Can bit check be sped up or eliminated?

[DickB]

This is from another thread:

Bit check on this project was a funny routine to. Since I am using the 3/16" for both a vector carve and drill function it asked to install it twice. The same for the 1/8" bit, doing the arc cuts plus the cut out. Very redundant to say the least.
I have a project where I use the 1/18" cutting bit for drilling, vector cuts, and cutouts. The 1/16" carving bit is also used. I have to load the 1/18" cutting bit multiple times before any machining starts. Can this be sped up or eliminated altogether?

[SteveEJ]

I have often wondered the same thing.

[liquidguitars]

I have a project where I use the 1/18" cutting bit for drilling, vector cuts, and cutouts. The 1/16" carving bit is also used. I have to load the 1/18" cutting bit multiple times before any machining starts. Can this be sped up or eliminated altogether?

If I understand your question right yes as long as you don't upgrade the software to 2.0 you can just keep one bit in the machine to index all bits. Once the carve starts and the bit is finished just install the next bit.

[DickB]

If I understand your question right yes as long as you don't upgrade the software you can just keep one bit in the machine to index all bits. once the carve starts and the bit is finished just install the next bit.
Not sure that will work with the 2.004 firmware unless you use a short bit. And what I am also asking is can it be eliminated, at least as an option?

[liquidguitars]

Not sure that will work with the 2.004 firmware unless you use a short bit. And what I am also asking is can it be eliminated, at least as an option?

Yes don't upgrade to 2.004 and you can work like normal. I just use one bit to index " I been doing this for years it a huge time saver!!

[DickB]

Do you just ignore the warning messages when bit lengths don't match?

[DocWheeler]

correct, just continue.

[chebytrk]

Brandon, just to understand you correctly. You're saying that no matter what type bit is being asked for (V90, V60, Roman Ogee, cutting bit)..... just use only 1 bit (I would guess the carving bit since that's usually the first bit to start a project off)? Does any kind of warning ever come up when just using 1 bit? Also, I'm still on 1.187 so would that make any difference? I guess I'm asking because we know that some bits are actually shorter in size than others... so does size matter... in this case? LOL


If I understand your question right yes as long as you don't upgrade the software to 2.0 you can just keep one bit in the machine to index all bits. Once the carve starts and the bit is finished just install the next bit.

[liquidguitars]

Yes as long as you don't use the upgrade your fine..


I'm asking because we know that some bits are actually shorter in size than others... so does size matter... in this case? LOL

[fwharris]

By choosing "continue" it will used the new measurement of the bit you just installed..

I was not aware that with 2.xxx this is not a possibility any more.

[liquidguitars]

By choosing "continue" it will used the new measurement of the bit you just installed..

I was not aware that with 2.xxx this is not a possibility any more.

I was told this was the case, I can't test it as the upgrade 2.004 disabled the Rock chuck.

[bergerud]

I just had that happen to me the other day with 2.004. I just hit continue and away it went just like 1.187.

The only difference I know of is that you cannot use one bit for all the tests because a long bit will get rammed into the bit plate if the firmware expects a short one. (2.005 may very well be back to normal.)

[liquidguitars]

The only difference I know of is that you cannot use one bit for all the tests because a long bit will get rammed into the bit plate if the firmware expects a short one. (2.005 may very well be back to normal.)

What? so if I use a 1/16" carving bit and the short V90 in one project only using the 1/16 carving bit to index it will work like 1.187?

[bergerud]

No because the carving bit is longer than the V90 bit. When the firmware thinks it is measuring the V90, it will ram the carving bit into the bit plate. It might work the other way around. Index all with the shortest bit. I doubt whether it would ram the bits later on the second touch. Some else can try that!

[liquidguitars]

No because the carving bit is longer than the V90 bit. When the firmware thinks it is measuring the V90, it will ram the carving bit into the bit plate. It might work the other way around. Index all with the shortest bit. I doubt whether it would ram the bits later on the second touch. Some else can try that!

Guys just stick with 1.187 to be safe so you don't damage your carbide.

