toptron and competition

[cimaguy]

..where.
in these days I visited the fair of parma (mecspe) and, in particular,
I stopped at some competition stands for toptron and.
I was looking for a cam-level comparison and I wanted to figure out how it was handled
the crude "multiasses" (let's call it this) from other systems.
Well, I have to say that I saw some things that left me a little bit.
I realized we're back!
for example,the classic half-per-part processing(first work from
above to half rough and then turn of 180°);while toptron not
can see what's under it,other systems recognize the residual material
and work to where there is material.
What do you think?

 

[Dylan]

Hi.

with this post it was obvious that I would intervene.

You're scrambling, bombing napalm on the red cross. as you may already know brake to 90% complex models and in 75% of cases are drawn from block.

The problem that I highlight is particularly suffering.

as far as I know (although I have never used it personally) tebis has been 10 years old doing what you say using polyhedratic crude (as, rightly, auton ones have copied).

since we are in a free country, on a free forum outside the names and features "notevoli" you saw in mecspe.

But let's say that the grass of the neighbor is always green until you buy her lawn. even "those" systems will have their magagne. .

soon
dylan

 

[monster]

ehhh beautiful story...on geometric pieces that have regular figures well
you arrive with limit management in z and maybe some caps of "sughero"


when instead you have to create a somewhat shaped detail or you need some
surfaces and limits or cut to the bottom....then with spindle ...head etc.

this year I could not go to the fair in parma cause the work "..."
sure as dylan says you have to see if these I quote some
♪
by the
Masterpieces
Visi
...and others deserve a praise

I didn't do a lot of tests... I'd like to do it... having the time available. . .magarita

It's okay.

 

[Dylan]

topguy wait for info on the news you saw!

Let us know.

dylan

 

[cimaguy]

therefore,
"This is better than the other."
I speak of this specific function:recognition of the residual crude
from various inclinations.
I quote a system that I have seen at the fair that, I repeat, in this circumstance,
He made me a good implication: hypermill.
I would have done a series of roughings from the sides of the piece, this system is able not only to "see" without problems the material remained from the various previous phases, but I could find that it was calculated alone the inclinations of the tool axis being able to perform, while trying, of the 3+2 workings with automatic re-positioning. according to me remarkable (if you have a spot 5x).
I, instead, first I must define the reference system and then calculate (with the limits we know) but beyond this .., in conclusion, according to me you must still improve in a situation where also others (see powermill and company) succeed better

 

[Dylan]

Hi.

Well, the function you explicitly mention is curious.
curious in the sense that I would like to see it work, as you rightly said, on a "my" piece.

At the commercial level, you are studying very effective findings that unconsciously lead you to overestimate a product. In everyday use, however, we should consider how and if they work. I find it difficult enough for an algorithm to do what I do by working at the desk to decide where the cutter has to pass, which cutter then with its length, at which point of the cycle etc...

I saw a system doing what you said several years ago. That's how it worked. taken the model into consideration and "cold" with a terna "by z" in order to understand us, the system went to create outlines where the tool path was interrupted (checking the ingombs of the caliper) and , choosing among the cloths previously created by the operator, went to resume the areas abandoned with the aforementioned inclinations tools. I repeat the two-year-olds still created them.

I've seen her do it on a 3d model without subsquadri so I don't know what would have happened in case that, instead of their file where everything always works, I gave him my where almost always something doesn't work. and we stand. patience, experience etc and everything is resolved.

I believe little to these phantom automatisms. until proven otherwise, I'm cleared under my eyes and... fresa.

it would be nice an intervention of some cammista who uses the software mentioned by you (not a representative or a seller..) ...

Good things.

dylan

 

[cimaguy]

Hi.
In fact, this thing has left me a little.
But I'm telling you, I saw him do a rough patch where at first.
the tool worked vertically (according to z) and then, in an area where with that
direction could not arrive, automatic bursting the working plan
ending the path with another working angle.
I would like a confirmation from someone who already uses this system

 

[Dylan]

Look at that. .

I've got a math in my hands.

I swear to my son that if that system is able to terrace the above piece (of course in an acceptable and logical way) I'm going to bake.

who wanted to see the sending. It's a piece by air force. :biggrin: . of those that when you see them you tighten your stomach only to the thought of fressing it. .

Shall we try? ? ?

out all magic systems!! :biggrin:

dylan

 

[cimaguy]

...you send it up!

...however dylan, please note that I did not say that the system in question
represent the discovery of the century: at the fair, open, I saw a "demo" , well prepared as far as you want, where I saw the things I mentioned;
Everyone, then, is free to believe or not to what he wants but is clear
that you should test the program as you must before expressing
"...it's better than toptron."

topguy

 

[Dylan]

Bye!

Because the mathematician is owned. not mine, obviously not the public on the hole.

Extend me the mail that I'll give you.

If there's some greedy cammist who wanted to see the detail in question send me the email.

I, the piece I've already fried and drilled, but I'd be curious to know how you would rub it with tops...

dylan