dynamic milling

[Thoob]

Are there any options in these toolpaths while using zig zag pattern, to have a different width of cut one way? Example if I'm hogging out a big part, I want to take a heavier radial cut on the climb mill but lighter on the conventional mill. Reason is I get chatter sometimes on the conventional cut, however I don't want to use just climb milling cause it cuts too much air. This possible? If not, does CNC Software ever think this will be a possibility?

[Guest]

Thoob,

 

These paths are not design for that, no there is no way to do what you're asking with the Dynamic paths.

 

When you're trying to maintain a "strict" chipload, what you're asking could be a big issue

[Thoob]

Oh, maybe I misunderstood what they are "designed" to do. Hell I use them all the time. Guess I was using them blind? What are they designed for? What was I doing wrong? Is it really a big issue to have a different chipload one way then another? Seems like a logical switch in the software. Maybe not, I'm not a software developer either.

[Guest]

You Thoob, every time I respond, you get smartassed

 

From here on out, I will refrain from responding to you

 

Good day!

[Thoob]

Not smartasses at all. I'm actually trying to understand. What am I missing? Am I running the toolpath wrong? Please tell me what they are designed to do?

 

On a side note, please show me other posts where I was a smartass. If you find one, I will surely apologize cause its never my intention. I have a hard time sometimes with your responses cause they are not always complete. Just because you know a lot about Mastercam, does not mean other people will completely understand what you say. Example your first response to this post. You left the post empty by saying it would be a big issue... What would be a big issue? You mean them changing it or just what could happen in the process?

[Thoob]

Paris I just want to say one thing. Please don't tarnish my name by saying what you did. I just went through a year of my latest posts and I have been very respectful to your responses. I am not sure if you have me confused with someone else. If you took this topic as smartass, I apologize.

[K2csq7]

ROR @ "Good Day!"

 

Thoob, climb milling is better for cutters, IMO, zigzagging with a high performance endmill is a no-no.

Use climb milling, go to the max you can on the depth of cut. Calculate for chip thinning and max out the back feedrate.

 

If you REALLY want what you are after, here is how I would accomplish it.

 

Program the path, save as geo, then xform all the "climb" milling moves a bit deeper (which would make the conventional cuts shallower). Then it's up to you to create blended splines (or manual if your feeling like a smartass) to re-connect the toolpath chain. Then contour the "adjusted" chain as a 2d contour with comp set to off. Then you will have to use "change at point" or toolpath editor to adjust the feedrate on the backfeed moves, which wouldn't be to bad since zigzag produces minimal backfeed moves. You will also run into ummmmmmmmmmmm, challenges if you are using the micro-lift function.

 

BTW "guess I was using them blind", and quoting "designed", were obviously "smartass" responses and you know it.

 

Huge PITA (unless its a short dynamic path).

[John@WMM]

Dynamic core will zig zag Look under cutting method...

[CJep]

I don't want to use just climb milling cause it cuts too much air.

 

Thoob the dynamic toolpaths primarily are designed to maintain consistent engagement or chip load, the backfeed moves are setup so you can double or triple the programmed cutting feed, you can also use the microlift to keep from dragging the tool across the finished depth.

 

Like Kevin said conventional cutting with a high performance mill is bad juju, it rolls the edge off the insert, you get crappy chip evacuation, it's inducing unnecessary vibration into the setup,....

[Thoob]

ROR @ "Good Day!"

 

Thoob, climb milling is better for cutters, IMO, zigzagging with a high performance endmill is a no-no.

Use climb milling, go to the max you can on the depth of cut. Calculate for chip thinning and max out the back feedrate.

 

If you REALLY want what you are after, here is how I would accomplish it.

 

Program the path, save as geo, then xform all the "climb" milling moves a bit deeper (which would make the conventional cuts shallower). Then it's up to you to create blended splines (or manual if your feeling like a smartass) to re-connect the toolpath chain. Then contour the "adjusted" chain as a 2d contour with comp set to off. Then you will have to use "change at point" or toolpath editor to adjust the feedrate on the backfeed moves, which wouldn't be to bad since zigzag produces minimal backfeed moves. You will also run into ummmmmmmmmmmm, challenges if you are using the micro-lift function.

 

BTW "guess I was using them blind", and quoting "designed", were obviously "smartass" responses and you know it.

 

Huge PITA (unless its a short dynamic path).

 

Thank you for the explanation. The above quotes are/were not smartass responses. That is the problem with forums. people "assume". I was in no means being a smartass. I truly did not know and figured by "blind" meaning I was not using them properly, and "what is the toolpath designed for" is just that. I thought it was just to remove the material quick and keep the tool engaged in the material as much as possible. I figured I was missing something. And it wasn't just this post Paris referred to. He said every time he responds, I give him a smartass response. This is clearly not the case. i have been nothing but respectful to him. You guys sure are edgy.

[Thoob]

Dynamic core will zig zag Look under cutting method...

 

Yes I see that. I was wanting to see if the width could be changed on climb or conventional.

[Thee Rickster ™]

You guys sure are edgy.

 

X- Circle guy, he need a Hy-jacking....

[CJep]

You guys sure are edgy.

 

whoa, whoa, whoa,......

you're headin' down that misconstrued street again,....

 

[mkd]

Yes I see that. I was wanting to see if the width could be changed on climb or conventional.

been thinking about this also for quite a while.

software should follow physics, it IS a good idea.

along with width control, differential feed rate control would really be sweet.

[neurosis]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

 

No more additional features until the current are working fully and properly!

 

 

[scooke4073]

JP said it before....

Thoob,

 

These paths are not design for that, no there is no way to do what you're asking with the Dynamic paths.

 

When you're trying to maintain a "strict" chipload, what you're asking could be a big issue

 

You are trying to maintain constant chipload...that's the point of dynamic milling. I say keep on climb milling...your tools will thank you.