Milling a radius on a 3d edge

[Müřlıń®]

I do put them back where they came from. right on to the surfaces, on the edges.

 

I change the color of my boundaries and you can see them better.

 

Note: Sometimes I will use 2-d boundaries transformed up in certain instances, but for the most part, every one of my 3-d models I have been doing, are 3-d boundaries right on the edges of the surfaces.

 

I haven't got a clue why sometimes 2-d boundaries dont work for me. Perhaps its because of the shortcuts I am taking building the surfaces.

 

 

My parting lines are all over the place.....most of the geometry consists of surfaces made with complex curves, and are no where flat and strait.

 

 

Murlin

 

[ 11-10-2003, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: Murlin ]

[Thad]

quote:

---

most of the geometry consists of surfaces made with complex curves, and are no where flat and strait.

---

If it's not proprietary stuff and you wouldn't get in trouble, would you mind sharing a file or 2 on the ftp (or email if it's not too big)? I've been doing more 3D programming this last week, but I'm still new at it and would love something to practice on. I'm also curious of what your idea of complex curves are to see how our files compare.

 

Thad

[Müřlıń®]

Sorry cant give any of the geometry files but you can take a look at forgedie.bmp in the picture folder.

 

Its not rocket science or anything but all the challenges are there. The yellow would be the 3-d fillet we have been talking about.

 

Now dont get me wrong, 2-d boundaries up on top of your model will also work in "most" cases.

But I'm not worried about the times that will work, I am concerned with the times that wont.

 

I dont do all the programming on my dies start to finish. I do it as I go along. When programming toolpaths, I need for what I am doing to work the first time, every time.

 

My machines are usually waiting on me to feed them a program. and the more time I spend messing around trying to get stuff to work........well you get the point.

 

Scallop is a tricky bugger at times to get it to do what you want it to do without gouging, and I use it on every one of my dies.

 

I dont think I can even show you a picture of the jetlegs. Those Rock-Bit guys might not like it too much. Those are the tuffer ones.

 

 

Murlin

 

[ 11-10-2003, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: Murlin ]

[Thad]

Thanks for all the info Murlin. I'll have to check out the picture tommorow. I've got to get to bed. We've got our QS9000 audit tommorow.

 

Thad

[Chris Rizzo]

quote:

---

cmr,

 

I saw your avatar and thought maybe you were from Detroit.

---

Haha! I'm from Buffalo, but have some family in Detroit. Spent a few summers in the motor city, and certainly see my avatar's resemblance to the "urban architecture".

 

Thanks for all the talk in this interesting thread, good for us surface newbies. I have been using check surfaces because it's pretty cut and dry, however will certainly try the containment boundry method.

 

However, say your trying to clean up a little INTERNAL fillet between a wall and a floor. A check surface or depth limit is the only way to prevent gouging the floor. right? Would you NOT recommend using "check" surface, but cut depth limit instead?

thx in advance, Murlin The Die Magician

[Chris Rizzo]

Actually, I have my little scenerio totally wrong.... Containment still would work fine, I think. The tool would still be "contained" just to your selected surface! DUUUH!

I'll keep thinking on this one.. could swear I though of a caveat for containment boundry.. something regarding protecting a z depth.

[Müřlıń®]

quote:

---

A check surface or depth limit is the only way to prevent gouging the floor. right?

---

cmr....I rarely ever use check surfaces....

but I use the cut depth toggles all the time

 

For cleaning out the corners of a cavity, Leftover and Pencil work pretty good.

 

The machining strategy one uses is determined by the end result one is trying to achive.

 

I only try to get around a 90 RMS off the machine and I will hand polish it to a little better than a 32 RMS for the forging process.

 

If you look at forgedie.bmp, the 4 impressions in the middle of the die have a diffrent surface finish requirement than all the rest. I will polish these. But the rest of the die is clearance. Since I do not have a HSM, I will use a large tool and a .1 stepover on all the other areas.

 

To avoid cusps around the impressions, alot of Scallops are used. So getting a 90 RMS over the whole die is wasted time and perishables. This is why I tailor my machining stratagies the way I do. Because of all the nested wierd shaped chaines and stuff.

 

OK, I'll shut up now

 

 

Murlin teh blabbermouth

 

[ 11-10-2003, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: Murlin ]

[Thad]

quote:

---

Sorry cant give any of the geometry files but you can take a look at forgedie.bmp in the picture folder.

---

Thanks Murlin. We do similar work. Looks like fun!

 

Thad