FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better tool changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much will it add to the price?

See my comments and FADAC's response he

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA

Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.

I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic parts.

There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.

jon_banquer fired this volley in
:

Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.

I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to
discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence
whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique
of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no
evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple
prismatic parts.

There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts
and converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.



Show us an example of what you call "3D surfacing".

Even the low-priced UK CamBam (primarily targeted to hobbiests) can do 3D
surfaces, roughing to approximate shape with flat end mills, and then, if
you have the time, pretty good surfacing at small stepovers and small
depth increments, using ball and bull-nosed cutters.

So, I'm not sure what you mean when you say most CAMs can't do it, unless
I don't understand what sort of 'surfacing' you're referring to.

Lloyd

On Monday, December 16, 2013 7:17:22 AM UTC-8, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
jon_banquer fired this volley in

:



Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.



I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to

discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence

whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique

of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no

evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple

prismatic parts.



There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts

and converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.







Show us an example of what you call "3D surfacing".



Even the low-priced UK CamBam (primarily targeted to hobbiests) can do 3D

surfaces, roughing to approximate shape with flat end mills, and then, if

you have the time, pretty good surfacing at small stepovers and small

depth increments, using ball and bull-nosed cutters.



So, I'm not sure what you mean when you say most CAMs can't do it, unless

I don't understand what sort of 'surfacing' you're referring to.



Lloyd

I already posted examples and the thread was basically ignored. I see no reason to do it again. It's pretty clear to me that serious home shop CNC machining isn't an interest in this group at this point.

jon_banquer fired this volley in
:


I already posted examples and the thread was basically ignored. I see
no reason to do it again. It's pretty clear to me that serious home
shop CNC machining isn't an interest in this group at this point.

I follow the threads. At least on my news server, none of your examples
showed up.

I'm NOT challenging you, I'm trying to understand what you state cannot
be done with fairly ordinary CAM that can be done with what you
recommend.

As much as you post here, it seems it would be very little additional
trouble to re-post for those who missed your point.

You can stamp your liddle foot and pout, or you can follow up. Your
choice.


Lloyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...
jon_banquer fired this volley in
:

Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.

I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to
discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence
whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique
of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no
evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple
prismatic parts.

There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts
and converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.



Show us an example of what you call "3D surfacing".

Even the low-priced UK CamBam (primarily targeted to hobbiests) can do 3D
surfaces, roughing to approximate shape with flat end mills, and then, if
you have the time, pretty good surfacing at small stepovers and small
depth increments, using ball and bull-nosed cutters.

So, I'm not sure what you mean when you say most CAMs can't do it, unless
I don't understand what sort of 'surfacing' you're referring to.

Lloyd

I do a fair amount of 3D with CamBam, but to be fair anything I can do with
2D (2.5D) I do. For me its about the price. I tried a lot of different
free and low price CAM software, and CamBam was the only one I could afford
that does do 3D ok.

It's a one man show so forget arguments based on the documentation. The
documentation is way behind what it can currently do. I would rather Andy
work on bug fixes and new features than spend all his time writing doc
files. That being said, my opinion was reversed when I started learning how
to use it a few versions ago. I was frustrated by the lack of detailed
documentation in some respects.

Somebody was talking about surface accuracy of a tenth. As near as I can
tell the limitation here is the processing power. CamBam does 3D machining
of a surface in two different manners, and that's pretty much it.

1: Waterline - It does waterline at a depth increment either as a finish
(0-X roughing clearance) where it cuts the contour lines of the part only,
or it does waterline roughing with (0-X roughing clearance) where it removes
all material in the defined area to finishing that depth increment at the
contour line. For some reason the waterline method seems to leave material
I would not expect sometimes.

2: Vertical or Horizontal (scan line method) This traces the surface
either with horizontal or vertical passes, and it can be by depth increment
or no depth increment. No depth increment is nice for a finishing pass as
it will trace the surface exactly (within the set resolution) on each pass.
Using this method with boundary shapes, defined cut areas, or a cut limit
based on the surface itself is modestly powerful.

