How to stop 2D chamfer gouging?

[ashes.man]

Can I stop this 2D chamfer from gouging the part?  And from probably breaking the tool tip!  Model attached.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

If you change the lead settings to the default of having no Radii, but just a 90-degree straight lead-in, I think it might be fine.
It's still nasty, though, that it doesn't check collisions during the leads. Let's tag @seth.madore to see if there already is a ticket for this.

PS. If you happen to have the machining extension, using the deburr toolpath might be the most convenient workaround.

[ashes.man]

@Laurens-3DTechDraw Thanks for the feedback.  I try to avoid having too sharp transitions.  My machine has very sharp acceleration and bangs a bit without a nice transition.  But for one cut I guess it would be OK. 

It would definitely be nice if it could at least warn about the unintended cutting.  I guess it is strictly not unintended, the tool is going where you told it to.  It is a chamfer path though, and if the cut is not actually on the selected edge to be chamfered then probably should be an error.

[ashes.man]

@Laurens-3DTechDraw Actually, I just tried adding a new 2D chamfer with the default lead in/out settings and it still touches the face below.  Maybe zero clearance.  Not sure how to do this tool path!  I will leave it out and do it by hand for now, but be interested to know how to resolve it in the future.

[nize7P396]

Hi,

In any case, You can not make non-variable champfer on complete edge, but You can get part of the champfer.

I modified offset on edge 3 selection + champfer tip offset (my minimum is 0,5 mm) + You can play with lead in/out to avoid colision between tool tip and model. I do not like parpendicular lead in/out, but i am not sure that You can get good result if You uncheck this box. 

This is how i would solve the problem, maybe one of the colleagues from the forum has a different vision.

[ashes.man]

Thanks.  I did try changing the offset on that edge extension to a negative number but didn't see any change.  I didn't try doing that as well as changing the chamfer tip offset and lead in/out.  I will have a play.

[nize7P396]

Your main problem is big radius (2mm) on lead in/out - here is the reason why You have colision between tool and model. 

CNC programming is constant "game" and play with parameters, I like to say "if You want to be a boss, not Your software, You have to take control"! 

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

The negative number works, the trouble is it's from the actual edge/line and not where the current toolpath stops, so you need a much larger negative value than you probably expect.

[seth.madore · Accepted solution]

Yes, there is a ticket for this already; CAM-58918. However, we don't plan on investing time in fixing this (it's not a small amount of work). Now, before everyone panics and grabs their pitchforks, the reason we're not going to be working on the above ticket is because development is well underway for an improved Chamfer toolpath, one that can better handle multi-axis as well as proper stepovers.

[pkomatlapalli]

Hi @ashes.man,

I wanted to follow up to see whether you still require assistance or if you were able to resolve your issue. Please let us know by providing an update.
If you have already found a solution, we encourage you to share it with the community so that other members with similar questions may benefit from your experience.
 

[ashes.man]

@pkomatlapalli I did not find a solution I liked or thought was safe to self adjust should I alter the part etc.  The real solution is @seth.madore answer above.  Wait for the new improved tool path.  Great to hear an improvement is coming.  I hope it is available in the free license editions.