Mirroring Toolpaths - 2020 take

[jwvt88]

Hey guys, I've done some forum searching and haven't come up with a recent take on this.

We have 18 parts we are working on now. They are aluminum seat trims for private jets. 16 out of 18 of them have 5 axis, all have 3+2. I haven't used mirror toolpath yet in MC, but I have in other software, as well as at my previous company we mirrored some in the control. Now I'm stuck with Mazak Variaxis for the foreseeable future, I'm wondering what will be the EASIEST way to get these accomplished in a timely fashion. As always, the time we were quoted was cut in half to get the first 12 parts machined, and all of our tooling hasn't even arrived yet. 

 

My coworker has done this before and believes the only/best way is to mirror them and we will likely need to reselect a lot of geometry/chains. It is however infrequent that we need to mirror anything so it has been a while. I believe there just might be an easier way, especially if we can utilize G51.1? Maybe for some of it? 

TIA

[JParis]

38 minutes ago, jwvt88 said:

My coworker has done this before and believes the only/best way is to mirror them and we will likely need to reselect a lot of geometry/chains.

This is an accurate statement.

If you use Toolpath >> Transform >> Mirror....make sure you allow it to create new operations and geometry...

You'll then want to double check and alter or rechain things as it requires it....some will likely need to be "adjusted"

[crazy^millman]

If you don't have to worry about losing your job then mirror and post and go run the parts on the machine. What is the worst thing that can happen you crash and tear up your machine. Sorry not trying to make lite of your situation, but unless I have run the code through CAV not something I would ever do no matter the CAM Software that mirrors a toolpath. That said in Mastercam I will do like suggest above or copy the file and then mirror that copy of copy the operation to a new machine group and then go through and copy my levels then mirror those levels and go from there. Sorry the auto-magic easy button so many keep taunting for what we do still isn't there yet IMHO. Will we be out of a job one day I have no real idea. I am still of the mind set God gave us our talents and no way a A.I. or anything else will ever match the creative part of our souls. Some thing are easy and they work great with mirror other things do take some tweaking, but compared to where it was in V9 we are light years ahead and improving every version along the way. I got tools in my toolbox I haven't touched in 20 years, but I have that specific tool when I ever need it. Use what you got the best you know how and trust me everything else will fail in place with some good old trial and error.

[jwvt88]

2 minutes ago, 5th Axis CGI said:

If you don't have to worry about losing your job then mirror and post and go run the parts on the machine. What is the worst thing that can happen n your crash and tear up your machine. Sorry not trying to make lite of your situation, but unless I have run the code through CAV not something I would ever do no matter the CAM Software that mirrors a toolpath. That said in Mastercam I will do like suggest above or copy the file and then mirror that copy of copy the operation to a new machine group and then go through and copy my levels then mirror those levels and go from there. Sorry the auto-magic easy button so many keep taunting for what we do still isn't there yet IMHO. Will we be out of a job one day I have no real idea. I am still of the mind set God gave us our talents and no way a A.I. or anything else will ever match the creative part of our souls. Some thing are easy and they work great with mirror other things do take some tweaking, but compared to where it was in V9 we are light years ahead and improving every version along the way. I got tools in my toolbox I haven't touched in 20 years, but I have that specific tool when I ever need it. Use what you got the best you know how and trust me everything else will fail in place with some good old trial and error.

I haven't used mirroring in MC(yet, I should get to playing with it by the end of the day) but it seems overly complicated compared to more solid based softwares(eg; I wouldn't need to go back and reselect chains to climb cut in a solid based software, and to my understanding thus far, this is the case in MC). Not to say any software is "perfect" for this situation as we would still probably run into some minor things that need to be adjusted, just not as much. 

However, I was awaiting your expertise, and that brings me to another question I had, are you aware of any CAV software with a mirror function? I've been leaning towards NCSimul or Vericut, but if Camplete or iCAM had this function I would look more into them. I do have quotes from NCSimul, Vericut, and iCAM though, and I don't think the boss will go with iCAM. 

[AMCNitro]

I would only use mirror on simple toolpaths, I've seen mirror do some funky stuff and I've been lucky to have caught it and not wrecked parts or machines.  