There are some tricks also... For instance you can rotate the surface (and
other associated geometry if needed), and then rotate the MOP back to the
original position to get diagonal scan lines. The transformation matrix is
pretty powerful in that respect, but there are things it gets confused at.
Fortunately they are things that confuse me to so we agree not to do those.
LOL.

What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface
mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation. In
a 3D machining operation it calculates the depth of Z based on a percentage
of cutter diameter along the scan line. For example with a .0625 diameter
cutter and a machine operation resolution of .01 it will recalculate the
depth of Z every .000625 inches. With a large operation that can be quite
time consuming to calculate tool paths. The higher the resolution the
longer it takes to calculate the tool paths, but the cut time is based on
the run mode of the machine, and the acceleration rate. Sometimes I
generate tool paths that take 45 minutes to an hour just to calculate them
on my little dual core processor CAD/CAM computer. As of the last time I
checked CamBam can actively use 2 worker threads for a MOP, but that's it.
(I seem to think it might only use one worker thread per MOP.) More
processors helps to calculate multiple MOPs at a time, but doesn't help
speed up a single MOP. It can also be memory intensive. I occasionally get
out of memory exception errors, but I am running it on a 32 bit OS that
doesn't even address all the memory I can socket on the motherboard. I do
wish that Andy had set it up to swap out to the hard drive (or maybe an
external memory drive) like we used to do back when memory was expensive and
the local computer gurus carried RAM in their fanny pack with their sidearm.
LOL.

So in theory atleast you could possibly get scan line resolution
calculations to within a tenth for a very simple small operation, but with
comparable step over it might take days to generate the tool paths. More
processing power, 64 bit OS, and more memory could probably help some, but
there really are practical limitations. I've generated code before that has
taken hours. For most of what I do with 3D I am happy to be within a .0015
for depth. As somebody else mentioned the fish don't really care. My
machines aren't accurate enough to get any better than that anyway. Well,
my Hurco mill is fair, but I run in CV mode with a 90 degree mode switch
limit and a .003 rounding limit most of the time.

The one thing that CamBam does that also looks like 3D is engrave a
polyline. With an engrave MOP the cutter will follow with the tool centered
on the line at the whatever depth RELATIVE TO THE LINE you set in the MOP.
This is handy for things like engraving a name on a surface. If the
polyline is not defined with bulges or arcs it will follow the line using 3
axis anywhere in 3D space that the line goes. It does not have to be on a
surface. I used this method to trick it into doing some 3D work before I
got a 3D CAD program and learned to use 3D MOPs in CamBam. CamBam also has
a nice tool to project lines to a surface. I use that with an engrave MOP
as a "trick" to engrave certain types of details into molds sometimes, and
its child's play that way to engrave a clients name into a mold that way.

CamBam is the best "affordable" hobby CAM program I have tried and in many
respects easier to use than some more expensive programs I've had the
opportunity to try.

It does not do "remaining material removal" machining. It would be nice,
but I have to figure that out for myself. If it did I would have saved
myself a dollar or two on broken cutters when I switch to a smaller cutter
for detail work. "Remaining material removal" machining is a fairly complex
bit of code to write. Constant engagement tool paths, trachoidal tool
paths, etc... HSM tool paths. Those would all be nice, but they aren't in
there. To some degree you can do it manually with good planning, but its
not powerful enough to do it all for you and take the thinking out of the
button jockey.







---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 7:12:47 PM UTC-8, Bob La Londe wrote:
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message

. 3.70...

jon_banquer fired this volley in

:



Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.



I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to

discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence

whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique

of idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no

evidence that these losers can machining anything other than simple

prismatic parts.



There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts

and converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.







Show us an example of what you call "3D surfacing".



Even the low-priced UK CamBam (primarily targeted to hobbiests) can do 3D

surfaces, roughing to approximate shape with flat end mills, and then, if

you have the time, pretty good surfacing at small stepovers and small

depth increments, using ball and bull-nosed cutters.



