How to get certain toolpaths to ignore portions of a model, but others to recognize it- within the same setup

[derinveron]

Hi, I'm bringing in a model from Rhino that I need to run an adaptive and parallel toolpath over before hollowing out these raindrop shapes with a smaller bit/different toolpath. I'm wondering if there's a way to get these first two toolpaths to ignore the raindrop shapes. If someone could explain the steps to do this i'd greatly appreciate it, very new to Fusion and confused.

[Anonymous]

Make patches in Surface workspace to cover teardrops and include them in operation, keeps the tool out.

[derinveron]

I spent hours trying to understand your screenshots and model but I think i'm missing a few things that aren't adding up. Setup1 has the cut for the raindrop shapes, but Setup1 (2) is the roughing for the cylinder shape? Yet it also has the 3 faces selected under "Model" for some reason? It seems mismatched to me and I can't tell how it's working. Also, how are you telling the machine how deep to cut into the surface of the raindrops, is that by any chance the "maximum roughing step-down" in Setup1's passes tab? I created patch surfaces in rhino because not all of the raindrops were able to be patched in fusion for some reason, and attached my file where I tried to do what you did. The tool doesn't cut into the material, it hovers above it. I'm sure the answer is simple, I just barely understand what I'm doing and might need an explanation in words. Thanks again I appreciate it!

[Anonymous]

In Surface workspace, select "Patch" from menu, select top edge of teardrop pocket and click OK,

In manufacture workspace, add patches in operation's geometry tab by selecting "model" and selecting those patches, patches are now added to setup model as covers for the teardrop pockets.

Setup1 does not have 3 patches selected in geometry tab of operation so tool dips into the teardrop pockets.

Setup2 has patches added in geometry tab and tool is prevented from entering teardrop pockets, well not entirely as there is a small dip in patch on wider side but it serves the intended purpose.

[daniel_lyall]

You need to make the model watertight first by stitching all the surfaces together.

[Anonymous]

I just looked at your file and it seems you got the idea, patches need to be covering cavities precisely, so if geometry on model is distorted, you will have some bad outcomes.

This is not the only way but it is adequate for intended purpose.

[derinveron]

Thanks for looking at my file but it didn't actually work so I'm still misunderstanding some key steps. I understand now that selecting model surfaces (patches in this case) prevents the tool from cutting into it. In the beginning I thought it did the opposite. I still don't understand how you got the tool to dip into the patches in your Setup 1. Does it have to do with this step?- "In manufacture workspace, add patches in operation's geometry tab by selecting "model" and selecting those patches, patches are now added to setup model as covers for the teardrop pockets." 

This is my process, and I'm trying to understand what's wrong that I have to change to get your results: I made patches, went back into manufacture, made a machining boundary selection on the outline for the part that I want to machine (the patches are present so it machines over the patches, there seems to be no need to select model parts in this step), now for the 2nd step I want to do a parallel cut and I want the bit to cut out the raindrop.

[Anonymous]

Once you created patches, you can turn them on or off in tree by clicking on eye icon, that does not effect cutting, just visibility.

If you want to machine over them, prevent tool from going into the raindrops, select "model" in operation and then select the patches you wish to include as a shield that prevents tool from going in.

If patches are visible but not selected in operation, tool will go in, if size allows it.

If your tool is larger diameter then teardrop width, tool will not go in because it cannot fit, in that case you don't need patches.

[derinveron]

Okay I am wondering if the part that I am not doing correctly is related to this- "If patches are visible but not selected in operation, tool will go in". Is the machining boundary I selected wrong? Right now my "machining boundary" is the bright green selection, telling the tool to cut everything inside the line. I'm wondering if selecting the patches in my Adaptive pass isn't doing anything because I didn't select what I want to machine correctly. Your file doesn't have a machine boundary selected because there's just one object I'm assuming

First toolpathSecond toolpath

[Anonymous]

Well, my sample file was focused on showing how to use patch, I see that you have rest machining turned on, not sure why though.

I don't know what prevents your tool path from running, I can't do much with pictures but if you upload f3d file maybe I or someone else can see it right away.

