Community
Fusion Manufacture
Talk shop with the Fusion (formerly Fusion 360) Manufacture Community. Share tool strategies, tips, get advice and solve problems together with the best minds in the industry.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

I'm getting a .060" offset when I 2D contour - Min cut rad is set to 0

37 REPLIES 37
SOLVED
Reply
Message 1 of 38
jpmerz
1212 Views, 37 Replies

I'm getting a .060" offset when I 2D contour - Min cut rad is set to 0

Hello.....  I don't know what is going on and I think I'm going crazy.  I have parts and when I CAM out the 2D contour, the part is being cut about 0.060" offset in the -Y direction. I don't know if it's off in the X direction, because the parts isn't being cut right and I can't measure it to the part it fits with.

 

The software/CAM shows everything is fine.

 

I have run the parts many times and have triple/quadruple checked that my 0 is in the right place. I'm using a Haimer 3D taster to zero.  I have re-CAMed the part.  Tried multiple ways to contour the part. I can't seem to get 3d contour to do anything!!  The only thing I've found online is to change the minimum cutting radius to 0.  Did that... and everything is the SAME!!  No matter what/how I CAM it... it keeps cutting the same thing.  0.060" off.  This has happened to the last 2 parts I've tried to cut with a 2D contour.  It also happened with the adaptive clearing.

 

Even when I change something and go back... it still cuts the same paths.  Re-zero, same path. New/different contour setting... same path. It's all the same... but 0.060" offset.

 

This is destroying me.  It's been almost 2 weeks trying to get this thing to cut right.  Imma go outta business if I can't get the contours to cut right.  

 

PLEASE HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

37 REPLIES 37
Message 2 of 38
leo.castellon
in reply to: jpmerz

We need more info to help you. What kind of machine are you using? It looks like you are machining the holes first, then machining the contour. Is the part being moved out of the vise after you machine the top surface and the holes or is it all one continuous program?  It would help immensely if you attached your program so we can look at it. Your pictures look like it was machined with a different fixture offset and that is why it has shifted. 

 

LeoC

Message 3 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: leo.castellon

Yes, the part was moved from a vise to a fixture and re-zero'ed.  I don't know how to show you my program.  I am relatively new to CAMing stuff and this is my first post.

Message 4 of 38
leo.castellon
in reply to: jpmerz

To share your program, save your program then go to File, then choose export, then attach the fd3 file to the message. By what you said, I suspect that your reference has changed when you moved the part. Can you pick up the center of the hole and use that for X0. Y0.? You won't be able to do that with your Haimer, you will need to use this technique: How to: Manually Pick Up a Bore or a Hole with an Indicator – Haas Automation Tip of the Day - YouTu... . Another way would be to use dowel pins to align your part for the next operation to cut out the profiles and use the center of a dowel pin to establish your machining origin.

 

LeoC

Message 5 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: jpmerz

So i don't know what is going on.  I started to machine the part in one place to see if the program is doing it or I am zeroing wrong.  Apparently I'm zero-ing wrong.  Doesn't make any sense though.... I'm zero-ing off the same point on the part whether it's in the jig or in the vise.  Literally the same point.  I just remove to part from the vise.... place it in the jig and re-zero from the same point I zero'ed from earlier. I don't get it, but it seems as though I'm just stupid.  Thanks for your help.  I guess I'll start zero'ing from a feature rather than the original 0.

 

Although, I still think something is up.  I've been working on manual mills for 8yrs now, full-time.  I know how to zero a part. I must be missing something here and it's destroying my work. This whole CAM business has been like pulling teeth... without anesthesia while having a bad hangover.

Message 6 of 38
leo.castellon
in reply to: jpmerz

Make sure on your CAM program that your first op and second op is referencing the same point. Usually on first op programs, your CAM program will be set up under "set up" with stock model being selected, and you provide a dimension for the stock and then you select a point for your X0, Y0. Then your second op will be referenced with Model stock, which if you took a side cut somewhere on your stock, then this will change for future setups, because material has been removed. Again, we can't provide more definitive answers without a program to look at.

 

LeoC

Message 7 of 38
seth.madore
in reply to: jpmerz

As @leo.castellon suggests, having a file for us to look at would go a long ways in helping to sort you out.

File > Export > Save to local folder, return to thread and attach the .f3d file in your reply


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Message 8 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: jpmerz

OK, grabbed/posted a program that does the same thing I'm talking about.  In fact, this is actually the program that created this (the larger, unfinished one): 

IMG_8689.jpg

 As you can see in the program, the part reference/zero stays the same.  Same place, same model, same same. Nothing gets taken off the sides because I already squared it up. I literally just split the program up into 2 different programs to run on the mill.  Zero'ed my stock then ran part 1 (the holes and reaming and what not.) I then took the part from the vise and installed it into it's jig.  Placed the jig in the vise and proceeded to zero FROM THE EXACT SAME POINT ON THE *STOCK*. Loaded up the 2nd part of the program (contour stuff.) Hit the GO button and.... everything is 0.060" off.  

