Why isn't aspire preview cutting down sides

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello, I have some questions about the 3D model which I created in Rhino and imported into Aspire, and about Aspire's measuring tools.

The rail cap (1st image) is supposed to be 4.5" wide and 1.93" thick. When I import it into Aspire, and have the Import 3D Model window open, (with the man's head) it shows the thickness of my model as being less than 1.93 inches. I moved the sliders so that I had none of the model below the dividing plane, so not knowing what to do, there is a window that allows me to manually change the x, y and z dimensions of the model. I changed the appropriate values and it seemed all was OK, so I continued on to accept the 3D model.

I set up my material stock model so that it is 1.94" thick. When I do the rough cut, I wind up with a large piece on the sides of the model that are not being cut. I set the boundary vector offset in the roughing toolpath window to be .5" after having had it only at .25" for my .5" dia bit. No help....

I then went back to my vector boundary in the 3D modeling window, and widened it by at least an inch on either side of my model..... No help, I am still not getting the correct cutting down to the bottom of my part.

Question 1: My guess at this point, is that my actual 3D model did NOT get changed when I altered the values on the 3d model import page, since it originally brought the part in too thin. Does this seem likely? IF that is the case, how can I fix this?

Questions 2 and 3: It seems strange in Aspire that there are the nice measuring tools, but I can only seem to apply them to the plan/flat/top view of the imported part as it shows in the 2D modeling window.
2) I would think I could conjure up an end view in the 2D model and use Aspire's measuring tool to measure, and hence compare the mysterious height of this part versus the model I created in Rhino. Is this possible? If so, how????
3) Even nicer, but no doubt harder, it sure would be nice and logical, if I could apply the measuring tools to my model in Aspire's 3D modeling window. Is this possible? If so, how????

Thanks, Chuck

PS: I have been doing this in Aspire 4, but haven't gotten to watch the videos yet. Maybe I should have watched those before asking, but these functions don't seem different than V3.5, where I did watch all the videos.
Thanks again, Chuck

[Brady Watson]

Try offsetting your toolpath boundary vector about 50-100% of the tool diameter. It is respecting the boundary you set for it, which is why the tool isn't going all the way down. So, try offsetting first 50% tool diameter and increase it from there until you are happy with the preview. This is a common "issue'/feature among software packages.

-B

[Chuck Keysor]

Brady, as I noted in my original post, I had actually moved the boundary vector to one full inch on each side of the material. The Aspire training videos had said going to 50% of the tool diameter was sufficient. So I started out with the 50% clearance. After that failed, I moved the boundary out to one inch on both sides. After that failed, I deleted the boundary vector and tried simulating that way, still without success.

That is why I have speculated that my 3D model is somehow not correct, and wished I could measure my 3D model in Aspire to see if it is wrong. I had momentarily thought I could export the model back into Rhino to check it. But then realized if the model was corrupted going from Rhino into Aspire, how could I trust anything that had gotten transferred back into Rhino.........

Any ideas? Or should I post this on Aspire's forum? I have never used it and feel more at home here.

Thanks, Chuck

[adrianm]

Did you click the Apply button after changing the dimensions?

You can check the height of the imported model by right clicking and checking it's properties from the Component Tree.

As you move the mouse over the model in the 3D view look at the status bar at the bottom of the Aspire window and you'll see the Z values being displayed.

[Brady Watson]

You CAN measure it in Aspire using the measuring tool, in conjunction with the same tool's cross section feature. If it looks good in Rhino (assuming that you constructed it as one single mesh/polysurface) then it should be fine in Aspire.

For the heck of it, check that your material is defined properly, and move the material slider all the way down to the bottom...

It seems very strange that you are having this problem. Also, why aren't you making the file in Aspire to begin with? Just curious...

-B

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Brady. I constructed this particular part in Rhino, because it was a system of many parts for a railing system. I designed the railing for a second floor porch in Rhino, in 3D. So I figured I'd just take the parts from Rhino and import them into Aspire to cut. (As I know from your earlier post to me, that Rhino is good for modeling simple extrusions, etc, and that is what most of the railing parts are. Per your suggestion, the artistic details (in this case some quatrefoils and Gothic arches) that were a real headache in Rhino, I WILL model in Aspire.)

