nc code verification
It sounds interesting. Keep in mind that OpenSCAD is not a language as
such - you create a text file that describes 3D solids and how to
mergrge them, that the openscad system then 'runs' to create a final lump.
In that sense it is just like Gcode toolpaths.
Some people have used programming languages to create the OpenSCAD
operations in a file, which is then used by OpenSCAD to create the final
output STL solid.
This is probably because OpenSCAD is not able to read another file eg
the NC toolpaths in Gcode, and interpret into solid descriptions. It
would be nice if it could.!
On 03/02/2015 00:56, stustev wrote:
I need multiaxis verification.
It should not be much more difficult than two or three axis work. The
cam program gives the tool end point and tool axis. With the next
point it is easy to construct matrix to correctly postion the model of
the tool for the boolean removal.
Stuart,
Do you envision working 2.5D type toolpaths, 3D or 3D with tool axis
varying?
Working up some code to generate OpenSCAD commands should be pretty
straightforward for 2.5D toolpaths. The 3D and tool axis stuff may be
pushing
things a bit. Also, how many tool points do you envision processing at
one time?
Phil(f) in WI
On 2/2/2015 5:48 PM, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
I am not asking to see if it generates a CAM program. My software
does that.
I want to be able to use openSCAD to open a CAM program.
Read it line by line.
Use the read lines as input to openSCAD to remove material from a
block or model
to simulate the machining process.
If no one has attempted this with openSCAD then I want to explore
this capability.
If someone has done this or is working on this then I want to
contribute as much
as I can.
thanks
Stuart
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:22 PM, doug moen <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]
OpenSCAD isn't a CAM program; it doesn't convert 3D models to tool
paths or generate g-code. It also doesn't read g-code, or any
other nc
code variant.
On 1 February 2015 at 23:45, stustev <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]
Gentlemen,
I searched for nc code verification and found nothing.
Has anyone developed this type of application on openSCAD?
thanks
Stuart
--
View this message in context:
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=4 <mailto:[hidden
email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=5>
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=6
<mailto:[hidden email]
http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=7>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to
read this
email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving
or reading,
and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=8
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11382&i=9
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11382.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here.
NAML
http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
View this message in context: Re: nc code verification
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11383.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive
http://forum.openscad.org/ at Nabble.com.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Richard Benjamin richard@digicalm.com
wrote:
It sounds interesting. Keep in mind that OpenSCAD is not a language as
such - you create a text file that describes 3D solids and how to mergrge
them, that the openscad system then 'runs' to create a final lump.
In that sense it is just like Gcode toolpaths.
Some people have used programming languages to create the OpenSCAD
operations in a file, which is then used by OpenSCAD to create the final
output STL solid.
NCL creates tool paths.
Postworks (NCCS's post processor) uses the CL (Cutter Location) file to
create the CAM program oriented for a specific machine and control.
This is probably because OpenSCAD is not able to read another file eg the
NC toolpaths in Gcode, and interpret into solid descriptions. It would be
nice if it could.!
This is what I want to develop or have developed.
The point of my original question was to determine at what level (if any)
this had been done.
Seems to me nothing has been done in this direction.
If I am understanding this correctly my path should be as follows.
Using a scripting application. Perl is the one I have a little knowledge of.
Open the CAM program
Read in the first line.
Use Perl to manipulate the input to achieve the desired output. (This would
be the 'technical' part). :)
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
If you are in single block mode or at a program stop (M01) you could
analyse the OpenSCAD model
If you are in auto mode the script would continue without interruption
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Read the next line in the CAM program.
Use Perl to manipulate the input to achieve the desired output
Open the saved OpenSCAD model
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
repeat until reaching the EOL or program stop (M01/M02/M30)
Having just started looking at OpenSCAD I have a lot to learn about it.
I brought in an STL file. OpenSCAD was extremely fast at this. It was not a
large file but the model appeared on the screen immediately and looked very
nice and clean. I was able to use a cube and remove material like I would
imagine the cutter would on the machine. I created a solid model of the
forging and a solid model of the finished part. It looks as if I would be
able to use OpenSCAD to 'machine' the forging and have the finished part as
a final product.
I would want to then compare the OpenSCAD finished part with the solid
modelled part to determine if the CAM program would indeed machine the part
as desired.
I would also be able to output the OpenSCAD finished part to a CMM and
inspect the model to the print.
Any help at any point of this path will be appreciated.
thanks
Stuart
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson stustev@gmail.com wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD script directly from Perl, and in the end, open the entire script in OpenSCAD to get the the final geometry calculated. That way, the perl script will be simpler and decoupled from OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in addition to OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g. Netfabb, Blender, the various openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:06 AM, kintel [via OpenSCAD] <
ml-node+s1091067n11389h36@n5.nabble.com> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson <[hidden email]
http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=0> wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD script directly
from Perl, and in the end, open the entire script in OpenSCAD to get the
the final geometry calculated. That way, the perl script will be simpler
and decoupled from OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in addition to
OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g. Netfabb, Blender, the various
openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which line of
code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking but other
times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what. If there is a
way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut
it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
Being able to process the entire CAM program will surely be early in the
cycle.
