Its working for me, I’m using chrome on a windows machine if that’s any help
thanks, I’m using firefox on a mac
ok, found a bug that chrome didn’t care about and firefox did. try again
Hi,
the troublefree workarea is an octagonal or hex shape, with arcs for sides, it is the green area in this picture:
in this example I chose the frame dimensions so I could cut a 1530x1530 birchply as well as a 2500x1250. Both boardsizes that can be bought here.
Arjen
2 Likes
I would really love to figure out how to scale the image to fit the screen (or have some sort of zoom controls for it)
It works!
I was intrigued by the “it is probably not possible to hit both max sizes at the same time”
I thought if we leave the 140 degrees as is, probably a good idea for the pull angles, especially on the topside of the vertical frame
and if we could somehow reduce the opposit arm angle to 115.5 degrees,
then we hit both max sizes at the same time, leaving us with the smallest frame posible to cut a 2440x1220, of 3330x2430
I know it is fiddling with numbers 
but that is close to the previously recommended frame size
by the way, what does the " Restrict workpiece size to cuttable area" do?
by the way, what does the " Restrict workpiece size to cuttable area" do?
right now it always sets the x/y so that a corner is on the edge of the green area, except if that box is checked, it doesn’t allow it to overlap the red areas.
I’m thinking of changing it so that if it’s unchecked, it doesn’t set the x/y and just plots what you enter.
thoughts?
that feature also does not work in my browser, so it plots what you enter, checked and unchecked, corner is not on the edge of the green area.
I think it is a good idea that if unchecked it plots what people enter, and checked the limit of the green area.
Small typo: Mas instead of Max
Maybe the title should change:
For me it makes sense to use only the area where there is no interference. But as Bar stated, we don’t know exactly how much of a difference it makes if you cut outside of the green zone. That is why I call the green zone the troublefree workarea, you could also call it the safe zone, or area without interference. What do you think?
Arjen
arjenschoneveld wrote:
that feature also does not work in my browser, so it plots what you enter, checked and unchecked, corner is not on the edge of the green area.
hmm, it works for me in firefox, chrome and brave. It triggers the update when
you move away from the workpiece x/y field.
it doesn’t trigger when you change the frame size.
I think it is a good idea that if unchecked it plots what people enter, and checked the limit of the green area.
done
Small typo: Mas instead of Max
thanks
Maybe the title should change:
suggestions for a new title?
For me it makes sense to use only the area where there is no interference. But
as Bar stated, we don’t know exactly how much of a difference it makes if you
cut outside of the green zone. That is why I call the green zone the
troublefree workarea, you could also call it the safe zone, or area without
interference. What do you think?
I’m open to changes, but am not sure what you are suggesting here.
David Lang
maybe that is the problem: when I open the link, the framesizes are already filled in with the sizes of my previous session
Maslow undistorted cutting area for …x… frame
Arjen
maybe that is the problem: when I open the link, the framesizes are already filled in with the sizes of my previous session
change the workpiece x or y value and the other will change (if the box is
checked)
Maslow undistorted cutting area for …x… frame
changed.
David Lang
ah, it doesn’t change when you check the box, but only if you then change the size of the Workpiece
arjenschoneveld wrote:
ah, it doesn’t change when you check the box, but only if you then change the size of the Workpiece
yes, I don’t know which dimension to keep constant when you check the box or
change the frame size, but when you manually set x I can figure you want me to
calculate Y
David Lang
2 Likes
I think it’s brilliant the way it is David
They aren’t indeed, as long as the belt angle is constant (maximized).
In the context of this attempt to have a frame size checker, I created an online tool, where you can enter the frame size, maximum belt angle and belt length. This results in a visual.
I’m curious if it matches the spreadsheet data of @dlang and drawings of @arjenschoneveld
Some quick manual physical angle measuring on the device shows me that the maximum belt angle is more than 140° but maybe this is limited in software.
Is a minimum belt angle of influence? Maybe with a large length to width ratio…
I haven’t built my frame yet so I can’t compare the output with the actual device yet.
Take a look / test at maslowcnc.nl/frame and let me know what you think.
1 Like
Hallo Geert,
Ik zit dit weekend niet bij mijn computer, dus ik kan even niks tekenen. Maar jij zegt dus dat het snijpunt van 2 lijnen met een vaste hoek (140 of 130 graden), glijdend over 2 vaste punten geen cirkel vormt? Daar leek het in mijn parametrische schets toch echt op…
De naast liggende armen hebben een fysieke beperking in de hoek die ze kunnen maken van maximaal 140 graden, de tegenover elkaar liggende armen hebben een fysieke beperking inde hoek die ze kunnen maken van minimaal 130 graden. Daar zijn mijn tekeningen en de spreadsheet van David Lang op gebaseerd.
Groetjes, Arjen
Correct. Source
It’s not crisp and clear to me what the minimum of 130° means exactly. Hor / vert difference?
the 130 degree limit is the minimum angle from the top right anchor to the sled near the top left to the bottom left anchor.
the sled can rotate, but in this corner, the arms hit the uprights.
what angles do you measure as the min/max?
Bar said that 40/140 degrees is the limit for adjacent belts (which would make 130 degrees the minimum for opposite belts, looking at the CAD, it looks like it should be possible to get just a little narrower/wider than that, and if you clip the ears off the top anchor to give the motors more clearance, you can get quite a bit narrower/wider (which are the three options in the angle pulldown in the document)
I stand corrected, it is not an arc. From your source I could deduct that only if the angle of the two lines is 90 degrees, it is an arc?
Can you tell me how the curve is called? In your source that was the question.
Very nice graphic in your area checker. I think that you would have to introduce a 3rd criteria though, that of the minimal angle of 130 degrees of two opposing arms, for each corner.
This one appears to be the most limiting for the workarea size.
If you introduce that 3rd criteria, I think our work areas will look the same, yours slightly bigger though, and it would be interesting to see how much the difference is.
Arjen
That is not my intention, I was in doubt if it is a circular arc. I’m not a mathematician 
Still not 100% sure if my ‘source’ is correct or if I misinterpreted something. My only goal is make useful tools and enjoy doing that.