2D Contour, Multiple Depths,

[Anonymous]

Hello,

I'm cutting using 2D Contour and multiple depths of cut.
I remove lead in and lead out
Use the ramp lead in only.

The ramp angle is by default 2 degrees.
I change it 20 degrees

(for some reason the 20 degrees won't change unless I change the ramp clearance height from the default 0.1 to 0.05, BUT that's besides the point)

The issue is the first depth of cut uses the specified 20 degrees BUT subsequent depths of cut use a long ramp that seems to be 50% of the chosen contour length (see picture).  There is no parameter to modify for subsequent depths of cut.  I assume the 20 degree ramp angle should be used for all depths of cut.

To elaborate, the lead in length on the second depth of cut for a small part with a 4" perimeter would be approximately 2" and a larger part with a 20" perimeter would have a 10" lead in (too much and too slow).

[jeff.walters]

can you either attach the part here, use the send feedback, or email it to cam.support@autodesk.com? i have tried to reproduce it and haven't been able to.

[Anonymous]

Hello,

Sorry it took so long to reply.  Keeping up with the machine running new programs and reposting with corrections really consumed my time.

Anyway, attached is an assembly setup in much the same way I do all our parts.  And the ramp angle for the first depth of cut is the specified 20 degrees but the second depth is not.  This poses a problem when the part is much longer and the second leadin is dragged out to 10" or more, consequently slowing down the machine.

[jeff.walters]

I have reported this on ticket CAM-2065. This should be using your 20° ramp angle for both the top and bottom as you are expecting. From what I’m seeing on your part the only work around i can think of is to not use ramp and multiple depths at the same time. 

[Steinwerks]

This might be a little different but I ran into a situation a few weeks ago where doing a ramp at multiple depths with a retract would have been gold, but didn't want to make four different toolpaths with all the height adjustments. Not common I'm sure, but possibly related.

[fredsi]

Change the maximum ramp stepdown to something 'absurd' and it will do the 20deg. ramps. Default in my system (Inventor HSM) was 1.5in.; changed it to 10.0in. and got second ramp at 20deg. Admittedly this is in InvHSM; may not behave same in HSMWorks. Just an fyi...

Fred

[jeff.walters]

The issue is that the first ramp down doesn’t match the second and you don’t have control over the second ramp. You can’t get both ramps to go at 20°.

[Anonymous]

OMG!!!

Fred!
You're right!
I changed the maximum ramp step down to 12in (absurd indeed!) and it did exactly what it was supposed to.

Thanks a million!!!

[Anonymous]

I discovered today exactly the same issue, also with 20° ramp angle.

I resolved it by setting Maximum Ramp Stepdown to 800 mm, 80 was not enough!

3.5 years after the initial post, this bug is not resolved!

Autodesk guys, I love Fusion 360, but please, stop adding incredible features, just make it works.

[FTKnur]

That is realy a great Feature/bug 🙂

I set the maximum ramp stepdown always to 9999mm.

When your contour is 300 mm long and you set 3° then you have a stepdown by ~ 15,72mm.

But now your maximum stepdown is 10mm then the angle was decreased to ~2°.

That's IMO not a bug ... it's a feature you just know how to handle it!

When you want to use angle as ramp parameter then choose stepdown 9999 and add multiple depths by "passes".

That is faster than ramp down by a lower angle.

If you want to ramp down without multiple depths to your z-face then you can use the ramp down stepdown with e.g. 10mm or maximum "tool_fluteLength" ...

[Anonymous]

FTKnur,

Thank you for your answer.
This feature is very obscure, maybe it as some utility, but it is very bad UI because it conflicts with Ramping Angle and Multiple Depths and there are inconsistencies. If Maximum Ramp Stepdown is lower than the Multiple Depth Stepdown, then it overrides Ramping Angle (here 20°) and is in fact the ramp stepdown for one revolution on the profile.Maximum Ramp Stepdown = 3

But if Maximum Ramp Stepdown is greater than the Multiple Depth Stepdown now it seems to be the ramp stepdown if the ramp would continue for one revolution (below the depth or cut). But only for second depth not for the first!

Setting Maximum Ramp Stepdown to 9999 resolve the issue, i.e. Ramping Angle is not overriden, but not for an open profile!

Maximum Ramp Stepdown = 9999Great feature or bug?

[FTKnur]

@Anonymous,

can you attach your file?

I have now tried a little bit but don't can get your result.

I have made many operations with other parameters but my ramp/multiple depth do exactly that what I want and not change the ramp from first to the other stepdowns.

Edit:

Okay now I see what's the problem. That is just when you have open contours. I see there what's the problem:

The start point of the first stepdown is calculated by the angle of ramp down and the others would (if not set to 9999) choose the other maximum stepdown for the complete contour...

But why do you use ramping with open contours? IMO an increased tool wear. In this cases you can do it like adaptive. Just multiple stepdowns but with roughing passes.

It's realy confusing tool path with ramp and multiple depths on open contours... there you can't change the ramp stepdown.

[FTKnur]

Edit2: (time was expired :D)

But why do you use ramping with open contours? IMO an increased tool wear. In this cases you can do it like adaptive. Just multiple stepdowns but with roughing passes.

When you want the 20° in an open contour how should be the tool path?

Ramp starts anywhere and end by the beginning of your contour and then make one of the "multiple depths" complete to the end of your contour. Now the ramp begins and end anywhere of your contour? Then cut to the beginning of the contour and retract or cut double the same toolpath backwards for the rest (material under the ramp). I don't know how to solve it efficient.

[Anonymous]

Maybe there are other ways, even better, to do the job.
But why Fusion does not do what we ask?

The logic would be to do a zig-zag ramp and finish at the left. 

2D Pocket has this option, why not 2D Contour?Zig-zag expected

[FTKnur]

@Anonymous,

okay Zig-Zag is a very great idea! But only when you use compensation in computer. When you choose in control you get a problem with this. Perhaps deactivate it for in control then it is realizable. With this "option" you can do it with the ramp down and angle parameter.

I think this should be posted into the idea station with a link to this discussion.

[kbpav]

will this problem be fixed?