Verify troubles

[bmilford]

I am working on a part that is 48"x48"x24", the stock file that I am using is irregular shaped and the STL file that I have created for it is 17kb. When I rough the top portion of the part the resulting STL is 10,989kb, and when I rough the rest of the part the resulting STL is 32,650kb.

I cannot use the roughing STL to verify the remaining finishing ops without getting an error,

I have spoken to MC tech about this issue before, not with this part though. They said the only thing I could do would be to reduce the tolerance in the verify settings, they are now at; Tool=.008"(max) STL=0.1", I still cannot verify the finishing toolpaths with out the error message.

Am I just out of luck because of the size of the part, or is there a way to get verify to work?

[Mark Graham]

Windows is not letting you use all of your mem.You need to edit your boot.ini file in windows to turn your 3GB switch on.I did this & have 1 file with about 1200 toolpaths on it w/out crashing.STL file is over 70 meg.

Grahmpa

[crazy^millman]

If it were me I would try to use a solid of my stock verse the STL. Seems STL have such a hard time with Verify where as solids seems to work much better in my experience with it.

 

HTH

[Nick Eaton]

+1 for memory allocation. Our IT guy did it for me and it definitely made a difference.

If you are doing a lot of verification your RAM will still get "clogged". RAM saver and reboot sometimes will help.

You can also try not verifying the whole program at once. I usually build an .STL library for every 5 - 20 ops depending on part complexity. Use your most recently saved .STL as your next startpoint

Having said that I have also had this break down and then had a successful verification doing the whole program......go figure.

.STL files are basically loads of triangles as a mesh. As the cutter moves through the material new triangles are created to represent the new surface. So if you mare doing a lot of fine pitch stitching the number of triangles (and therefore file size) skyrockets. It only takes one of the thousands of triangle vertices to not meet perfectly to start generating error messages.

You can reduce the number of triangles in the mesh in MC, but it is cumbersome. If you do a lot of .STL work it might be worth investing in software with more .STL functionallity than MC has. Rhino has all kinds of .STL tools - mesh repair, bad triangle mapping etc...

Plus you get some good surface tools....

I have several complex parts with similar .STL file sizes (and greater) and I have never had to increase my tolerence to greater than .001/.001....although it has sometimes beeen a battle...

Cheers

Nick

[bmilford]

Our IT guy has no idea about the boot.ini file, how does one go about editing it?

 

I am trying to verify and save a smaller number of toolpaths, in the past I have seen the size of the STL files skyrocket by doing this, but I will try.

 

As far as editing the STL in Rhino I cannot get my first finishing toolpath to verify without crashing mid verify. The tool path is a Surface high speed (scallop) 3/4" ball endmill .05" stepover toolpath size is 17,538.3k.

 

I just tried verifing a toolpath at .001/.001 tolerance settings, the file is the same size as one verified at .008/.01.

[Nick Eaton]

Thats a fairly hefty toolpath file. Have you filtered it?

 

Nick

[bmilford]

Yes, I am using toolpath refinement, for the best surface setting, extended calculation time, normal program length.

[MotorCityMinion]

Google boot.ini and 3gb switch. It's fairly easy to do. BAK up your original file on a stick. The forum has some referances to it as well.

[Nick Eaton]

Try your tolerance settings at good surface and short program length. Just to see if this cures the verify problem......you can always return if you really need that tolerance setting. Just out of curiosity what are you making? Does it require such a fine tolerance setting?

cheers

Nick

[Verndog]

quote:

---

I cannot use the roughing STL to verify the remaining finishing ops without getting an error,

---

Have you tried to reduce the speed / quality toggle before running and then saving the rough STL? This toggle will make a huge difference in STL file size, and if its just rough path drop it all the way down to speed to reduce file size---then save STL and run finish.

[bmilford]

Nick,

I was mistaken, the settings I used where the middle settings, the toolpath was 17,538.3k, changing just the surface quality to "good" reduced the toolpath size to 7,289.3k. I can get though that toolpath in verify now, I am still having problems as I verify more toolpaths.

I have sent the file to my re-seller and they have sent it to CNC to see what can be done.

The part is the male plug for a bathtub sump, I am tring to get the surface as good as I can to help limit the amount of sanding our pattern makers have to do after machining.

 

Got the 3GB switch set-up, still have trouble, I am not sure if there is a benefit or not.

[Mark Graham]

Are you sure the 3GB switch is working? I am running huge aircraft parts with .STL files over 50,000k regularly.Sometimes over 70,000.

[Nick Eaton]

Sorry I didn't get back earlier....got a problem child of my own on the machine.

I would still try the short program length on the tolerance setting, have you got all the create arcs toggled?. It sounds like a fairly simple shape, so your finish shouldn't suffer.

I've seen too much code actually make things worse. What's your cutter size and step over?

If its .5 ball I would go with a .015 step over.

I think you are generating so many triangles so close together an error is almost inevitable.

To give you an idea of whats possible I have a series of complex surfaced parts. 4 setups, 750+ ops and 4 .STL libraries up to 70,000k. All on .001/.001 setting.....it was a struggle sometimes tho'..!

Cheers

Nick