2D Adaptive Clearing - Rest Machining

[Anonymous]

I have a pocket with radiused corners in a solid. The corners are  0.125" radius. I 2D adaptive clear out with a 3/8" tool, then I want to adaptive clear with a 1/4" tool, leaving 0.010" everywhere for finish ops later. I can create both toolpaths, but the second 1/4" tool adaptive clearing ends up cutting mainly air until it gets to the corners. How can I set the second adaptive clearing op to just machine what was left over from the first?

[HughesTooling]

Can you upload the part, you probably have something wrong on the geometry tab it would be easy to figure out if you can share the file. To export go to the model workspace right click the file name in the browser and select Export and save as a f3d file.

Thanks Mark

[Trigg3r]

A bit of a weird one this I find. 2D adaptive doesn't have a rest machining option, I assume because it's not designed for use as a finishing strategy.

However, cases like this where the adaptive strategy keeps constant load in places like corner clearing would be handy.

I think it's because 2D op's don't dynamically calculate stock remaining like the 3D Adaptives do, hence it really doesnt know what's left, it relies on you to tell it.

I'd say either clear the remains with a pocket op with Rest machining enabled and some stock to leave setting as required, before finishing. 

Otherwise use a sketch to contain a 2D adaptive op to the corners if you think the adaptive stratergy is worth it.

Or I could just be talking out of my hat 😉

[triggerguard1 · Accepted solution]

2D pocketing has rest machining, but not adaptive.  Been down that road myself.

I find little use for the adaptive function with 2D, but 2D pocketing with "rest machining" is very handy.

[Anonymous]

BIG "duh" moment for me. Dont know why I didnt think to use pocketing with rest after the adaptive. That should do the trick since its very little stock to be removed.

[ovisopa]

Hello guys,

Instead of opening a new thread I think it's better to continue  the discussion here, even this is an old thread, but I have the same "issue" and I don't understand why 2D adaptive doesn't have the REST MACHINING option, 2D pocket can't really do what 2D adaptive does, and I found out the hard way - I just broke a 3mm carbide end mill - my fault I haven't checked the simulation much careful, I seen the toolpaths with a small stepover of 0.5mm I though it will be ok, but I didn;t think it will plunge in the unmilled material . 

Now I came back to my PC to check what I did wrong as I was sure I set the diameter in rest machining correctly, now I really don't know what I could change to start from the outside (I also tried PLUNGE OUTSIDE OF STOCK, it didn't help) .. what is the proper method to clean that area? - 2D adaptive was perfect if there was an option to only mill that small area. And really, what is the reason that 2D adaptive doesn't have the rest machining option ?

In the attached file, I used the second setup to mill the part, and the pocket that plunge right in the material, was "2D Pocket with REST MACHINING @ 3mm endmill (2)"

Any ideea what I could set to mill just that small area ? Should I draw a new sketch with only that small area? Or there are any tricks to use rest machining?

Have a beautiful day/evening/night .. I'm going to sleep now, and continue milling tomorrow morning.

Thank you.

[uta.alexander]

Hey ovisopa,

I know it's been a while since you posed this question, but I just came across it as I have been running into the same issues. I have been dealing with them in acceptable ways which I'll describe in a bit, but I am looking for better ways to do this. 

A couple of different things I have tried successfully have been to set the rest machining tool diameter bigger than the actual tool used. For instance, if you machined with a 6mm end mill for the 2D adaptive, set the rest machining diameter to 7.5mm. With a bit of fine tuning you can reduce or increase the diameter of the tool and get it as close to the previous stock as possible, but check that all pockets are being cleared by the tool, don't rely on just one. 

The other thing to do in conjunction with this is to increase/decrease your linear lead in distance, under linking, leads and transitions, for fine adjustment. But make sure that the lead in speed is not too high if the end mill is going to be cutting while leading in, or it will break your end mill. Once again, check your simulation to make sure the tool will not lead into the stock at a lead in speed while it's meant to be cutting. 

Another thing I am using is the multiple depths option located under passes for the 2D contour. This allows for multiple passes at different heights, including an option to do a finishing pass at the final depth. The great thing about this is that it reduces your load on the tool and it is less likely to break it.

One final thing to look at are the feed optimization options under the passes tab, all the way down. Just like John Saunders (NYC CNC on youtube) said in one of his videos, this option doesn't really say what it does in the title, BUT, it is really handy. What it allows you to do is to slow the feed speed down when coming up to a corner, which reduces the load on the end mill. You can set how slow you want the tool to be fed, as well as what type of corners to slow down in and how far away from a corner to start slowing down. I have used this option with great success.
When you look on your simulations, you will see that in a corner the step over of your tool is much larger that the one you have set under the multiple step over options in the passes tab. This is because the step over distances are calculated parallel to one another by the looks of it, which does not take into consideration the corner. Therefore the tool become heavily loaded up and breaks. 

