Sign software and such ...

[dogfuel]

Gotta new PRT96 (actualy, just new to me - I bought it used) and have it running fairly well at the job I intended for it (still have a bit of tinkering to find the best bit for the soft plastic we're cutting, but the machine is working well).

Lurking in this forum, I'm fascinated by some of the work you guys do. It's easy enough to engrave lettering with a vbit and typesetter but I'd really like to "reverse the relief" (certianly incorrect terminology) and have the letters raised.

What sw packages are useful for this? The parts I'm cutting are simple enough to do with just the shopbot control laungage so I have no investment is SB or sign specific packages. I use turbocad, autocad and corell as I still have to occasionaly trick my laser into doing something useful but my only experience going for the effect I want is (for the laser) using corell to add contour lines out from an autocad drawing with a spacing equal to the laser "kerf".

I know there is a much more sophisticated (and presumably more precise) way to achieve this with sb than actual rendering the entire tool path in corell but do not know what software to use or the process to do it. Any suggestions?

[scottmc (Unregistered Guest)]

Look at Enrout 3, It is easy to use, and there suport is a lot better.
Scott

[joe]

Joe,

There are several programs such as ArtCam & Enroute that a full fledged packages in the 3K price range (See Software Packages Under ShopBot).

You could try out the free 30 day test or SB makes the Parts Wizard which cost less but is rather limited.

No one can advise you very well on this topic without knowing what you expect to do. For example: You could cut letters out and apply them to most any background. This is much more effecient than removing lots of background and them trying to finish it.

j

[K. Simmerer (Unregistered Guest)]

No big trick to do raised prismatic letters. Machine along vector with your v-bit, Area clear to the same depth, viola' raised prismatic. The trick is how deep to cut for the bit you are using to achieve your top edge without a flat. To determine this create a v-carve file for the letters in question and note the max depth. If your machining depth is at least that figure you are fine. For instance if max depth figure was .187 then if you cut .20 deep you are good to go.

Hope this makes sense,
Keith

[dheise]

As a table top ShopBot owner and a sign maker of several years, I am asked increasingly for graphics of old cars (eg. '55 T-Bird) and old tractors. Is there software out there that has profile views of such and maybe with a few lines such as doors and windows... I have a version of SignLab that has some but not the ones I require?

[kerrazy]

You need vector Mega Graphics, which has many different vehicles available in it. It is EPS or DXf ready to cut graphics.
Dale

[dheise]

Thanks for the info. Several replies recommended Vector Mega Graphics, all positive, so will check it out.
Dave

[Richard Warnell (Unregistered Guest)]

I was wondering it someone could explain the difference between 2 1/2 D & 3D for me.

[bleeth]

2 1/2 d is comparable to a relief map- It has all the elevations but lies on a (more or less) flat plain. 3d is more like a globe-It is carved all the way around.
Dave

[paco]

Richard,
I have two point of view about this topics:

-the process; 2 1/2 D would be using more than one Z height for machining a part but each Z height levels being Z fixed height moves. Cutting at different pocketing levels for instance and cutting the exterior throught the material. 2 1/2 D involve ONLY two axis movement control; X & Y move while Z is fixed...
3D involve 3 axis movement; all 3 axis CAN move at the same time.


-the finish result; both 2 1/2D and 3D can create the effect of a 3D part; with a combination a various Z fixed toolpath and various cutter shapes, 2 1/2D strategie can achieve quite suprising results approaching to what a 3D strategie can do... but if the relief (the intended part) is complex, probably that you'll need to machine it with a 3D strategie more often using a ball end tool bit.

How does this sound?

[mikejohn]

Paco
Going back to the discussions on the half pillar thread, is the method of doing curves in the z axis (not your waterline method) 2 1/2D or 3D?

.....Mike

[paco]

Mike,
assuming that your are refering to Morris's strategie, I'd say 2 1/2D (non standard; X & Z axis)... what do you think yourself? To which strategie are you refering to?

From the process point of view 2 1/2D is, I believe, two or more 2D toolpaths done on one part... one strategie that is often called 2 1/2D but is, again, I believe, 3D is V carving since 3 axis are enable to move, at some point, to achieve the resulting toolpath...

[billp]

Richard,
I think TRUE 3D is when you have machined a piece that you are able to see, and have access to ALL sides of your finished part. This means you revolve it in your hand and see the top, undersides, back/front, etc. as you rotate it. Much of what we do with the 'Bot is closer to 2.5 D where as it's been pointed out above, you have multiple changes in your depth level. We CAN do true 3D on the 3 axis 'Bot (see Darrell Blanton's work for example), but it means re-positioning, and indexing, your part at least once on your table..
Paco, I think most 2.5 D work has multiple Z depths where the Z is not a fixed height...

