Separate post to avoid mixing this opinion with the fact work done by Toby and me. Why should we make changes to the Boxford? The first question I guess is whether it is useful as it is? The current setup is fine for learning, but of much less value to produce any finished article. Those using the machine have all learnt a massive amount, but still struggle to follow a basic design process from concept to finished product. Limitations in the software nearly always result in compromises of the design to meet the limitations of the machine, OK for learning, but not for getting stuff made. So as is, it might remain a project or novelty, but not a tool for the space.
In time, I think eventually it would be hard to justify the space taken compared to the value as a tool. I think it important to understand, that CNC Milling is a complex process, a CNC Mill will never be an easy tool to use. Like other 3D CNC tools, we know that competency of 3D design technique and software is a prerequisite. Also, knowledge of milling in general and appreciation of manual milling is required. Many hackspaces do not induct on CNC mills until users are trained on manual mills, this is usually true in industry too. Gorillaz clint eastwood mp3 download skull. What I am saying is that if we make the Boxford easier to use, there is still a significant learning curve for new users.
All retail software uses a serial number or key of some form. The installation often requires the user to enter a valid serial number to proceed. A serial can also be referred to as a 'CD Key'. When you search for Boxford V10 Cad Cam CD Key Serial for example, you may find the word 'serial' amongst the results. The Boxford CAD/CAM DESIGN TOOLS software is an integrated suite of powerful CAD/CAM tools which create G&M code programs conforming to Industrial Fanuc ISO programming standards. 2½D or 3D Post Processed files can be imported from major CAD/CAM packages.
If we were to improve the VMC260, there will still be an entry learning level to usage (maybe 10 to 50 hrs), and so limited capability to make parts for casual users. Based on my evaluation of the VMC260, which has a solid mechanical structure with CNC control, my opinion is that improvements can be made to turn the VMC260 into a productive tool, all be it that the entry level for users may be high. Costs of the improvements may be possible at around £100, but I think a figure of £500 is more realistic. Open to discussion here on group, or at rLab. I completely agree with all of that, Richard.
In particular, I don't think that designing for or running a CNC mill will ever be a process that requires no experience, intuition or experimentation. It will never be the laser cutter, which for all intents and purposes is a printer/plotter. People should adjust their expectations and take that into account when considering the cost of options re the mill. Thus far on the Boxford, I've made some small brackets and adapters, nothing complicated, just some facing, pockets, channels and holes; maybe 4 or 5 tool changes. However, every time the Boxford software hung and didn't prompt for later tool changes.
It's also not repeatable setting up datums, which would make swapping the vice a pain. Whilst I think swapping the innards of the Boxford is doable I question the return on investment. Free download ben 10 alien force games for windows xp.
The hardware is much more capable than the software to be sure, but how capable is it compared to £500 replacement hardware and professional control software? The software is critical, as demonstrated by the Boxford software. Alex showed me the de facto open source mill control software and frankly it looked like a teenager had thrown a UI toolkit at the screen. Complex processes don't require horrendous UX, in fact the inverse is true. We don't want to be in the same situation as with the Piranha where the software options are limited, so for me it's a priority that the replacememt is well known and can just plug in to Fusion or at least understand new/standard dxf or gcode. As much as this is a hack space, it is also a maker space and I don't think the Boxford in any configuration will ever be a maker's machine.
I don't see how I'd make more complicated projects on it than I already have. I also don't see how projects wouldn't require a great deal of time. Ian has done outstanding work downstairs where every tool just works if you have the skill, with no hackery or maze of accomodations to navigate. As you say, consisldering the floor space of the Boxford I don't think it meets the standard of the other tools downstairs. Laurence Malcolm Napier 24/6/2017, 3:27 น.
> However, every time the Boxford software hung and didn't prompt for later tool changes. > It's also not repeatable setting up datums, which would make swapping the vice a pain. For me these are showstoppers to me using the Boxford. > The hardware is much more capable than the software to be sure, but how capable is it compared to £500 replacement hardware and professional control software? Is that £500 plus the cost of professional control software? > We don't want to be in the same situation as with the Piranha where the software options are limited, so for me it's a priority that the replacememt is well known and can just plug in to Fusion or at least understand new/standard dxf or gcode. I am not clear what you are saying here.
