Not very intuitive and not sure how you would use the examples in real life. One problem I found was it puts the point of the tool right on the line which made a mess of the edge. Is there a way to tell the software to use the middle of the cutting edge to cut the chamfer?
Hello and thanks for the comment and question. I would suggest using the "overcut" option in the Chamfer form. This will help you to shift the center point so that you can use the side of the tool. Let me know how it goes.
So this is a bit infuriating really. I had my company purchase this upgrade specifically because the new Chamfering function was added (among other things) and it simply works in the most ridiculous way possible. Why would there not be a way to do a SINGLE cutting path for cutting the Chamfer with a ball-nose or really any other bit. Why is there not rest machining function added to this Chamfering function either? Rest machining function is present in the moulding function but not in this. It boggles the mind. There is even a gadget maid to do any chamfer type at any angle using a ball-nose but it does it in one pass instead of doing 500 passes per step down. So, am I missing something, is there no way to use a large clearing out tool, followed by a single pass per step function in making a chamfer using a ball-nose?
Hello and thanks for the comment and sorry you are feeling frustrated. Let me see if I can help and if not please feel free to contact Vectric Support - support@vectric.com - Yes we do allow you to use ball nose endmills and you can reduce the number of passes if you adjust your pass depth. (If I am misunderstanding then please contact support) - Yes you are correct we do not allow for a "clearing" tool to be used. I suspect we could but this would be something you could suggest to Support for future consideration. Would be good to also include a use case so we can get a better understanding of what you are thinking. We are always open to feature changes or updates... so please always feel free to let us know.
@@vectric howdy, sorry for the pissy attitude. So you actually did partially misunderstand me. Imagine a miter at 30 degrees. Any miter has a slope. So that slope may contain something like steps on a staircase but are actually steps along a vector. There are two ways to cut that out. One way is to cut at one path per step (I. E. A staircase) or you can do it like vcarve currently does it. Vcarve creates multiple passes per step and as it gets deeper there are less paths per step. So what vcarve is doing is clearing out ALL of the material based on the resolution you've specified (in this case your resolution is based around the micro depths and step overs that you specified within the tool file). So if one wants a "high resolution" cut then one may do a step over of 0.02 and a depth per cut of 0.03. But this also means that for every depth of cut one may be cutting 35 tool paths at the top, then 34, 32, 30, and so on. What doss this mean. This means the way vcarve processes these cuts will be nearly 300+ cutting paths to do a simple miter. The way fusion 360 and even the vcarve gadget does it, it will be around 24 passes at the above stated resolution. This means the cutting difference of hours. A serious problem. So. This is why I ask the question of how could vectric let this one slide? Their gadget for vcarve and cut2d is better than this addition!
Just a personal note: To me, the narrator has a most irritating voice and accent, and should not be presenting technical information although it is quite pleasant otherwise.
Mate, she has an accent that she has no control over. It is easy to understand and has a pleasant sound. Your comment should never have been made it is rude , I feel that you should delete it
Finally... Someone started using their own software to make parts...
This explains the Thread Milling and Chamfering Options...
Great content and I love the accent.
Thanks for your kind comments! Glad you like the content we put in for 10.5 😊
Very nicely done...as always.
Thanks John!
Great job really appreciate the update to 10.5
Hey Rodney, Thank you for your kind comments, glad you like it!
Not very intuitive and not sure how you would use the examples in real life. One problem I found was it puts the point of the tool right on the line which made a mess of the edge. Is there a way to tell the software to use the middle of the cutting edge to cut the chamfer?
Hello and thanks for the comment and question. I would suggest using the "overcut" option in the Chamfer form. This will help you to shift the center point so that you can use the side of the tool. Let me know how it goes.
So this is a bit infuriating really. I had my company purchase this upgrade specifically because the new Chamfering function was added (among other things) and it simply works in the most ridiculous way possible.
Why would there not be a way to do a SINGLE cutting path for cutting the Chamfer with a ball-nose or really any other bit. Why is there not rest machining function added to this Chamfering function either? Rest machining function is present in the moulding function but not in this. It boggles the mind.
There is even a gadget maid to do any chamfer type at any angle using a ball-nose but it does it in one pass instead of doing 500 passes per step down.
So, am I missing something, is there no way to use a large clearing out tool, followed by a single pass per step function in making a chamfer using a ball-nose?
Hello and thanks for the comment and sorry you are feeling frustrated. Let me see if I can help and if not please feel free to contact Vectric Support - support@vectric.com
- Yes we do allow you to use ball nose endmills and you can reduce the number of passes if you adjust your pass depth. (If I am misunderstanding then please contact support)
- Yes you are correct we do not allow for a "clearing" tool to be used. I suspect we could but this would be something you could suggest to Support for future consideration. Would be good to also include a use case so we can get a better understanding of what you are thinking.
We are always open to feature changes or updates... so please always feel free to let us know.
@@vectric howdy, sorry for the pissy attitude.
So you actually did partially misunderstand me.
Imagine a miter at 30 degrees. Any miter has a slope. So that slope may contain something like steps on a staircase but are actually steps along a vector.
There are two ways to cut that out. One way is to cut at one path per step (I. E. A staircase) or you can do it like vcarve currently does it.
Vcarve creates multiple passes per step and as it gets deeper there are less paths per step. So what vcarve is doing is clearing out ALL of the material based on the resolution you've specified (in this case your resolution is based around the micro depths and step overs that you specified within the tool file).
So if one wants a "high resolution" cut then one may do a step over of 0.02 and a depth per cut of 0.03.
But this also means that for every depth of cut one may be cutting 35 tool paths at the top, then 34, 32, 30, and so on.
What doss this mean. This means the way vcarve processes these cuts will be nearly 300+ cutting paths to do a simple miter.
The way fusion 360 and even the vcarve gadget does it, it will be around 24 passes at the above stated resolution.
This means the cutting difference of hours. A serious problem.
So. This is why I ask the question of how could vectric let this one slide? Their gadget for vcarve and cut2d is better than this addition!
Is there a option to cut in climb direction or conventional
I´m asking the same question :-)
Is it an open source software
Hello. sorry it is not. You can download a trial version if you like from here - www.vectric.com/free-trial ~Todd
Just a personal note: To me, the narrator has a most irritating voice and accent, and should not be presenting technical information although it is quite pleasant otherwise.
Thanks for the feedback
Mate, she has an accent that she has no control over. It is easy to understand and has a pleasant sound. Your comment should never have been made it is rude , I feel that you should delete it
@@SuperiorEtchworx I agree and so stipulated in my original statement. However in this particular application I feel that it is inappropriate.
@@pierdolio You should have kept your opinion to yourself
@@SuperiorEtchworx Your opinion is duly noted. Thank you for your feedback.