Hi,
The following path is actually an error in the profile operation, but, is there any way to somehow set a different entry point on operations? The tool instead of blanching down is making contact from the side at an angle.
Thanks in advance!
Most important: Don’t leave us guessing what you did in your file. Important: your FreeCAD infos as described in http://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2264.
Sorry Chris,
My question does not deal specifically with this operation. Beside the path in the picture, it has been made with a modified Profile.py file and will not run on your computer.
I’ve made a mistake on my question above also. I will try to rephrase.
In some operations, the tool is starting at the origin point, travelling above the part and at some point is plunging down straight to the part and starts the cutting path. Can I set a second point in between, in different height also, to force the tool to ender from the side? I hope that makes sense.
P.S. Another possible strategy is to add a small helix as the tool is travelling down to make contact. I’m trying to be more polite with my tools.
If what I’m asking is still not clear, leave it as is for now and I will try to reproduce a test part as an example and add a file. It’s 4 o’clock in the morning here and I have to go. 
Sorry once again.
You may be looking for LeadInOut Dressup.
Yes Chris, I think this is it. I need more control on the entry point. Is there any tutorial available?
I don’t know about one. You can set in the properties UseStartPoint=true and set a certain StartPoint.
Thank you!
Hi,
The LeadInOut feature is excellent! To me at least it’s essential. Solved 99% of my problems. If you can move it in a tab at the Operation Panel to have easy access it would be great.
The “Extend in”, “Style in” and the rest of the controls are more than enough at most of the times. If we could have more control over the x and y coordinates of the LeadIn starting point, it will solve another 0.5%. Sometimes instead of tweaking the settings and searching for a sweet spot it would be just easier to add the x and y coordinates.
Other than that.
The “UseStartPoint=true” and the ability to set the x and y coordinates is a nice to have also. Although, I still don’t have any, or I have very limited control over the point that each operation chooses as a cutting start and actually making contact with the part. That essentially would be a complete and full manual control over every aspect of the operation if need it.
Finally, I think that as is the Path Workbench is a complete a reliable solution. In other worlds, great job guys!!!
Thank you once again.
I’m taking that back. Actually is not a good idea. I don’t need full control on x and y, I need some control. Maybe to be able to choose a spot within the already calculated path.
Hi,
I have modified the LeadInOut.py a bit to add more functionality. Most of the times it does a great job detecting the correct lead-in-out side but, sometimes you may need to make some changes in the direction.
Without modifying the UI, I’ve added a reverse option on Style.
Do not test this on any of your existing files. You may mess up your work. Download an Appimage of 0.21 versions and copy any of your files without the LeadInOut Dressup to work with.
If you choose Center, sometimes, depends on the angle of the leadin, the Extend In and Length values are cancelling it’s other on Reversed-Tangent and Reversed-Perpendicular. You may have to set a low value in one of those.
The Machine CRC has to be tested. I don’t know if it works as it should.
Hopefully we will see a more robust and tested version in a future release.
The py file is on the next post…
Opps! No py file was attached.
Did you create also a pull request?
Hi Chris,
No, how do I do that? Sorry, I still have no clue how things work.
I’m not really familiar with the github stuff, someone else want to jump in?
That sounds premature. New functions may not be perfect, but they should not come with warnings such as “don’t try this on real files.”
More testing can be accomplished just as done in this thread. Offer a module and ask for testers. It may take a while to get reasonable results.
Gene
Exactly. I’m not posting this as a new function but, as an idea that hopefully someone with more knowledge than me take it and make something functional out of this.