Cut Path Bug

[bergerud]

Has anyone noticed that cut path does not respond immediately to changing the default parameters. If you apply cut path and change the offset from 0.000 to say 0.063 and press accept - no change. You have to remove the cut path and apply it again. It pops up with the new offset and it now works. This is not so bad as you can see that it did not work and you can get it to work. If, however, you change the tab height, you will not know that the change you made has no effect because you cannot see the tabs in Designer. I believe this is a bug. The variables are not updated when the accept button is clicked.

[bergerud]

I am having trouble with the cut path tabs. I am getting full height tabs independent of the tab height I choose. I have tabs thicker than the 1/4 max setting. Does anyone know if this is a bug? I cannot, no matter what I do, get a 1/16 tab height to carve.

[AskBud]

I am having trouble with the cut path tabs. I am getting full height tabs independent of the tab height I choose. I have tabs thicker than the 1/4 max setting. Does anyone know if this is a bug? I cannot, no matter what I do, get a 1/16 tab height to carve.
We really need to see this MPC!
AskBud

[bergerud]

Here is the mpc. I do not know what you can see unless you carve it since the cut path tabs do not show in Designer. See the picture, the tabs are nearly 1/2 inch high which is not even an option.

[AskBud]

Here is the mpc. I do not know what you can see unless you carve it since the cut path tabs do not show in Designer. See the picture, the tabs are nearly 1/2 inch high which is not even an option.
OK, here are my findings and suppositions.
I deleted everything but the cut-path and it worked well. You will know as you watch the first two cut-paths that the tabs should be fine as the bit does not rise.
I used 1/2" wood and no sled.
I'm going to guess as to your problem, based on my test.
First would be that the memory card does not have the same cut-path setting as your MPC (if you made changes after your save to the card).
Second, is that you used a sled and as you set up the machine you got an option to carve the "Board" or "Project". It may be that you selected "Board" rather than "Project".

I suggest that you reload your card and run a test in wood, mounting the wood the same way you did the plastic.
AskBud

[bergerud]

Thanks Bud. I have been around this loop a few times. I will try the cut path alone as you did later tonight and report.

[liquidguitars]

You could layout the tabs buy making spaces in the path, however since the " auto tabs" where not designed to work with Designers "manual cut path depth settings" it makes it confusing.

Lets say that your stock is .75" thick and you need tabs, you would set the project board to .75 and the CW will try to cut correctly. lets say the tabs do not work so you use the manual cut setting but now the software will not cut through the board as you can't go deeper that 75" your stuck and will need to set the board size to .80 but then designer will stop you and not let you change the project board until you delete stuff and you lost your settings.

You could copy and paste the offending objects to fix the depth issues but copy and paste sometimes will not keep it's original placement so you have to manually replace the cut paths and rasters.

I think auto cut tabs are wondefull but I can't use them as much as i would like at times.

[bergerud]

I carved just the cut path and as for Bud, it worked fine. I got 1/16 tabs. If I carve the complete double sided dust cap top, however, I get the full 1/2 tabs. I do not get it. Why should the cut path tabs depend on other elements in the carve? This seems buggy to me.

[fwharris]

Could it be the software knowing it was a 2 side curve makes the adjustment for bigger tabs?

[bergerud]

You may be right. I just deleted the back side and it made the correct tabs. The problem is therefore related to double side carving. Does the program make full depth tabs whenever there is a carving on the other side independent of the user's tab choice? What if I choose no tabs? Should I try that?

(You know, I love to experiment with things but I find it annoying to have to always experiment just to find out how the software works.)

Is this a bug? Could someone at LHR please explain.

[AskBud]

I sent a PM to LHR. I think they will look at it next week.
AskBud

[bergerud]

Thanks Bud. I hope we get an answer.

[mtylerfl]

I am having trouble with the cut path tabs. I am getting full height tabs independent of the tab height I choose. I have tabs thicker than the 1/4 max setting. Does anyone know if this is a bug? I cannot, no matter what I do, get a 1/16 tab height to carve.

I took a VERY quick look at your MPC...

I think what may be causing the tabs to be thicker is the recessed carving on the rear of the board. There is a portion of the carve on the rear (next to the cut path area) that is .125" deep. This may be what the software is "keying in" on. When the cut out is performed after flipping the board to the front, the software knows that .125" is missing from the backside, so in order to force tabs to occur, the software raises their height automatically to compensate for the "missing" material on the rear of the board. I don't think it has any way of knowing that the .125" is not "everywhere" - it just assumes it is and raises the tab height overall.

