5X Deburr not seeing the "back side" of a lollipop mill

[JB7280]

I'm trying to do some deburring with a lollipop mill.  But for some reason it doesn't seem to be recognizing the cutting edge past 180deg.  Is there something special I need to do for it to recognize the full tool?  

[Leon82]

I usually don't do anything special. Is the back half yellow indicating cutting geometry? Shank clearance may be too big

[Jake L]

A file to look at would be helpful here.

[crazy^millman]

1 minute ago, Jake L said:

A file to look at would be helpful here.

Watch it people are going to start calling you a mean person for asking for such a thing.

[JB7280]

2 hours ago, Jake L said:

A file to look at would be helpful here.

I wish I could share this one, but I can't.  I'll make and share a file later with a similar condition though.  

 

3 hours ago, Leon82 said:

I usually don't do anything special. Is the back half yellow indicating cutting geometry? Shank clearance may be too big

[Leon82]

are you using line for orientation? i usually use line and let it do its thing

[Jake L]

This is just a complete guess but I've run into issues before if the "length of cut" defined in the tool is shorter than the radius of the lollipop ball. My workaround for this is extending the length of cut a thou or two up the shank. See attached screenshots for better explanation.

We get our lollipop cutters from Harvey. I download the SIM file and when I fill in the LOC for the tool (given by Harvey) the LOC is usually shorter than the radius of the lollipop tool. In the past this has caused Mastercam to not recognize how far of an undercut the tool could make. So Mastercam would only use, say 230 degrees of the tool, when in reality the tool had 270 degrees of flute.

This was in Mcam 2022, not sure if it was fixed in 2023. And again, this is a shot in the dark, it could be a hundred other things.

[GIZMO 21]

16 hours ago, Jake L said:

This is just a complete guess but I've run into issues before if the "length of cut" defined in the tool is shorter than the radius of the lollipop ball. My workaround for this is extending the length of cut a thou or two up the shank. See attached screenshots for better explanation.

We get our lollipop cutters from Harvey. I download the SIM file and when I fill in the LOC for the tool (given by Harvey) the LOC is usually shorter than the radius of the lollipop tool. In the past this has caused Mastercam to not recognize how far of an undercut the tool could make. So Mastercam would only use, say 230 degrees of the tool, when in reality the tool had 270 degrees of flute.

This was in Mcam 2022, not sure if it was fixed in 2023. And again, this is a shot in the dark, it could be a hundred other things.

 

yes this will work. I always define my cutters as they are.

had a part in 2021 for deburring some undercuts. the toolpath was good with the tool defined as Harvey described it.

 

a few months later I opened up the file in mastercam 2022 and tried to run it with no success. everything on that toolpath was over tilting 

my table for overtravel.

 

long story short, I got a hold of our mastercam reseller and was told to extend the cutting depth into

the shank. that fixed everything for me.

 

I do not like it, but it works.

[crazy^millman]

1 hour ago, GIZMO 21 said:

 

yes this will work. I always define my cutters as they are.

had a part in 2021 for deburring some undercuts. the toolpath was good with the tool defined as Harvey described it.

 

a few months later I opened up the file in mastercam 2022 and tried to run it with no success. everything on that toolpath was over tilting 

my table for overtravel.

 

long story short, I got a hold of our mastercam reseller and was told to extend the cutting depth into

the shank. that fixed everything for me.

 

I do not like it, but it works.

 

One of the many work arounds we have to use to make the tool in our toolbox do what we need to get the job done.

[JB7280]

17 hours ago, Jake L said:

This is just a complete guess but I've run into issues before if the "length of cut" defined in the tool is shorter than the radius of the lollipop ball. My workaround for this is extending the length of cut a thou or two up the shank. See attached screenshots for better explanation.

We get our lollipop cutters from Harvey. I download the SIM file and when I fill in the LOC for the tool (given by Harvey) the LOC is usually shorter than the radius of the lollipop tool. In the past this has caused Mastercam to not recognize how far of an undercut the tool could make. So Mastercam would only use, say 230 degrees of the tool, when in reality the tool had 270 degrees of flute.