[crazy^millman]

3 hours ago, jwvt88 said:

I haven't used mirroring in MC(yet, I should get to playing with it by the end of the day) but it seems overly complicated compared to more solid based softwares(eg; I wouldn't need to go back and reselect chains to climb cut in a solid based software, and to my understanding thus far, this is the case in MC). Not to say any software is "perfect" for this situation as we would still probably run into some minor things that need to be adjusted, just not as much. 

However, I was awaiting your expertise, and that brings me to another question I had, are you aware of any CAV software with a mirror function? I've been leaning towards NCSimul or Vericut, but if Camplete or iCAM had this function I would look more into them. I do have quotes from NCSimul, Vericut, and iCAM though, and I don't think the boss will go with iCAM. 

Your boss is leaning the correct way in his thinking on the list of whom not to choose. I have a relationship with all 4 companies listed and all 4 companies have good products. End of the day really going to come down to customer service. Hard for me to guide any company today on what CAV to choose since I have a vested interest with 4 companies on the list. I use 3 of them on your list and CAMPlete doesn't offer the same Comparison tools for the model that NCSIMUL, Vericut and ICAM offer. CAMplete multi-CAM is the posting engine for the machines they support along with Verification so one and done so to speak for posting, simulation.They give you a lot of control to change things after the code is posted. The issue not not a way to know differences in verification like the other 3 offer. NCSIMUL has very good graphics and is using Open GL and have for over a decade not something they just got added to the latest version. Can edit code right in the middle of a simulation and keep moving forward without having to save IP files. They don't have the same presence in the US as Vericut. CG Tech is a good company and has good customer support in the US they have the biggest presence of all on the list in the US. NCSIMUL, Vericut and ICAM are not limited to the machines and controls they support. With CAMplete the machine your company has will have to be on the list to be supported. They only Support NAKAmura Tome on the Mill/Turn side of the equation. The customers deal with one person and one person only for that support. On the Milling side they have a bigger and great support group. ICAM also has a posting engine supporting many different CAM softwares like CAMplete.  

Optimization and other things all 3 of the big ones have. NCSIMUL and ICAM offer tools to move posted code from one machine kinematic to another without having to go back to CAM software. I am not aware of this ability in Vericut and CAMplete so they may have it, but I am not aware of it. 

I however I still build a Machinesim for each machine I can for any of the CAV. Issue is I want to know right away what I am checking when it comes to holder, part and other things and not a simple task with any CAV. One might ask why? They are not integrated into the CAM software. Time you run the interface and go through the steps to see what the Machinesim gives you then you understand how much faster using it for simple verification is. With a Post tied to Machine simulation you not exactly like CAMplete, but we have customers running this exclusively and understand the risks involved. They run code day in and day out with no issues. Comparing when I first started doing 5 Axis machining and Multi axis machining to  where are currently things have drastically changed.

Any company 10 years from now still going out to the machine to run anything without CAV as part of the their process might be out of business. Printing is gaining ground and other advances are requiring manufactures to rethink the way they make parts. There will still be the need for a Boring mill, VTL and other CNC machining Centers for the next 50-100 years. Question will be how advanced does the manufacturing process get? Will it be the Star Trek make something out of thin air in seconds in that time I don't think so, but we have the Apple watch that is a Cell Phone and other things all in one that were not possible 30 years.

I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night  so take what I say with a grain of salt.

[htm01]

i use mirror all the time, usually just have to right click on geometry and reverse path, then check your start position and comp direction, it will comp change when you reverse if you only have one contour. ( or you can just rechain )

[jeff]

1 hour ago, htm01 said:

i use mirror all the time, usually just have to right click on geometry and reverse path, then check your start position and comp direction, it will comp change when you reverse if you only have one contour. ( or you can just rechain )

Don't you have to hit "Change Side" also?

[#Rekd™]

I usually take the safe route and mirror my geometry and copy the toolpaths and select new geometry and regen the toolpath. Not as elegant but it works, my files and parts are relatively small though.

[Guest]

Mastercam 2018 did a real number on mirroring splines, haven't tries anything similar since then.