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=1
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11389.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here
http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=11373&code=c3R1c3RldkBnbWFpbC5jb218MTEzNzN8LTEyODc0MzU0ODM=
.
NAML
http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11392.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I can see the value of the cut by cut approach.
If you did the whole lot in one batch, then cmpare the result STL to the
designed STL, eg by differencing, you will get to see gouges and uncut
areas, but not where in the program it occured.
If you create each program step cut as an additive operation then
intersect that with the designed STL, you will see over/deep/gouge cuts,
or nothing, at each step.
You probably don't need to see cuts that don't touch the finished part
as they will be lots of roughing etc.
On 03/02/2015 15:27, stustev wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:06 AM, kintel [via OpenSCAD] <[hidden email]
</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11392&i=0>> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson <[hidden email]
<http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=0>> wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD script
directly from Perl, and _in the end_, open the entire script in
OpenSCAD to get the the final geometry calculated. That way, the
perl script will be simpler and decoupled from OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in addition
to OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g. Netfabb, Blender,
the various openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which
line of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking
but other times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what.
If there is a way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which
line of code cut it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be
just fine.
Being able to process the entire CAM program will surely be early in
the cycle.
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=1>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11389.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here.
NAML
<http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to
read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without
saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my
private correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
View this message in context: Re: nc code verification
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11392.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive
http://forum.openscad.org/ at Nabble.com.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Richard Benjamin richard@digicalm.com
wrote:
I can see the value of the cut by cut approach.
If you did the whole lot in one batch, then cmpare the result STL to the
designed STL, eg by differencing, you will get to see gouges and uncut
areas, but not where in the program it occured.
If you create each program step cut as an additive operation then
intersect that with the designed STL, you will see over/deep/gouge cuts, or
nothing, at each step.
You probably don't need to see cuts that don't touch the finished part as
they will be lots of roughing etc.
Many times the miss cut event is a roughing cut that is incorrect. You are
not able to see it until the finish passes and you must examine the finish
passes in detail to determine the problem is not in the finish passes. You
can always find the problem but it can be easier and quicker with certain
techniques.
It is a time, frustration issue. :)
On 03/02/2015 15:27, stustev wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:06 AM, kintel [via OpenSCAD] <[hidden email]
http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11392&i=0> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson <[hidden email]
http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=0> wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD script
directly from Perl, and in the end, open the entire script in OpenSCAD to
get the the final geometry calculated. That way, the perl script will be
simpler and decoupled from OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in addition to
OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g. Netfabb, Blender, the various
openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which line
of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking but other
times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what. If there is a
way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut
it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
Being able to process the entire CAM program will surely be early in the
cycle.
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=1
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11389.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here.
NAML
http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
View this message in context: Re: nc code verification
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11392.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive http://forum.openscad.org/
at Nabble.com.
OpenSCAD mailing listDiscuss@lists.openscad.orghttp://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
On Feb 3, 2015, at 10:27 AM, stustev stustev@gmail.com wrote:
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which line of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking but other times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what. If there is a way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
There are ways of structuring this in OpenSCAD. You could e.g. describe all tool locations in a list and let OpenSCAD iterate over that list.
You could even have an animation playing through the list to see the actual tool movement.
Some of these things are possible in real-time, while others require a lot of processing.
The best would be to start somewhere and get some experience in terms of what limitations in OpenSCAD you’ll have to live with.
Perhaps this example could help understand highlighting/animation:
http://files.openscad.org/examples/Advanced/animation.html
-Marius
Well there you go then, the concept will work (my para 3).
It will not detect an over deep rough cut that misses the finished
surfaces, and that may be a problem too - loading everything up from the
cutter to the workpiece.
But that leads me on to think - by modelling each cut step and
calculating it's volume...hmm, would need to difference the tool with a
'work so far' model at any instant to check for too much plunge or just
slamming sideways into the piece.
Could be done.
You would also probably want to do a minowski on the 'designed' STL to
reduce it a skim. THis would prevent arithmetic errors causing tiddly
bits of intersection and make the go/nogo result clear.
On 03/02/2015 16:52, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Richard Benjamin
<richard@digicalm.com mailto:richard@digicalm.com> wrote:
I can see the value of the cut by cut approach.
If you did the whole lot in one batch, then cmpare the result STL
to the designed STL, eg by differencing, you will get to see
gouges and uncut areas, but not where in the program it occured.
If you create each program step cut as an additive operation then
intersect that with the designed STL, you will see over/deep/gouge
cuts, or nothing, at each step.
You probably don't need to see cuts that don't touch the finished
part as they will be lots of roughing etc.
Many times the miss cut event is a roughing cut that is incorrect. You
are not able to see it until the finish passes and you must examine
the finish passes in detail to determine the problem is not in the
finish passes. You can always find the problem but it can be easier
and quicker with certain techniques.
It is a time, frustration issue. :)
On 03/02/2015 15:27, stustev wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:06 AM, kintel [via OpenSCAD] <[hidden
email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11392&i=0>> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson <[hidden email]
<http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=0>> wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD
script directly from Perl, and _in the end_, open the entire
script in OpenSCAD to get the the final geometry calculated.
