OK, so trying to understand start and depth of both clear out and v carve! like doing the female side of an inlay…female only.
easy with start depth at zero, works great!
but have pocketed out 3mm from the surface and want to do the v-carve from start of 3mm!!!..
so rough out 1/8" end mill start is 3mm …now to get a 5mm carve or rough at this stage is the final depth be (5 or 8MM)???
Also , in the v carve side you have a start depth---- again im putting 3mm because that’s what’s pocked out from surface . now i’m after the same as roughing depth of 5mm from start ,with is 3mm ! still with me ! sheatt I’m confused
So in v carve 's LIMIT MAXIMIN DEPTH. WHERE’S THAT FROM ??? Surface or start depth ,again do I put max depth 5MM or 8mm to get the desired depth from start of 5mm
sorry hope I’ve explained better than I did in email? because the 2 depths aren’t marrying , out… difference is a lot !
thank you know it’s new , and its great so some help would be appreciated , please
can you attach your file, only if you want so can see what your doing
depth cut.mage (3.6 MB)
have a look at my settings is that wht your after
Buddy_vcarve.mage (876.7 KB)
hope this works.
if so, watch the preview as the operation 4 and 5 have different depths even though I start at 3mm and final depth is 5 mm?
no2 operation, is good at 3mm no 4 is at 5 mm ,but suspecting from surface not start depth , and bit v-carve goes down to 8mm .
again from surface im thinking not start depth of 3mm
above my pay grade…
and it’s probably me ! with the highlighted ,to get an accurate look and comparison
even in this one you sent me v states starting at 3 max depth 5 actually goes to 8mm
For the “correct” output you must:
- Ungroup
- Break Apart
- Delete Duplicates
. - Select Open Shapes
- Set them to another Layer
- Hide Layer C00
- Check if the remaining Open Shapes selected before are important for the design/Op.
- Remove them.
- Show C00 and continue.
before..after
depth cut_191421.mage (3.3 MB)
My understanding is, if the Op is set to start at Z = -3mm and limited to “eat” more 5mm, -3 + (-5) = -8mm and Z can go to -8mm.
Rough example with same bit:
1st shape Max set to 5mm 2nd shape Max set to 20mm, the Op only goes to -4.732 limited by the sides of the shape and the sides of the bit.
3rd shape Max set to 1mm and is what the op does, 1mm touches left, 1mm touches right.
V-Carve Op has a “natural” Max Depth, that´s when the sides of the V-bit touches the lines of the shape going trough the path defined by the medial axis of the shape:
.
.
EDIT:
If we increase the width of the 3rd shape to 3.5mm and the Stepover to 100%:
.
So we can also jog with this to get different effects:
Only one Op
i wasn’t to worried about my image was just creating a file to see if thats what he was trying to achieve , but thanks for how to correct it
no, and thank you!
that wasn’t my dog it was Terrys as an example, thank you Terry!
but your all missing the point ! and im listening as I’m learning here on MM.as well so all things listen too.
This is what I’ve found …
Now think of the, my v-carve as a female of an inlay , so I’m wanting the rough out using an end mill 1/8" bit, to be approximately the same depth as the v carve!!! this is important!.
Its how the math in MM is different at this moment from the clearing 1/8".I also realise this only works where the lines in my intended vcarve etc is more than 1/8" wide
so still on the clearout to v path… start depth is 3 from surfacestrong text allows for the 3mm pocket I didstrong text !final depth of 5… and im talking where you put the input of the operation and tool.
now with this …(and ill send the file of a small piece I’ve practised on.) look at the difference iv had to input to get a common real depth from 3mm
that leaves a clear out in real depth from the top of the pocked 3mm to 2mm still with me
now here is where the confusion starts as it Totally different MATH for the v bit carve as it computes from the start depth not the surface depth as the clear out does …
so now ,be it really confusing I am understanding the extra MATH that needs to be given
so ive done the v bit side as start depth 3mm (again starting at the 3mm pocket depth I did) and I went down 2.1 that makes it very close to even The 0.1 more to the v on purpose …surly there’s an easier way to compute , realise this is a RC, this is why I’m mentioning it.
also if both are start depth at 0 eg the real z surface, it works even and PERFECT . its only when you, like say your doing the pocket’d out catch All as an example and the start strong textdepth is not 0 strong textthat’s where the extra MATH is needed
thank you for helping
hope this helps understand what im getting at …at least now I realise how to apply the math to get it close
Pat
Buddy_vcarve.mage (926.8 KB)
forgot this its page 2 and operations AB andC
With V-carving you specify the start depth as normal, then the “depth limit” at the moment is added to the start depth. If you wanted the carve to start at 3mm and go down an additional 2mm, you’d just specify a 2mm depth limit.
My intention was to make it trivial to do inlays, because the “depth limit” would be how much deeper to make the V-carve. For inlays, yo - no other mathu’d just set that to your glue gap depth and that’s it. However, the difference seems to be tripping everyone up, not making it easier, so I’ll likely rework the code so it behaves the same as final depth, meaning you’d have to manually add your start depth and the additional carve depth desired to get the “depth limit” number.
I believe these are “glitches” in the way our brains process things, resulting from the field being more or less in the same location as Final Depth. In my opinion, there’s no need to change the code – you just need to change its presentation so that it looks different from the usual Final Depth, allowing our brains to “process” the difference. Or placing the fields at right…
i do agree , we all look at things from different prospective, i did it the other day with 3d set up one simple explanation from OZ and i got it , if the codes work why change them , as user we are the ones that need to adapt, never going to please everyone
I think part of the problem is the docs aren’t available for v carve and 3d at present ,and were like kids at xmas, got a new toy rip box open forget about learning how it works 1st, and when it doesn’t work as we think it should , we get grumpy and cant look at it from other perspectives,
i have a 6mm 90 deg v and a 90 deg v with 1mm flat max doc is 6mm
created test to see if it does what i assume and how detail should look pocket is 10mm wide
which is about what i expected
using same tools and setting i put them into an image
90v with point
90 with flat
am i seeing this because of the flat tip being wider than the project shape and flaring out
my understanding is it doesn’t go wider than project shape, looking at my top trial or have i got that all wrong
With V-carving you specify the start depth as normal, then the “depth limit” at the moment is added to the start depth. If you wanted the carve to start at 3mm and go down an additional 2mm, you’d just specify a 2mm depth limit.
My intention was to make it trivial to do inlays, because the “depth limit” would be how much deeper to make the V-carve. For inlays, yo - no other mathu’d just set that to your glue gap depth and that’s it. However, the difference seems to be tripping everyone up, not making it easier, so I’ll likely rework the code so it behaves the same as final depth, meaning you’d have to manually add your start depth and the additional carve depth desired to get the “depth limit” number.
answering too above !..ill get the hang of this forum one day hehe
Actually this is good its the roughing out with the end mill first that’s where the confusion is as with most v carve inlays there a clearing out and then a v carve and when done together THEY SHOULD HAVE THE SAME start protocol and finish …
doing a great job!
Pat