Organizing toolpaths

[JB7280]

How do you guys organize your toolpaths, operations (set-ups)?  I find that things get really clumsy, and hard to go back and modify, when I start getting lots of toolpaths in a part.  Right now, I usually Create a toolpath group for each setup, then break down a toolpath sub-group in each.  Last part I programmed I did a roughing TP Group, a finishing TP Group, and a Drilling/tapping TP Group.  That ended up getting messy because roughing may have had a few drills in it, drilling may have had a few milling ops in it, etc.   I'd be curious to see how others do it.  

 

Another issue I have is when running verify.  Maybe I'm working on Setup #2, and I go back to make a change in Setup #1.  Now I have to reselect fixtures, stock, etc.  Is there a way to tie setup #1 parameters (stock, fixtures, etc) to setup #1, and vice versa, etc?  

 

I find that difficulty navigating is losing a lot of time for me, and I'd like to get faster!

[crazy^millman]

Well I am 1400 operations in a part now and I have 4 setups. I have a Setup Group under the Machine. I then have a OP group under that for this customer. Then under that I had a Tool group that tool is doing. Then in that tool group I have the specific operations.

Really comes down to the part and process I am developing. I like to keep it simple when possible, but when not possible and customer has strict requirements then I do what is needed to the level required. The 30 Threadmilled holes I talked about in the other thread have to be cut to -.002 under nominal and then stepped out at .0005 increments to +.005. They don't use cutter comp. After each operation there has to be a manual comment saying what the operation did to have man readable code after the last cut. Each threaded hole has 30 operations per hole. That worked out to 900 operations. Thankfully I was able to tap most of the rest of the hole or this could have easily got up to a 5000 operation part. 

I am going to reach out to Peter(byte me) and see if he has some tricks to rename and renumber already made Mastercam operations. Not good when you at operation 427 and realize you missed a hole and skipped a number and that all has to be renumbered one by one again.

[Leon82]

Unlabel than in the tool comment page.

 

You can also make tool groups labeled

[Guest]

1 hour ago, JB7280 said:

How do you guys organize your toolpaths, operations (set-ups)?  I find that things get really clumsy, and hard to go back and modify, when I start getting lots of toolpaths in a part.  Right now, I usually Create a toolpath group for each setup, then break down a toolpath sub-group in each.  Last part I programmed I did a roughing TP Group, a finishing TP Group, and a Drilling/tapping TP Group.  That ended up getting messy because roughing may have had a few drills in it, drilling may have had a few milling ops in it, etc.   I'd be curious to see how others do it.  

 

Another issue I have is when running verify.  Maybe I'm working on Setup #2, and I go back to make a change in Setup #1.  Now I have to reselect fixtures, stock, etc.  Is there a way to tie setup #1 parameters (stock, fixtures, etc) to setup #1, and vice versa, etc?  

I would caution you against using large files with many operations in them, one setup could be programmed, exported into an operations file and then imported and verified prior to posting, this could be done for each setup to keep the workspace from becoming overcrowded. The import operation geometry checkbox in the import tab allows this, (it works much better with wireframe and surface geometry than solid).

 

For my 3 + 2 Programming on 5 Axis Machines I program everything in Top View TPLane and CPlane and the WCS is shifted for the rotation, each operation is programmed and verified in a separate file and then imported into the file to be posted.

[JB7280]

23 minutes ago, byte me said:

I would caution you against using large files with many operations in them, one setup could be programmed, exported into an operations file and then imported and verified prior to posting, this could be done for each setup to keep the workspace from becoming overcrowded. The import operation geometry checkbox in the import tab allows this, (it works much better with wireframe and surface geometry than solid).

 

For my 3 + 2 Programming on 5 Axis Machines I program everything in Top View TPLane and CPlane and the WCS is shifted for the rotation, each operation is programmed and verified in a separate file and then imported into the file to be posted.