[mtylerfl]

Just came back in to jot down an idea that came to me when I was in the workshop...

...you might want to create a manual cut path (i.e., assign the cutting bit to the outline and specify a depth manually, with your Max Pass, etc.). Set the final depth to be "short" of the 1/2" material thickness by a small amount to create an "onion skin" of material to be left behind. It would require you to separate the part from the board by cutting through the onion skin manually with an XActo knife or whatever, but that might be easier than cutting through the thick tabs.

...ok, goin' back out to the shop!

[bergerud]

I am sure you are right about the carving on the back being the cause of the problem. I do not know if I believe it is a programmed feature. A warning message would be appropriate not a full depth set of tabs. I use the "onion skin" method all the time but in this case, with the variable thickness of cast acrylic, I thought it a poor choice. What I have done is to separate the carving from the cutting into two files. I first do the double sided carve and then, without removing the board, do the single sided cutting. This works well but I am still hoping this is a bug that will get fixed. I am trying to make the carving of this dust cap as simple as possible.

Check out this "feature" I noticed. The cut path of the bit plate below can be flipped vertically but not flipped horizontally. Why would that be? (I wonder also why the rotations are grayed out. This is a path made of basic Designer lines and curves.)

[liquidguitars]

flipped vertically but not flipped horizontally


Could be the radius

Auto tabs is the way to go for this, but if you get in a bind you could try manual paths and have a little more control as long as the ordering works.

Back in the day I had a manual path with manual tabs above the first path for humbucker pickup routs " i now use the .38" bit today and pocket the waste away.

I worked on your outline a little see below:

[mtylerfl]

I am sure you are right about the carving on the back being the cause of the problem. I do not know if I believe it is a programmed feature...

Yep, it is an intended feature. An example is cutting out a picture frame with a dado on the back for the glass and photo insert and a cut path on the front to cut out the viewing area of the frame. The dado overlaps the frontside cut path, so the software is "aware" of the missing material and compensates the tab height accordingly. (I'm pretty sure I wrote up a Tips & Tricks tutorial explaining that feature a few years ago.)

[bergerud]

Ok, I'll have to find a way around it. I think a feature like that is poor programming if it cannot be disabled. A check box: ignore back face carves - yes/no.

LG, I tried manual gaps like you suggest and it did the short sections first. I would have had to air cut or cut into the tabs full height. The carving list order did nothing to change the carving order, so, I gave that up.

[liquidguitars]

It's hit or miss...
I know at times the compiler will get it right and cut the path you like. One time i grouped the objects into separate entity's and the cut order was ok... but the compiler seem's to choose in the end.

[bergerud]

I worry that it is random and what works for one may not work for another. You know, it might depend on random memory addresses. Thanks for trying. I may have to go with the thin uncut layer.

[mtylerfl]

Ok, I'll have to find a way around it. I think a feature like that is poor programming if it cannot be disabled. A check box: ignore back face carves - yes/no.

I respect your opinion, but no - I cannot agree that it is "poor programming". I would call it "intentional programming". It assures no one has an accident (parts flying around their machine) if there has been a carve on the back. My goodness, some folks have enough trouble. Too many user intervention options and it starts to wander outside of the intended demographic of users. The CarveWright software is the envy of many other software companies who "wish" theirs was as easy to use for such a wide audience.

Some of us do like more control over every aspect of their CNC tooling. That comes with a price. The ShopBot (PRSAlpha BT48 with upgrades) and associated software I use (Aspire and V-Carve Pro) retails for over $20,000. Yes, indeed - we can have control - but probably not as much as we (or at least a few of us) may like in the under-$2000-price range of our CarveWrights (I LOVE both my CarveWrights!...and I LOVE the Bot, too!) I hope that helps a little with putting things in perspective.

That said, the programmers are always open to suggestions for future features, etc. Who knows? Maybe someday we will "have it all" at such a bargain price! Personally, I can't complain. There is very little I can't figure out how to accomplish on my CarveWrights as compared to the Bot (or any other CNC machine for that matter)!

[liquidguitars]

Too many user intervention options and it starts to wander outside of the intended demographic of users.


I am overall happy with the Carvewright and do not see the need for a higher end CNC at this time, but are you saying we should dummy Designer down to enable a demographic of newbie users ? That never won a race especially in software sales, I guess if the pro version of Designer comes out we can have a few options that work together as opposed to each other. Fingers crossed.

