Oval Z changing chamfer

[friesendrywall]

Is there any way in fusion to properly calculate the chamfers on the top oval holes, or is this a tool limitation?  I think a modified Engrave path could do this, but maybe there is a cleaner way??  The trace chamfer doesn't cut it right, it is too deep on the sides.

[LibertyMachine]

Trace will give you problems, as it's not "model aware" and also not compensating a great deal for tool geometry. Part of your "deeper on the sides" issue is also due to there being material left from the Corner Rounding tool. You have .005 radial and axial stock left on.

Your two options are going to be a Scallop toolpath and Project. In this case here, Project is locking up my computer hard, so I'm thinking it's not possible with a Chamfer mill.

This leaves us with Scallop. My quick placement of a toolpath is an example only, there is fine tuning to be done, but you get the idea.

[friesendrywall]

That still blows out the side.  Somehow the toolpath will have to factor in the upside edge of the tool.

[Steinwerks]

Actually the reason it's gouging the part is that you are leaving .005" stock both radially and axially in the 'Finish round' toolpath.

[friesendrywall]

I don't follow what you mean.  Run a simulation.  The sides of the holes are completely outside of the chamfer, probably because of the high side of the tool.  The other 3 holes aren't cut, the Finish round really isn't a factor that I understand.

[Steinwerks · Accepted solution]

---

@friesendrywall wrote:

I don't follow what you mean.  Run a simulation.  The sides of the holes are completely outside of the chamfer, probably because of the high side of the tool.  The other 3 holes aren't cut, the Finish round really isn't a factor that I understand.

---

I'm not sure what you mean here by the sides of the holes are outside of the chamfer.

I did a little refining of @LibertyMachine's toolpath and simulated after changing the stock to leave values in the Finish round toolpath to zero (unchecking that box) and get this:

The simulation does show a little gouging from the original he posted but his solution is valid. You can limit the toolpath by changing the boundary to just the outisde profile and some tweaking (negative value in the offset and limit number of stepovers on the Passes tab (here it is limited to 4).

If I return the Stock to Leave to .005" for both axial and radial this is the result:

And this is the toolpath:

File attached.

[friesendrywall]

@Steinworks Sorry, but if I run your file as posted, I get this -

[Steinwerks]

Yes, just like the second photo in my last post.  (I ran it as Wall Paint for material in the simulation).

Again, you have Stock to Leave set at .005" for the corner round tool, that's going to reflect in that toolpath because the chamfer will be .005" "thicker" than it is in the model.

[friesendrywall]

I don't get it, sorry, either I have a disconnect or something else.  See my screencast.  With no offset, mine looks like your second, with offset it is even worse.

[Steinwerks]

This is the toolpath in which you currently have extra stock:

[friesendrywall]

Ah yes, light is now dawning.  Sorry about this.

[friesendrywall]

After that, I realize that .005 chamfer tip offset works acceptably in trace/chamfer too.

Thanks for the look see catch.

[LibertyMachine]

@Steinwerks Thanks for jumping in and taking care of this. I'm trying to keep the Mori running AND set up a job on my old Matsuura....and I really shouldn't have been on the forums 

You explained what was going on better than I, I'm marking your answer as the solution.