Fusion
Community
Under multiple depths in 2d pocket and contour there's an option to taper the pocket. selecting at the top or bottom of the pocket should produce different tool paths, if you select at the top the pocket should taper away from the edge making the pocket smaller. If you select at the bottom of the pocket it should get bigger at the top face. At the moment it makes no difference and it produces a pocket as if you've selected at the bottom of the pocket.
In this example I've selected at the top so the pocket should taper away from the logo and make a smaller pocket at the bottom.
But as you can see it machines as if I've selected at the bottom and removes to much material.
In the attached file I'm trying to remove the boarder, it's only there for the Engrave op. I can work around the problem by adding an offset of 1.75 in the allowance.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Hi Jeff
The problem is with logos and text Fusion can't make the 3d model so you can't use 3d pocket and you can't generate the curves to select at the bottom. If you try and change the extrusion in the file attached to post #1 to a 30° draft Fusion gives an error. Can you add a request for this to work like it says it should in the help?
Another thought as a workaround would be to enter sin(30)*3 in the offset but there's a problem, you can enter sin(30) but I can't figure out how to enter *3.
Thanks Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Looks like my idea of entering sin(30) doesn't work because when you go back and edit the sin(30) is replaced with -0.988032mm which is wrong as it should be 0.5mm.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
Looks like you need to use radians in the expression so I can enter this.
tan(30*(3.1415926535897932384626433832795/180)) * 3mm
Not what you'd call user friendly though.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
OK this does actually work how it says in the help you just need to set the height tabs like this. So there's no bug, just needs a bit more explanation in the help.
File attached with no workarounds that machines taper correctly.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
@HughesTooling wrote:
OK this does actually work how it says in the help you just need to set the height tabs like this. So there's no bug, just needs a bit more explanation in the help.
What do you think it should say in the tooltip? I assume you are referring to the details in the tooltip you included a screenshot of?
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
I don't mind if it's in the help documentation and I think you'd need an example of the heights dialog like the one in post #6.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
@HughesTooling wrote:
I don't mind if it's in the help documentation and I think you'd need an example of the heights dialog like the one in post #6.
Mark
What is it about the -3mm offset that makes it work? To be honest I haven't had an issue with this command before, it's always just worked for me.
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
Have you tried the file I attached, if you can get it to work just selecting faces that would be a great help. I had to enter the pocket depth of -3, just selecting faces made it default to the way it works if you select at the bottom and it removes to much material.
Mark
Mark Hughes
Owner, Hughes Tooling
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
@HughesTooling wrote:
Have you tried the file I attached, if you can get it to work just selecting faces that would be a great help. I had to enter the pocket depth of -3, just selecting faces made it default to the way it works if you select at the bottom and it removes to much material.
Mark
There is definitely a bug here... see the attached file. As you've pointed out, selecting the bottom face for the bottom height makes it behave as if you selected the bottom contour! It shouldn't do this... It should be exactly the same as defining it by typing in an offset value (just like you have with 3mm).
Regarding the tool tip, it should warn you that you may need to adjust the heights to get the desired result depending on if you select the upper or lower contour.
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
Forums Links
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.
Post to forums
