<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Incorrect gcode generation for nested patterns in Fusion Manufacture</title>
    <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9854916#M91471</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;That's a good point about the climb versus conventional milling when dealing with the mirror pattern. Using a circular pattern to make the second piece, and then linear-patterning the result works as well. Still curious that the mirror pattern fails when nested in the linear pattern.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2020 04:59:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>dymkJW3GJ</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-11-09T04:59:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Incorrect gcode generation for nested patterns</title>
      <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9852056#M91386</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;When nesting mirror pattern into a linear pattern, Fusion 360 generates the correct preview, but incorrect simulation &amp;amp; gcode. Screenshots attached (several in a .zip archive), as well as the f3d file and generated gcode.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2020 06:13:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9852056#M91386</guid>
      <dc:creator>dymkJW3GJ</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-07T06:13:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Incorrect gcode generation for nested patterns</title>
      <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9852533#M91387</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;At the glance, your first clamp is done using climb milling but when you make mirror pattern of that tool path, your second clamp is done in conventional milling.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It depends on material in question how that will affect the outcome, I would suggest programming clamp shown in blue separately if that's the only one oriented that way.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="2020-11-07 05_57_14-Fusion360.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/841509i130C5DB9FF645CBB/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="2020-11-07 05_57_14-Fusion360.png" alt="2020-11-07 05_57_14-Fusion360.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2020 14:04:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9852533#M91387</guid>
      <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-07T14:04:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Incorrect gcode generation for nested patterns</title>
      <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9854916#M91471</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;That's a good point about the climb versus conventional milling when dealing with the mirror pattern. Using a circular pattern to make the second piece, and then linear-patterning the result works as well. Still curious that the mirror pattern fails when nested in the linear pattern.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2020 04:59:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-manufacture/incorrect-gcode-generation-for-nested-patterns/m-p/9854916#M91471</guid>
      <dc:creator>dymkJW3GJ</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-11-09T04:59:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