[bergerud]

I hear what you are saying Michael. I would like more control but I also understand the need for user friendliness. I still, however, think it is poor programming to alter the users input without reporting that it has been done. A message that tabs have been changed due to back carve depth would have saved me many hours. That message, in my opinion, would make the software more user friendly.

I love my machine too. I delight in pushing it to do new things. Check out my latest try on tabs. I have not carved it yet but it looks good in Designer.

[liquidguitars]

bergerud if you have any cool ideas you like me to pass along to software the guys that would make your job better please let me know. It's a project like yours that tends to bust the programing logic.

[bergerud]

Thanks LG this is wish list stuff. It would be nice for what I am doing if one could add tabs to bit paths. It is interesting though to try and use the machine as a mill instead of a carver. It would be very useful if closed paths could be milled out like the drill operation mills out circles. Geometric shapes become more important. It would be nice when you scale geometric objects like half cylinders that they scale in all three dimensions the same. I understand the weird z scaling is good for carvings but it distorts geometric objects and without knowledge of the original size, one cannot figure out the right height percentage to recover the shape. It also would be nice if objects could be raised and lowered without this same distortion. A 3d scale lock toggle would be useful.

[kool69sporty]

LG, you're right on, Designer PRO, available only to registered owners after 3 months, give us the ability to carve wax and foam beyond 0.808" deep, independent feeds & speeds, adjust tabs, etc, etc. I was thinking 3-axis milling with my carveWright from day 1. The capability is there, just give us the ability to use it (at our risk if LHR has warrany concerns). My 2 cents. Joe

[mtylerfl]

I am overall happy with the Carvewright and do not see the need for a higher end CNC at this time, but are you saying we should dummy Designer down to enable a demographic of newbie users ?

Hi LG,

I'm very happy too. No, I never said to "dummy down" Designer. It's already an extremely good program, and I think is the most user-friendly software on the market for CNC. The software engineers do a great job balancing user-friendliness along with powerful features!



That never won a race especially in software sales, I guess if the pro version of Designer comes out we can have a few options that work together as opposed to each other. Fingers crossed.

I too, look forward to an advanced version of Designer at some point in the future with additional features that we can all enjoy.

[mtylerfl]

... It would be nice when you scale geometric objects like half cylinders that they scale in all three dimensions the same. I understand the weird z scaling is good for carvings but it distorts geometric objects and without knowledge of the original size, one cannot figure out the right height percentage to recover the shape. It also would be nice if objects could be raised and lowered without this same distortion. A 3d scale lock toggle would be useful.

Howdy,

Do you own the CarveWright STL Importer? If so, you can import your STL models and use its 3d "scale lock toggle". It will keep everything in exact proportion, then you can save it out as a PTN for use in your Designer layouts. Very handy feature!

[mtylerfl]

I hear what you are saying Michael. I would like more control but I also understand the need for user friendliness. I still, however, think it is poor programming to alter the users input without reporting that it has been done. A message that tabs have been changed due to back carve depth would have saved me many hours. That message, in my opinion, would make the software more user friendly.

I love my machine too. I delight in pushing it to do new things. Check out my latest try on tabs. I have not carved it yet but it looks good in Designer.

Yes, it's sometimes hard to "know" everything Designer does automatically. I took a peek at your MPC. Looks like a great solution for the tabs! Let us know how you make out.

[bergerud]

I do have the STL importer and find it very useful. My problem is that to tweak a complicated 3d object's size then requires going outside Designer in a "trial and error" loop. Usually the loop is even bigger involving the software which originally exported the STL. A complicated procedure for what is a trivial operation in any other 3d graphics program.

I wonder if there would be a market for another Designer add on to help with the milling of 3d objects? It could include a library of 3d objects which could be scaled and manipulated in various ways. I would buy it.

[liquidguitars]

It could be a good idea to have the auto tabs show in the MPC and from a check the file before you carve , it would be nice to see the wireframe view of the mesh components at times.

[gregsolano]

I am overall happy with the Carvewright and do not see the need for a higher end CNC at this time, but are you saying we should dummy Designer down to enable a demographic of newbie users ? That never won a race especially in software sales, I guess if the pro version of Designer comes out we can have a few options that work together as opposed to each other. Fingers crossed.