Years ago, maybe on Woodweb, enough people had impressed on me the power of being able to design a system comprised of many parts using Solid Works, and then being able to toolpath the individual parts in Mastercam. That provided my goal of what I wanted to be able to do, though using Rhino and Aspire instead. And as noted, Rhino seems to work very well for making simple extrusions. Is this a flawed objective to design systems in Rhino, and toolpath in Aspire, except for the artsy things that Rhino seems to choke on?

After being told that I can measure in Aspire, I did play with that this evening, and looking down the X axis and seeing the stair stepped rough cut of the railing cap, the measuring tool seems really very curious. If I move the cursor anywhere beneath a horizontal step, no matter where I am vertically or horizontally under any given step, I get a read out of the height of the step, until I go somewhere under the next lower step, and the height reading drops by .2 inches, for any location under that step. I don't know if I am making this clear. But it is a funky measuring tool, and trying to get width readings was slightly stranger, but I couldn't resolve onto the width of my part. In Rhino, the part I had modeled was exactly 4.500, but in Aspire, I would get a reading of something like 4.455 and then it would jump to 4.59 (roughly speaking, I didn't write down the exact values.) But it does not look like I can simply measure in a way I can in any other software I have used.

I now don't recall if I addressed all of your questions, as I don't think I can save a draft of this and go back and read your post. I usually have two PCs running, so I can comfortably read a post on one PC and reply on the other.

Thanks, sincerely, Chuck

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Brady. Looking at the end view of my model made in Rhino after it was imported into Aspire, with that image filling the screen, I move the cursor to the left side of the part and get a cursor location reading of 4.7817, and then moving to the far right side of the part, I get a cursor reading of .3098. The difference between these is the width of my model as Aspire sees it, 4.4719. However the model in Rhino is exactly 4.50" wide. And when I imported this part into Aspire, the 3D import dialog pane allowed me to correct/adjust the dimensions. And I did that again this afternoon, and note with some frustration that as I am measuring the part in Aspire, it seems to have not accepted the value change.

Brady, I will heed your advice and directly model this part in Aspire. However, that leaves a big hole in my long sought modeling toolpathing aspirations!

Chuck

[Brady Watson]

Chuck,
It sounds to me like you are not running enough resolution on the Aspire model, which stretches the voxels/3D pixels too thin. (Think of sugar cubes) Jack the res up on the new model screen to 7X. Then pull that 3D model back in. When you export out of Rhino, make sure it is of sufficient resolution/tolerance as well or the model will be faceted.

The purpose of me mentioning the measuring tool before was to call your attention to the cross section feature of it. Tick the radio button on the measuring tool fill in sheet towards the bottom & create a cross section of the 3D model as it sits. This will give you a vector representation of the 3D section you selected. Then look at it and measure THAT...

If you are working on large railing parts, then I'd put my money on your resolution not being high enough.

-B

[gc3]

hold down the shift key while selecting a 'NEW' file, you will access up to 50X resolution. There will always be some pixelation, as this is the way the software works.

[adrianm]

In addition to what Brady has said you should check the material size in relation to the actual model as well.

You don't want to be importing a model that is 6" square (for example) into a job that you've specified as 8' x 4'.

There are only so many pixels to go around and you want as many of them as possible in your model rather than in the empty space around it.

