Inventor HSM 2017 4.1.0.075

[porsbym]

We just posted a new development version of Inventor HSM on http://cam.autodesk.com/inventor-hsm-experimental/

Along with a bunch of fixes, this version includes a number of new features in beta mode, and we would very much appreciate your feedback on those:

• Added "Wrap Toolpath" option to 2D Contour, 2D Pocket, 2D Adaptive for creating 4-axis substituted operations.
• Added Secondary Spindle Chuck, Pull, Return operations.
• Probing: Support probing from stock.
• Added Taper Angle parameter to "Face Mill" tools.

• Added Corner Radius parameter to "Face Mill" tools.

• Added "Ball" mode to "Tapered Mill" tools.

• Added "Thread Mill" tool type.

For the Wrap feature there is still a couple of open issues: Specifically the height cylinders are orientated wrong, and stock contour and entry points don't work correctly. No need to report these.

/Mark

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

---

@scottmoyse wrote:
I'm well aware of that Laurens. And a static Y offset can still be classed as 4th axis substitution. But I personally don't think the CAM software should ever be able to gouge the model like this does.

---

The trick is your not gouging the model.

It's just that you can't model a wrap in Inventor.

In Solidworks I can model exactly what I can mill with the feature.

So using it for what it is not designed for is not gouging the model if you ask me.

[scottmoyse]

If it gouges, it shouldn't generate. And I don't see why you can't model that geometry in Inventor in the same way you can in Solidworks. What makes you think you can't?

[scottmoyse]

If it gouges, it shouldn't generate. And I don't see why you can't model that geometry in Inventor in the same way you can in Solidworks. What makes you think you can't?

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

---

@scottmoyse wrote:
If it gouges, it shouldn't generate. And I don't see why you can't model that geometry in Inventor in the same way you can in Solidworks. What makes you think you can't?

---

There was an Idea for this. Maybe it's in Inventor but not in Fusion? That could be.

It doesn't gouge since it doesn't have an idea about the model.

That's the trick here, you can use a 2D flat sketch and wrap it around a cylinder without modeling it. So gouging is part of its functionality.

So or you have to model it correctly or you know it's going to cut into the part.

You should think of this as a 2D operation, that's where it's in, so 2D don't care about the part. So it can gouge if you select the wrong line. But that also gives it a lot of power.

I'm really not sure why people see this as a problem unless they don't understand this isn't 4-axis but wrapping, also known as axis substitution. 

[scottmoyse]

Gouging with a 2D operation is far more obvious than gouging with wrapping.

Axis substitution can still include Y axis offset and it not be full 4 axis movement.

I've not once said any of this stuff should be in the product now. But that it should be sorted in the future.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

---

@scottmoyse wrote:
Gouging with a 2D operation is far more obvious than gouging with wrapping.

Axis substitution can still include Y axis offset and it not be full 4 axis movement.

I've not once said any of this stuff should be in the product now. But that it should be sorted in the future.

---

The problem with a static Y-offset is you still can't machine a "normal" pocket.

Because it would have to move the Y from one side of the center to the other when you move from one side of the pocket to the other.

So I'm not really seeing how that can benefit in pockets.

[ivan.stanojevic]

---

porsbym wrote: 

• Added "Wrap Toolpath" option to 2D Contour, 2D Pocket, 2D Adaptive for creating 4-axis substituted operations.

---

@porsbym

Is there a plan to implement 4-axis toolpath in other 3D strategies?