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

2d adaptive clearing problem.

acuturn
Enthusiast

2d adaptive clearing problem.

acuturn
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

whenever i clear an area with 2d adaptive clearing, it always leaves some stock in the middle. The fusion simulation always shows the cutter clearing it out easily, but when it machines it it leaves it on. Im using the hurco 3d post processor. Anybody know where I should start looking at first? Pic below, and I know its only supposed to be a roughing cycle, but it creates extra work to clear. thanks for any help.20171018_115924.jpg

1 Like
Reply
Accepted solutions (1)
1,105 Views
7 Replies
Replies (7)

Steinwerks
Mentor
Mentor

Can you share this part on the forum? It could be a few things but I'd like to see it myself if possible.

Neal Stein

New to Fusion 360 CAM? Click here for an introduction to 2D Milling, here for 2D Turning.

Find me on:
Instagram and YouTube
0 Likes

acuturn
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

f3d file attached as requested. thanks.

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable

Hello, I have seen this problem.  I changed the maximum roughing distances, do you have screen shots of your settings?

0 Likes

acuturn
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

20171025_112746.jpg20171025_112808.jpg20171025_112816.jpg20171025_112825.jpg

Hope those are clear enough

0 Likes

523Industries
Advocate
Advocate
Accepted solution

First I would check your tool to make sure it's indeed 10mm in diameter.  Then I would check your machine settings to make sure there isn't a diameter offset at that tool position.  Then I would look at your post to make sure there isn't some kind of cutter compensation within the code itself.

 

Now on to your programming.  I don't know for sure but I think part of the problem may be that the Tolerance and related Smoothing is set too high for Adaptive Clearing.  I've changed that and maybe another thing or two and seem to get a longer pass down the middle which may clear that stock.

 

Ive also added a 2D Contour pass as an alternative to your Trace.  Not that yours was wrong or not giving you your desired results but per the description I think Trace is best used when you have different heights (Z) to machine but you're just smoothing the wall after the roughing.

 

Maybe worth mentioning is that even though the machine time between your Adaptive and my suggestion is about the same the file size is significantly smaller.

 

I'm not saying I'm right, just trying to offer help and learn from this as well.

 

 

Nick Santiago
1 Like

acuturn
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

thats great, the tolerance and the smoothing have corrected the problem. I would have thought that higher tolerances on the passes and smoothing would have kept the tool path closer to what was simulated. Not really got my head around how that works.

many thanks for your help

1 Like

523Industries
Advocate
Advocate

You're welcome!  I don't completely understand how it works either, but looking at a simulation while watching the Info tab can help figure out what's going on.

 

For example, I did a 3D Adaptive Clearing operation and then watched the Simulation.  With the Tolerance set at 0.001" and no Smoothing or Stock to Leave the tool never got closer than 0.006" to the top face of the model.  As an experiment I changed the tolerance to 0.0001" thinking it might get closer to finishing the top, but it remained the same.  AND, the Machining Time was 3 seconds less on a 9 minute operation with the higher tolerance because the Machining Distance in the Simulation Statistics tab showed 10" LESS distance, which probably would've left material like what you've experienced.  Not only that but the time to calculate the operation and file size was significantly increased with the unnecessarily higher tolerance.

 

I think it may be important to note that 3D Adaptive operations are "smart" in that they typically won't allow you to violate the model even if you have settings that would otherwise let it, whereas 2D Adaptive operations MAY violate the model (excessively machine into the part you're trying to make) which you'd only find out in the later finishing operations.  I could be wrong but that's my understanding of it from webinars I've participated in.

Nick Santiago
0 Likes