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Brady, Gene and Adrian:

Wow, thanks again, even though I have just started to get into your suggestions.

a) Brady, I attached the image of my Rhino porch model, only because I forgot to attach it with my previous reply to you as to my need for designing in Rhino.

b) Your suggestions made me first realize I should go back and check my OBJ file that I had imported from Rhino into Aspire. The width and height of the model were exactly correct. But I had two facets along the top of the railing cap. So I experimented with the Rhino export functions, and found out what to change to at least get rid of the facets in my OBJ file. (I was going to attach my OBJ files, as they are small, but it turns out I can't attach those.)

c) I have been running my Aspire at 7x/hi resolution all the time. I'll import my fixed model after lunch.

d) OK, the cross section tool is cool, I had not used that before. Hopefully that is new in version 4 so I don't have to feel too bad that I didn't know it was there.......

e) Wow Gene! as to holding down the shift key to get a 50X resolution. WOW! I haven't tried it yet, but with the fine carvings I have been doing, the previous 7X high resolution really wasn't much use, it would always be pixelated for examination of any meaningful detail.

f) Adrian, I have had my model stock size in Aspire set up to be the actual size of my lumber/stock. So the fit of my model to the material should be as good as it could be. Does that address your point, or am I missing the mark????

Thanks again gentlemen, I could have never stumbled onto this information on my own. Of course I still haven't cut my railing part successfully....

Thanks, Chuck

[adrianm]

f) Adrian, I have had my model stock size in Aspire set up to be the actual size of my lumber/stock. So the fit of my model to the material should be as good as it could be. Does that address your point, or am I missing the mark????

You've got it right. Basically you always want as much as the defined material size to be within the model.

The cross section tool was in 3.5 as well..... ;)

[Chuck Keysor]

Hmmm, the dimensions of the imported model are still off. I will set-aside my Rhino to Aspire IDEAL work flow for the time being, as I have to make the railing. As Brady suggested, I will FOR NOW just re-model each part in Aspire.

Adrian..... Maybe people treat you like Santa Clause's cousin, so here are some details, as there is a bit of user feedback, incase your cousin Santa is listening... (I have been good......)

I re-imported the hi-resolution OBJ file (now without any facets) into Aspire, just using 7X resolution. When I imported the model, this time, all the dimensions were off by lots compared to the Rhino model dimensions.
4.5" width came in as .375"
55" length came in as 4.3113"
1.93 height came in as .1607"

I unclicked the lock xyz ratio option, and manually entered in the exact dimensions of what I had just measured in Rhino, 55 long, 4.5 wide, 1.93 high. I made sure I clicked "Apply". Then I used the Model Cross-Section from the Measure/Inspect page.

I expanded the model to fill the screen, and the measuring tool doesn't have any snap functionality, nor orthogonal lock (even when holding shift), so it was rather indeterminant, I measured:
4.4893 (versus 4.5 entered value) width
55.0246 (versus 55 entered value) length
2.0752 (versus 1.93 entered value) height

a) So beyond the numbers being off by a mile when I imported the model, even after forcing to the correct value, the model is still off some.

b) Having snaps and orthogonality in the measurement tool would seem pretty logical (though how hard that is to do versus the cost.......)

c) Making it so I could simply go to the 3D window and select the x, or y or z axis view, and measure that directly would make a lot of sense. Not instead of the cross section tool, as the cross section tool is very general purpose. But because the views presented by those axis are all things one would logically want to measure.

Well, that is my little feedback. I would like to know at some point how to get my Rhino generated OBJ file to get exactly locked in in Aspire...

Oh, and lastly, I never have found out why I am not cutting down the sides of my model. But right now that is not a pressing matter, as my saw can fix that.


Thanks, Chuck

[srwtlc]

Chuck,

Hit F4 or 'Edit/Snap Options' and make sure you have geometry snapping on and anything else that helps. When using the 'Measure/Inspect' tool, refer to the various information fields for various measurements. You could also use the new 'Add Dimension' tool to constrain any horizontal/vertical dimension to check a measurement.

You can't really measure anything in the 3D window as what is there is pixel based and not vectors. Your obj file would be vector based until it is imported and then it becomes a pixel based model.

For the "not cutting down the sides", if your Aspire model is the same size as your imported obj, it may be that there is no information (pixels) beyond the model size to see to cut down the edge. Not sure about that one. Also, you could make a vector boundary around your part and then apply a vector boundary offset when making the toolpath and that should make it cut down the edge.

If you zip the obj, you should be able to post it here for testing. Unless it's still too large.

