Announcements
Attention for Customers without Multi-Factor Authentication or Single Sign-On - OTP Verification rolls out April 2025. Read all about it here.
BWENGUK
496 Views, 8 Replies

New "Order For Shorter Links" doesn't seem to work as intended?

Just trying out the new "Order For Shorter Links" which is something I've been wanting for ages. But it doesn't seem to work how I would have expected it too. This is a very basic example, but I have a 50mm tool set to do 20mm stepovers. The first 'front' cut is correct, however the second 'back' cut ends up doing pretty much a full width of cut, ignoring the 20mm step over.

 

I assume it is essentially just generating the old style tool path which works from one side across, but then changing the order of the cuts? Rather than creating a new tool path that should be working from each side in, until it meets in the middle.

 

I have added some screenshots below. Hopefully this makes sense. I was looking forward to this new toolpath, but as it's currently implemented, I can't see it being useful at all, as you seem to have no control over that cut at the back!

 

BWENGUK_0-1716194169211.png

BWENGUK_1-1716194181371.png

BWENGUK_2-1716194382579.png

 

BWENGUK_3-1716194450191.png

 

seth.madore
in reply to: BWENGUK

You raise a good point and I think this was overlooked when implementing this feature. I've raised a ticket to improve the behavior; CAM-54081.

Thanks for trying it out and sharing your feedback!


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Ks-bart
in reply to: seth.madore

 hi @seth.madore ,Another issue is when you select "use chip thinning" togheter with "order for shorter links" the direction "climb milling " is no longer valid!

So with multiple passes, the first pass is climb, second conventional, our mills really don't like this :winking_face:

seth.madore
in reply to: Ks-bart

If you update to the latest Production release (just came out last night) you will find that both matters should be resolved :slightly_smiling_face:


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Ks-bart
in reply to: seth.madore

hi Seth, that's weird, I tested this yesterday before and after updating to 

Fusion 2.0.20256 x86_64

combining  "Order For Shorter Links" with "use chip thinning" , no change for me, still climb-conventional-climb

 

a.laasW8M6T
in reply to: Ks-bart

I just checked this now and its working Fine for me.

 

Can you share and example .f3d where this isn't working?

Ks-bart
in reply to: a.laasW8M6T

I've attached a f3d...

the problem only occurs if the mill ends on the other side as where the start point is, so with unequal passes

a.laasW8M6T
in reply to: Ks-bart

Ah yes I see, and multiple depths

 

My test had an even number of stepovers and also no multiple depths.

 

Your example file should be good data for @seth.madore to report this.

 

 

seth.madore
in reply to: a.laasW8M6T

Thanks @a.laasW8M6T and @Ks-bart, I've opened up CAM-57065 to investigate the issue


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing