peter-harrison
Established Member
Hi, has anyone got a good one of these to recommend? Preferably free and downloadable!
Panel optimiser?
- Thread starter peter-harrison
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
mudman
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2004
- Messages
- 993
- Reaction score
- 98
Is this what you are looking for?
Cutlist Optimizer - optiCutter
Cutlist Optimizer - optiCutter
peter-harrison
Established Member
I have had a go with it, it's ok- a bit slow and the diagrams are hard to read (I use panel optimising for timber as well as sheet materials, at the moment I'm cutting some 5 meter boards and the diagrams opticutter produces are almost unreadable. Maybe I'll just have to relearn the art of cutting boards!
peter-harrison
Established Member
I retract the previous comments! I was using Cutlist which has a similar title on a browser. Opticut seems good.
Thanks.
Pete
Thanks.
Pete
Distinterior
Established Member
It might be sad to admit this, but I quite liked working out how to cut the panels for my kitchens and wardrobes from 8x4 sheets. I used to sketch them out on A4 , with each piece of paper representing a board. A sort of Sudoku for woodworkers. Some of the trickier combinations often required "dog leg" cuts in a board to get the best yield.
I am not familiar with these optimiser programmes, so I am curious as to whether they prioritize ease of cutting over best yield.
I am not familiar with these optimiser programmes, so I am curious as to whether they prioritize ease of cutting over best yield.
Last edited:
Cabinetman
Established Member
Yes that’s pretty much what I do, never seem to waste any board, can’t see it working with timber very well though as it can’t take into account all the variables, grain knots splits etc.
Distinterior
Established Member
The last job I did before Christmas entailed 16 sheets of 18mm material, 2800mm x 2070mm......The thought of working out the position of all those components by hand to achieve the best yield and optimum positioning would be time wasting, to say the least.
If I remember correctly, it took about 90 secs to generate the cutting list and another 30 secs to produce the PDF file and print it off.
Its certainly worth it for me....
Edit. As Cabinetman said, I wouldn't bother with it on real wood, but for manmade panels it's a doddle!
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
Works brilliantly with timber. You start with a thorough cutting list and work down in order from largest pieces first, always taken from smallest pieces of stock available and up to standard with your aforementioned variables (knots, straightness, splits etc etc).
Dead simple, highly effective, minimises waste.
Also needs no calculations or forethought, if you have enough stock to start with. Self correcting - just head-down brain-off. You have the job done before you could even finish putting the data into a computer
You can do the same with sheet but orientation introduces another factor to be considered.
I can't see why anybody would need an "optimiser" and it would most likely take longer and introduce more problems, unless you are IKEA etc.
Last edited:
peter-harrison
Established Member
I don't know.. I've done it both ways, a lot! Basically, for 20 years up to about 10 years ago I did it your way, and for the last 10 years or so I've used the optimiser for most jobs apart from ones with figured timber or where the grain is a big deal such as table tops, drawer fronts etc. I am pretty sure that my wastage is down a lot. This may say something about my ability with Tetris-type visialisation!
I do a lot of painted work, and can't see the difference between a bit of ply and a bit of beech for that.
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
If the grain or other detail are important enough you'd have a separate cut list for timber stock separately selected for grain, species etc. e.g. for drawer fronts.
You can chose to prioritise in any way you want. The basic method prioritises minimum waste and maximises speed.
kinverkid
Established Member
I can see the usefulness of these programmes. Some of them are amazing, especially the ones they use in the garment industry for the cutting of textiles.The last job I did before Christmas entailed 16 sheets of 18mm material, 2800mm x 2070mm......The thought of working out the position of all those components by hand to achieve the best yield and optimum positioning would be time wasting, to say the least.
If I remember correctly, it took about 90 secs to generate the cutting list and another 30 secs to produce the PDF file and print it off.
Its certainly worth it for me....
Edit. As Cabinetman said, I wouldn't bother with it on real wood, but for manmade panels it's a doddle!
But, for me, working out board cutting and timber component cutting, was always , the moment I well and truly got my head around the job. Learning exactly what the job was about - so to speak.
