1st ? HS Paths do you use them ? 2scd ? if not is it because?

[Jayson Kramer]

1st question do you use the HS paths?

 

2scd Question relates some thoughts of why not.

I have found that allot of people do not use use them because they only think they are for High Speed Machining.

 

SO I want to see how many are using them.

Also please post your thoughts of why and why not.

[Fred @ Slate Industries]

75 % of the time.

Sometimes what I am doing doesn't warrant all those pages of questions and number crunching.

 

"I just want a .03 radius all the way around the

Detail" Surface finish contour DONE

[Jayson Kramer]

Tony how about now with X4 multi tasking do you find it faster and prompt you to use it more?

[gcode]

I don't use them much

There are WAY too many points in the arc

leadin/lead out moves.

Most programs won't fit in the controls of the

machines I run and when they do fit, the points

are so close together that the machines slow

to a crawl during lead in/lead out.

 

I don't use the remachine because the tool slams into the wall then does a vertical arc into the cut. If I sent code like that to the floor, the guys would take a hammer to me.

[MotorCityMinion]

Radial works good when I need more control options.

 

Scallop works ok when I'm lazy and want to cram a lot of surfaces into 1 op..

 

Raster disappointed me.

http://www.emastercam.com/cgi-bin/ultimate...3763;p=1#000005

 

Never cared for the limited functions/results from waterline.

 

The roughing tool paths just look iffy to me.

 

Haven't tried the others.

 

In all fairness, lack of experience with these path's, not enough time to experiment with them and not knowing what types of surfaces they are best suited for keep me from using them more often. No vericut/verisurf here and a lot of one offs. If I don't understand or like the moves I'm seeing, I'll mess with it for a few, or simply move on to another type of tool path.

[MLS]

I tried them out some and didn't like a small amount of the motion it generated.

 

I like having total control of what the tool is doing and if I can't get it then I am going to find a way to force it. Often times the older toolpaths are the only way I know of doing that.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

What Gcode said. I usually draw wireframe where I want the tool to go and contour it unless I'm doing a surface finish. Anything else just doesn't make clean enough code, misses or recuts areas, and spends too much time in the air. They'd probably be good for one-offs, but when setting up for a run it has to be more efficient.

[3R!< W3NG3R]

Horizontal area is awesome!

[neurosis]

Everything that gcode said and then some.

 

These paths seem to have been written with high speed machining only in mind and for machines that have an unlimited amount of memory and processing power. That pretty much kills any chances of me being able to use the convenience and ease of some of these.

[gcode]

My previous post was directed at the 2D high speed

toolpaths. I don't get much opportunity

to run the 3D high speed stuff.

Most of my work doesn't need it and the

big machines I have to work with think

100 IPM is a rapid move.

The few times I have tried 3D high speed

they did want I needed them to do

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I use them almost exclusively. Then again I, more often than not ame programming for state of the art (now) equipment. Not unlimited memory, but ALWAYS having either a Dataserver, or Flash Card acting like a Dataserver, and definitely up there on the processing power. I routinely program in the high hundreds for feed rates so the smooth transitions are a must. I could care less about how much code is produced so long as it gives me a good part. I use the older toolpaths as a last resort because I have so much more flexibility with the new paths. I can easily change a roughing toolpath into a finishing toolpath, and/or change the strategy entirely if need be with a a few mouse clicks. As far as them breaking tools, I have only used them on ALuminum and 4130 (32Rc) so, that's all I have experience with so far but will get the opportunity to give some Ti here in the next few months as I will be doing a turn-key so we'll find out soon enough.

 

JM2C

[Mr. Wizzard]

Most of the work I do is for complex 3-D surfaces and models. These are prototypes that eventually become die castings from aluminum. I have used the Surface High Speed Toolpaths a ton. They work awesome, most of the time, even with axis-substitution. Sometimes, I can't get exactly what I want and use Surface Finish Flowline or others. For the most part, they have been tremendously helpful.

 

The only thing is making sure you double check everything you set before you run them. Other than that, I love 'em.

[[email protected]]

quote:

---

I use them almost exclusively.

---

Me too. We have up-to-date machinery and the smallest hdd capacity is 40Gb, so no problems for large programs. I have ran some as large as 32Mb. That's a sh!tload of text!!

 

I'm glad the 64k days are gone

[Jayson Kramer]

Are we saying this all that use it.this can be any of them not just the HS surface paths but this includes the 2d I interested to see if those are used to.