Jump to content

Welcome to eMastercam

Register now to participate in the forums, access the download area, buy Mastercam training materials, post processors and more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Use your display name or email address to sign in:

Wireframe vs. Solid Chaining


Camelot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Toolpath generation based on constructed wireframe from the model is what I've been doing for years.  But obviously just using the the solid is a faster way of programming.

My concern is if I would use the solid for the tool paths and then we have a deviation of the part and am given a new model, I would loose all the paths and redo it.  By using my wireframe, I can just simply correct the deviation with a few geometry clicks. 

Am I wrong on thinking this?  I just would like to see what everyone else is doing out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do wireframe.  In addition to leaving the toolpath intact when importing a new model, it lets me apply Kentucky windage to certain features, like a thin tab that deflects more than the other features being cut by the same cutter, or features with a single sided tolerance that need to be shifted from the model.  More control all around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use both pretty interchangeably. If I'm doing features that can be driven directly off the solid, I'll do that.  If I need to manipulate something to get a different shape or containment, I'll create those wireframes as needed.

I often even use model prep to remove features like holes/fillets/pockets or extend/modify surfaces for other types of machining.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Solids Chaining, and some of the new Wireframe Chaining options, have improved quite a bit in recent years. I love having the new chaining arrow where you can toggle through the chaining branches that Mastercam can find. Keeps you from having to jump between the chaining dialog box, and the model.

If I think a part is likely to have revisions, or there is likely to be more than 50 operations, I'll build wireframe "as needed" (typically using create curve) from the model. If my part is not likely to change, and be less than 50 operations, I'll drive the 2D Operations using Solid Chaining.

One thing that I would love to see added would be an "Air Stock" control, or to have the 2D Operations be "stock aware", so if I select an "air chain" from the Solid, Mastercam could detect that there was stock on the part that existed outside that "air chain" boundary.

I also do the same thing as Aaron, where I create Solids that are copies of the model, which I manipulate by using the "Remove Feature" function. This allows me to use "in-process" manufacturing models, where I don't have dozens of Operations tied to a single model.

The blessing and curse of Solids is "should you need to modify/change anything on the solid", it will dirty all Toolpath Operations tied to the solid. I like to be able to choose "what paths did this change affect", and "do I need to redo/regenerate everything, or can I leave the Roughing Operations as-is".

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the input!  Looks like I'm doing the same as you guys.  I just didn't want to be left out of the loop and not be programming with the best methods.

Ron, I watched all your "Ron week" videos.  This is what actually sparked me to ask the question of what everyone else was doing.  By the way, great job on those videos!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody used the "Change Recognition" in the file menu?  How does this actually work? 

Will it actually replace the original working model with the new deviated model and only dirty the deviated operations pertained to the changes on the model? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would always use the one-click magic rough button (optirough) for all roughing and then occasionally semi-finish with it too.

Then for finishing, everything would be wireframe for all the reasons the guys said above - but predominantly lead in and offs etc.

The vast majority of my stuff was electrical enclosure type parts so prismatics (2D ramp contour for sidewalls and pocket for bottom) , but when there were scanned faces, copy surface and untrim/extend to allow for lead in/out using the fantastico flowline.  I tried to love the other paths but gave up with the roll over of the edges (what is THAT all about 🤷‍♂️)

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...