So, I'm not sure what you mean when you say most CAMs can't do it, unless

I don't understand what sort of 'surfacing' you're referring to.



Lloyd



I do a fair amount of 3D with CamBam, but to be fair anything I can do with

2D (2.5D) I do. For me its about the price. I tried a lot of different

free and low price CAM software, and CamBam was the only one I could afford

that does do 3D ok.



It's a one man show so forget arguments based on the documentation. The

documentation is way behind what it can currently do. I would rather Andy

work on bug fixes and new features than spend all his time writing doc

files. That being said, my opinion was reversed when I started learning how

to use it a few versions ago. I was frustrated by the lack of detailed

documentation in some respects.



Somebody was talking about surface accuracy of a tenth. As near as I can

tell the limitation here is the processing power. CamBam does 3D machining

of a surface in two different manners, and that's pretty much it.



1: Waterline - It does waterline at a depth increment either as a finish

(0-X roughing clearance) where it cuts the contour lines of the part only,

or it does waterline roughing with (0-X roughing clearance) where it removes

all material in the defined area to finishing that depth increment at the

contour line. For some reason the waterline method seems to leave material

I would not expect sometimes.



2: Vertical or Horizontal (scan line method) This traces the surface

either with horizontal or vertical passes, and it can be by depth increment

or no depth increment. No depth increment is nice for a finishing pass as

it will trace the surface exactly (within the set resolution) on each pass.

Using this method with boundary shapes, defined cut areas, or a cut limit

based on the surface itself is modestly powerful.



There are some tricks also... For instance you can rotate the surface (and

other associated geometry if needed), and then rotate the MOP back to the

original position to get diagonal scan lines. The transformation matrix is

pretty powerful in that respect, but there are things it gets confused at.

Fortunately they are things that confuse me to so we agree not to do those.

LOL.



What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface

mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation. In

a 3D machining operation it calculates the depth of Z based on a percentage

of cutter diameter along the scan line. For example with a .0625 diameter

cutter and a machine operation resolution of .01 it will recalculate the

depth of Z every .000625 inches. With a large operation that can be quite

time consuming to calculate tool paths. The higher the resolution the

longer it takes to calculate the tool paths, but the cut time is based on

the run mode of the machine, and the acceleration rate. Sometimes I

generate tool paths that take 45 minutes to an hour just to calculate them

on my little dual core processor CAD/CAM computer. As of the last time I

checked CamBam can actively use 2 worker threads for a MOP, but that's it.

(I seem to think it might only use one worker thread per MOP.) More

processors helps to calculate multiple MOPs at a time, but doesn't help

speed up a single MOP. It can also be memory intensive. I occasionally get

out of memory exception errors, but I am running it on a 32 bit OS that

doesn't even address all the memory I can socket on the motherboard. I do

wish that Andy had set it up to swap out to the hard drive (or maybe an

external memory drive) like we used to do back when memory was expensive and

the local computer gurus carried RAM in their fanny pack with their sidearm.

LOL.



So in theory atleast you could possibly get scan line resolution

calculations to within a tenth for a very simple small operation, but with

comparable step over it might take days to generate the tool paths. More

processing power, 64 bit OS, and more memory could probably help some, but

there really are practical limitations. I've generated code before that has

taken hours. For most of what I do with 3D I am happy to be within a .0015

for depth. As somebody else mentioned the fish don't really care. My

machines aren't accurate enough to get any better than that anyway. Well,

my Hurco mill is fair, but I run in CV mode with a 90 degree mode switch

limit and a .003 rounding limit most of the time.



The one thing that CamBam does that also looks like 3D is engrave a

polyline. With an engrave MOP the cutter will follow with the tool centered

on the line at the whatever depth RELATIVE TO THE LINE you set in the MOP.

