Sheetcam revised post - please test

At this stage yes.

RNJFAB wrote:

Thanks Phillc54.

So only workaround is to go to an old pp and choose the material in QTPlasmac?

James can you try editing the post and set Near the top?
Your Sheetcam tool number must  matche your QTPlasmac tool number.

Hopefully that will retrieve the tool from QTPlasmac. there is a plasmac script to import tools.

phillc54 wrote:

With the current G-Code filter you won't be able to run from line if you use temporary materials. We could probably rework the filter so that this is possible.

Phil, it would be good if you could rework the code to support this. There is only going to be more users using sheetcam's included post. They should not be disadvantaged. I guess we could also add the tool number to the magic comment, then you would have it.

Temporary tool numbering is handled by the filter.

I struggle to understand the thought process behind temporary materials.  Maybe I'm missing the tasty kool-aide, but I let the material library on my machine be the source of truth, not SheetCAM.  I use SheetCAM materials for picking the material type only.  My thought process is that when I make changes to the material parameters in QtPlasmaC, as a result of cut quality, etc. the material is instantly updated.  Any time I reference that material from then forward, it has the new variables. 

Otherwise, I'd have to remember to go back to SheetCAM and make the same changes.  But I'm willing to entertain that I'm missing something.

The original idea behind it was that it may be handy for a oneoff test of a cut.

I use the QtplasmaC material file as the master as well, with no material selection at all from SheetCam, that way I can cut the same job with different materials by manually selecting the material for the job.

phillc54 wrote:

The original idea behind it was that it may be handy for a oneoff test of a cut.

I suppose I could see that being useful, before one commits a material number to the library.

I use the QtplasmaC material file as the master as well, with no material selection at all from SheetCam, that way I can cut the same job with different materials by manually selecting the material for the job.

I had not considered that as an option. I think I would forget to set the material too often (like with some of my recent kerf-cross tests ). Normally I edit the code and change the material number.

It is nice to learn a new option though. Interesting to learn everyone's preferred work flows.

snowgoer540 wrote:

I had not considered that as an option. I think I would forget to set the material too often (like with some of my recent kerf-cross tests ). Normally I edit the code and change the material number.

Why edit code when you could be lazy like me and just go click click.

phillc54 wrote:

Why edit code when you could be lazy like me and just go click click.

Let's just say material 0's settings consistently leave something to be desired :laugh:

I think you guys have grown up with Plasmac so are used to it now. Sheetcam goes back years well before any entry level system had its own materials to select.

I was using it well before I used Plasmac.

An existing Sheetcam user migrating to QTPlasmac will have all of his cutcharts sorted so probably does not need to import his settings into Plasmac. That just adds another layer of complexity.

The real issue I guess is that we have data redundancy because we have two sources of the same info so there is not a single point of truth. Its really up to the user to choose and maintain his single point of truth.

Plasmac's moved on a lot but I chose Sheetcam to be my SPOT.  It was much easier to maintain cut charts in Sheetcam. I will say it is convenient to update data in plasmac but then if I grab the Thermal Dynamics manual to check settings it will be when using Sheetcam when setting up a job.

I did try to update Sheetcam after any change. eg. I might be cutting a new (to me) material, I might end up with a voltage or cut override which I then convert in my head to specific number to update the chart with.

Anyway, to Phil's credit he did a good job of incorporating the requirements for a post processor to control job settings.