Page 1 of 1

Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Wed 12 Dec , 2012 22:41 pm
by oyoung
Hello - is there a way to determine how long a particular toolpath will take to cut? Sometimes something looks good until you realise it has a squilllion lines will take till next wednesday. Thanks

Re: Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Thu 13 Dec , 2012 16:24 pm
by Denford Admin
It's very difficult / impossible to estimate because the machine blends short moves together and slows down through corners...how much it slows down depends on the angle between the moves.
Are you running the machine in Turbo mode? Turbo mode will allow the machine to run through lots of small moves quicker by not stopping after each one.

Re: Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Thu 13 Dec , 2012 17:55 pm
by oyoung
Thanks Admin. I suppose what I really wanted was a little box underneath that purpley preview saying this will take x hours/minutes. Surely as the software runs through simulation it can time itself? (Boxford Geocam did/does... :wink: )... even if it is a relative time - some kind of estimation is surely possible. The machine knows how much its going to slow down doesn't it? :?

Re: Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Thu 13 Dec , 2012 18:42 pm
by Steve
It is possible to make an estimate but depending on the complexity of the shape the amount of ramping moves. The cut time could be anywhere up to 50% out from the theoretical time. Geocam suffers exactly the same issue in that the estimates are inaccurate.

Re: Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Thu 13 Dec , 2012 19:44 pm
by oyoung
Thanks Steve, and forgive my ignorance. Why can't Quickcam Pro know how long these things take?

Re: Quickcam Pro time taken for cutting?

Posted: Thu 13 Dec , 2012 23:40 pm
by Martin
Each machine will have set ramps & feeds for different type moves that differ.

Even the distance the work piece is clamped from the datum position would alter times.

Then it would have to presume the feed override pot was set to 100%.

All in all there are just too many variables to take in to account