This is handy for things like engraving a name on a surface. If the

polyline is not defined with bulges or arcs it will follow the line using 3

axis anywhere in 3D space that the line goes. It does not have to be on a

surface. I used this method to trick it into doing some 3D work before I

got a 3D CAD program and learned to use 3D MOPs in CamBam. CamBam also has

a nice tool to project lines to a surface. I use that with an engrave MOP

as a "trick" to engrave certain types of details into molds sometimes, and

its child's play that way to engrave a clients name into a mold that way.



CamBam is the best "affordable" hobby CAM program I have tried and in many

respects easier to use than some more expensive programs I've had the

opportunity to try.



It does not do "remaining material removal" machining. It would be nice,

but I have to figure that out for myself. If it did I would have saved

myself a dollar or two on broken cutters when I switch to a smaller cutter

for detail work. "Remaining material removal" machining is a fairly complex

bit of code to write. Constant engagement tool paths, trachoidal tool

paths, etc... HSM tool paths. Those would all be nice, but they aren't in

there. To some degree you can do it manually with good planning, but its

not powerful enough to do it all for you and take the thinking out of the

button jockey.















---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com



Lets cut through the long winded bull**** posted above that's just marginally better than the bull**** that senile, wheezy, old, Uncle George posts on CADCAM.

The Bottom Line:

CamBam isn't suitable for doing surfacing toolpath and the results one gets aren't going to be satisfactory on the majority of parts that require surfacing toolpath.

CamBam has only one roughing surfacing toolpath strategy and one finishing surfacing toolpath strategy and both are very primitive... at best.

Next:

How about we stop being cheap mother****ers like iggy and Mark Wieber are and look at the bigger picture?

Maybe it's time to spend more than a lousy $200 dollars and move up to the westside like George Jefferson did?

This is what $1,000 will get you:

http://www.mecsoft.com/vm6/visualmill6.html

http://www.mecsoft.com/PriceVisualMILL.shtml

Anyone else got any suggestions for affordable CADCAM for surfacing toolpath?

jon_banquer fired this volley in
:

Lets cut through the long winded bull**** posted above that's just
marginally better than the bull**** that senile, wheezy, old, Uncle
George posts on CADCAM.
.......

How about we stop being cheap mother****ers like iggy and Mark Wieber
are and look at the bigger picture?

----------------

Well, Bob, I guess he sure put you in your place! You'll have to stop
selling your bull**** to fishermen, too, "Unca George wannabe".


Jon, you' a liar, and/or you forget a LOT very, very quickly, and/or
you're a truly demented sociopath. I'm guessing it's all three.

Yesterday you asked for detail... you wrote that you "live for detail".

So, now Bob, who has no interest in this except that he uses the software,
gave you more of the detail you requested -- and you call him a longwinded
bull****ter for doing exactly what you ASKED?

Man! You're really ****ed in the head, son!

Lloyd

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:07:01 AM UTC-8, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh wrote:
jon_banquer fired this volley in

:



Lets cut through the long winded bull**** posted above that's just

marginally better than the bull**** that senile, wheezy, old, Uncle

George posts on CADCAM.

......



How about we stop being cheap mother****ers like iggy and Mark Wieber

are and look at the bigger picture?



----------------



Well, Bob, I guess he sure put you in your place! You'll have to stop

selling your bull**** to fishermen, too, "Unca George wannabe".





Jon, you' a liar, and/or you forget a LOT very, very quickly, and/or

you're a truly demented sociopath. I'm guessing it's all three.



Yesterday you asked for detail... you wrote that you "live for detail".



So, now Bob, who has no interest in this except that he uses the software,

gave you more of the detail you requested -- and you call him a longwinded

bull****ter for doing exactly what you ASKED?



Man! You're really ****ed in the head, son!



Lloyd


Nice to know I'm only ****ed in the head when I tell the truth and refuse to be a CADCAM fanboi, like you and dumb blond, Loud.

It's now clear you're too ****ing lazy and cheap to learn solid modeling and you have no idea what tools are needed to do surfacing toolpath.

