Mutiaxis roughing / Pmill vs fusion360

[a_machinist]

So I saw an Instagram post yesterday of someone doing cylindrical roughing using Fusion360.

Is there any chance we're going to see multiaxis roughing on Powermill anytime soon?  I have a fancy auger I need to machine that would be so much faster if I had a cylindrical rough to vortex everything away.

Has anyone heard the release date for 2019?

Any chance they're adding multiaxis roughing?

Does anyone out there have fusion360 and Pmill?  It looks as though Fusion is drastically cheaper than Pmill, but do they compare at all?

Thanks in advance,

Nate

[a_machinist]

So I saw an Instagram post yesterday of someone doing cylindrical roughing using Fusion360.

Is there any chance we're going to see multiaxis roughing on Powermill anytime soon?  I have a fancy auger I need to machine that would be so much faster if I had a cylindrical rough to vortex everything away.

Has anyone heard the release date for 2019?

Any chance they're adding multiaxis roughing?

Does anyone out there have fusion360 and Pmill?  It looks as though Fusion is drastically cheaper than Pmill, but do they compare at all?

Thanks in advance,

Nate

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Will you share the link with multiaxis rough in Fusion360?

Thanks,

Jacob

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Will you share the link with multiaxis rough in Fusion360?

Thanks,

Jacob

[TK.421]

Theres a video posted by @Meysam_Ghorbani (i think) on youtube. that shows a way to do this in powermill. maybe it will help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-SSLek8hBI

[TK.421]

Theres a video posted by @Meysam_Ghorbani (i think) on youtube. that shows a way to do this in powermill. maybe it will help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-SSLek8hBI

[a_machinist]

Yeah I tried this and unfortunately I think my part is just too complicated for this strategy to work.  He's dealing with a pocket the tool path is limited.  I'm dealing with a cylinder where nothing is limiting the toolpath.

I copied all his settings and I get what you see below.   I've already talked to a couple support guys at Adesk and they assured me there is no great way to rough this part on Pmill.  To top it off, I'm trying to do this on a 3 axis with a rotary as the part is to long for our 5 axis machines.

[a_machinist]

Yeah I tried this and unfortunately I think my part is just too complicated for this strategy to work.  He's dealing with a pocket the tool path is limited.  I'm dealing with a cylinder where nothing is limiting the toolpath.

I copied all his settings and I get what you see below.   I've already talked to a couple support guys at Adesk and they assured me there is no great way to rough this part on Pmill.  To top it off, I'm trying to do this on a 3 axis with a rotary as the part is to long for our 5 axis machines.

[TK.421]

wow, that's a tough one for sure, but it looks fun!  i'm not sure what you've got as far as macros go, but here are two of mine for stock models. these are just simple macros to ease the pain with stock model calculation. I always have my output workplane named g54 or g55... it isnt ideal to have 4 roughing toolpaths ( i agree, a rotary rougher would be much better...), but it's doable

[TK.421]

wow, that's a tough one for sure, but it looks fun!  i'm not sure what you've got as far as macros go, but here are two of mine for stock models. these are just simple macros to ease the pain with stock model calculation. I always have my output workplane named g54 or g55... it isnt ideal to have 4 roughing toolpaths ( i agree, a rotary rougher would be much better...), but it's doable

[Anonymous]

Hi,

To understand, is it something like this you want?

https://www.screencast.com/t/4N5ecAkm5

http://autode.sk/2sFaX1s

[Anonymous]

Hi,

To understand, is it something like this you want?

https://www.screencast.com/t/4N5ecAkm5

http://autode.sk/2sFaX1s

[a_machinist]

Jacob,

If i could get that to work on my part that would be great.  However I tried something like that and as you can see in the photo above it doesn't seem to be working.

[a_machinist]

Jacob,

If i could get that to work on my part that would be great.  However I tried something like that and as you can see in the photo above it doesn't seem to be working.

[M_Hennig]

If I was going to tackle that part, I would make a few cylindrical ref surfaces in there to limit my toolpath, that way the slices are following an arc, rather than the flat yours is doing.. I agree, multiaxis roughing would make this much easier. I think roughing in between the pegs along the "x" axis, projecting to a line and flipping the program around will be your fastest route.

[M_Hennig]

If I was going to tackle that part, I would make a few cylindrical ref surfaces in there to limit my toolpath, that way the slices are following an arc, rather than the flat yours is doing.. I agree, multiaxis roughing would make this much easier. I think roughing in between the pegs along the "x" axis, projecting to a line and flipping the program around will be your fastest route.

[NanchenO]

What about roughing a "segment" (limited between two rows of pins by surfaces and copying the toolpath with a rotation ?

Olivier

[NanchenO]

What about roughing a "segment" (limited between two rows of pins by surfaces and copying the toolpath with a rotation ?

Olivier

[briannystadvej]

It needs a projection vector towards a line. So you can project the calculations differently from Tooaxis. 

Like the Line Projetion finish, but it must be available for all toolpaths to set the projection vector.

I have been asking for that many years

It has been possible in Siemens NX to do that for at least 20 years

Brian

[briannystadvej]

It needs a projection vector towards a line. So you can project the calculations differently from Tooaxis. 

Like the Line Projetion finish, but it must be available for all toolpaths to set the projection vector.

I have been asking for that many years

It has been possible in Siemens NX to do that for at least 20 years

Brian

[ksorbo6]

I've seen someone do this with a macro. It would create a cylinder in powershape the size of your block and do a line projection finish down to that surface. Then it would delete that cylinder, create another 1 stepdown smaller, toolpath again, until you end up with a series of progressively closer toolpaths.