This was in Mcam 2022, not sure if it was fixed in 2023. And again, this is a shot in the dark, it could be a hundred other things.

This worked. Thank you!   I only had to add .020", but it did the trick.  

[crazy^millman]

3 hours ago, JB7280 said:

This worked. Thank you!   I only had to add .020", but it did the trick.  

Thank you for posting back you got it working. I for one appreciate it.

[Aaron Eberhard]

I think this is an issue of the software doing what you're telling it, but not what you intend.

If you have a .25" lolli with .125" shoulder, if you think about what the collision zone is creating using the default .010" clearance on the shoulder:

This whole area on the top bit of the ball isn't really useable because you can't get in there.   It's the same thing as telling the algorithm that the flutes are only .22" high instead of the full 2.33" high. 

If you lie a bit, and say the flutes go up .020" onto the shoulder, then the algorithm would see this instead, which you could easily tilt to get under a corner:

 

You should be able to accomplish the same thing by leaving 0 or .001" or something on the shoulder instead of .010".

On the other hand, if your usable flute really was only .21" or whatever high, think of how annoyed you'd be if it tried to guess what you meant and used the whole ball instead!

 

[JB7280]

14 hours ago, Aaron Eberhard said:

I think this is an issue of the software doing what you're telling it, but not what you intend.

If you have a .25" lolli with .125" shoulder, if you think about what the collision zone is creating using the default .010" clearance on the shoulder:

This whole area on the top bit of the ball isn't really useable because you can't get in there.   It's the same thing as telling the algorithm that the flutes are only .22" high instead of the full 2.33" high. 

If you lie a bit, and say the flutes go up .020" onto the shoulder, then the algorithm would see this instead, which you could easily tilt to get under a corner:

 

You should be able to accomplish the same thing by leaving 0 or .001" or something on the shoulder instead of .010".

On the other hand, if your usable flute really was only .21" or whatever high, think of how annoyed you'd be if it tried to guess what you meant and used the whole ball instead!

 

I thought about this, and you could be right.  Visually, it looks to be more thant .01" from the shoulder, but maybe not.  My next step was to adjust the angle a bit, but I'm in a hurry to get this part running, so for now, this solution works.  When there's more time, I'll draw it up and try a few different methods.  

 

On 2/11/2023 at 12:59 PM, crazy^millman said:

Thank you for posting back you got it working. I for one appreciate it.

I always try to followup, that way if someone has the same problem down the road, maybe a simple internet search will fix the problem without having to post.  

[Aaron Eberhard]

On 2/11/2023 at 7:53 AM, GIZMO 21 said:

a few months later I opened up the file in mastercam 2022 and tried to run it with no success. everything on that toolpath was over tilting 

my table for overtravel.

If I recall, the issue was fixed in 2022 for for someone using an Ingersoll insert-lollipop, which could only cut with 80% or so of the diameter of the lollipop, but Deburr was ignoring that and using the whole ball regardless of what you did.  So the change was to make sure that it actively looked at the "cut depth" portion and wouldn't cut somewhere that "didn't have flutes." 

[Jake L]

On 2/11/2023 at 10:54 PM, Aaron Eberhard said:

I think this is an issue of the software doing what you're telling it, but not what you intend.

If you have a .25" lolli with .125" shoulder, if you think about what the collision zone is creating using the default .010" clearance on the shoulder:

This whole area on the top bit of the ball isn't really useable because you can't get in there.   It's the same thing as telling the algorithm that the flutes are only .22" high instead of the full 2.33" high. 

If you lie a bit, and say the flutes go up .020" onto the shoulder, then the algorithm would see this instead, which you could easily tilt to get under a corner:

 

You should be able to accomplish the same thing by leaving 0 or .001" or something on the shoulder instead of .010".

On the other hand, if your usable flute really was only .21" or whatever high, think of how annoyed you'd be if it tried to guess what you meant and used the whole ball instead!

 

This makes so much sense. Thanks for the explanation!