Tool paths randomly exclude selected contours (especially Chamfer)

[jwatte]

Using Windows 10; latest version of Fusion 360; I have an assembly with four parts which are just references because I'm making four of them in one mill operation.

Trying to use 2D chamfer, it will not chamfer certain areas, with no rhyme or reason. There's plenty of clearance, and the same profile chamfers on reference 1, but not reference 2 on the same part!

Here's a link to the project: https://a360.co/2H1xycN

I'm using a 6.35mm 90 degree chamfer mill, a 0.2mm chamfer, a 1.6mm tip offset, and there's 7mm between the parts (with offset 1.6mm, it should only be about 4.8mm out from the part)

Especially the area with the ring around it is bizarre. The same area, with less clearance, is chamfered correctly on the rightmost part.

Here's the setup in the project:

If I were to take a super wild guess, perhaps the chamfer clearance checker doesn't correctly account for the transform of each of the references? Totally bizarre.

[HughesTooling]

People more likely to take a look at the file if you export it as an f3d and attach, the share links are too much hassle.

Mark

[Anonymous]

https://a360.co/2J1nRys

There is no problem if using 2D contour instead of chamfer.

[Anonymous]

Well, I replied to wrong person again, but I wanted to add,........... I never use chamfer strategy because it seems to have ongoing issues, besides, 2D contour gives me option to preserve order, do more passes on larger chamfers or leave stock and finish with same or another tool.

[jwatte]

Except I can't export as f3d because it uses referenced components.

[jwatte]

So, while it's helpful to know that 2D Contour does not have the problems that Chamfer does, it's not actually the same thing once you need to keep clear of geometry close to the chamfer path.

I take it that Chamfer is buggy, and has been buggy for some time, and I should post this in the "support" forum?

[HughesTooling]

---

@jwatte wrote:

Except I can't export as f3d because it uses referenced components.

---

That's a problem. You could temporarily break the links and export as an f3d then just close the file without saving to maintain the links in your design.

Mark

[Anonymous]

Contour strategy includes chamfer feature where you can define chamfer size and tip offset plus have the benefit of other options that "chamfer" strategy does not have.

[Anonymous]

---

@jwatte wrote:

So, while it's helpful to know that 2D Contour does not have the problems that Chamfer does, it's not actually the same thing once you need to keep clear of geometry close to the chamfer path.

I take it that Chamfer is buggy, and has been buggy for some time, and I should post this in the "support" forum?

---

You chose tool size that you know will clear, define tool tip width that is required and use tip offset to clear walls.

You can use tangential extensions to limit chamfer start and end points near walls.

Below are two examples where 2D contour did the job for me, in fact I never used "Chamfer" feature in past 2 years.

This was actual job detail where 1/8" 90 degree spot drill was used to deburr edges of two intersecting counter bores.

Sample to show why 2D contour is all I need for 2D chamfers.

[seth.madore · Accepted solution]

@jwatte the issue you are seeing is a carbon based error.

You never designated the Model in your setup:

Setting it correctly to include all your models will give you this:

To the point made by @Anonymous I too seldom use Chamfer, but that's mostly because it didn't even exist when I started using Fusion. When it first came out, it was super limited in what it did, but it has improved over time. I do use it often now when I have a shoulder or wall to come up against.

[jwatte]

Thank you for the answer!

I have used Fusion for several years, and I've always thought that "None" on "Model" means "every body is the model."

Learned something new today!