[paco]

Bill,
as I wrote, one can ask/answer this question both from the process AND the finish resulting part;

-process: 2 1/2 (should be 2D; 2 1/2D do not exist sice there are no such thing as 2 1/2 axis) is 2 axis toolpathing... 3D is 3 axis toolpathing, 3 dimenssional toolpathing (or more axis...)

-the resulting part: this can argued for long since it depends on the part shape complexity. A 2D part could be a simple shape cutting like a letter from a sheet good. A 3D part would have 3 dimenssional relief (at least on one side). A VERY REAL 3D part would be machined from it's every sides.

2 1/2D work sure have two or more Z depth... or it would be named 2D!... right?

BUT, this is only the way I see all this... I not pretending that it should be the truth for everyone.

How would you define 2 1/2D work?

[billp]

I think 2.5 D work is when you have graduated Z levels, such as in the "ramping" of "V-carved"letters. In this case the extra ".5 D" would be the graduated entry/exit as compared to what I would call a "2D"cut, such as a "machine along vector" in which the depth is a constant. Of course then you have grey areas such as models of rice terraces, or flights of stairs, I have NO idea what to call them...

[paco]

Bill,
that is what I feel too; there is grey areas in between 2D and 3D works/parts... I wonder how "specialist" of CNC see this...?!

[gerald_d]

I am not a specialist of CNC by any means, but in my simple understanding, the "half-D" is an axis that could almost be manually controlled during the CNC process. As in setting down to a fixed depth for a first pass, and then setting deeper for a second pass. Very much related to the early concept of using different colours as "codes" for different depths. Guys were using 2D CAD programs with colours and fed this into the SB's DXF converter to get a file that cut at different depths. This was 2.5D in my book.

V-Carving (centerline, not outline) is full 3D - there is no way that depth could be controlled by hand or colour. The 3rd axis z is continually, and smoothly changing position.

Another way to think of it is to think whether the 3rd axis works simultaneous with the first 2 axes. If x and y have to stop while z moves, then this cannot be 3D, but it is more than 2D...therefore 2.5D?

[gene marshall (Unregistered Guest)]

If something exists for a measurable amount of time it just became 4D
geneM

[evan]

And if you make it with strings it's 11D
EMC2

[jsfrost]

Let's see how this attempt flies?

Within a machine boundaries and perceptual limits, for 2D the machine or toolpath can preceptually follow an arbitrary curve on a fixed plane. 2.5d can aproximate an arbitrary curve in space with visually discreet steps on one axis. 3D can preceptually follow an arbitrary curve in space.
Of course, at the micro level it's all steps.

[gene marshall (Unregistered Guest)]

seriously, a 3D cutting job on a flat background is often reffered to as a 2.5D.
gene M

[btk]

I beleive that a part can only be 2D or 3D.

However CNC machines are generally
2 Axis
2.5 Axis
3 Axis or more

I beleive a standard Shopbot is 2.5-"axis" machine
capable of cutting 3"D" parts

I beleive that a machine could be classifed as being capable of true 3-"Axis" machining when it is capable of removing material that is "behind" material that remains on the finished part.
So a shobbot w/ indexer is true 3Axis machine.

[fleinbach]

It has always been my understanding that when cutting parts from flat material where you only cut around the part like a cookie cutter was referred to as 2D. In 2d you are only cutting out a silhouette defined in the X and Y plain using a 2D program. Where as a 3D operation creates a relief having all three dimensions X, Y and Z and requires a 3D program. The operation of creating this dimensional affect requires the tool to move in all three plains using a bit with a simple shape. The shape of the bit alone does not contribute to creating the 3D affect but carves the shape following a 3D tool path created using some 3D cadcam software

Now a 2.5D is a method of creating a 3D affect while using a 2D strategy and only needs a 2D tool path. In other words if you cut out a silhouette with a straight bit you have a flat shape. Now if you cut out the same shape but use a bit with a profile such as an Ogee or some other shape it will no longer be just a flat silhouette but become three dimensional. So using a 2D tool path you wind up with a 3D shape. Hence the term 2.5D

If you get quite imaginative you can obtain some very intricate 3D relief’s following vectors using only a 2D program like Part Wizard

BTK

The Shopbot is a 3 Axis machine. There are no half axis's. An Axis is defined as: A straight line about which a body or geometric object rotates or may be conceived to rotate.