[jwvt88]

Thanks for the replies everyone. By the time I got to play with it today I got handed other things to do. I did attempt to transform a few. It seems like most things are working pretty well. I tried to do an entire operation(roughly 120 paths) at once with a lot of 3+2 paths, and it DID create new planes for me(my colleague thought it wouldn't, so he was excited). However it still has my origin/WCS at the original model and everything rotated off of there. Did I miss a box to offset that the 10 inches that I offset everything else? Or is the standard to just create a new level, and overlay it on exactly the same point? 

Thanks in  advance, heading out for the night.

[pro grammer]

When using mirror(unless you programmed everything on centerline with wireframe, you have to go through so much BS that you might as well just mirror the model and reselect everything.

[jwvt88]

1 hour ago, pro grammer said:

When using mirror(unless you programmed everything on centerline with wireframe, you have to go through so much BS that you might as well just mirror the model and reselect everything.

it is from the center of a bounding box set to the size of the material ordered. 

[Code_Breaker]

Maybe I should rename who I am to Johnny-come-lately?

If I get the luxury of Knowing I have a Left Hand and a Right Hand Project, I program the First Part to the Print. I also plan all my Toolpaths in Advance anticipating Mirroring the Toolpaths. This will make Mirroring easier. Then, as mentioned above, mostly 2D contours and the likes, will need to be re-selected if using Cutter Comp/Wear to change directions.

I used Designated Level for anything I will be mirroring as well. Makes life simple. This includes Level 15 as my Mirror lines for X and Y of equal lengths and crossing in the Middle for Center of Rotation for some Tool Paths.

Just my humble opinion, but I help it if I am right?

Don Dawson

Corona, CA

 

[jwvt88]

1 minute ago, Code_Breaker said:

Maybe I should rename who I am to Johnny-come-lately?

If I get the luxury of Knowing I have a Left Hand and a Right Hand Project, I program the First Part to the Print. I also plan all my Toolpaths in Advance anticipating Mirroring the Toolpaths. This will make Mirroring easier. Then, as mentioned above, mostly 2D contours and the likes, will need to be re-selected if using Cutter Comp/Wear to change directions.

I used Designated Level for anything I will be mirroring as well. Makes life simple. This includes Level 15 as my Mirror lines for X and Y of equal lengths and crossing in the Middle for Center of Rotation for some Tool Paths.

Just my humble opinion, but I help it if I am right?

Don Dawson

Corona, CA

 

Yeah, I'm discovering this. I got it to work actually pretty well. Going back through and reverifying it currently. Minor things need to be addressed. I guess some issues I need to look further into are:

1. Seems like a bug, but after i mirror, the original is like a purple ghost  model on my screen. I couldn't get rid of it. I had to mirror 3 toolpath groups, and the only way I could figure out how to get rid of it was to save, close MC, and reopen(2020, current update)

2. I activated a new level for each new group. 1000, 2000, 3000, for ops 1, 2, 3. When mirroring, it turned my solid into surfaces and copied them into the new level. However, it mirrored all of my geometry, and kept them in the original level. So for my op2 geometry level I have even more of a disaster than it already was. 

3. Stock models didn't mirror. Wasn't a huge issue, just took a few minutes to redo them all.

I'm not quite finished yet, but I will import the customer provided solid and overlay it and reverify to make sure everything is good, and I will delete the original toolpath groups, then I think I can just go and delete all unassociated geometry and reorganize a bit, and hopefully it works out. 

[jwvt88]

We are now having an issue in a separate, similar file. Trying to mirror OP 1, and it doesn't mirror the model for some reason. I tried to help my colleague and showed him what settings I was using, no luck. So I thought maybe he had something wrong, I opened it on my PC, tried again. Still doesn't work. I went back to the one that I already mirrored, used the same settings, and worked beautifully. I even tried skipping over OP 1, and going to OP 2, and that mirrored the model, but it was missing a significant amount of surfaces. I can't seem to figure out why, but maybe you guys have an idea?

Both original models are solids. The models are pretty similar, operations pretty similar, tools are the same. The machine group was using a different machine but I even tried switching that and didn't work. Kinda bugging me now because I thought we were set, but he's going back to the old way mirroring geometry and everything individually.