 

This happened multiple times. The loose spacers in the pic are from a previous attempt. I ran that program 3 separate times through squared up Ti. Each run had an attempt to "fix" whatever was going on.  The first retry was actually something as simple as putting in an orientation marker on the corner.  The first run, I didn't do that because I thought, "Oh, it's not needed because I'm gonna zero off, blah blah blah." "Oh, maybe I got the stock backwards/upsidedown/whatever. OK I'm dumb." However, the second run I made absolutely SURE everything was in it's proper orientation. Hit GO... 0.060" off.  THE... SAME.  Exact same same. And when I REMADE the program... and when I REMADE the part in CAD, the same thing happens.  I started to run everything in Al because I can't afford to keep losing time and $$$ on Ti. The 3 attempts I made in Al are Exactly The SAME. 

Here they are (Top row is the Ti, original screw ups):

IMG_8692.jpeg

 

So, come to think about it... there are a couple programs that did almost the same thing but it was a number of months ago. I thought it was just my fault for being careless or dumb or something.  THEN, it happened about a month ago on the same parts, AGAIN... but I had reworked the CAM so that "that thing wouldn't happen again." Drilled holes, moved part to a jig and zero'ed off THE SAME POINT on the *STOCK*. Hit GO and everything is about 0.020" off. Min Cut Rad is set to 0. So again, I thought this was me being careless somewhere in the process so I changed the reference point to a feature in the part itself. Program runs flawless now. Every point or curve is exactly where it's supposed to be. And THAT is what had to be done to get my latest program to FINALLY run correct!! Reference off a feature IN the part itself. That's not cool.

 

I think this is a bug.

 

Ok okokokokokokok ok. Now, it sounds like I'm just not referencing my zero correctly.  That's what I kept thinking this whole time.  It's been months since this stuff has been happening. I thought I was just... doing something wrong.  Not zero'ing correctly.  Sure, sounds like me... something I can be prone to do.  However, this stuff has been CONSISTENT and REPEATEABLE.  If I was screwing up my reference point, the parts run at different times would have different offsets. That is NOT the case.  If I'm off on my reference.... then I'm ALWAYS the SAME OFF EACH TIME. That doesn't jive. As I stated before, I've been manually machining similar things for the past 7-8 years. In titanium. As my profession. So I might be new to CAM and CNC...  but I've been around the block a few times in regards to machining parts.

 

So I truly think this is a bug.  It has cost me lots of time and money.  Cost of materials and tooling... the TIME to square up everything... just to have it destroyed by a bug in the software.... In turn destroying my mental stability. CNC was supposed to make things easier and faster... but I've gotten less done than I would have if I had just done it manually... AND I wouldn't have had so many frustrations. Sad. 

Message 9 of 38
leo.castellon
in reply to: jpmerz

Everyone has their own way of making parts, personally, if I have to move the part to a different vise or fixture, then I separate that operation into another program. Take a look at the attached file, I modified it into two different programs. The second op is being referenced by one of the holes. 

 

LeoC

Message 10 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: leo.castellon

Yes, I have separated the ops out into different setups/programs. In fact, that’s what’s causing the bug I think. The program I posted is an iteration where I was trying to get things to work and kept everything in the same setup. 

 

When I ran the program and didn’t separate the program into 2 (Whether it was a different setup, or I just posted the operations into separate programs) it ran fine. It’s only when the 2D contour is in a separate program that this issue occurs.  

And yes, there are many ways to do something. However, when I do it the way *I want, it offsets. I don’t particularly like pulling my reference of a feature… because that feature usually has a mounting screw through it in the 2nd OP. It’s easier to ref off the original ref I was using in Op1. Fusion won’t let me do that without throwing in an offset. 

This is a bug. 🤷‍:male_sign: 

Message 11 of 38
programming2C78B
in reply to: jpmerz

To be fair, I've programmed over 300parts this year and never encountered this. My guess is you're using a stock datum when you really want to be using Model, or something is drawn wrong. You may have moved a body or had an ungrounded model in your setup.

Please click "Accept Solution" if what I wrote solved your issue!
Message 12 of 38
seth.madore
in reply to: jpmerz

I'm looking at the last file that you shared, but I'm only seeing this for Setups and toolpaths:

2023-12-05_06h45_48.png

Where are your Setup(s) and toolpaths for the operation that's going awry?


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Message 13 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: seth.madore

Yes, this particular program does NOT have multiple setups. However, in past iterations, it WAS split up into 2 setups. The “only 1 setup” was only done to see if it would fix the problem. It did not.


