it.
Thanks,
Randy
Oops, that’s “Accept Toolpath” dialog…
Randy
Robert,
Sorry, I just checked the version number on my laptop and it is 7151 not 7141. Sorry if I caused you any inconvience.
Bob Stack
Randy,
My “show/hide geometry” in “accept Toolpath” seems to work fine.
A while back I quit the hide and seek game of finding the short cut, Robert seems to like moving it around
I just make a new one, set its properties and put it where I want it.
Speed is nice but for me also a distant second priority after a good path. 30 minutes is good for taking a cat for a walk in the snow, and then washing the blood off
Jeff
Jeff,
I’ve done some more digging. The non-appearance of “show/hide geometry” seems to be specifically in the case where I’ve modeled the rawstock in the STL and am doing 2-sided machining. The same STL in single-sided machining has the option available.
Randy
Randy,
I just checked, single sided was what I tested.
Jeff
I did a little more checking, and the non-appearance of “show/hide geometry” seems to be associated with two-sided machining in general. It is absent when I load a different STL, define stock around it and generate supports with MC.
Happy Puppy
Hello,
the “Don`t mill top of stock” function only works with the roughning pass, not with the finishing pass. That would be very useful.
Florian
Florian, in what situation does “don’t mill top of stock” not work for you for finishing?
It works properly for me both when I model the rawstock in the STL, and when I model only the part itself and let MC do the rawstock, both in single and double-sided machining.
Randy
Florian,
I hope my previous posting did not come across as harsh. I was not questioning your observation. But the more detailed your report is, the better Robert can track down the circumstances that cause it.
Best regards,
Randy (Happy Puppy)