[bergerud]

I agree. I only use 2.004 if I am using the deep bits. I am carving right now with 1.187.

[Dan-Woodman]

Are you saying that all the people that bought a rock chuck can't use it with the new 2.004 software?

[bergerud]

No. The Rock problem is only if using carvetight bits with the adapters. That makes them a little too long. If you do not use carvetight adapters (or heat them and move them) and have your bits the right length, you will be ok. This is supposed to be fixed in 2.005 which must be coming out soon.

[DickB]

Bits, the Rock, and Designer 2 came up again in another thread, prompting me to raise my original question again: Is there a reason why initial bit loading and checking can't be eliminated or optionally bypassed? Doing so would save significant time on projects.

[liquidguitars]

Yes, Dick you can use one bit to index all the bits. just hit " 2 " after the next bit is loaded.

[bergerud]

I am sure there have been discussions on doing this at LHR . Maybe it will happen. It would sure be nice for the many "dexterity challenged" users.

Maybe the display could just list all of the bits needed for the project instead of asking to measure them all up front.

[bergerud]

Yes, Dick you can use one bit to index all the bits. just hit " 2 " after the next bit is loaded.

Can this be done with all bits? I do it all the time with carving and cutting bits. Can you get away with interchanging V bits and carving bits? Surely you cannot get away with interchanging V bits and deep bits. I do not know, I have not tested all the combinations.

[DickB]

Yes, Dick you can use one bit to index all the bits. just hit " 2 " after the next bit is loaded.I understand that work-around, but if it is not necessary to load the actual bits why not eliminate this step altogether?

[aokweld101]

Yes, Dick you can use one bit to index all the bits. just hit " 2 " after the next bit is loaded.

So, if I'm using the 1/16 carving bit and the 1/8 cutting bit and after it homes in on the carving bit I can press #2 on the key board and not put in the 1/8 cutting bit ?

[DocWheeler]

So, if I'm using the 1/16 carving bit and the 1/8 cutting bit and after it homes in on the carving bit I can press #2 on the key board and not put in the 1/8 cutting bit ?
Yes, unless you are using 2.005 because it might give you a Z-axis error by jamming the bit into the bit-plate while testing the length when testing the actual bit.
Although that shouldn't happen if the "unmeasured" bit is shorter than expected.

[liquidguitars]

Can this be done with all bits? Yes all bits including the v90 and v60.

[liquidguitars]

unless you are using 2.005 because it might give you a Z-axis error by jamming the bit into the bit-plate while testing the length when testing the actual bit.

This error has been addressed. No longer a issue...

[DocWheeler]

This error has been addressed. No longer a issue...
Sorry, I forgot that we swapped that problem for the inability to use Black Chancery text.
I hope that this later problem will be addressed also.

[liquidguitars]

All of the issues have been resolved by LHR last month including the Rock. I have Beta tested them in production.

[liquidguitars]

Black Chancery text.

can you recap this for me what is the error?

[RMarkey]

it has to do with the way fonts are made. Some fonts have keywords that designate attributes as the actual filename, some have them embedded inside the file, some in attribute tags. A font could be the normal font with an attribute "set" in it, or it could be a completely different font altogether.

This is one font that got caught in the filename/internal name/internal tag hell.

For example see section 6: <http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=IWS-Chapter08> -- there are 20+ name fields internal to a truetype font, and figuring out which one takes precedence is a challenge. Oh yea... its different on a Mac, too.

[bergerud]

So, if I'm using the 1/16 carving bit and the 1/8 cutting bit and after it homes in on the carving bit I can press #2 on the key board and not put in the 1/8 cutting bit ?

No. What you do is put in the carving bit (since it will be the first bit actually used by the project) even though it asks for the cutting bit. You leave the carving bit in for all the bit checks. It then does the carving with the carving bit. After it is finished carving, it asks for the cutting bit. Put in the cutting bit. After the bit check the program will choke because the length will not agree with the carving bit length which was measured. It is at this point you press 2) continue. The program will use this last measurement of the cutting bit and finish the project.

