buildlog.net

Greolt wrote:

twehr wrote:Vectors do work. They just depend on having everything set up correctly.

I suspect you have had a happy coincidence of ratios that make it appear that the vector is being scaled.

Greolt

Not sure what you mean by this. Are you ny able to make them work? I am using a friction type rotary adapter and vectors do work very well. Since I don't have a chucking type I can't test that out.

twehr wrote: Are you ny able to make them work?

Tim

As I said above, when raster engraving, the DSP utilises the scaling as set in "advanced functions"

However when vector engraving-cutting those settings are ignored. As is the "run box" feature.

At least that is my experience with every test I have made.

What I meant above is;

I suspect that in your case, you had the happy coincidence of the ratios being very close to the same, when running the rotary or linear axis.

So that the laser progressed across the material a similar distance for a given number of steps put out by the controller as when using the linear Y axis.

Now that is a guess and may be off the mark. I cant see your setup. I am on the other side of the world.

I do know that vector work is not being scaled for my setup, as well as Marco and Li the programmer.

I will prepare a visual example.

Greolt

Tim

If you try this little exercise you should see what I am saying about vectors not being scaled

Run a similar vector and raster engrave job to that shown below in the pic.

I am guessing, because of what you said above, that both of the the circles will come out at close to the true shape.

Then without changing anything, EXCEPT, double or triple the value in "Current diameter (mm)" box. Same material, same everything else.

Re download the job and run again.

I believe you will see the raster engraved circle change shape (scaling changes around the rotary axis) as you would expect.

But the vector engrave circle will remain unchanged.

Hope this helps.

Greolt

Greolt wrote:Tim

If you try this little exercise you should see what I am saying about vectors not being scaled

Run a similar vector and raster engrave job to that shown below in the pic.

I am guessing, because of what you said above, that both of the the circles will come out at close to the true shape.

Then without changing anything, EXCEPT, double or triple the value in "Current diameter (mm)" box. Same material, same everything else.

Re download the job and run again.

I believe you will see the raster engraved circle change shape (scaling changes around the rotary axis) as you would expect.

But the vector engrave circle will remain unchanged.

Hope this helps.

Greolt

I will try this. However, even without trying it, I will say that you are probably correct - at least partially. In the write up I specifically said that if you have a friction type rotary, as I do, then once you set it up, you NEVER change the setup. There is no need to change the diameter, regardless of what diameter you use. This is true because the friction feed works the same as if you were on a flat limitless plane.

In the testing I did to get it all figured out initially, after initial settings were determined, changing only one of the parameters, like diameter, would scale the engraving but not the vectors. That IS why I said set it up and forget it. You don't need to touch it again.

Since I don't have a chucking type adapter, I can't be sure if the vectors will work correctly or not. Perhaps someone out there has one and can test for us. But, unless my retest today proves otherwise, I will stand by my statement that setting up as I described and then leaving everything alone will work for the friction feeds,

I tested again, using the Friction Type Rotary Adapter and my earlier comments were confirmed that once set up correctly, you can run vector, engraved, or combined jobs just fine without any adjustments to your setup.

I updated my blog with a video, which I am also including here, showing the output of a job on a 70mm object even though the settings are for an 18mm object.

Tim we have a saying in Australia. "Your barking up the wrong tree" Maybe you have the same in the US.

Anyone who has used a friction roller type rotary axis realises that a change in material diameter will not necessitate a change in settings. That is a given. Lets get past that tree and move on.

The point that needs to be made for other readers of this thread is that raster engraving is scaled according to the settings in "advanced parameters" and vector work is NOT. (neither is "run box")

The presumption that "both work fine in my friction roller rotary" so therefore both will work for every other friction roller rotary is wrong and is going to have users pulling their hair out.

As I said, your rotary has the happy circumstance of the out put ratio either matching or very close to matching the Y axis.

This could be argued to be good design and I would agree.

If you were to change the motor pulley on your rotary to either a larger or smaller tooth count and do settings to suit this ratio change and retry your example, you would find that the vectors now come out wrong.

Not every user of the AWC608 will have the same happy match of ratios that you do. The AWC608 will be installed in all sorts of lasers. Both home and factory built.

The settings on the "advanced parameters" are all to do with "when ratios don't match"

All of the above does not matter to either of us. We both know how to use our rotarys and understand the limitations of the controller as they apply to us.

BUT information that goes into a manual really should be correct.

Greolt

I changed the couple of sentences in the blog and the manual that refer to vector operations with a rotary adapter. I now state the specific circumstances under which anyone can make it work, and left (and repeated) the original statement that it is not officially supported.

If you have a friction type rotary adapter and your adapter steps per inch are the same as the axis you are plugging it into (Y or X), then I encourage you to try it. It is very useful for some design situations.

---------------------
Notes Regarding Vector Operatoins on a Rotary Adapter

Officially, the AWC 608 does not support vector (cutting) operations when using the Rotate Engrave Advance Function.

In practice, however, when using a Friction Type Rotary Adapter, vector (cutting) operations appear to work very well for some installations. The key appears to be having the gearing (steps per inch) of the rotary adapter to be the same as the steps per inch you normally have on the Y (or X) axis. A common configuration is 1000 steps per inch for both. When they are the same, functions that use vector movements, including outlining vectors/cutting, Box, and Cut Box all appear to work well. Again, this is not officially supported but it may be worth giving it a try on your setup.
---------------------

Sounds good Tim. Well done. I am looking forward to reading the manual.

All this discussion has got me thinking I will build a friction roller type rotary, to add to the chuck type I have.

I can see that it is good design principal to have the gearing or ratio match the Y axis. I will do it this way.

What diameter are the friction drive wheels on yours? And space between them?

I see you had some problems with items being kicked out during rapids.

Has experience with your rotary told you this is ideal, or would you make them larger or smaller, if doing it again?

My guess is, larger would be better than smaller.

Greolt

Greolt wrote:Sounds good Tim. Well done. I am looking forward to reading the manual.

All this discussion has got me thinking I will build a friction roller type rotary, to add to the chuck type I have.

I can see that it is good design principal to have the gearing or ratio match the Y axis. I will do it this way.

What diameter are the friction drive wheels on yours? And space between them?

I see you had some problems with items being kicked out during rapids.

Has experience with your rotary told you this is ideal, or would you make them larger or smaller, if doing it again?

My guess is, larger would be better than smaller.

Greolt

Mine was the prototype for the first buildlog rotary adapter. I think there is lots of info available on the forums here about the current design, including a new design of the tail stock that Bart and I came up with.

I still have trouble with slippage of light objects. In the wate bottle example, I had to bit a heavier object inside to help hold it down.

I would like to have a chuck type do some objects. If I built that, though, i would gear it for 1000 steps per inch on the chuck gear, just to minimize setup tweaking to begin with.

If I ever build a new laser, I would also build it with mor z height. The current size is a bit tight for doing rotary work.

twehr wrote:I would like to have a chuck type do some objects. If I built that, though, i would gear it for 1000 steps per inch on the chuck gear, just to minimize setup tweaking to begin with.

You could possibly do that for an average size diameter of say 60 to 70mm. A rotary is degrees not inches. But you know that.

If I ever build a new laser, I would also build it with mor z height. The current size is a bit tight for doing rotary work.

Yes I made mine with 300mm table travel for just that reason. Maybe a bit excessive.

So any way I am thinking of maybe about 90mm diameter friction rollers.

I will do some reading on Barts design discussion.

Greolt