You and dumb blonde can be CamBam fanboi's all you wish but it's not a program that is capable of doing surfacing toolpath in most real world situations. That's the bottom line and it's one an asshole like you can't deal with.

I guess Jim had your right all along.

**** off and die, Loud.

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 06:07:01 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

jon_banquer fired this volley in
:

Lets cut through the long winded bull**** posted above that's just
marginally better than the bull**** that senile, wheezy, old, Uncle
George posts on CADCAM.
......

How about we stop being cheap mother****ers like iggy and Mark Wieber
are and look at the bigger picture?

----------------

Well, Bob, I guess he sure put you in your place! You'll have to stop
selling your bull**** to fishermen, too, "Unca George wannabe".


Jon, you' a liar, and/or you forget a LOT very, very quickly, and/or
you're a truly demented sociopath. I'm guessing it's all three.

Yesterday you asked for detail... you wrote that you "live for detail".

So, now Bob, who has no interest in this except that he uses the software,
gave you more of the detail you requested -- and you call him a longwinded
bull****ter for doing exactly what you ASKED?

Man! You're really ****ed in the head, son!

Lloyd

You just figured this out?

Gunner

--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don’t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

jon_banquer wrote:


This is what $1,000 will get you:

http://www.mecsoft.com/vm6/visualmill6.html

http://www.mecsoft.com/PriceVisualMILL.shtml

Anyone else got any suggestions for affordable CADCAM for surfacing toolpath?



I have heard some good things about MadCam.
The 3 axis module sells for under $1000, but you need
to own Rhino also.

http://www.madcamcnc.com/start_page.html

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:52:44 AM UTC-8, jim wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:





This is what $1,000 will get you:



http://www.mecsoft.com/vm6/visualmill6.html



http://www.mecsoft.com/PriceVisualMILL.shtml



Anyone else got any suggestions for affordable CADCAM for surfacing toolpath?







I have heard some good things about MadCam.

The 3 axis module sells for under $1000, but you need

to own Rhino also.



http://www.madcamcnc.com/start_page.html



---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com

I've heard the same about MadCAM. I had forgotten about it. Glad you mentioned it!

It's really too bad this newsgroup has been destroyed by Mark Wieber and his clique of idiots because I think it would be nice to see a small core group of hobbyists/small shop owners that want to do more than cut simple prismatic parts.

2D wireframe CAD really isn't productive for most situations now. It's been many years since I've been in a machining job shop that used 2D wireframe CAD. Everything is solids and advanced surfaces.

Even tiny shops that do hot rods are now using solid assembly modeling:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Indus...16378821730298

Bob La Londe wrote:


What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface
mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation.

That is not all that affects accuracy. Even if you have the time
and computational power and storage capacity to produce g-code
files with millions of data points there is still the question of
whether your CNN can fluidly move to all those data points and cut
the part to within .0001".

If you had a machine that could do that
it is unlikely you would be using CamBam.

If you are making fishing lures and the end product
conforms to the original CAD surface geometry to less than
0.002" then you are doing exceptionally good job.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 5:20:57 AM UTC-8, jim wrote:
Bob La Londe wrote:





What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface

mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation.



That is not all that affects accuracy. Even if you have the time

and computational power and storage capacity to produce g-code

files with millions of data points there is still the question of

whether your CNN can fluidly move to all those data points and cut

the part to within .0001".



If you had a machine that could do that

it is unlikely you would be using CamBam.



If you are making fishing lures and the end product

conforms to the original CAD surface geometry to less than

0.002" then you are doing exceptionally good job.



---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com


There are some CADCAM programs that can produce toolpath directly from a surface model and don't triangulate the surfaces in order to produce toolpath.

This one mentioned in this discussion has a reputation for producing very high quality surface finishes that don't need any polishing:

http://lnkd.in/baa9swf

jon_banquer wrote:

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 5:20:57 AM UTC-8, jim wrote:
Bob La Londe wrote:





What affects surface accuracy is of course the resolution of the surface

mesh (STL or 3DS) and the defined resolution of the machining operation.



