Detail Pass only cutting new X and Y, but no change to Z

Machine is Onefinity, I am using Easel Pro and exporting G-Code.

I am cutting some trays, and experimenting with the rough vs detail passes, expecting to see the detail pass use a smaller stepover for the final pass on the sides and bottom of the pocket cut. But it A) doesn’t appear to use any different stepover, the width of cut on the final pass is the same as the original as it cuts the final wall pass, and B) it only makes a final cut for the walls, and doesn’t even attempt to finish the bottom of the tray. Ie, it only cuts down to the same Z point that the rough pass does, only finishing cuts on the X and Y.

I basically can’t see any reason to use a detail pass G-Code for pocket cuts, other than if I wanted different feed rate and/or cut depth for the final pass. (I see the point for other types of cuts, but not in use here)

Is this expected?

Yes, the two-stage carve is primarily for using a roughing bit and then a smaller detail bit to get into areas of the design where the roughing bit cannot get to.

I think what you might be wanting is a “spring pass” as a final pass that is way lighter in stepover & depth while using the same bit as the roughing pass…? This can be accomplished, but it gets more involved since you have to consider the geometry of the design. A lot of people, including myself, will carve the design and then run another carve with the depth per pass set to the full depth of the deepest part of the carve. This will provide a “spring pass” of sorts and works fairly well.

{:0)

Brandon R. Parker

Ah. Thank you.

Yes, ideally I want to use the same bit, just reduce to a 5-8% stepover for the deepest Z cut to significantly reduce the amount of sanding required.

Since the step-over seems to be at the application level, (rather than at the cut setting level, which I would have expected), I assume this method requires leaving it at 40%, exporting G-Code, changing it to 5%, then exporting the spring pass, then changing it back. Is this accurate?

That would do it…

{:0)

Brandon Parker