[SteveNelson46]

So, if I'm using the 1/16 carving bit and the 1/8 cutting bit and after it homes in on the carving bit I can press #2 on the key board and not put in the 1/8 cutting bit ?

Why not just do as the machine asks and put each bit in as prompted? Yeah, it takes a couple of minutes longer but, everything works as it is supposed to and if it doesn't, it's one thing less to debug. Impatience will put yellow stains in your shorts (lol).

[fwharris]

Why not just do as the machine asks and put each bit in as prompted? Yeah, it takes a couple of minutes longer but, everything works as it is supposed to and if it doesn't, it's one thing less to debug. Impatience will put yellow stains in your shorts (lol).

A few seconds/minutes +/- out of a 1 hour carve really does not make much a difference.

[Bigtyme]

+1 to Steve and Floyd's comments. Following the routine as the CW points it out only serves to keep things on the straight and narrow....

[SteveNelson46]

A few seconds/minutes +/- out of a 1 hour carve really does not make much a difference.

Especially if you get part of the way through a carve and get a z-axis error after a bit change.

[aokweld101]

O K .... Ya'll are right I was talking to my wife ( if she was listening ? )... I kinda like to do what I know works ! :D I already have enough problems getting the machine to work, don't need anymore quirks then needed. LOL

[DickB]

Back to my original topic again, the current procedure is really a significant time waster and not trivial. Granted, if doing a carve only, it is not significant. But I routinely run projects with a carving bit, cutting bit (sometimes two different ones), and a V bit. The cutting bit may be used for drilling, vector cuts, and cutouts. Sometimes the same bit is required to be loaded again, after it has been removed and another bit loaded, because it is for a different operation (e.g. drilling versus cutout). This can require 4 or more bit changes and the associated bit finding cycles before anything gets going. If you haven't run projects like this, you probably don't appreciate the amount of time that it takes. Maybe I should post a project so you can see for yourself. I don't babysit my machine the whole time it runs, so whether it is a 10 minute carve or a 4 hour operation, it makes no difference to me - my time is spent loading boards and installing bits, and this seemingly unnecessary bit loading is time I could be spent doing something more productive.

[bergerud]

For me the situation is even be worse. I use bits with different shank sizes and collets in ER chucks. Changing bits usually means changing collets. If I really want to keep the machine happy, I would also have to get into stop collars.

Why? This is all so stupid. I agree with Dick, measure the bit when you use it. Hopefully the firmware routine will be changed in the near future.

[aokweld101]

I understand what your saying DickB, I'm not far enough into the game to use a lot of bits, only use at the most 3 bits... but the little tidbits I learn on the way helps.

[FWMiller]

I have some very small projects that fit on a sled that carve in less time than it takes to go through the redundant bit checks. I can't merge multiple copies into a single carve because I am using my scrap wood to make them. I don't often do carves that run for 4+ hours so I'd love to see the unnecessary bit checks eliminated.

[SteveNelson46]

Back to my original topic again, the current procedure is really a significant time waster and not trivial. Granted, if doing a carve only, it is not significant. But I routinely run projects with a carving bit, cutting bit (sometimes two different ones), and a V bit. The cutting bit may be used for drilling, vector cuts, and cutouts. Sometimes the same bit is required to be loaded again, after it has been removed and another bit loaded, because it is for a different operation (e.g. drilling versus cutout). This can require 4 or more bit changes and the associated bit finding cycles before anything gets going. If you haven't run projects like this, you probably don't appreciate the amount of time that it takes. Maybe I should post a project so you can see for yourself. I don't babysit my machine the whole time it runs, so whether it is a 10 minute carve or a 4 hour operation, it makes no difference to me - my time is spent loading boards and installing bits, and this seemingly unnecessary bit loading is time I could be spent doing something more productive.

If the Carvewright people had thought that there was a faster and safer way when they programmed the firmware I'm sure they would have done it. It's just part of the cost of doing business. But then again, maybe they are sadistic at heart and just like to throw in unnecessary procedures so carving a project will take an inordinate amount of time (lol). I would rather see them working on fixing existing bugs and new features.

