[diyengineer]

Just wondering if anyone has come up with some good video tutorials?
I'm going to start using it pretty regularly and wouldn't mind a jump start.
If i can't find anything, maybe ill bite the bullet and do a video series.

[zool]

Did you see these?

http://www.cambam.info/vids/

[diyengineer]

Ya, it's a start but by no means the whole package. I feel like its a GREAT product but not backed with enough instruction from there website. If they have more thorough videos I think they would capture a lot more of the market.

[zool]

Check on youtube as well.

I have been using CAMBAM for about three years and with the forum [REALLY smart and EXTREMELY helpful people] I progressed from confused to competent surprisingly quickly. When I first switched from using another 2D g-code generation product to using CAMBAM, I will admit the learning curve was steep, but it was short.

When I switched from 2D to 3D, I ran up against a lot of problems, mostly me not understanding the CAMBAM nomenclature. I posted a narrative concerning what I wanted to do and what happened, along with the DXF, CB [CAMBAM suffix], and g-code files, and Andy, the inventor of CAMBAM, answered my questions within 24-hours [Andy is in England; another helpful guy is in France]. I did as he said, which completely addressed every concern and then had new difficulties, posted them in a similar fashion, and Andy and several others analyzed the files and posted suggestions, all within 24-hours. I recall an odd bug was found, and that got fixed. After about three days, the problems were solved, PLUS, I found out how CAMBAM worked doing 3D, and from then on have solved challenges myself.

To speed one's learning, the CAMBAM help files were published as a PDF [in 2012] which helped greatly. I printed these out in color, sat down and read them throughly, and learned many of the CAMBAM nuances. Odd eh..reading the instructions!! I think I told you about those...

Also, there are so many people from so many different countries using CAMBAM in so many different ways, the introductory videos on the web site get one started easily, then by searching the forum, one will find an applications similar if not identical. Stuff like: spindles for the front-end of a race car; parts for an experimental airplane; parts for pickle sorting machines; miniature V8 motors; woodworking projects galore; fishing lures......its pretty amazing.

I am not saying more videos would not help, after all look at what has happened with SketchUp, I mention how I learned so as to help you learn, and maybe help with a paradigm for videos you are contemplating making.

You are correct, it is a GREAT product. The newest version is even greater [more user friendly], though I am using an older version that does everything I want it to.

[recordingwhiz]

I too am having similar challenges, I was able to create one part I needed to a while back (with a lot of help from the forum), however when attempting to create a 3D object now I am just running into a wall.

I know its more than capable of doing what I want, its just overwhelming the amount of settings required, not to mention that some settings appear in multiple places.

A walk thru to make a 3D part that was made in a 3d CAD setup, would be very helpful. maybe Im just not stumbling into the right tutorial or something.

Understandably the awesome flexibility of CamBam is what makes it seem so daunting.

GG

[diyengineer]

It's amazing how they can create such a wonderful program, but then totally fail on providing worth while tutorials for common things like drilling, milling, facing, tapping, pecking, plasma, etc. maybe even supply 5 solid cad files that the user could follow along with and do the work. I believe everyone diyer would be using cam bam a lot if only they supplied a little effort in tutorials. Powerful program though.

[zool]

Whiz:

I too banged into a wall when I went from 2D to 3D, though I persevered though with the help of Andy, the inventor of CAMBAM, and all the other members of the CAMBAM forum.

Go to the CAMBAM forum and serarch for "3D" and "STL", and there will be two or three threads on making the jump from 2D to 3D. The threads are quite detailed and there are DXF and CB files so you can download them and see what has to be done.

As for the desire for tutorials: CAMBAM is a very complex and rapidly evolving program, so I think it would be hard to provide tutorials for every aspect of it. In addition, Andy is a one-man band, so his energy is going into continuing to improved and expand the program.

The logic of the program is consistent from the 2D portion of it to the 3D portion; and the 3D portion is quite complex. There are many on the forum who are making incredibly complex parts.