[derinveron]

Gotcha, I turned off rest machining in the adaptive cut and attached my file here. With adaptive I want to rough the surface, and with the parallel cut I want to get into the pockets. I know that the 1/8" bit is too big for parts of it, I'm going to go in with a 1/32" bit but keeping the file small while I try to understand how to do this. Thanks

[Anonymous]

So I was messing with it on and off between other activities, trying to figure out where head and tail is and I think I made some progress.

In your setup, don't set "cam rooth" as body, only select bodies that you intend to cut in that setup.

You want to be able to manage patches inside tool path geometry tab and if you set cam rooth as body, everything is included in setup.

I see a lot of surfaces so I tried to figure out what belongs where and stitch it into one solid body, not sure I got it all in right place.

You need to manage bodies by labels so you know what is active where and why.

Tabs you modeled are a bit of overkill in proportion to models and you could use a bit more clearance between frame with tabs and bodies to clear tools.

You would make a sketch that restricts tool from touching frame holding tabs and use that as stock boundary.

One last complaint, define X and Z or Y and Z axis in setup by referencing each one to faces, edges or sketches on model.

Small green patch shown in picture is where tool violates model, likely due to restricted space and I had some light crashes around perimeter during simulation so more space would be beneficial.

[derinveron]

Took the weekend off from this- thank you for spending time on it earlier. The tab overkill is due to detailed/precise cuts on both sides of this object- I want it to be as secure as possible. Next, I'm not sure what "cam rooth" is, I googled it and couldn't find anything. I select the outer silhouette as the machining boundary so that the tool cuts everything inside of it. I can also definitely make more room for the "profile" area around the piece in rhino later. Lastly, I still don't think i'm any closer to understanding how to get the tool to ignore the patches and dip into the raindrops in the step after the adaptive cut. 

[daniel_lyall]

@derinveron cam root as in the root component.

[derinveron]

Can you describe what a root component is? Google didn't produce any results. 

[daniel_lyall]

It is just the name of the top node in CAM you can unselect it and select model what is CAM component its nothing to worry about with your part selecting the top node or body is the incorrect action as it has a tonne of bodies and surfaces that make up the entire model but some you don't want to select if you had a lot of separate models or components you select the component or body itself. 

For the patches have a look at this.

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

The reason for not selecting Cam root as body in setup is so that you can use patches within adoptive and parallel operations by selecting model and adding them to setup selection of body or bodies.

After roughing and finishing top surface, you hide patches in file tree so you can see raindrop pockets and select geometry.

You then rough and finish each pocket without including patches in operation geometry tab, patch is just like a cover on bucket and serves same purpose in this case.

If you set "Cam rooth" in setup as body, it includes all bodies in the tree, therefore defeating the purpose for having patches because you cannot select or unselect them inside each operations as needed.

[derinveron]

Ah okay thank you, I understand a bit more. Would you (or anyone) be able to look at the file I attached? In this one, I manually selected the shape that I wanted to machine in the Setup tab, and selected the silhouette of the part in the geometry tab of the Adaptive cut as the machining boundary, so the tool could cut the space around the piece. In the future I will set the depth of cut lower than the bottom of the stock so that the tool can actually cut all the way down.

My issue unfortunately is still with these raindrop shapes.. In this file, I used the avoid/touch surfaces option in the Parallel pass, and it's giving me horrible results. These pockets will be inlayed with other pieces of wood, so i'd love to get a nice precise pocket. Also, I will go in with a 1/32" bit after the 1/8" pass, I'm just keeping the file small for sharing purposes for now. Thanks so much! Hopefully this is possible to do after all in Fusion

[Anonymous]

In your file, you selected 2 bodies in setup and 6 bodies in adaptive operation. This doesn't make sense because 6 raindrop pockets are already selected in setup and yet, this results in tool avoiding them, not sure what's going on there.

Moving on, focusing on raindrop pocket, you have option to orient tool path direction in parallel, I prefer to drive tool from end to end along longest stretch of the feature. Because you are working with curved surfaces, using flat end mill is not an option, step down ball end mills in size and use rest machining.

[derinveron]

Ah okay the pass direction was a good call, thank you for sending your file! Learned a few things.