[bergerud]

In the beginning, I think the CW people wanted to make the machine as bullet proof as possible for novice users who would buy projects and make them. The pre-bit find procedure would make sure that the user had all the bits required before starting the project. It would not be a nice thing to find that one did not have a required bit in the middle of a project. That, to me, makes some sense if projects require many special bits. As it has turned out, most project creators make projects that require, at most, the two standard bits. It follows, I think, that the people who use the other bits are people who have made their own projects. These people know which bits they have and which bits their project uses and probably are not served by the pre-bit find procedure.

Another thing to consider is the change from the QC to the CT. The QC with its adapters made it quite easy to pop bits in and out. That was its claim to fame. With the CT, having to deal consistently with the fancy bits and adapter sleeves, requires collars and has really become problematic.

I think a compromise is needed. Have the display run through all the bits required in the project before the project starts. It could even require confirmation for each. (How about the option to skip a bit?)

[DocWheeler]

Steve,

I don't think there was any evil intent here.
My thoughts are that the program designer simply went about doing the things necessary to get to the final result.
One thing necessary in the program would to populate an array or work-file with information for each bit, and it
would be only natural to think of doing this first so that all programming that followed would have that information.
Later, in the program, it was probably deemed necessary to test the inserted bit to assure the number that was stored.
So, I can see how this developed, the problem now would be the introduction of new "bugs" by having zeros in the initial array.
Or, something like that.

[liquidguitars]

Sometimes the best way to do something is at ones own speed with a choice of options, with my new DC its not simple to install bits all day and can be painful.

[SteveNelson46]

It is kind of a PITA but, they probably won't change it anytime soon.

[liquidguitars]

they probably won't change it anytime soon.

No need to change anything the software gives you a choice, novice and continue.

[kroskam]

No. What you do is put in the carving bit (since it will be the first bit actually used by the project) even though it asks for the cutting bit. You leave the carving bit in for all the bit checks. It then does the carving with the carving bit. After it is finished carving, it asks for the cutting bit. Put in the cutting bit. After the bit check the program will choke because the length will not agree with the carving bit length which was measured. It is at this point you press 2) continue. The program will use this last measurement of the cutting bit and finish the project.


What do you mean by the last measurement of the Cutting Bit? Do you mean it would use a measurement stored previously for the Cutting Bit on a past project?

[bergerud]

What do you mean by the last measurement of the Cutting Bit? Do you mean it would use a measurement stored previously for the Cutting Bit on a past project?

What I mean by "the last measurement" is the measurement just before the bit is actually used.

On the last measurement of the cutting bit, the machine will notice a difference and prompt you to refind or continue. When you press continue, the last (and the only important) measurement is the one used. The machine discards the original measurement of the cutting (actually the carving) bit which it made during the pre bit checks.

[kroskam]

What I mean by "the last measurement" is the measurement just before the bit is actually used.

On the last measurement of the cutting bit, the machine will notice a difference and prompt you to refind or continue. When you press continue, the last (and the only important) measurement is the one used. The machine discards the original measurement of the cutting (actually the carving) bit which it made during the pre bit checks.


I am carving several projects that use numerous bits. Each one requires numerous bit changes during the initial setup that is time consuming. What I am hearing in your post is that I can use the Carving Bit
each time a different bit is asked for by the machine during the initial setup even say the shorter 90 degree bit, and I only need to choose 2. Continue when the machine sees a difference in length discrepancy between the two bits, and everything will carve, and drill successfully?

[bergerud]

I am carving several projects that use numerous bits. Each one requires numerous bit changes during the initial setup that is time consuming. What I am hearing in your post is that I can use the Carving Bit
each time a different bit is asked for by the machine during the initial setup even say the shorter 90 degree bit, and I only need to choose 2. Continue when the machine sees a difference in length discrepancy between the two bits, and everything will carve, and drill successfully?

Yes. I and many others do this all the time. The deep bits are different and I do not know (untested) if you can mix them in with the rest of the bits.

[kroskam]

Thank you for the info. This will really save me a lot of time. I will try it on the next carve.