As a DIYer program, CAMBAM does seem to satisfy those that are intellectually curious, and either really really smart, or are too stupid to give up , or a perverse combination of both.

To become adept with CAMBAM takes a lot of effort at first, that I will not deny, but it is well worth it in the long run. And remember, this program is not run with screens and swipes that much of the rest of the software world has embraced. This is code-based program, and the code is not far below the surface. Being so, it makes it easier for developers to use it and expand its capabilities.

Keep at it and soon you will have an "AH HA" moment. Guaranteed.

[recordingwhiz]

I ended up purchasing Vectric Cut 3D to handle the 3d parts and just use CamBam for the rest of the stuff, trying to figure out how I can make more efficient G-code without wasting too much time with unnecessary tool paths. I have spent so much time last few months doing the conversion on my PM25MV and now that its converted and calibrated now I gotta tackle the software side of it now.

[recordingwhiz]

I would figure making a part that was created in a 3D CAD program would be very common place (something along the lines of a hood ornament or an rifle receiver), enough for some one to do a vid on it. I have been somewhat thru the forums and I completely agree that the software is more than capable of doing what I need it to (flipped thru the galleries in several forums).

however all the factory tutorials are about making products from within the software or 2.5d objects.

something to help a fellow make a part similar to what Cut3D or Meshcam work really good at would be a great barrier breaker for some that just learn differently. I do understand that the software is so flexible so that it can work for every type of CNC, this flexibility also makes it remarkably setting intensive for an amateur to get a handle on it without tons of frustration.

Thanks Zool for the search criteria, I will indeed look for those subjects.

GG

[zool]

Here is a problem that just got solved on the CamBAM forum [link to thread at bottom of this post]:

I made an STL file of a surface that included numerous peaks and troughs. The surface is continuous and smooth. Because of the formula used, the saddle points between two peaks (or between two troughs, if you look at it that way) were all on the Z-axis origin, i.e. Z=0. The stock surface was set well above 0, i.e. +7mm.

The photo shows what happened when I used the Waterline Finish MOP - the obvious lozenges around a small number of peaks that cut right through the natural waterline path are the most serious problem, but the flanges along some of the contours at height zero are also unexpected. In the course of calculating the paths I get a number of "Warning! Open poly skipped (offset=13) messages". Inspecting the actual paths does show the lozenge shapes, although you have to look carefully (which I did not think to do before hand!).

The important finding I made is that the problem goes away if I arrange that the Stock Surface minus a multiple of the Depth increment does not ever hit 0. Specifically, with the Stock Surface set to 7mm and the Depth Increment set to 0.5mm, I get a problem, but with the Stock Surface set to 7.25mm, the problem goes away. The passes at 0.25mm and -0.25 mm straddle the Z origin.

Saddles of this type hitting a contour of course represent a problem for a waterline algorithm, since a decision has to be made as to whether to go round the peak or to start going round the valley. I suspect that there is either a precision problem inherent in floating point arithmetic, or a divide-by-zero or some such. But whatever happens, carving a line that crosses an earlier contour is always going to be an issue. I am not sure if the 'open poly' warning is related to this, but the error message means nothing to me as it stands and does not appear to relate to .STL files.

To the extent that I now have a workaround and am on my way, this is no longer a problem for me, but I would expect other people to have surfaces with saddle points at the same height as contours who might also encounter this effect.

I'm afraid I cannot post the .cb file or the .stl file since they are 28Megs, but I could put them up on a server somewhere if this would assist in debugging.

For background, the surface is the sum of two formulae: cos (arctan (x/y)*4*pi and 0.5 * sin (sqrt (x**2+y**2))) which is then scaled to increase Z the further you are from the origin. The result basically has 12-fold symmetry, sort of, and I am using it as the background for a clock. If anyone cares to have the stl-generating Perl program, I can provide it.

Here is the link to the thread: STL Surface with Saddles - Waterline Finish giving unexpected behaviour