Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
after chatting on IRC a few of us would like to add a 'tool table' to the mix.
From IRC:
' Diameters, min and max speeds, surface speed for materials, ect. '
'automatic RPM calculations would be good too'
'Give a surface speed for a type of tool like HSS, and then use the diameter of
each
tool to automaticly set the RPM'
Thanks,
Dan Falck
Original comment by ddfalck2...@yahoo.com
on 3 Jun 2009 at 4:25
I have added a Cutting Tool object to the operations group. It defines a single
cutting tool but does not,yet, contain speeds or materials. I do like that idea
though. I added it because I wanted to have a single point of reference when
adding
a drilling cycle. I don't know enough about the feeds and speeds stuff yet to
do
anything with these attributes but feel free to change the object. I could
easily
add the parameters to the Cutting Tool object but I assume we would need to
interpret
them so as to set feed rates in the generated GCode. I don't know how to do
this
second step.
I also have not changed the existing objects (ZigZag etc.) to refer to the
cutting
tool object rather than having its own parameter. I just haven't needed it yet
and I
don't feel I understand that code well enough to be playing in it yet.
Thanks
David Nicholls
Original comment by David.Ni...@gmail.com
on 13 Jun 2009 at 10:46
Thanks David, this looks like some good work.
I think this CCuttingTool should not be derived from COp.
I think we should make a new object "Tools" as a sibling of "Operations", and
cutting
tools should be children of "Tools".
I have added an issue for this
http://code.google.com/p/heekscnc/issues/detail?id=103
Original comment by danhe...@gmail.com
on 14 Jun 2009 at 9:46
It is my intention to modify the DepthOp class so that the tool number could be
set
by a 'combo' box where the drop-down options would come from a scan of the
model for
CuttingTool objects. Maybe presenting both the diameter and the title of each
CuttingTool object. This would mean moving the tool diameter parameter from the
DepthOp class to the cutting tool.
I haven't done this yet as it seems a little presumptuous of me to force models
to
have to define CuttingTool objects where they don't at the moment. It would,
however, be nice to centralise information throughout the model so that we get
consistency.
Just throwing this 'out there' (assuming we're not alone) for comment.
Original comment by David.Ni...@gmail.com
on 19 Jun 2009 at 11:08
I have done a 'half way' solution for this. I have added the
'cutting_tool_number'
value to the COp class so that all operations may, optionally, refer to a
cutting
tool when they're created. The parameters that come from the cutting tool
class are
used to provide initial values for the DepthOp (and other) classes. I haven't
removed the existing parameters as I would like some idea of whether people
would
rather use the CuttingTool objects or just fill in these values for each
operation.
I like the idea of putting information in a single, logical, place and then
referring
to it but I concede that it requires people to change their workflow when using
these
operation classes.
Original comment by David.Ni...@gmail.com
on 1 Jul 2009 at 7:35
I think this is done now.
I have made it so that operations remember which tool was used for the last
operation
of the same type.
Original comment by danhe...@gmail.com
on 26 Aug 2009 at 10:58
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
shopinth...@gmail.com
on 3 Jun 2009 at 3:22