[Brady Watson]

Chuck,
For the heck of it, export your 3D model as an STL mesh. Set the tolerance to 0.001". Choose Binary (not ASCII) when asked. Then import into Aspire. See if that changes anything.

-B

[Chuck Keysor]

Scott, thanks for the added tips on Aspire constraints and the pixel based nature of the images I see in my previews/3D window. As to cutting down the sides, I have used the tool offset, and manipulated the vector boundary, without benefit. As you say, maybe there is just nothing there....

Brady, I'll try to import the STL model in a few minutes.

Thanks again, Chuck!

[gc3]

http://www.3dsignforum.com/aspire/again-not-a-sign-but-3d-carving/msg7168/#msg7168

scroll to 3rd post...

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Brady:

I created an STL model per your directions (I don't know how you, or anyone can know so many things!).....

This model when opened in the import 3d model window, came in undersized. With link xyz checked, and correcting x to be 55 inches, the other two dimensions came in too large.
X should have been 55.00, came in as 4.3113, forced to 55
Y should have been 4.50, came in as .375, went up to 4.78
Z should have been 1.93, came in as .16, went up to 2.047

I unlinked XYZ and forced all values to match the Rhino model, and hit apply. Then measuring the Aspire model, X, Y and Z were all correct..... BUT, the short vertical side walls (that I had not been able to get to cut all the way down to the base) had a 2 degree draft! (The Rhino original and the OBJ model did not have any draft angle.

So any suggestions on correcting the draft angle? At this point it would be of interest, but not important.

Thanks, Chuck

[gc3]

Chuck, it's Aspire. Doubtful you will get exactly what you want. Viktor's post that I linked to has a lot of info...short and sweet.

[Chuck Keysor]

Thanks Gene. I assume I was to note Viktor's post. That was interesting. But does that mean I can't plan on directly importing my Rhino created models into Aspire? For the short term, I can avoid Viktor's problems by creating, or I should say, recreating my models in Aspire.

Is this situation Viktor had, likely to be resolved in the future by Aspire? I would guess people would want to create models in other software and then toolpath it in Aspire. But maybe that is a minority application??????

Thanks, Chuck

[Chuck Keysor]

Thanks Gene for the reply, which came while I was replying to your earlier post. I hope I will be able to find out if this situation I have ever gets corrected. I don't know how one stays on top of all these things. Thanks again, Chuck

[pkirby]

Chuck,
I'm not sure if you were aware, but you are now able to import a .3dm (Rhino's native format) straight into Aspire 4. Try doing that to see what happens.

Brady,
Out of curiosity, why do you recommend exporting the .stl as binary and not ASCII ?


Thanks,
Paul

[Chuck Keysor]

Gene, after thinking a little about this matter, of STL files and OBJ files not seeming to come into Aspire without various distortions, what does that mean if someone is purchasing a 3D file?

I looked at Vector Art, and they sell files as RLF, STL and V3M. Since STL files coming out of Rhino don't seem to hold true, what happens when someone purchases an STL 3D model?

Noticing that Vector Art also sell V3M files, which is the native Rhino file type, I went back to my simple rail section in Rhino, and since it was already a V3M file, I opened that in Aspire. It opened almost exactly the same as the STL file, undersized to the same numbers, and it also had a draft angle. But the draft angle was a bit less, about 1 degree.

Don't I have something really confused? Otherwise, how would anybody purchase premade 3d part models for use in Aspire? Or do they just have to plan on scaling them, and having added draft angles?

Chuck

[Chuck Keysor]

Paul, your brain waves must have reached me here in Illinois, but they weren't strong enough to get me to type in the correct file.... But the native Rhino files I imported directly into Aspire were in fact 3dm files..... They didn't work right in Aspire as noted. Chuck

[pkirby]

Chuck,
Try playing around with the options in Rhino when you export the stl. I routinely export 3d models from Rhino into Aspire with great accuracy. The models I export are somewhat small (3" x 7") and I set the tolerance to 0.001". Once they come into Aspire, they are always within 0.001". Also, try playing with the way the "units" are setup in Rhino (mine are setup as "decimal"). Also, click on detailed controls when exporting and you will get this screen:

17756

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Paul: Thanks for your information to let me know that your Rhino and Aspire work together correctly. That is reassuring, and will help guide me when I get back to my Rhino-Aspire interface issue.

