New user here, just built my first MPCNC and Crown prints great. Is there a repo @V1Engineering for folks that want to share their gcode for either 2d or 2.5d projects? Specifically, I would really like to locate a detailed drawing that can be produced by already known good gcode to see what my new rig can do before I mount the router and start venturing into actually milling… and then I would like to the same as a test with known good gcode. Being new to much of this, I have tons to learn in creating my own designs and effective gcode and would like to be able to test drive my rig a bit without introducing other self-generated errors or overly basic designs through self-created gcode at this point.
Random premade g-code is a potential problem. It is possible (and fairly easy) to put milichious g-code in a g-code file. I assume you ran the premade crown g-code that Ryan provides. If so, I would take the following steps.
- In your CAD/CAM of choice author a big square and run it with the pen. Measure the square to verify that the size is accurate and there is no skew to the square.
- Redo the crown from “scratch.” Ryan provides the DXF file plus a set of steps in EstlCAM.
Once you’ve completed these two steps, you have the foundation to create drawings from arbitrary DXF and SVG files. Not all DXF files are good candidates, but many should work. A good candidate for a test might be tribal art, so do an image search for “DXF Tribal Art”.
I run all gcode through a simulator first, even the ones that I have made! I only takes a couple of minutes and can save some expensive material etc.
I use camotics, it’s free and works.
Thanks for the link to the software. Typically I use online g-code simulators when I want to test g-code, but I downloaded the app from camotics and will play with it.
But I don’t think a simulator solve the problem of milichious g-code. For example, I can crank up the current of the steppers, or mess with the accelerations, or scale the speed way up, or initiate a factory reset. I don’t think any of these things would be caught by a simulator.
Another aspect is that there are enough differences between machines that the gcode itself may not really be “portable.” Shared gcode for a 3D printer is feasible because the printers are really very similar once the build envelope is taken into consideration. There are a lot more variations on a CNC cutting/engraving machine, even with things as “standardized” as flood/mist coolant (which I have retasked for air assist on my K40) and laser intensity/spindle RPM controls.
This is my complaint on the gcode sharing at prusaprinters.org. my old printer is way slower than a prusa and has different bed leveling commands. I would not run the gcode for a prusa mk3 on my frankenprinter.
As long as whomever is sharing is willing to post the 3D model as well as the gcode you can always just slice it yourself.
This is why it makes sense to me to look for the designs of the objects, and do the CAM yourself rather than running gcode that may not work as expected on (let alone possibly do damage to) your machine.
Shared gcode only really works if you have the same printer as the person that posted the gcode. My gcode would probably kill 99% of the printers here on the forums.
So 1-2 examples to first test since everyone here has an mpcnc… seems like the community leaders here could have 1-2 vetted gcode files for download to test… .initial cuts… much like the crown… I’m not even speaking to the ability to offer/share extensive files and creative creations.
You are right. The crown file runs on every Marlin machine, and Ryan provides a laser test file that seems to run on any machine that has inline laser commands enabled. I can see:
- A more extensive drawing file like you asked about…mostly because I remember the excitement the first time my machine drew the crown, and it would be fun to see something more extensive.
- A file of squares and circles. The goal would be to test for skew and aspect ratio.
- A speeds and feeds file using one specific bit.
The last one would be the hardest, but perhaps the most valuable. Right there are hand-wavy claim about how spcecific MPCNC specs impact performance, but there is little real data. One or more vetted files could be created and the results (and the MPCNC specs) of test runs could be posted to the forum.
Ryan posted a dxf to use in the race thread. You could go with that. I don’t think anyone will post a cutting gcode for someone else to use. It’s not done in commercial industry for a reason. Liability. A lot of us that have posted videos of our machines cutting have thrown the speeds and feeds in the video description. That should be enough for anyone to replicate.