We are all wired differently, but for me it would be a bit like going into an exam where I could look up the answers on my mobile phone. Guaranteed success, but would I have understood anything.
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
If you use the system I describe no working out is needed. It's more a procedure likely to optimise the outcome. Not guaranteed but highly probable.
Impossible. Did you mean 90 minutes perchance?
Cabinetman
Established Member
Haha, sorry Jacob I was unclear, I meant I couldn’t see an optimiser working with timber!
Distinterior
Established Member
Nope!.....Once all the quantities & dimensions are entered, number of stock sheets entered etc, I hit " Calculate " and it took about 90 seconds to produce the complete cultist and another 30 seconds to produce and print the PDF file.....Perhaps you should try it Jacob, you never know, we may drag you out of the middle ages....
.ajs
Established Member
It's one of those things that a computer essentially can't solve fully, short execution times generally means they've given up sooner rather than being fundamentally better. It's a class of problem called NP complete in computer science, essentially the only way to arrive at the single best solution is to try all possible permutations in all possible orders - it doesn't take very many parts that to fully calculate it would take until the heat death of the Universe to work out, even for a computer.
Instead there are various strategies that the programs use to try to get somewhere close to optimal without checking all possibilities, essentially a codified version of an experienced hand saying "I'd approach it this way".
Personally I tend to find them of limited value, by the time you have constrained for e.g. grain direction and optimised for useful offcuts you could have figured it out well enough by hand. In many cases I'd rather break an extra sheet if it means I end up with 3'x8' and 6'x4' "offcuts" instead of 6" squares or even triangles.
Instead there are various strategies that the programs use to try to get somewhere close to optimal without checking all possibilities, essentially a codified version of an experienced hand saying "I'd approach it this way".
Personally I tend to find them of limited value, by the time you have constrained for e.g. grain direction and optimised for useful offcuts you could have figured it out well enough by hand. In many cases I'd rather break an extra sheet if it means I end up with 3'x8' and 6'x4' "offcuts" instead of 6" squares or even triangles.
worn thumbs
Established Member
It looks like a good case for a CAM system with a nesting facility.Not cheap but they are very,very rapid.I have nested sufficient parts for 140 sheets in less than a minute.Only really workable in a CNC context,since sawing panels will have to accommodate through cuts.Probably nowhere near justified for a single job but if it is a regular exercise it might be justified if only to pass the file to a CNC service.
Jacob
New Luddism. Wake up and resist.
That'd be your 90 minutes or more.
No it's much quicker my way. You have to prepare a cutting list of course, and to have enough stock, but after that it's head down brain off. Saves having to key in all that data for starters, and it's self correcting so there's no data to rework or re-enter.I hit " Calculate " and it took about 90 seconds to produce the complete cultist and another 30 seconds to produce and print the PDF file.....Perhaps you should try it Jacob, you never know, we may drag you out of the middle ages....
MrKenny
Member
I needed some MDF sheets cutting for an on-site project several years ago.
My local orange coloured box store with the cutting service meant this was easiest way to do it - the chaps there used Cutlist Optimiser to calculate the cuts.
Board size is retained for common sizes, add the required sizes, hit calculate. I've got it on my tablet, and after calculating the cuts, print it on my printer.
Cutting order (cut 1, cut 2) is there as the sheet saw will only cut straight lines, I know my wastage/spare/scrap/leftovers from the boards and fInd my time better used even if I'm doing the job at home - unless it's time for a brew.
'Data entry ' time is a few seconds.
As everyone else has said, timber - different story.
My local orange coloured box store with the cutting service meant this was easiest way to do it - the chaps there used Cutlist Optimiser to calculate the cuts.
Board size is retained for common sizes, add the required sizes, hit calculate. I've got it on my tablet, and after calculating the cuts, print it on my printer.
Cutting order (cut 1, cut 2) is there as the sheet saw will only cut straight lines, I know my wastage/spare/scrap/leftovers from the boards and fInd my time better used even if I'm doing the job at home - unless it's time for a brew.
'Data entry ' time is a few seconds.
As everyone else has said, timber - different story.