[btk]

Frank,

I am not a physicist, however I am pretty sure there is no such thing as a half of a Dimension either


I am just going by what I have read (by memory) in the past as a definition of a 3-axis machine, however I will try to find a reference.

[btk]

I found the reference I was thinking about and needless to say, I was off a bit......
I am posting the entire excerpt from the chapter on NC machining, the section is called "Axis of Motion", because I would not know how to begin to summarize .
The book is from 1989, however perhaps it still holds true, or at least shows some history of the terminology

<blockquote>
"Several different types of machining operations can be performed by NC machines, such as milling, lathe turning, flame water-jet or laser cutting, bibbling, etc. In each of these machines, the motion of the cutter relateive to the part is described using a 'right hand rule' rectangular cartesian coordinate system as has been used through this Guide. In some type of machines the cutter will move, and in others, the part will move and the cutter will remain stationary. This makes no difference when creating the NC program, since the tool motions will be described relative to the part in either case.

These motions are designated by convetion X, Y and Z. The General convention for machining is that the Z axis is parallel to the axis of the spindle rotation, which is often vertical for a milling machine or horizontal for a lathe. The X axis is usually the longest axis perpendicular to this Z axis. Some machines will have more than these three axes, such as rotating the spindle or the work peice in one or two directions. Five axis machine or more are common.

One of the first considerations in planning the machining process is decideing how many axes of machining are required, and what machine should be used. The number of axes of the machining operation is the number of independend motions that are requied. For example, for flame cutting parts out of sheet metal, only two axis X and Y are required. Milling machines often have 3 axes of motion, an X and Y motion of the table, and a Z motion of the rotationg spindle. For many parts however, the type of machining that is required is called two and a half axis machining. This refers to the fact only two axes are ever changed simultaneusly. The third axis may be used to drill holes or to set the depth of the spindle for pocketing, profiling, or plunge cutting, but not at the same time as X and Y motion. Although the result is a three dimensional part, the machining operation used is called two and a half axis instead of three axis. Three axis machining is where all three axes are controlled at the same time, such as to machine a sculptured part.

It is important to understand the difference between two and a half axis (2.5D), or three axis(or any multi-axis machining), since the geometry preperation will be different. In the first case, we will only need the projected 2D profile of the object. For multi-axis machining, we will need to be concerned with the surfaces of the object as well as the wireframe edges."

</blockquote>


The book is the manual for SDRC I-Deas (Integrated Design Engineering Analysis Software) circa 1989

[mikejohn]

I think this is purely semantics.
In the real world of solids there is either 2D or 3D, nothing else. In the world of the ShopBot, we all understand what we mean by 2 1/2D.
I believe that, if you can view your tool line as a straight line from any angle, you have cut 2D. If you can not, like cutting a spiral, you have cut 3D.
Basically, it's Jims point, but the plane is only 'fixed' in relation to the cut, not the machine.
I feel this is important, as it means the discussions in the half pillar thread all use 2D cuts to create a 2 1/2D surface.
2D tool paths have to be the easiest to programme.
this from someone who still has 4 weeks before his ShopBot arrives

....Mike

[gerald_d]

"if you can view your tool line as a straight line from any angle, you have cut 2D"

Sorry, don't agree. Except if "any angle" means any of the three directions parallel to the machine's 3 axes.

All stepper motors cut in tiny straight lines, therefore we have nothing else but straight tool lines, even if we believe that we have cut a spiral. It doesn't help the argument to distinguish between curves (spirals) and straight lines.

The basic ShopBot, bundled with Partswizard, could be described by competitor companies as something less than 3D, because of the software limitation. With better software, it can definitely be called a fully capable 3D machine. The joy of salespeople and semantics.

[mikejohn]

If you cut from x,y, to x1,y1 in a straight line, with z going from z to z1 and back to z you have cut in a single (2D) plane relative to the cut. A curve can be on a single plane. A spiral on x,y with changing z can never be on a single 2D plane.
Imagine a tool with sufficient length to cut through the entire material, even with z at it's highest point. The cut face would be 2D when viewed perpendicular to the face.
Providing two axis move to make a straight line, it doesnt matter how the third axis moves, you will always end up with a planar face.
in the northern hemisphere

.....Mike

[gerald_d]

Moving a cutter along the 4 edges of an African (Egyptian) pyramid needs a 3D machine, even though it is all straight lines. Ask Ron if he could cut his Texas stars with a 2D machine.
Why are you silent about the cricket these days?

