cant generate toolpath for lathe on a dished front feature

[tgford58]

I am trying to generate a good toolpath for a feature on the face of a part I have to machine.

The OD of the part is 9.1"  starting at 7" the face has a tapered recess of .058" ending at a center drilled hole.

I was able to generate a problematic toolpath using a CNMG tool and using tons of passes to thin the chip.  When I switched to a 17.5deg offset DNMG tool  I lose the toolpath.

Can someone help me please.

@links to members

[ryan.bales]

Can you upload the file? We cannot offer much without seeing it.

[tgford58]

Which file would you like? Tell me what and how and I will surely share.

Sorry I am a rank beginner on Fusion.

[ryan.bales]

Which ever one is not working. You can share a link on here, or use File>export and save it as an F3D, then upload it to a reply in this thread.

[tgford58]

I believe this is what you need.   Let me know.

[tgford58]

I will load the file of the part.

Thank you.

[HughesTooling]

Seems to be a problem with the tool setup. Although you've set a 17.5°end relief the tool ends up with no side relief.

Setting up a custom style and setting the leading angle to 17.5° seems to work. @seth.madore  this looks like a bug, there's an option for 5.0° on both faces (no good for this tip) but noting for 17.5° on both faces.

[HughesTooling]

@tgford58  Just noticed you need to set the trailing angle to -17.5° and the leading to 17.5° to get the correct reliefs on the holder you have.

[HughesTooling]

@akash.kamoolkar  Can you take a look at the problem setting up the tool above?

Edit. Just to be clear the problem is for this tip you should have an option for 17.5° side and face. There is an option for 5.0° Both but that makes no sense with this tip.

Thanks Mark

[akash.kamoolkar]

@HughesTooling I'll get back to you on this one.

Regards,

Akash Kamoolkar

[tgford58]

That change seems to generate a toolpath that meets the feature.  Thank you.

Why does the tool stay RED during this operation?  What is the interference or is there one?  I'vre attached a screen capture.

[HughesTooling]

I see there's a collision adding the chamfer because there's still material to remove, is that what you're seeing? Also don't attach pictures you can just paste into the message from the clipboard.

[HughesTooling]

If I simulate both setups I don't get any collisions so not sure what you're seeing.

[tgford58]

No I get a red tool on profile finish from start to finish.

How do a save and image to clipboard?  Capture Image under file drop down?

[HughesTooling]

Can you export your file again and share here please?

Windows has a built in snipping tool that grabs images to the clipboard, see here.

Thanks Mark

[tgford58]

[tgford58]

Here is my file with the collision on Profile finish

[HughesTooling]

I see the problem now. The tool has no clearance on it so you get a collision.

If you're sure the actual tool will work you can work around this if you set the tool as a round shank.

[HughesTooling]

@akash.kamoolkar  Is there a reason selecting from Back to Front doesn't cut the concave part? I've enabled Allow radial and axial grooving and on something like this machining from the outside down the face would be a better option.

Edit. The old profile OP had face profiling that does a lot nicer job.

Thanks Mark

[tgford58]

The tool has a -5 deg rake so there is adequate clearance.

It seems that Fusion hasn't taken into account that tools can come in larger offsets that 5deg.  It seems like a ton of work around especially in the lathe area.

I will just let the simulation show red.  It is fairly common on lathe tool paths to show collisions when none occur.  At least that is my experience.