Rout Tool VERY slow in 1.187, better in newer versions?

[brdad]

I'm working on a dollhouse and using the carvewright to do a brick pattern on the walls (both sides). The sections are large, about a foot high and three feet long, which adds up to a litte over 2600 "bricks".

The horizontal lines it does real quick No problem there.
The short vertical lines are the issue. I started with separate lines, which carved quick on a small test piece but the software crashes on the full wall because there are too many items on it (I've had this happen on other projects as well). Anyway, my solution was to use the route tool, carving at .01" depth for .22" length, then 0" depth for .22 length, and repeat.

This is carving very well, but very slow. Designer predicts about 2 hours to carve, but the actual carve time is 4 hours and 45 minutes! Per side! And the reason is the routs. The bit goes down, carves for .22", which takes .25 second if that. Then the bit comes up and sits doing nothing for 4 seconds! 4 seconds X apx. 2600 vertical lines = 2.9 hours of wasted time per side, give or take. I have 5 of the 3 foot panels to do and six slightly smaller. What I expected would take 20 hours of carve time is going to end up taking close to 50 hours.

Assuming there is no better way to do this, I'm curious if the rout tool is any faster in the newer versions of designer? Doubt it but thought I'd ask.

[bergerud]

When I have done things like this before, I would plan it out so the bit stays down. Even if you have to go over some parts twice, make it one continuous path.

As to whether there is any speed difference in 1.187 or 3 I do not know.

[bergerud]

Something like this is what I was thinking.

[brdad]

Yeah, I considered that, but due to the pattern it seemed counter-productive to either go back and fill those missing spots, which would have given me the same issues I have now, or double back on every track, which now that I look at it probably would have been a lot faster than what I am doing.

Anyway, at this point I really don't dare change the process at this point as I have 2 sections done and the first side of the third running now.

[bergerud]

Well I just ran the square foot of bricks. It was supposed to take 19 minutes but it actually took 26 minutes. A little pause at each corner must add up to the difference.

I still like the single vector idea, even if the time savings is not so great. It cut like a carving carves. Slowly proceeding forward in the x as the y goes back and forth. I like to see each section get completed as the board moves slowly through as opposed having the board and truck jumping around.

[brdad]

Well I just ran the square foot of bricks. It was supposed to take 19 minutes but it actually took 26 minutes. A little pause at each corner must add up to the difference.

I still like the single vector idea, even if the time savings is not so great. It cut like a carving carves. Slowly proceeding forward in the x as the y goes back and forth. I like to see each section get completed as the board moves slowly through as opposed having the board and truck jumping around.

I tend to agree, for speed minimizing the pauses makes a big difference, and it appears all or most objects create a pause afterward. Added bonus is a little less wear on the machine. The downside of a single vector is it makes it a little harder to make adjustments (which might be less hassle with the newer software).

I think on my next sections I am going to try a combination. I will try the horizontal lines individually and drop down and back up as I go to create the vertical lines. So one vector effectively does the upper lines of one row of bricks. That is backwards as you suggest, but from my calculation it results in similar X movement overall (288" vs. 281"). It will take a break at each row, but 54 rows is less than 2 minutes added time IF the pause is 2 seconds.

We shall see, it can't be any worse than using the rout tool. I'm on my last large piece, so I'll be trying that tomorrow.

[brdad]

Well, I'm back to doing things the way I started.

Trying the horizontal lines individually was a fail. Instead of routing down to the end, then routing back up, the machine decided to do all the routs from left to right. This resulted in a tracking innacuracy that made every row about 1/16" offset to the right compared to the one before. Not really surprising on a 3 foot long board.

So I decided to hich all those horizontal individual lines together. Despite being a few years old I think my computer is fairly capable, but designer just wanted no part of that. It crashed a few times, and after I finally suceeded, I ended up with many dimensional vertex errors so I gave that up.

So, starting from scratch I decided to try and make individual vertical rows, like bergerud's but broken up into vertical sections. That seemed to work without crashing Designer, so I connected them together as one line and that seemed ok as well. I was going to try a section like this, but on upload it calculated a carve time of 3:44 for the individual vertical rows and 3:42 for all one vector. While either of these methods may work, it's clear it really won't save a lot of time. I predict an actually carve time of 4 hours on thse slightly shorter walls, so even if the other methods were calculated accurately we're only talking 15 minutes. I'm thinking I'm safer sticking with what I know works. Sometimes we just have to accept there is no "best" way to do something.

[cestout]

My opinion: the edge rout tool, rout tool, and the cut to length are all un-necessary for most of us.
Clint

[SteveNelson46]

I'm working on a dollhouse and using the carvewright to do a brick pattern on the walls (both sides). The sections are large, about a foot high and three feet long, which adds up to a litte over 2600 "bricks".

The horizontal lines it does real quick No problem there.
The short vertical lines are the issue. I started with separate lines, which carved quick on a small test piece but the software crashes on the full wall because there are too many items on it (I've had this happen on other projects as well). Anyway, my solution was to use the route tool, carving at .01" depth for .22" length, then 0" depth for .22 length, and repeat.

This is carving very well, but very slow. Designer predicts about 2 hours to carve, but the actual carve time is 4 hours and 45 minutes! Per side! And the reason is the routs. The bit goes down, carves for .22", which takes .25 second if that. Then the bit comes up and sits doing nothing for 4 seconds! 4 seconds X apx. 2600 vertical lines = 2.9 hours of wasted time per side, give or take. I have 5 of the 3 foot panels to do and six slightly smaller. What I expected would take 20 hours of carve time is going to end up taking close to 50 hours.

Assuming there is no better way to do this, I'm curious if the rout tool is any faster in the newer versions of designer? Doubt it but thought I'd ask.

In this example there are no overlapping lines which should result in less cutting time. I didn't do it in the Designer but it probably can be done using the "copy offset" tool. It might take a little longer though.

[bergerud]

It's all about how it is drawn and to eliminate as many overlapping lines as possible.

To me, it is all about using a single vector. Here are some reasons:

1. Jumping - the machine may jump all over the place in some crazy order if there are many separate vectors.

2. Time - the bit will have to rise up and down to start and stop each vector.

3. Tracking - with a single curve one can control the cutting to move back and forth in the y as the cutting moves slowly in the x.