Is my project lost?

I just finished up a pretty long roughing job with a 0.25" endmill. I loaded the next tool path and switched to a 0.062 tapered ball mill. I started the cut and quickly realized I didn’t set my Z for the new bit. I stopped the cut on the laptop but not before the bit drove into the wood and getting stuck. Now the XY and Z are off.

Now for the main problem. As I reset the touch plate and prepare to re-zero XY and Z I noticed that it is set for a 0.125" endmill. I’m positive all I did was a switch from the Z touch to XYZ touch when I saw the wrong endmill was set in gsender.

So now I think I may have set my XY and Z for the roughing pass using a 0.125" (in gsender) instead of the 0.25" on the router.

Can I reestablish my XY and Z doing the same mess up? Using a 0.25" endmill and keying in gsender that it is a 0.125"? That is if that is what happened originally. My memory sucks especially if I start to doubt something.

@Swinly Lonnie: Just so I am clear, when you first set your zeros, gSender was set for a .125" end mill, but you actually had a .25" end mill in the router?

Incorrect text deleted by author.

1 Like

That is correct. I’m not using a 0.125 at all. I’m only using the 0.25 and the tapered.

At least it is a project for myself so I won’t disappoint anybody and it will still be something to learn from.

@Swinly You should be able to put the 1/4" bit back in and rezero X and Y as long as the corner of the work piece you originally referenced from is still there. Leave the bit size set to the original 0.125". This will reestablish the original XY zeros. Then swap back to the tapered bit and use the probe block to only set Z zero. This assumes that you have at least one spot of the work piece at the original height to place the probe block on. Then you should be good to go. The only issue you might have because of the 0.125" setting is your entire carving will be slightly misplaced in the work piece. If you’re cutting the sign out and have plenty of margin you won’t even notice it.


@Swinly @paullarson Lonnie: I did say that someone could prove me wrong. :grinning: Let us know how you make out. Tks, Paul.


@Swinly @paullarson Just so you both know, I am deleting my posts since they put out bad information. I don’t want them to remain on the site for anyone else to stumble on and follow. Sometimes, people don’t read to the end of a thread before proceeding.

Thanks again, Paul. I guess that I’m slow. I had to draw pics this morning before I finally agreed with you. :grinning:

Sorry for the misstep, Lonnie. At least Paul jumped in before any harm was done - I hope.

1 Like

@gwilki Grant, not problem. Some of these concepts are a bit spatially abstract.

The good news is it seems to be on the right path now. I did as Paul said and the finishing carve seems to be going smoothly now.

I tried a 3d relief before and failed because I carved away all of my reference points. So I started incorporating a square in the bottom left for the touch probe on * all my designs.

Thanks again to all

*a grand total of one.

1 Like

@Swinly that’s smart leaving a reference point when you can.

1 Like