3d relief : rough pass deeper than detail pass in one place only

Easel 3D in Easel Pro
1

Dear all,
using the 3d easel functions with a rough pass (1/8 flat nose) and a detail pass (1/8 ball nose) I was successful to make several reliefs. Today I made a new one and the rough pass went too deep. This is not a Z problem because I was able to simulate it using the both gcodes (converted back the gcode to stl), the detail pass is clearly over the rough one as seen in the image.

easel_problem_apo
easel_problem_apo1920Ă—576 74.9 KB

easel_problem_apo_2
easel_problem_apo_2860Ă—436 222 KB

Recomputing the path several times does not change anything

Any ideas on the issue are welcome

2

Hey Abram, can you share the Easel project for this?

In Easel go to Project>Share, then set it to “unlisted” then copy the link shown there and paste the link over here.

3

Hey,
Sure here it is incriminate project

1 Like
4

I was able to make the issue go away by increasing the stepdown…

My unsolicited 2 cents:
Something else to consider as well, a 6% stepover is pretty low, you might get better results by using a 2mm ball bit and a 10% stepover. The carve time would be basically identical since the stepover distance would be the same but the smaller tip size would allow it to get into that the 1/8" ball cannot reach.

5

Thanks for the tips. Few more questions/comments.

  • Do you have an explanation of the origin of the problem having the rough pass below the detail one ?
  • You “increased” the stepdown ? what is the value you used ?
  • Yes I just ordered a 2mm ballnose and was using the 6% in order to limit the path marks and it works quite well, but I’ll try the 2mm once in hands.

And a final comment, my choice of 6% was also given by the verticality of some areas in order to limit the steps effect of the finish. According to some slopes I have on the terrain but I’ll see with the 2mm.

6

I don’t know exactly why it occurred, I actually didn’t verify the fault either.

To make the toolpaths more visible in the Easel simulation, without having to use another program to view the layers, I went to 8mm depth per pass and it was clear while watching the simulation that no toolpaths went into that section of the model.

7

8mm depth per pass is ok to remove this artefact, but I can’t use such a parameter with my material. For this reason I will digg further the question of the cause.
Thanks a lot for the insights

8

I made few tests tweaking the cut depth a little bit and it removes the artefact. Should have been a mathematical aberation somewhere in the gcode creation that is reproductible but also removable.

The lesson of this for me is that I have better to test (10 minutes) by simulation the consistency of the rough gcode with the detail gcode before sending the whole to the machine (10 hours) in order to avoid ridges to disappear and waste time as material.

2 Likes
9

To make this post complete I rewamped a bit the illustration of my problem in producing a consistent gcode as I submitted the problem ot Inventables (currently working on it, thanks to them).

Summary of the problem : roughing pass removing more material than needed, thus having finishing pass flying over
Source of the problem : gcode generation in easel 3d, not the machine nor the material. Why? just because simulating the machining result with the gcodes allows to replicate the problem seen in wood
Illustration of the problem :