- Author: admin
- Category: Category
Separate post to avoid mixing this opinion with the fact work done by Toby and me. Why should we make changes to the Boxford? The first question I guess is whether it is useful as it is? The current setup is fine for learning, but of much less value to produce any finished article. Those using the machine have all learnt a massive amount, but still struggle to follow a basic design process from concept to finished product. Limitations in the software nearly always result in compromises of the design to meet the limitations of the machine, OK for learning, but not for getting stuff made. So as is, it might remain a project or novelty, but not a tool for the space.
In time, I think eventually it would be hard to justify the space taken compared to the value as a tool. I think it important to understand, that CNC Milling is a complex process, a CNC Mill will never be an easy tool to use. Like other 3D CNC tools, we know that competency of 3D design technique and software is a prerequisite. Also, knowledge of milling in general and appreciation of manual milling is required. Many hackspaces do not induct on CNC mills until users are trained on manual mills, this is usually true in industry too. Gorillaz clint eastwood mp3 download skull. What I am saying is that if we make the Boxford easier to use, there is still a significant learning curve for new users.
All retail software uses a serial number or key of some form. The installation often requires the user to enter a valid serial number to proceed. A serial can also be referred to as a 'CD Key'. When you search for Boxford V10 Cad Cam CD Key Serial for example, you may find the word 'serial' amongst the results. The Boxford CAD/CAM DESIGN TOOLS software is an integrated suite of powerful CAD/CAM tools which create G&M code programs conforming to Industrial Fanuc ISO programming standards. 2½D or 3D Post Processed files can be imported from major CAD/CAM packages.
If we were to improve the VMC260, there will still be an entry learning level to usage (maybe 10 to 50 hrs), and so limited capability to make parts for casual users. Based on my evaluation of the VMC260, which has a solid mechanical structure with CNC control, my opinion is that improvements can be made to turn the VMC260 into a productive tool, all be it that the entry level for users may be high. Costs of the improvements may be possible at around £100, but I think a figure of £500 is more realistic. Open to discussion here on group, or at rLab. I completely agree with all of that, Richard.
In particular, I don't think that designing for or running a CNC mill will ever be a process that requires no experience, intuition or experimentation. It will never be the laser cutter, which for all intents and purposes is a printer/plotter. People should adjust their expectations and take that into account when considering the cost of options re the mill. Thus far on the Boxford, I've made some small brackets and adapters, nothing complicated, just some facing, pockets, channels and holes; maybe 4 or 5 tool changes. However, every time the Boxford software hung and didn't prompt for later tool changes.
It's also not repeatable setting up datums, which would make swapping the vice a pain. Whilst I think swapping the innards of the Boxford is doable I question the return on investment. Free download ben 10 alien force games for windows xp.
The hardware is much more capable than the software to be sure, but how capable is it compared to £500 replacement hardware and professional control software? The software is critical, as demonstrated by the Boxford software. Alex showed me the de facto open source mill control software and frankly it looked like a teenager had thrown a UI toolkit at the screen. Complex processes don't require horrendous UX, in fact the inverse is true. We don't want to be in the same situation as with the Piranha where the software options are limited, so for me it's a priority that the replacememt is well known and can just plug in to Fusion or at least understand new/standard dxf or gcode. As much as this is a hack space, it is also a maker space and I don't think the Boxford in any configuration will ever be a maker's machine.
I don't see how I'd make more complicated projects on it than I already have. I also don't see how projects wouldn't require a great deal of time. Ian has done outstanding work downstairs where every tool just works if you have the skill, with no hackery or maze of accomodations to navigate. As you say, consisldering the floor space of the Boxford I don't think it meets the standard of the other tools downstairs. Laurence Malcolm Napier 24/6/2017, 3:27 น.
> However, every time the Boxford software hung and didn't prompt for later tool changes. > It's also not repeatable setting up datums, which would make swapping the vice a pain. For me these are showstoppers to me using the Boxford. > The hardware is much more capable than the software to be sure, but how capable is it compared to £500 replacement hardware and professional control software? Is that £500 plus the cost of professional control software? > We don't want to be in the same situation as with the Piranha where the software options are limited, so for me it's a priority that the replacememt is well known and can just plug in to Fusion or at least understand new/standard dxf or gcode. I am not clear what you are saying here.