However, even when I only post half of this program into 2 operations, it still happens. Ex. Only post the drilling operations as program 1, and post the contour stuff as program 2. This still causes the issue. Exactly THE SAME issue as when it’s 2 separate setups. All of the part pics I posted are different iterations of this/these programs. All the previous attempts were 2 separate programs, with the upper left corner of the *stock* as my reference for BOTH setups. And as you can see, the parts come out EXACTLY THE SAME. Offset by ~0.060”. 

it SEEMS that if any 2D contour (or adaptive) is split out into another program… and you use a stock point (in my case, the upper left-hand corner of the stock) as your reference… it causes an offset. 

the only way I have found to work around this is to pull my reference (for the second setup) off a feature of the part rather than a ‘stock point’. I believe that is the problem. I feel that the software is calculating the stock size wrong or somehow miscalculating the reference point’s actual position when it’s in a second setup… or posted separately. I mean, there was that min cut rad bug adding to outside contours a little while ago. That doesn’t make any sense either, but it was a bug. 

as I think about this… again, a little while back… in a second setup, fusion said it couldn’t verify that the setups were the same (continue from previous setup). When it did that (ONLY on this one program/time) the model was visibly shifted off to the side in the CAD/CAM. I didn’t move anything, but it def moved in software. Obviously I abandoned that setup and started a new one. Thought it was just a glitch. Might be THIS bug. 

Here’s another image of this bug happening. I mentioned it in a post previously, but this is the same issue. Setup 1 were the holes and counterbore. Setup 2 was the chamfer and round channels. You can see the offset, but this time ~0.020” in X and Y direction. This time my reference was the top right corner of the stock. The way I fixed the issue was to pull my second reference zero off a hole in the part itself. THEN it machined flawlessly. THAT seems to be the workaround… but it shouldn’t be a thing… but it is. 

jpmerz_0-1701786867224.jpeg

 

Message 14 of 38
DarthBane55
in reply to: jpmerz

Your stock is not necessarily the exact same size in real life as in Fusion.  On the 2nd op you should always pick something that was machine from op1, never the stock on op2, because again, actual size may not be 100% accurate to Fusion size.  On op1 it doesn't matter too much if it is not 100% matching size, because you have material to machine all around anyways, but once you have some features machined, it becomes critical.

Message 15 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: programming2C78B

You say “My guess is you're using a stock datum when you really want to be using Model.” 

Can you explain this? I WAS using a stock point as my references. Is this not good practice? If not, why. It *should* be fine right? I mean, that’s exactly what I do machining manually. One reference point for multiple setups/jigs because that point doesn’t change (in my process.) 

 

And “ungrounded model.” Can you explain that too?  I’m new to CAM/CNC and software and stuff… but relatively experienced in machining in general. 

 

 

Message 16 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: DarthBane55

Why would the stock change between setups in fusion? I use fixed sized stock. Continue from previous setup. SHOULD be the same stock size. Shouldn’t it? If not, that there is a bug IMO. 

Message 17 of 38
seth.madore
in reply to: jpmerz

It's not clear from your file;

Are you simply taking the stock out of one fixture and moving it to another? Are you flipping the part 180 along the Y axis so as to machine features on the other side of the part? Are you locating the stock along the same datum point? Where is that point?


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Message 18 of 38
seth.madore
in reply to: jpmerz

And I guess the other question is; why are you machining some features in one Setup, and other features in a second setup, especially when all those features appear to be able to be addressed in the same initial setup?

 

What you are looking to do is totally doable, and it's something I do on a regular basis. I can say with a high degree of certainty that the issue does not exist on the Fusion side. We're going to need to see complete Fusion projects as well as NC code. Images of results only show that an error occurred, it doesn't give us data to show where it occurred


Seth Madore
Customer Advocacy Manager - Manufacturing
Message 19 of 38
DarthBane55
in reply to: jpmerz


@jpmerz wrote:

Why would the stock change between setups in fusion? I use fixed sized stock. Continue from previous setup. SHOULD be the same stock size. Shouldn’t it? If not, that there is a bug IMO. 


No, the stock size does not change in Fusion from op1 to op2, but the stock is most certainly not 100% the same as in real life.  So for op1 you pick an origin, and then you machine, it's all good because there is extra material around.  Then in op2, in real life, you pick the same edges as in op1 or different edges?  Once you have machined features, the next ops should come from these, not from the stock, because stock size can vary from Fusion to real life.

Message 20 of 38
jpmerz
in reply to: seth.madore

To your 1st question, the process is as follows:

Place squared stock in vise. Reference top left corner of the stock as zero. Machine setup 1. Remove stock and place it in a jig in the SAME ORIENTATION as setup 1 and re-zero-ing the SAME reference point on the stock (top left corner of the stock.)


To your 2nd question,  the reason is because material deflection and stock rigidity… along with wanting to have shaped parts when I take it out of the machine. The contours. I have to drill holes so that I can mount it on a more rigid jig so that the cuts are clean and don’t need as much cleanup… AAND the part is in its (almost) final shape. 

My stock is usually ~ 5.5” x ~5” x ~0.150” Ti. Ti deflects quite a bit in my experience. Destroys tooling and can make really ugly cuts, real quick. So, work holding, rigidity and hating part cleanup are the reasons. 

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report