That way, the perl script will be simpler and decoupled from
OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in
addition to OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g.
Netfabb, Blender, the various openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly
which line of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by
just looking but other times it is not clear which line of code
did exactly what. If there is a way to highlight the cut
surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut it then
preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
Being able to process the entire CAM program will surely be early
in the cycle.
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
<http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=1>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11389.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here.
NAML
<http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you
to read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this
without saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or
opening my private correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this message in context: Re: nc code verification
<http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11392.html>
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive
<http://forum.openscad.org/> at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.openscad.org>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.openscad.org>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to
read this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without
saving or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my
private correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
If OpenSCAD supports user defined attributes on a face-by-face basis, one can
attach the sequence number (Nxxxx), a g-code file line number or even the text
of the block itself (perhaps with a level of indirection) to each set of faces
affected by the respective cut vector.
On 2/3/2015 11:07 AM, Richard Benjamin wrote:
Well there you go then, the concept will work (my para 3).
It will not detect an over deep rough cut that misses the finished surfaces, and
that may be a problem too - loading everything up from the cutter to the workpiece.
But that leads me on to think - by modelling each cut step and calculating it's
volume...hmm, would need to difference the tool with a 'work so far' model at
any instant to check for too much plunge or just slamming sideways into the piece.
Could be done.
You would also probably want to do a minowski on the 'designed' STL to reduce it
a skim. THis would prevent arithmetic errors causing tiddly bits of intersection
and make the go/nogo result clear.
On 03/02/2015 16:52, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Richard Benjamin <richard@digicalm.com
mailto:richard@digicalm.com> wrote:
I can see the value of the cut by cut approach.
If you did the whole lot in one batch, then cmpare the result STL to the
designed STL, eg by differencing, you will get to see gouges and uncut
areas, but not where in the program it occured.
If you create each program step cut as an additive operation then
intersect that with the designed STL, you will see over/deep/gouge cuts,
or nothing, at each step.
You probably don't need to see cuts that don't touch the finished part as
they will be lots of roughing etc.
Many times the miss cut event is a roughing cut that is incorrect. You are not
able to see it until the finish passes and you must examine the finish passes
in detail to determine the problem is not in the finish passes. You can always
find the problem but it can be easier and quicker with certain techniques.
It is a time, frustration issue. :)
On 03/02/2015 15:27, stustev wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:06 AM, kintel [via OpenSCAD] <[hidden email]
<http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11392&i=0>> wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Stuart Stevenson <[hidden email]
<http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=0>> wrote:
[…]
Open OpenSCAD
Run the Perl output line in OpenSCAD
[…]
Save the resulting model and close OpenSCAD
Instead of doing this, I would simply generate an OpenSCAD script
directly from Perl, and _in the end_, open the entire script in
OpenSCAD to get the the final geometry calculated. That way, the
perl script will be simpler and decoupled from OpenSCAD itself.
This way you could also experiment with other engines in addition to
OpenSCAD by simple changing your output (e.g. Netfabb, Blender, the
various openjscad-like tools etc.).
-Marius
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which line
of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking but other
times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what. If there is a
way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut
it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
Being able to process the entire CAM program will surely be early in the
cycle.
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=11389&i=1>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11389.html
To unsubscribe from nc code verification, click here.
NAML
<http://forum.openscad.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read
this email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving
or reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private
correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
View this message in context: Re: nc code verification
<http://forum.openscad.org/nc-code-verification-tp11373p11392.html>
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive <http://forum.openscad.org/>
at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.openscad.org>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org <mailto:Discuss@lists.openscad.org>
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
--
Addressee is the intended audience.
If you are not the addressee then my consent is not given for you to read this
email furthermore it is my wish you would close this without saving or
reading, and cease and desist from saving or opening my private correspondence.
Thank you for honoring my wish.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
Marius, Forgive my laziness, it's been a while since I used OpenSCAD, but does
OpenSCAD support a linear sweep / extrude of a solid body (resulting in a new
solid that can be subtracted) versus a linear sweep / extrude a 2D profile?
Phil(f) in WI
On 2/3/2015 11:03 AM, Marius Kintel wrote:
On Feb 3, 2015, at 10:27 AM, stustevstustev@gmail.com wrote:
I agree this should be an option.
I like the idea of line by line. That allows finding exactly which line of code makes which cut. Sometimes, it is clear by just looking but other times it is not clear which line of code did exactly what. If there is a way to highlight the cut surfaces/sections and see which line of code cut it then preprocessing the entire CAM program would be just fine.
There are ways of structuring this in OpenSCAD. You could e.g. describe all tool locations in a list and let OpenSCAD iterate over that list.
You could even have an animation playing through the list to see the actual tool movement.
Some of these things are possible in real-time, while others require a lot of processing.
The best would be to start somewhere and get some experience in terms of what limitations in OpenSCAD you’ll have to live with.
Perhaps this example could help understand highlighting/animation:
http://files.openscad.org/examples/Advanced/animation.html
-Marius
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org