[fleinbach]

Technicaly speaking if you want to split hairs I suppose you could call a 2D cut out 3 dimensionable even though it has straight sides since you can hold it in your hand and rotating it see front, sides and back.

[mikejohn]

Gerald
still 2 to go
( more humiliation no doubt)
I agree 100%.
Any cut, by definition, must be 3 dimensional. All physical object are 3 dimensional. As I said earlier, this is semantics.
But what I find interesting is this. To make the machine cut from a to b requires a start point (x,y) and an end point (x1,y1). The simplest possible cut you can make.
Introduce a start z position, and an end z1 position, the cut is still straight, still easy to instruct the machine. Make a number of small straight lines (with a little more calculation) and you have an arc.
Add arcs together and you have my half pillar.
Nowhere in this is there any toolpaths deemed to be 3D. The half pillar is 2 1/2D (in ShopBot terminology), but achieved by simple, straight line toolpath instructions.
28 days and I can try this for real

.......Mike

[kaaboom_99]

Here is my thoughts. As posted in another thread regarding the cutting of a pillar, thoughts were to cut the pillar in (2) halves then laminate. That said, each halve would be considered a 2.5D part. Should the columns been cut while on an indexer, true 3D parts could be cut.

As Gerald stated, to cut along a vector with only a single Z height (profile cut), this would be 2D
as per the Collegiate House Dictionary" :

two dimensional - having the dimensions in height and width only.
three dimensional - having, or seeming to have, the dimension of depth as well as height and width"

I surmize that the 2.5D stuff we create leans towards the part of the 3D definition of "seems to have the dimension of depth..." but by literal definition, they are 3D components.

I believe that the industry created the term 2.5D to differentiate what some machine will do (out of the box) as compared to a 6 or 7 axis machine. We have such a CNC at work that is used to gauge our parts that sit stationary on a stand. The machine (gantry style) moves around the part and probes ALL surfaces with a ruby tip, records all dimensions and prints out any deviations.

Just 1 Canucks thoughts...

[billp]

Just to muddy the waters even further ( Richard did you EVER think you were going to start all of this with your question above?...)
Here are TWO "2.5D" carvings glued together.Using modern math does this now become a "5D image".......? (or worded differently-HOW many "D's" are in this picture?)
5875

[btk]

Bill,
That is Rhino....so it must be 3D

[mikejohn]

"2D or not 2D, that is the question"as Shakespeare almost put it

.............Mike

[paco]

I'd say 2D; it's a "flat" picture!

[ron brown]

"Ask Ron if he could cut his Texas stars with a 2D machine."

Be a female dog and a lot of jig and replacement but I think it could be done. It would not be an intelligent thing to do.

I'm wondering how Bill P got those undercuts on the Rhino in "2-1/2D". I might need some help on my overunity machine. I'll see him at the Texas ShopBot camp in Austin and ask.

Ron

[gene m (Unregistered Guest)]

my head is spinning

[billp]

Ron,
I used my "1D hacksaw blade" for the undercuts. After all Rhinos CAN be ticklish...See you in Austin..

[jsfrost]

Would it be accurate to say a machine and software are truely 3D only if the combination is capable of machining a sphere or any solid (within the machines resolution) that could be enclosed within? If so, the standard shoppbot, with any of the "3D" software available is limited to very precisely detailed 2.5D. Best case without outside help is a hemisphere. Detail is neat, and more desirable than stairsteps, but does detail and precision really add a demension?

[gerald_d]

Male rhinos are particulary fussy about being undercut with a hacksaw blade.

[mikejohn]

How can you tell its a male rhino?
Ah! I see.
It's not got its mouth open.
..............Mike
is the rain going to save you?

[gerald_d]

With England already 2 wickets down with only 7 runs on the board? Duckworth-Lewis may favour us yet

[mikejohn]

Now there's a challenge, explaining Duckworth-Lewis to those across the pond

in fact, trying to get me to understand it would be an uphill task!

[donchapman]

On the ShopBot home page click on "Applications" and then on "Model Signs" you will see that in August 2000 I wrote the following: "All of my designs so far are so-called 2.5D, not true3D, since I usually have only one or two different depths of cut."
Five years and many signs later, I'm still doing what I like to describe as 2.5D. Until I read the above string of 30+ messages, I never realized that I might be arrested by the semantic police. I thought I was just being humble in not claiming to be routing in "true 3D" when I typically have only one depth of cut.