Lastly, this is just my experience so far as I am a full time knife maker in New Zealand and I have had no formal training in Fusion 360 or any CNC systems> SO!! take the above as thought provoking information, rather than a guide and go from there. 

Hope this helps and if you have any questions let me know. Maybe I didn't explain something clearly. 

OH! I almost forgot to mention!! after the initial 2D adaptive clearing, I use a 2D contour, with the options mentioned above, as a roughing operation. Therefore I leave a bit of stock for a final finishing 2D contour run.

[uta.alexander]

Actually, scratch using 2D contour or 2D pocket.

I was doing some thinking and just happened to try out 3D adaptive! EUREKA! It has rest machining that doesn't require you to select the tool diameter, it knows what you have and have not machined from your previous operations in your setup!

Just use 3D adaptive with rest machining from previous operation and select the machining boundary as your pockets. These are both under the Geometry tab! Cut down machining time by over half, with less overall tool load! 

I am going to try this out straight away!

[Anonymous]

Wish I've come across this before I broke my 4mm end mill.

I was milling a pocket and decided to use an 8mm end mill to rough out some material before using my 4mm end mill to clean up those my 8mm cannot reach, did not check the simulation and the tool ran straight into a corner 100% radially and broke the tool.

I wonder why rest machining option is there if it doesn't know how much stock is left?

Cheng

[ovisopa]

Are you sure you checked the rest machining option? in the mean time, and many fusion360 updates later, we now have REST MACHINING option for 2D adaptive too, and it works ok, I haven't noticed any issue so far, but I almost all times write a bigger number than the actual tool I used in the previous operation, for example, if I milled with a 3mm end mill, and next tool is 2mm end mill, I usually write 4mm diameter for the TOOL DIAMETER option in the rest machining tab

[Anonymous]

Hi, 

Yes, I did the same thing as you, defining a larger tool diameter. I found this out the hard way. Why do I have to do this? Is it a bug or something with a reason?

Cheng

[ovisopa]

I think there are 2 parameters for the previous operation, that the REST MACHINING option doesn't know about (I think):

1. Is the MINIMUM CORNER RADIUS

2. STOCK TO LEAVE

If any of those 2 options (at least) have a higher value than 0, the roughing operation will leave more material in the corners, than we might want. I do the "fake larger tool diameter" trick to be sure I compensate to whatever value I have on those roughing operations.

Maybe if you attach the fusion archive we can check out to see exactly why in your case, you need to use a "fake larger tool diameter".

[Anonymous]

Just to make things clear we are talking about 2D Adaptive here. Here I upload a simplified version of motorcycle hub damper mould I was working on recently.

First 2D adaptive with 8mm end mill works fine, with 0 stock to leave and 1mm minimum cutting radius. 

Second adaptive I continue with a 4mm end mill and with the same setting but REST machining is used with tool diameter: 8mm, corner radius: 1mm (I believe this is the minimum cutting radius of the previous operation). 

Notice during the operation with a 4mm end mill, when the tool plunges into the left cavity, it slightly touches the sidewalls at the backside and when it moves forward, it runs straight into the stock: 

 

3D Adaptive and your way of defining larger diameter work fine. But, if there's NO STOCK TO LEAVE and DEFINED (MINIMUM) CORNER RADIUS, what could possibly cause this to happen? Or this option has its own purpose?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Cheng

[seth.madore]

Looking at your file, I would actually wager that you have exposed a bug with how Rest Machining is implemented in Fusion. I'll open a ticket on this today (hopefully) and let you know when I have more to share.

-EDIT-

Oh, should have mentioned; Corner Radius in the Rest Machining dialog refers to the actual corner radius of the tool, not the corner radius of the part or any other radius. In this case here, you are leading off with a flat endmill, so the value should be set to zero.

[Anonymous]

Thanks! Now I know what corner radius is for. Hope to hear some good news from you.

[144558]

Hallo

Ich verwende für solche Fälle gerne

3D Adaptiv oder 3D Tasche sehe keinen Grund oder vorteil es mit 2D Adaptiv zu tun.

[Anonymous]

Hi, 

I use 3D Adaptive for my operation now. It should be fixed if there's a bug?

Cheng

[seth.madore]

Well yes, a ticket will be opened and an assement will be done. From there, it will be put into the queue and addressed in due time. Some issues take longer to track down and fix then others.

[seth.madore]

I've opened up CAM-20366 to investigate this issue.

[Anonymous]

Where can I check if this issue if fixed?