But in the mean time, I have abandoned my Rhino model, and created a new model with the two rail sweep in Aspire. And this time, I am just going to cut a 12" long section out of junk wood until I get this figured out. (I already have wrecked two carefully prepared pieces of glued up thick stock....) Thanks, Chuck

Hello All: OK, the Aspire model of my railing cap was easy to make, and the roughing pass with the 1/2" endmill went perfectly. I changed bits to a 3/4" box core (or is that core?) bit, re-zeroed/C2 to the top of my stock, loaded the finish toolpath file, and then got the following error message when I tried to run the file:

Parameter Value Below Range for VS - setting to lower limit (.05)!

Following is a little message that somehow or another was generated in a little text file. Then after that are the first 20 or so lines from my finish file.

Can anybody tell me what I am doing wrong now????? Thank you again, Chuck
+++++++++++++++++++ Text Message ++++++++++++++++++++++++
Last Not Complete Stopped@Line 9 |Cut Mode| Elapsed: 00:00:25 Reps: 1 ConsoleMvSpeed 1.0 FileEndSpeed 1.0 17:16:57 04-16-2013
File Completed:No Ln:9 Max: 4.00, 2.50, 0.25 Min: 4.00, 2.50,- 9.20 Offset:no Brks=0 TBCs: 56.637, 36.635, .000 Props: 1.000, 1.000, 1.000

++++++++++++++++++++ SB Finish Cut File ++++++++++++++++++++++
'top 12 cap finish 4-16-13
'File created: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - 04:47 PM
'SHOPBOT FILE IN INCHES
IF %(25)=1 THEN GOTO UNIT_ERROR 'check to see software is set to standard
C#,90 'Lookup offset values
'
'Turning router ON
SO,1,1
PAUSE 2
'
'
'Toolpath Name = 3D Finish 1
'Tool Name = Ball Nose (0.75 inch)
MS,3.0,0.0
JZ,0.800000
J2,0.000000,0.000000
J3,2.443311,2.607999,0.250000
J3,2.443311,2.607999,0.200000
M3,2.443311,2.607999,-0.101712
M3,9.544514,2.610543,-0.101895
M3,9.544514,2.567466,-0.100054

[srwtlc]

Chuck, the speed setting for your Z axis is at 0.0 (MS,3.0,0.0). That's what is giving you the error.

Go into your tool database in Aspire and set a proper speed for the plunge rate for that tool. Then reselect that tool when recalculating the toolpath. Or, you can just edit the tool in that toolpath and recalculate, but that won't save that setting for that tool for the next time you use it.

[Brady Watson]

Brady,
Out of curiosity, why do you recommend exporting the .stl as binary and not ASCII ?


Hey Paul,
STL Binary is more universally accepted across the '3D software world' - kinda like a Visa/Mastercard thing...But mostly, I choose it because it has a much smaller size than ASCII, and that can make a big difference for a customer that has an average computer. I'd rather send them a 45Mb Binary than a 100Mb ASCII one, with no difference in geometry or quality. STL binary has the smallest footprint of the 'generic' 3D mesh files. It is WAY smaller than a 3D DXF, smaller than OBJ and STL ASCII in most cases.

-B

[Chuck Keysor]

Hello Scott! Thanks for bailing me out. I changed the speed variable to .8IPS and the file ran fine. Well, my little test part worked fine. Tomorrow, I'll try and cut my 15 foot railing and find out what else can go wrong.....

Thanks again, Chuck

[pkirby]

Brady,
Thanks for the info. I have always selected ASCII because I saw that it required a larger file, thus I assumed it meant better quality. It's hard to kick my American spirit of "bigger is better":D