Has anyone used Fusion 360 to run the Multicam?

Woodshop
#1

I am interested in using Fusion to run the Multicam, but am not sure which post-processor to use. There are some post-processors named “multicam” in the Fusion postprocessor library, but I wanted to ask on here to see if anyone has already figured this out before doing anything potentially risky.

Vcarve would also work for my projects, but with the Fusion cam being so great, I figured it was worth asking. If no one else has done it (and if there are no objections) I would like to do some dry runs using the built-in postprocessors, and will then report back on the results.

Thanks in advance for any info!

Post-processor choice 3d toolpaths from fusion360 on the Multicam
#2

Does it have an arc inch post available?

#3

Nothing described exactly as arc inch as in vCarve. This is what it’s got:

multicam_postprocessors.png604×554 20.6 KB

This is what some gcode generated by the “Multicam ISO” postprocessor creates:

gcodesample.PNG772×521 41.8 KB

The gcode generated by “multiam HPGL” is very strange, I doubt it will work. It doesn’t even look like actual gcode. Here that is:

strangegcode.PNG655×501 19.7 KB

Google hasn’t given me anything (though I haven’t exactly searched for a super long time), mostly just people asking if it’s possible. Any thoughts?

#4

Those will not run on the Multicam Router. It needs a .cnc file. Those files are for plotter style equipment.

#5

The first gcode image is a .cnc file, it’s in inches too. I’ve heard that some multicams define Z down as positive, which could pose an issue with this postprocessor. I’ll post some gcode from vcarve and compare.

2 Likes
#6

Only the second one appears to be, actually. First one looks like conventional gcode on first inspection.

I would suggest devising a simple model that is identical in both F360 and vcarve. Same work offsets, etc. and then comparing the gcode outputs.

I’m hard pressed to believe a company as big as MultiCam doesn’t have post processors for common CAM packages, especially given Autodesk’s push lately to support all the things. Or at least attempt.

1 Like
#7

It would be awesome if a way could be found. Having separate CAD packages for each different machine at the space is a bit tough to keep up with.

#8

You can CAD in whatever you like. Design in VCarve is for the birds

#9

Then what are we talking about upthread ?

#10

CAM and post process.

#11

Ok, rephrase: It would be great if we could use to the greatest extent possible the same software for 3D printing, Mas-Cam, the HAAS, and the plasma cutter.

That should have been clear from context, but I’m a programmer, not a designer. Forgive the slip in terminology.

#12

Expecting the same workflow for disparate pieces of equipment is a pipe dream.

Making a model can be done on a multitude of platforms.

#13

Yup. Creating production file(s) is another process altogether from creating the design.

#14

It might not hurt to post for help in the AutoDesk forums… I glanced over a few somewhat related questions, and people seem quite willing to try to help…

Here is an example that has a reply with some links that may be helpful…

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/computer-aided-machining-cam/help-with-post-processor-required/td-p/6443999

1 Like