Morphed Spiral option for Facing

[Anonymous]

Hi, 

I was thinking the option to have a constantly engaged tool path for the face strategy would be good. Some materials and cutters don't like the start stop nature of facing, even with chip thinning. 

Quote from Sandvik Knowledge

" 

• Frequent entering and exiting the workpiece should be avoided if possible. It can create unfavorable stresses on the cutting edge, or cause dwell and chatter tendencies. It is recommended that you program a tool path that keeps the milling cutter in full contact, rather than performing several parallel passes. When changing direction, include a small radial tool path to keep the cutter moving and constantly engaged.

"

http://www.sandvik.coromant.com/SiteCollectionImages/Technical%20guide/Snapshots/blank/D%20Milling/d...

Wondering what everyone else thinks?

Thanks. 

Sandvik Coromant. 2016. What is face milling? Learn about general face milling . [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.sandvik.coromant.com/en-gb/knowledge/milling/application_overview/face_milling/general_fa.... [Accessed 10 August 2016].

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

You can do an "Open Pocket" 2D Adaptive.

That has a constant engagement toolpath.

If that is not what you are looking for can you explain a little more?

[Anonymous]

Hi Laurens,

I've tried the 2D adaptive method, and it works well, but I have to draw a sketch to define the stock. I just thought it was something that could be integrated into the face toolpath menu to make it quicker to program by eliminating the need to draw any sketches. Am I missing a trick to 2D adaptive?

Many thanks,

Matthew. 

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

No need to make any sketches:

[Anonymous]

I'm using inventor, and inventor hsm.  I think HSMWorks handles this a little differently, inventor comes up with an error, select pocket to machine, even if it has stock contours switched on, hence my thinking I need a sketch. I can do it with 3D adaptive using this method I think, but not 2D adaptive.  

Many thanks, 

Matthew. 

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

@al.whatmough Can you chime in?

I think we have concluded that having open pocket 2D Adaptive would solve his request. And for parity this should work in Inventor HSM just like in HSMWorks of course.

[narzinskin]

http://autode.sk/2biVw2Y

Video for inventor hsm adaptive facing

[Anonymous]

3D adaptive solves this issue.  I still think that morphed spiral should be an option in the facing toolpath, but that's just my opinion.  This does achieve the same result I was looking for except in some rare circumstances, but there's ways to better control 3d adaptive to make it do as I want.  Thanks nnarzinski, the video was helpful, and thankyou to Laurens for all your help. 

On another note, any ideas about why inventor hsm, and hsm works differ as to their handling of 2d adaptive with no geometry selected?

Thanks, 

Matthew. 

[al.whatmough]

@Anonymous  You are correct.  This is best solved with face selection for fully open pockets in Adaptive.

The facing strategy is a specific cutting strategy for using with face mills.

If we start to blur the lines and add to much overlap to strategies in the end it becomes more confusion not less.

Let's say for example we added "adaptive" to face.  The next request in a year is "I want to face multiple Z level faces at once"

So, while I do not disagree that this functionality is needed.  The correct place for it is in the Adaptive strategy.

Can we all agree on that?

As an Aside, it is exciting to see the community engagement on this Idea Station!  I don't know how you guys still have time for making parts.

[Anonymous]

Laptops beside machines are magic!  

I'd completely agree with you that multiple Z level facing is beyond the scope of the facing tool path, and that it should be in adaptive.  Where i'd see morphed spiral being used is in the same applications as conventional face milling, with most tooling reps now advocating keeping face mills engaged in cut during facing op's it seems to be a logical addition, while still keeping the function of a facing operation, i.e. machining from outside the stock to remove any stock above the model top, to the model top, with the default area for machining being the entire set-up stock. The only real thing I have against using 3D adaptive to face the top of a part is that calculation of 3D adaptive takes longer to calculate than a simple face, although adding morphed spiral to the facing op might level this out. 3D adaptive does what I want, which I didn't think of at the time (I solved it by drawing a formula curve for a spiral, and using trace), it really comes down to semantics of what constitutes facing operation, but i'd be happy to say I can use adaptive for that. 

[al.whatmough]

You make a very good point about the defaulting to the stock silhouette.

This is something worth taking into consideration!

[kb9ydn]

Wait a minute.  Weren't totally open pockets (for 2D adaptive) supposed to have been added to HSM Inventor and Fusion a long time ago?  I could swear we've had this conversation before.

C|

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

@kb9ydn Yes this has been discussed before.

[Rob.Lockwood]

Maybe we could roll back the clock to the good old days, when 2D Pocket could do totally open pockets. Life was so magical then.

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

Rob, why do keep wanting something so simple and clearly useful?

[kb9ydn]

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...

C|

[Anonymous]

Just wondering if anyone would be interested in a tick box option on horizontal finish to machine inside out, instead of outside in, this probably isn't what horizontal finish is for, but i'd see it being useful sometimes where I don't want the cutter going to the centre, and working it's way out.  I'm probably missing something with this strategy, and other alternatives would suit what I'm doing better. 

[Anonymous]

I agree. If not specifically morphed, then a constant contact path that starts from the outside to the inside. The main reason for doing this is so there's less of a chance burrs will be created on the faced ( top ) edge, especially when I'm not going to do any follow-up contouring of the part.

It's also needed when working with stone so the edges of the stone don't get broken off.

[xander.luciano]

Hey guys!

It's great to see some more in depth discussion about CAM strategies! I wanted to quickly tell you guys that this is possible currently. And it's pretty simple too 🙂

Here's a quick tutorial I recently created on how to do exactly this, it's one of my favorite tricks.

Bonus Tip:

After you create this operation, you can right click -> store as template. This way you can easily reuse it on future setups.







Hope that helps! Let me know what you think, and if you guys have any questions.

Best,
Xander Luciano

[Anonymous]

The only problem with using 3D adaptive in this method is you have to have flat area detection ticked, and set to a low value.  This means that the output code will match the amount of stock to leave you had input.  The point I was making about having it included in the facing strategy was to reduce calculation time, eliminate some weird artefacts you sometimes get with the 3D adaptive, and enable greater control over the multiple depths, stock to leave, and enable a finish pass (all features currently available in the dedicated facing operation).  Ideally this feature would be optional for the finish pass, having it's own "morphed spiral" tick box.  I'm not arguing there isn't a workaround, I am arguing that the workaround isn't ideal.  Even allowing completely open pockets in 2D adaptive would be better than using 3D adaptive.  

[Laurens-3DTechDraw]

@xander.luciano

I would agree with @Anonymous that we would need to be able to do this in the 2D Adaptive or in the facing strategy. (I'm for 2D Adaptive)

But not using the 3D operation.