I hope a pro version of designer is not in the works, I am afraid new developments would go into the pro version in the future forcing you to pay the extra for it and the version that comes with the machine would become stagnant and lack anything but essential updates needed to work with new versions of windows and mac software. Let major enhancements be sold as add ons and continue to make designer better in future updates. Some of us cannot afford major enhancements and updates as easily as others and I for one took a year to be able to buy the machine and that is all I can afford right now. I limit my carving to what I can do with designer and paint.net. I hope to buy more later but I can't afford it right now.

[liquidguitars]

Right now with a good 3D program like Lightwave or Modo you can do almost anything you need with Designer but LHR can't or should not make the software to fit everybody's needs this thread is a good example. I guess some people will argue that Designer should go the direction store purchased or simple projects only by removing core tool sets in Designer and some need more tools and options to compete with the desktop CNC and software. like most of the users here I right now do not feel the need to slap down 20k on software and hardware but would use that money to upgrade machines and plug ins.

[mtylerfl]

I hope a pro version of designer is not in the works...


Hi Greg,

I'm the opposite - I sure DO hope a Pro version is in the works! Will fill the need for some of the more advanced user requests that have been voiced over the years. I am sure if a "pro" version ever does become available, they would have to charge for it accordingly.

Think of it this way - Adobe PhotoShop Elements comes included with many scanners, printers, etc. (very similar to Designer - great program and it's included with every machine) - and it is a very powerful program on its own. However, PhotoShop Elements does not have the same suite of features as full-blown PhotoShop that a more advanced user might need. So, Adobe offers the full-featured PhotoShop for those who want it (at additional cost, of course). Likewise, if a more advanced version of Designer ever comes out, we would have the choice to take advantage of the offer, if we felt we needed it.

[gregsolano]

I see your point Michael but Elements is a bare bones basic software that never gets upgraded while Photoshop continues to have R&D and enhancements. I am really afraid that designer will become stripped down and no more than designer light and some of us may not be able to afford to pay for more. Remember even though this is much more than a hobby or garage woodworker machine, that is what it is geared and marketed for. The Price point and the fact that it was relatively affordable is why I own one and what was really a selling point for me was that I could buy it and use it out of the box without having to buy any extras. Other than rubber belts, patterns, and the new 3/16 bit I have not spent a ton of money on upgrades and I would not be able to afford to do so right now. It is my hope that as I make some money with my hobby that I will be able to buy centerline and the scanner/probe but I really can't afford that right now. I did go to the conference but I spent bare bones money doing it by driving there and staying in a cheap hotel etc. I just hope the machine and software stays at a price point for hobbyists while allowing for add ons that allow it to do more. But once again I really fear a designer pro will leave the hobbyists in the cave and be the start of leaving them behind.

[Dan-Woodman]

They have already started chopping up designer by taking away centerline and charging extra for it.
later Daniel

[jaroot]

You've been around a lot longer than me. I've never had Centerline until I paid for it. It however is one component that really should be part of designer as it allows the beginner the ability to product a descent look sign with minimal effort thus providing instant gratification from the very expensive hobby toy.

Just my opinion and well worth every penny you paid for it. <-insert smiley

BTW Are we ever going to get smileys back?


They have already started chopping up designer by taking away centerline and charging extra for it.
later Daniel

[mtylerfl]

Hi Greg (and all),

I wouldn't lose any sleep over this - it's a discussion about a situation that doesn't exist, after all. Not all that relevant at the moment, plus I don't believe we need to fear that Designer will be "forgotten" or allowed to "stagnate" even if a more advanced version ever does come along at some point in the future. We'll be fine, I'm sure.

[gregsolano]

No I am not losing sleep but when talk of a designer pro started I wanted to make sure and get my fear and opinion out there before its too late. You know the old saying about not speaking up when you had the chance. I was maybe a little too passionate with my post but I wanted to convey my passion and fear. I am ok, I promise. :D:D:D

[mtylerfl]

No I am not losing sleep but when talk of a designer pro started I wanted to make sure and get my fear and opinion out there before its too late. You know the old saying about not speaking up when you had the chance. I was maybe a little too passionate with my post but I wanted to convey my passion and fear. I am ok, I promise.

That's good! Let's get back to carving! (Actually, I'm just finishing up the layout on the next POM, as well as working on the 2011 Tips & Tricks series! Probably won't have a chance to crank a machine up until tomorrow afternoon.)

[liquidguitars]

Greg, if i know LHR it will be fair for all, your opinion is a good one. Regarding a pro version it's what the beta guys like Dan had 4 years ago so you could just get your wish.

[Dan-Woodman]

As far as I know we still have most everything we started with.
Do you guys have" select puffing"?
later Daniel