That is not all that affects accuracy. Even if you have the time

and computational power and storage capacity to produce g-code

files with millions of data points there is still the question of

whether your CNN can fluidly move to all those data points and cut

the part to within .0001".



If you had a machine that could do that

it is unlikely you would be using CamBam.



If you are making fishing lures and the end product

conforms to the original CAD surface geometry to less than

0.002" then you are doing exceptionally good job.



---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com

There are some CADCAM programs that can produce toolpath directly from a surface model and don't triangulate the surfaces in order to produce toolpath.

This one mentioned in this discussion has a reputation for producing very high quality surface finishes that don't need any polishing:

http://lnkd.in/baa9swf

The issue with producing toolpaths from meshes is not entirely
about accuracy. 3d surface cutting usually requires a ton of point
to point tool moves to cut the part. Ideally, at the micro level each
pass of the tool across the surface should be parallel to the last
pass such that the tool is constantly removing about the same amount
of material. To do this with point to point moves, each point to point
move in one pass should line up with the point to point moves of the
previous and next pass. Creating tool moves from well constructed meshes
is a way of making sure the point to point moves in each pass match
up to the moves in neighboring passes.

In most cases when the CAM software people tell you that they
create toolpaths from surface data what they mean is that an
ideal mesh is created that is aligned with the projected motion
of the tool across the surface. If you set the toolpath tolerance
parameters loose enough you will still be able to see in the
surface finish the underlying mesh pattern.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

I was not really trying to quibble over any of this. Lloyd just mentioned
my 3D work with CamBam and since he has actually helped me with useful and
practical information in the past I figured I'ld step in and tell you guys
what CamBam does and how it functions in my experience. I doubt many of us
personally own a machine capable of accuracy and repeatability of a tenth.
Even with a machine that has accuracy and repeatability of a 1 thou it would
be difficult to attain reasonable material removal rates without cutter
deflection and/or machine rigidity becoming an issue. That's not even
counting the accuracy of the end mill itself from one to the next. None of
that was my point. I didn't really even try to make a point. I just wanted
to clarify what and how CamBam does 3D since I have a little more experience
using those features than Lloyd does. (I think)

I also said I am happy if I get within .0015 for most things. I didn't say
I was always successful. LOL.






---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 8:55:10 AM UTC-8, Bob La Londe wrote:
I was not really trying to quibble over any of this. Lloyd just mentioned

my 3D work with CamBam and since he has actually helped me with useful and

practical information in the past I figured I'ld step in and tell you guys

what CamBam does and how it functions in my experience. I doubt many of us

personally own a machine capable of accuracy and repeatability of a tenth.

Even with a machine that has accuracy and repeatability of a 1 thou it would

be difficult to attain reasonable material removal rates without cutter

deflection and/or machine rigidity becoming an issue. That's not even

counting the accuracy of the end mill itself from one to the next. None of

that was my point. I didn't really even try to make a point. I just wanted

to clarify what and how CamBam does 3D since I have a little more experience

using those features than Lloyd does. (I think)



I also said I am happy if I get within .0015 for most things. I didn't say

I was always successful. LOL.













---

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com



Accuracy is the least of CamBam's problems when it comes to creating surfacing toolpath. The problem is CamBam's utter lack of surfacing toolpath strategies.

I'm sorry but the toolpath surfacing part of CamBam is a sad joke and completely inadequate for most/the majority of parts that need to be machined with surfacing toolpath.

Look at the links that both Jim and I posted that show the difference in $1,000 toolpath surfacing software and $2,000 surfacing toolpath software.

Anyone who thinks they are going to be surfacing much of anything with CamBam is in for a rude awakening.

"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...

FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better tool
changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much will
it add to the price?

See my comments and FADAC's response he

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA

Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.

I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to
discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence
whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of
idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no evidence
that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic parts.

There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and
converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.

Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso

RogerN

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:46:01 PM UTC-8, RogerN wrote:
"jon_banquer" wrote in message

...



FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better tool

changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much will

it add to the price?



