nesting issue
Moderators: Jason Susnjara, Larry Epplin, Clint Buechlein, Scott G Vaal
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri, Aug 25 2006, 9:12AM
- Company Name: Paris Kitchens
- Country: CANADA
- Location: Paris, ontario
nesting issue
is there a way to get the nests to come out better when you have base gables and upper gables to cut? currently, if i only have a couple of base gables, it will nest those first, then nest the upper gables arround them, but it doesn't nest well to fill the remaining space. here is a pic of what i mean. the program makes me load up a second sheet to cut the last upper gable, when it could easily fit in the space leftover on the first sheet once the base gables are cut. any ideas, or am i stuck with running it as 2 sepperate jobs to use the material best?
- Attachments
-
- layout.JPG (19.86 KiB) Viewed 8021 times
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri, Aug 25 2006, 9:12AM
- Company Name: Paris Kitchens
- Country: CANADA
- Location: Paris, ontario
i am sending the job to a router, i am using true shape. it is grained material, so the part orientation is fixed.
i run into this problem all the time, and would love to be able to tell the program to relocate certain parts, or tell it to discard the current orientation and try another, or something to that effect.
i run into this problem all the time, and would love to be able to tell the program to relocate certain parts, or tell it to discard the current orientation and try another, or something to that effect.
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue, May 17 2005, 2:06PM
- Company Name: Thermwood
- Country: UNITED STATES
- Contact:
Be sure to check your Collar value (under Nesting) and true shape cutter diameter (under preferences). Both of these will affect nesting inside eCabinets. I assume you would want to match those values to what you have at the machine so you're apples to apples.
I typically use .375\" for the true shape cutter and .1\" for the collar.
I typically use .375\" for the true shape cutter and .1\" for the collar.
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri, Aug 25 2006, 9:12AM
- Company Name: Paris Kitchens
- Country: CANADA
- Location: Paris, ontario
i think where the problem really lies is with where the program wants to look first to place each part. it appears to always want to put the next piece as close as possible to the left side. if you look at the picture above, the first 2 upper gables are placed this way above the base gables, followed by the third upper gable in line with them since that is where it can fit that is closest to the left. then, because that third upper gable is placed there, there is no longer enough space to place the last 2 upper gables, but only 1 of them.
is there no way that the program could realize that there is tonnes of space above, where the one gable could be shifted to in order to fit the extra piece at the end of the base gables?
it could be done by making the priority for placement be the bottom, then the left (currently it is left, then bottom), but i suppose that you would likely end up running into the same issue. but what would really work would be if it tries both as well as a combination of the 2 methods, and pick whichever nests the best.
this is probably just a memory killer, but just a thought. i wouldn't even mention it except for the fact that this happens almost daily, and really cuts done on the efficience and increases waste.
is there no way that the program could realize that there is tonnes of space above, where the one gable could be shifted to in order to fit the extra piece at the end of the base gables?
it could be done by making the priority for placement be the bottom, then the left (currently it is left, then bottom), but i suppose that you would likely end up running into the same issue. but what would really work would be if it tries both as well as a combination of the 2 methods, and pick whichever nests the best.
this is probably just a memory killer, but just a thought. i wouldn't even mention it except for the fact that this happens almost daily, and really cuts done on the efficience and increases waste.
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue, May 17 2005, 2:06PM
- Company Name: Thermwood
- Country: UNITED STATES
- Contact:
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri, Aug 25 2006, 9:12AM
- Company Name: Paris Kitchens
- Country: CANADA
- Location: Paris, ontario
-
- Guru Member
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue, May 17 2005, 2:06PM
- Company Name: Thermwood
- Country: UNITED STATES
- Contact:
Re:
I agree.Mark Hesketh wrote:.........however, it would still be nice if the program could determine which was best for each sheet automatically.
It's easy to overlook the "little" things within the software.