"Shoulder Length" should be renamed "Tip to Shoulder"

[Anonymous]

Please update the New Mill Tool dialog and online help's reference of Shoulder Length.

Shoulder Length causes confusion because in straight bits there is no shoulder. In this case there should be an option of "No Shoulder" to leave shoulder length the same as body length.

If you renamed Shoulder Length to "Length Tip to Shoulder" it would be a much more accurate description. Currently you disable the OK button to prevent bad data (in case the user measured the start and stop length of the shoulder - which is what the literal definition asks for).

Rather than frustrate users with disabling the OK button simply renaming the field and updating the online help to have an accurate defintion would help.

http://fusion360.autodesk.com/learning/learning.html?guid=GUIDA0197982-0082-45AF-B848-8D62CAF57C49

Current online help states:

  Shoulder length:

The tool shoulder length.

this should be changed to:

Length tip to shoulder:

The length from the tip of the mill tool to where the shoulder starts. This is used to ensure your tool has proper clearance. If you are using a straight mill tool with no change in diameter choose "no shoulder" and the body length will be used instead.

[Anonymous]

Shoulder Length could also be called "Maximum Tool Depth" for how far the mill tool can be put into the material.

[Anonymous]

The third tab - SHAFT is what defines a mill tool's shoulder. Seems like the "Shoulder Length" value should be shown on the Shaft dialog in the visual indicator so that folks can see that Shoulder Length is Tip to Shoulder and that Shaft is now defining what that shoulder looks like. A simple checkbox for No Shoulder would simplify the Shaft window options so straight bit users could check and skip.

Calling Shoulder Length a better word like Maximum Tool Depth, Tool Reach or Neck and showing a diagram of it would help.

[OFGLLC]

There is an additional confusion and I consider it an error..  If you have an indexible tool with a maximum cut depth and the tool also has a shoulder, you can easily program a multiple depth cut and it will proceed, even though properly defined, to step down past the shoulder and crash the tool with no indication of the problem in the simulation.  Apparently, the depth reference is being compared against the shoulder instead of the actual depth of combined cuts.