CamBam plus 0.9.8

[10bulls]

If anyone has any bug reports, comments or suggestions regarding the new CamBam version 0.9.8, please post them here.

Thank you very much for your feedback!  

Details of the new release and a link to the download are in this thread:
http://www.cambam.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=1196.0

[kvom]

I just installed, and it looks good.  I'll try to remake a part that I did with 9.7.

One suggestion is to put the CB version # in the first line of the g-code output.  I modified the post processor I use to reflect this.

[spiked3]

I do not do the fancy machining a lot of others do, actually I have taken a break from doing much of anything for the moment - but;  I did do a chassis for a mobile robot and everything worked perfectly. I really like the new style paradigm. It also looks like some intelligent tool speed and feed type functionality is just around the corner as well, that is great.
Oh, and I love the ability to define (multiple) stocks and easily manipulate origins - it made the robot chassis go a lot faster than before since the part was too big for the machine and I had to break it into several localized operations - bravo.

I mentioned to a few already - but I will be posting the source for my Alibre to CamBam bridge (ver 0.9.8 compatible) again very shortly - it is actually already done   But I will not be able to offer any support for it. That was my intentions before and I lost track of that and it started taking a significant amount of time.

Andy, much thanks - Mike.

[coolant slinger]

Andy,

I downloaded version 0.9.8. I see you added lead out to profiling tool path. This is nice. I also see that there is a lathe option and an example cb file of the lathe option. I do lathe work on my mill so this is a great addition to the software. I liked Lazycam for that very reason that it was capible of lathe and mill 2.5d. But it is not as powerfull and user friendly as CAMBAM. And they have stopped development. I can't wait to play with the lathe option. Dude, you just exceeded my expectations.
Keep up the good work.

[kvom]

I did some experimenting with the tool libraries and ran into some minor issues.

1) When I create a new tool library, I cannot rename it.  First is named Tools, then Tools1.

2) When I added a tool to the library and referenced it in a pocket MOP, I got the error message Stepover must be greater then zero.  However, I had set stepover to .5.  When I just set the endmill diameter in the MOP (overriding the tool library), the message went away.  FWIW, it would be helpful if the name of a MOP is displayed with such error messages.

While I can select multiple MOPs, the enable/disable options don't work on the selected grouping.

I appreciate the new ability to generate G98 for clearance/retract height management in drilling.

[Jeff_Birt]

One minor thing I have noticed is that the MOP window is reset when you generate a tool path. This is frustrating when you trying to get a setting just right and have to keep going back down the MOP window finding and expanding the correct section of the tree to make a minor tweak.

[EAC]

Andy, you may already have some of these from DW testing    Just wanted to get them all in one place.

Can not rename any new Cam Styles....  just template1 etc... as with tool library.

It would be nice if style variants were shown under the original, (with the + ) instead of in the list separately.  Have not found a way to re-order the styles in the list.  They won't drag. No problem, just messy.

Made a new Cam Style (templates), and created a new style in it.  Applied the style to a MOP, and when I generated toolpath, it couldn't find the style.

When you set a new start point using the property method the tabs don't reflect the change as they do when start point is changed using right click method.  Would be nice to change to both calling the property method.

It would be nice to add a property to tabs that set the minimum distance from a endpoint (i.e.: corner).  Tabs too close to a corner always have to be moved.

Going to be working on stuff today, so I'm sure there will be more..

Don @ EAC

[blowlamp]

In my opinion, the hardest thing to grasp is where some of the settings or values within a MOP are being obtained and why.
If you've set MOPs to derive settings in several ways, it can soon get tricky to follow.
I think some kind of feedback would be in order, even if it's just colour co-ordinated text for a value that indicates the source Style is from a Part or Machining object.
I'd find it handy if the chosen Auto, Default, Value and Inherited option could remain on view in the MOP as well, to serve as a clue.
It would also save a couple of clicks if the Inherited style info could be displayed on the initial right click - if you get what I mean.

Martin.

[FatFreddie]

Nice one Andy - looks like lots of great improvements. Particularly pleased to see the lathe stuff. Unfortunately I'm off on holiday so won't get chance to play with it for a couple of weeks :-(

One minor comment - the MachiningOrigin defaults to NaN - is this by design?

Cheers,
Mark

[EAC]

A minor weird one that may be left over from 97, not sure..

Create a MOP, adjust tabs to your liking, then set a new style to the MOP.  The tabs stay set at manual.  This is a problem when you change to a style that has NO TABS.  Shouldn't tabs reset to the new style?  A new style should reset the MOP to NEW beforehand. We need to know that things won't be leftover if we make changes. That can cause a lot of problems.

Don @ EAC

[EAC]

OK, 1 more for Andy.

CB files convert to v98 when loaded, is there a way to 'apply to MOP' to copy old templates into styles?  Some of us have accumulated a lot of templates, and I can see a lot of typo's if we have to do it all manually.

Don @ EAC

[blowlamp]

A minor weird one that may be left over from 97, not sure..

Create a MOP, adjust tabs to your liking, then set a new style to the MOP.  The tabs stay set at manual.  This is a problem when you change to a style that has NO TABS.  Shouldn't tabs reset to the new style?  A new style should reset the MOP to NEW beforehand. We need to know that things won't be leftover if we make changes. That can cause a lot of problems.

Don @ EAC

Don.
I think you might be running into the problem I'm referring to in my post above.
If you right-click on the words in the HoldingTabs cell of your MOP, you'll get the options of Auto, Default, Value and Inherited style. Try experimenting with these and see if it now works as you want.

Martin.

[EAC]

A minor weird one that may be left over from 97, not sure..

Create a MOP, adjust tabs to your liking, then set a new style to the MOP.  The tabs stay set at manual.  This is a problem when you change to a style that has NO TABS.  Shouldn't tabs reset to the new style?  A new style should reset the MOP to NEW beforehand. We need to know that things won't be leftover if we make changes. That can cause a lot of problems.

Don @ EAC

Don.
I think you might be running into the problem I'm referring to in my post above.
If you right-click on the words in the HoldingTabs cell of your MOP, you'll get the options of Auto, Default, Value and Inherited style. Try experimenting with these and see if it now works as you want.

Martin.

Yeah that fixes it once, but that setting changes with the new MOP applied, so it will be a problem again..   Maybe the 'Great One with the Beer Hat' will chime in on the logic for this issue.  Totally resetting the MOP before applying a new style is the only way I see it not getting in the way big time.

Don 

[EAC]

Found the issue with not finding the MOP under new cam style 'templates'.  To find it is other than 'standard', you have to set the proper style folder in the 'style library' under 'part1'...  Then it won't find others under different sub-styles.

There is SO MUCH new in this version, that I can see it taking a while to get it all together, but it will be worth the wait.  Gonna be VERY cool, Andy

Don @ EAC

[kvom]

The default for Spindle Direction in the provided styles, IMO, should be CW.  The first g-code I generated with 0.9.8 had no M3 code.