[ksorbo6]

I've seen someone do this with a macro. It would create a cylinder in powershape the size of your block and do a line projection finish down to that surface. Then it would delete that cylinder, create another 1 stepdown smaller, toolpath again, until you end up with a series of progressively closer toolpaths.

[5axes]

I don't think it's necessary to make something so complicated. For the Screw rougthing I'm using the function Pattern finishing. The Pattern is not so complicate to design ( just a copy of the main spiral curve to define a stepover. Then the  multiple cut option will do the job. (normally with the right method 5 minutes is enought to design these curves)

If you need to  optimize the cutting direction then you will need to change the curve direction and order .. In this case you will spend much more time on the pattern definition But if it's just for one shot, it's not insane.

[5axes]

I don't think it's necessary to make something so complicated. For the Screw rougthing I'm using the function Pattern finishing. The Pattern is not so complicate to design ( just a copy of the main spiral curve to define a stepover. Then the  multiple cut option will do the job. (normally with the right method 5 minutes is enought to design these curves)

If you need to  optimize the cutting direction then you will need to change the curve direction and order .. In this case you will spend much more time on the pattern definition But if it's just for one shot, it's not insane.

[Meysam_Ghorbani]

see this clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-SSLek8hBI&t=12s

[Meysam_Ghorbani]

see this clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-SSLek8hBI&t=12s

[briannystadvej]

Nice.. but the toolpaths are not radial as he is asking for. The toolpaths are still only 2.5D and are only able to be projected from Z-axis. 

[briannystadvej]

Nice.. but the toolpaths are not radial as he is asking for. The toolpaths are still only 2.5D and are only able to be projected from Z-axis. 

[artur.boszczyk]

that is not roughing

[artur.boszczyk]

that is not roughing

[artur.boszczyk]

that is not 4th or 5th axis. Each Z level of the toolpath still lies in a single flat plane. It is just that the tool axis is adjusted and limited. We need the 4th axis roughing that would produce toolpaths, which each X,Y,Z values  of each Z-layer would vary, or you can say it - there won't be a Z layers.

@craig.shipley - what is the status of PMILL-4058?

@5axes 

Cheers

[artur.boszczyk]

that is not 4th or 5th axis. Each Z level of the toolpath still lies in a single flat plane. It is just that the tool axis is adjusted and limited. We need the 4th axis roughing that would produce toolpaths, which each X,Y,Z values  of each Z-layer would vary, or you can say it - there won't be a Z layers.

@craig.shipley - what is the status of PMILL-4058?

@5axes 

Cheers

[Meysam_Ghorbani]

PowerMill doesn't  have a standard 4 or 5-axis roughing strategy and they (the PowerMill development team) have no desire to add this strategy to PowerMill even in version 2050!!

The videos below are my gift to you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO2977vxjS8&t=146s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XuuJVQakWI&t=47s

[Meysam_Ghorbani]

PowerMill doesn't  have a standard 4 or 5-axis roughing strategy and they (the PowerMill development team) have no desire to add this strategy to PowerMill even in version 2050!!

The videos below are my gift to you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO2977vxjS8&t=146s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XuuJVQakWI&t=47s

[artur.boszczyk]

Thanks for these videos. Looks like quite a time-consuming job. Your application uses the cylinder and wraps the 2d paths onto the cylinder. My application uses cone-shaped surfaces, blocked up using 50mm thick epoxy blocks to form more like a step shape. I cannot wrap anything. My number of depth passes will vary - you only got 1 pass, so that is easy. We need the Model Area Clearance which doesn't follow the Z level, maybe the U/V surface directions, or pattern etc 

Unfortunately, the model area clearance cannot set the direction of material removal either, like around the cone, instead of following the Z direction of the active workplace. It is a shame there is not much control over the direction of Model Area Clearance, like by using a pattern. Raster direction isn't good enough for cone shape

@craig.shipley  - I need to know what PowerMill does to improve the 3+2 or 4th axis roughing. If nothing, I need to look at different software to support us with multi-axis roughing operations, that support the direction of roughing, and levels of passes are calculated as offset from 3d surfaces, not as Z- levels of current workplane etc

@TK.421 - can you help?

@5axes  - can you help?

[artur.boszczyk]

Thanks for these videos. Looks like quite a time-consuming job. Your application uses the cylinder and wraps the 2d paths onto the cylinder. My application uses cone-shaped surfaces, blocked up using 50mm thick epoxy blocks to form more like a step shape. I cannot wrap anything. My number of depth passes will vary - you only got 1 pass, so that is easy. We need the Model Area Clearance which doesn't follow the Z level, maybe the U/V surface directions, or pattern etc 

Unfortunately, the model area clearance cannot set the direction of material removal either, like around the cone, instead of following the Z direction of the active workplace. It is a shame there is not much control over the direction of Model Area Clearance, like by using a pattern. Raster direction isn't good enough for cone shape

@craig.shipley  - I need to know what PowerMill does to improve the 3+2 or 4th axis roughing. If nothing, I need to look at different software to support us with multi-axis roughing operations, that support the direction of roughing, and levels of passes are calculated as offset from 3d surfaces, not as Z- levels of current workplane etc

@TK.421 - can you help?

@5axes  - can you help?

[5axes]

Sorry not anymore a PMill user since 2020.

[5axes]

Sorry not anymore a PMill user since 2020.

[iamcdn79]

What are you using now?

[iamcdn79]

What are you using now?