See my comments and FADAC's response he



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA



Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.



I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to

discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence

whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of

idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no evidence

that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic parts.



There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and

converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.



Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso



RogerN



From what I can tell the answer is yes:

http://www.flashcutcnc.com/cnc-contr...ntrol-software

"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:46:01 PM UTC-8, RogerN wrote:
"jon_banquer" wrote in message

...



FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better
tool

changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much
will

it add to the price?



See my comments and FADAC's response he



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA



Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.



I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to

discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence

whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of

idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no
evidence

that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic
parts.



There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and

converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.



Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso



RogerN



From what I can tell the answer is yes:

http://www.flashcutcnc.com/cnc-contr...ntrol-software



http://www.fadal.com/

On Thursday, December 19, 2013 7:21:01 PM UTC-8, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
"jon_banquer" wrote in message

...

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:46:01 PM UTC-8, RogerN wrote:

"jon_banquer" wrote in message



...







FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better

tool



changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much

will



it add to the price?







See my comments and FADAC's response he







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA







Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.







I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to



discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence



whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of



idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no

evidence



that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic

parts.







There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and



converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.







Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso







RogerN







From what I can tell the answer is yes:



http://www.flashcutcnc.com/cnc-contr...ntrol-software







http://www.fadal.com/


Any idea who is behind the new Fadal?

"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, December 19, 2013 7:21:01 PM UTC-8, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:
"jon_banquer" wrote in message

...

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:46:01 PM UTC-8, RogerN wrote:

"jon_banquer" wrote in message



...







FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much
better

tool



changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much

will



it add to the price?







See my comments and FADAC's response he







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA







Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.







I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to



discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence



whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique
of



idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no

evidence



that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic

parts.







There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts
and



converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.







Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso







RogerN







From what I can tell the answer is yes:



http://www.flashcutcnc.com/cnc-contr...ntrol-software







http://www.fadal.com/


Any idea who is behind the new Fadal?


It appears to be a company named Fives Machining Systems Inc.....There is a
physical address listed on the website that is the same building that Fadal
had previously operated out of.

"Fives Machining Systems, Inc. is a new business unit comprised of the
recently acquired MAG Americas machine tool and composites companies which
include Cincinnati, Giddings & Lewis and the aftermarket group, Global
Services."

http://www.fivesmsi.com/en/about-fiv...y-profile.html

Maybe I'll give em a call, I've got a '91 4020 that's pretty sick and
perhaps they'll take it as a trade-in.

"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 4:46:01 PM UTC-8, RogerN wrote:
snip

Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso

RogerN



From what I can tell the answer is yes:

http://www.flashcutcnc.com/cnc-contr...ntrol-software

Have you ever seen a need for a 6th axis? I'm curious because it seems like
all positions and angles are able to be reached with 5 axis. I realize it
can be useful on robotic arms but I can't see the need on a CNC mill.

RogerN

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:46:01 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...

FADAC is beginning to get serious about their UMC10 with a much better tool
changer than the umbrella type. The major question I have is how much will
it add to the price?

See my comments and FADAC's response he

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2wWpbOz7jA

Note the request by another commenter for a 3D surfacing video.

I'm still waiting for Mark Wieber, or any of his clique of idiots, to
discuss machining parts that need surfacing. I've seen no evidence
whatsoever that a liar like Mark Wieber, or any member of his clique of
idiots, has ever created surfacing toolpath. I have also seen no evidence
that these losers can machining anything other than simple prismatic parts.

There is a lot more to CNC machining than just doing prismatic parts and
converting an old knee mills to Linux CNC.

Can the FADAC UMC10 machine 5 axis parts like a LinuxCNC machine can?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh9eCupbsso

RogerN


Some of its not even 5 axis..

https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...16893109196866

https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...58661446 8594

Some of its not even CNC

https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...17893652911570

On the other hand...some of it is

https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422.../ShopsIveBuilt

Gunner

--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don’t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com