So you have multiple files for a part sometimes?  When I started learning mastercam, it felt like everyone strongly suggested programming everything in one file.    One issue I had last time I did a part in separate files, was, I shared a number rid tools between the set-ups, and when I modified stickout lengths, etc, it was a bit of a pain making sure everything matched between setups.  But that may just be issues with my own personal organization.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, JB7280 said:

So you have multiple files for a part sometimes?  When I started learning mastercam, it felt like everyone strongly suggested programming everything in one file. 

For sure there are different schools of thought on this, keeping information updated between files is key, checking the postion matches and tool length are critical, having a good setup sheet for tool length should help you verify that aspect.

Having a clean workspace makes it easy to program and keep things organised, with less confusion, you will have more time to validate data between setups/files.

[Guest]

A naming system in the operation comment section might be in order as well, something like ->

"Rough | Contour | 0500 Em | 420 IPM | 18000 RPM | Stickout 1.5 | T3"

[cncappsjames]

I will usually have 1 machine group for each physical machine the part will go into. Generally two. Sometimes a VMC prep op. From there I'll have a Toolpath Group for each operation. Since the majority of time I am working on a 5-Axis machine, there's maybe 3 ops. Usually only two. Then like roughing group(s), Semi-Finishing Group(s), FInishing Group(s), Hole-Prep group, semi-finish Holes, finish holes. Deburring, etc...

It's not uncommon for me to have dozens of groups with of hundreds of operations. Groups and sub-groups is what keeps things organized. ...a file with a hundred ops and NO groups. Going through that  is... ROUGH. Even worse is all those ops and no operation comments.

I label EVERY operation without exception. There's just no good reason not to IMHO.

[JB7280]

8 hours ago, cncappsjames said:

I will usually have 1 machine group for each physical machine the part will go into. Generally two. Sometimes a VMC prep op. From there I'll have a Toolpath Group for each operation. Since the majority of time I am working on a 5-Axis machine, there's maybe 3 ops. Usually only two. Then like roughing group(s), Semi-Finishing Group(s), FInishing Group(s), Hole-Prep group, semi-finish Holes, finish holes. Deburring, etc...

It's not uncommon for me to have dozens of groups with of hundreds of operations. Groups and sub-groups is what keeps things organized. ...a file with a hundred ops and NO groups. Going through that  is... ROUGH. Even worse is all those ops and no operation comments.

I label EVERY operation without exception. There's just no good reason not to IMHO.

By operation comments, you're referring to the comment on the Tool tab within the toolpath operation, correct?  I always label those, Usually with a quick description, and the characteristic number from the print.    Last part I made had about 250 operations, broken down into about 6 groups.  It was a bit of a mess.  I'm trying not to get into that mess again.  Thanks for your suggestion.  This thread gave me a few different methods to try.  I'll have to see what suits me the best.

[JParis]

Tool by Tool List

 

Operations & Positions

If I am programming our 5 axis stuff, I stick with the same routine

VMC stuff, I load a machine group for each operation

 

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

This might not be practical for those working on very large and complex parts, but I like to put a stock model every few operations, so I can quickly check what the part looks like at each step.  Then if going back for changes I can quickly look through the stock models to see when a particular feature was machined.

[Newbeeee™]

On 11/17/2020 at 9:26 PM, Matthew Hajicek - Conventus said:

This might not be practical for those working on very large and complex parts, but I like to put a stock model every few operations, so I can quickly check what the part looks like at each step.  Then if going back for changes I can quickly look through the stock models to see when a particular feature was machined.

This is what i did.

Worked a charm if you  multi task and have to answer the phone make the tea and clean the toilets.

As soon as you sat back down and thought "where was i" you can instantly get back into it.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Newbeeee™ said:

This is what i did.

Worked a charm if you  multi task and have to answer the phone make the tea and clean the toilets.

As soon as you sat back down and thought "where was i" you can instantly get back into it.

I never actually use stock models unless I have to do something special to the leftover material, there is something wrong with my setting that, when I cut slots in the side of a panel the top "skin" is missing, which makes it pretty useless...