Ideal simultaneous toolpath

[Kyle F]

It's rare I get a part that truly calls for 5axis motion. 99% of the time I get through with 3+2 but this part seems to call for it. 

2024 zip2go file can be found here: https://uploadnow.io/f/6mLh3kf

I have model prepped out any non-necessary features

So essentially I have a semi-finished aluminum part that will be coming to me from the lathe.

I have then already 3+2 roughed out majority of everything, and have it stock model on toolpath #1

toolpath #2 is a simultaneous semi-finish for the .05 radius around the base of the feature.

and then toolpath 3-4 is me just messing around trying a few different things. stepovers are spaced at like .05-.1 to speed up regeneration. unified automatic and unified morph with oval form endmills.

So I guess I have a few questions:

Does mastercam support 3d high speed toolpaths with oval form or barrel form finishers? I can't seem to get it to work but was curious if maybe I had the tool defined improperly.

Would an oval form finisher be an appropriate tool to finish this part? Or I wonder If I should just stick to what is easiest and finish in 3axis, and then come in 3+2 and ballmill finish what's left on that angled port boss thing lol

I really appreciate and value the opinion of you all and would love to hear any advice or input you have. Unfortunately I am the only 5axis guy at my shop so i can't really go to many people for help on these kind of things.

[crazy^millman]

On operation 3 use travel limits to help control the steep swinging of the tool 50 degrees seemed like a sweet spot.

I wouldn't use automatic on that shape I would use one curve and parallel to the top edge to get motion that would be better suited to the tool and machine kinematics.

I also recommend you spending some time to learn the in and outs of linking. Get away from Automatic on them. That is a lazy programmers way to hope they get good results. Know what you know by taking the time to learn each of these.

Here is a link to the file with some small changes.

Dropbox Link

[Kyle F]

30 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

On operation 3 use travel limits to help control the steep swinging of the tool 50 degrees seemed like a sweet spot.

I wouldn't use automatic on that shape I would use one curve and parallel to the top edge to get motion that would be better suited to the tool and machine kinematics.

I also recommend you spending some time to learn the in and outs of linking. Get away from Automatic on them. That is a lazy programmers way to hope they get good results. Know what you know by taking the time to learn each of these.

 

Thank you so much Ron!

currently diving into your changes and recreating them in my original file to better understand them.

and yes I am usually pretty particular about lead-ins and outs, I had automatic/off on those just trying to get better movement and I will always fine tune later. But I like seeing the way you went about it with the reverse tangential arcs. coming from a 3axis way of thinking it's such a weird lead in/out but on a toolpath like this I can see how it makes sense, avoiding gouges and everything near that angled boss.