Surfacing a radius on top of large part

[DCOPE17]

So, I have a .100 radius to put around a rather large part. The corners of the part are square so the radius has a 3D distance of .078. But at the corners, the 3D length is longer ( don't know exactly what it is... but longer )

I'm running a surface - finish - flowline and I have 2 issues.

Since the corners are longer, it rapids to all the corners and starts hitting the tops then once it goes to all of them several times, it then starts to machining a continuous cut around the part. Is there a way to have a variable stepover so that the stepover is greater at those corners but smaller on the straight parts. That way the tool can stay engaged and not lift?

Also, I haven't worked this out yet, its still doing a lot of lifting and not flowing from one surface to the next. It seems to be cutting the left, small rapid move, then the top... then getting a funny diagonal move across the entire part.

 

I have done several other flowline surfacing and the tool stays engaged the whole time. I've tried different ways of selecting the geometry and even made a solid and radius the corners. Maybe I made the solid in a funny order?

 

Don't know, anyway... Thanks in advance for the help.

Dan

[crazy^millman]

Can you share an example? Do you have 5 Axis toolpaths? Morph between 2 curves has options other toolpaths don't have.

[DCOPE17]

No 5 axis, Vertical mill and we don't have multi-axis MasterCam.

[Guest]

A couple of times I have had to break my geometry in the middle and create it as 2 paths to get the start out in the middle and work into the corner

[Micromoldmaker]

 

I'm running a surface - finish - flowline

Why don't you try "Surface-Scallop?"

[DCOPE17]

I have currently, surface parallel and am doing one side at a time and zig-zag. would prefer climb milling continuously. But with 4 parallel surfacing ops and making them all run lengthways with the cut, I have a 1 1/2 hour cycle time.

 

I did the scallop and kept it climbing but had very broken up toolpath and said it was over 4 hours with the same speeds / feeds/ stepover.

[Thee Awbade™]

If we're on the same page on what we're thinking, then I think, either the Surface-Scallop that Micro suggested, or a Surface-Hybrid may do the trick for you. 

[mkd]

surface scallop is probably the best for the application, guessing from the description.

if you are covering the same area with the same stepover the cycle time is going to be pretty similar, not a factor of 4. edit: scallop can run longer because it produces even stepovers regardless of approach angle.

 

flowline can be nice for controlling individual surfaces, as you already know

[DCOPE17]

The Scallop looks pretty good...it does go around a hit the corners first ( where the length is longer )  but makes a clean toolpath after with the exception of breaking it into small pieces. But the Backplot still shows an hour longer than the parallel surfacing. I'll have to double check my stepover settings and make sure they're the same.

 

Thanks for the help so for, I'll try the Hybrid and see where that gets me.

[mkd]

The Scallop looks pretty good...it does go around a hit the corners first ( where the length is longer )  but makes a clean toolpath after with the exception of breaking it into small pieces. But the Backplot still shows an hour longer than the parallel surfacing. I'll have to double check my stepover settings and make sure they're the same.

 

Thanks for the help so for, I'll try the Hybrid and see where that gets me.

parallel will have short cycle because the stepovers are going to get bigger and bigger as you reach the bottom of the radii.

short cycle does not make a better part in this case.

 

post a file or a picture so we can see what you are talking about "hitting"

[DCOPE17]

parallel will have short cycle because the stepovers are going to get bigger and bigger as you reach the bottom of the radii.

short cycle does not make a better part in this case.

 

post a file or a picture so we can see what you are talking about "hitting"

You got me there... I dislike contour surfacing because of its consistent depth making the top look bad and the bottom super smooth. I thought the Parallel had a consistent surface stepover. Sure enough, you're right. Its the same as the contour but it has a consistent X-Y stepover making the top look super smooth and the bottom look bad.

 

I did get what I wanted to work out.

 

I ended up using waterline ( which looks the same as contour ) but it has the ability to add cuts and dictate a maximum profile stepover. A little tinkering with this and I get a clean, uniform climb cut all the way around with no lifting. Oh and a pretty consistent stepover.

 

Thanks for the help guys. You all generally pointed me in the right direction and I ended up where I'm supposed to be.

 

 

P.S. don't know what I can post... doing Aerospace work and been at this job 2 weeks. not looking to get into any trouble yet. Been about 3 years since programming and with X4. A few things have changed and doing a bit different work. Great that you all are so willing to lend a hand.

[mkd]

 

I ended up using waterline ( which looks the same as contour ) but it has the ability to add cuts and dictate a maximum profile stepover. A little tinkering with this and I get a clean, uniform climb cut all the way around with no lifting. Oh and a pretty consistent stepover.

 

Thanks for the help guys.

AAH! waterline. nice solution

i'll have to reconsider my old methods.

 

thanks for closing the loop, i hate it when ppl ask then split.

[crazy^millman]

You got me there... I dislike contour surfacing because of its consistent depth making the top look bad and the bottom super smooth. I thought the Parallel had a consistent surface stepover. Sure enough, you're right. Its the same as the contour but it has a consistent X-Y stepover making the top look super smooth and the bottom look bad.

 

I did get what I wanted to work out.

 

I ended up using waterline ( which looks the same as contour ) but it has the ability to add cuts and dictate a maximum profile stepover. A little tinkering with this and I get a clean, uniform climb cut all the way around with no lifting. Oh and a pretty consistent stepover.

 

Thanks for the help guys. You all generally pointed me in the right direction and I ended up where I'm supposed to be.

 

 

P.S. don't know what I can post... doing Aerospace work and been at this job 2 weeks. not looking to get into any trouble yet. Been about 3 years since programming and with X4. A few things have changed and doing a bit different work. Great that you all are so willing to lend a hand.

 

Yes thanks for coming back and finishing the topic. Waterline like you did it should do a great job I like it when people pop in and bring new ways of thinking.

[DCOPE17]

Well sure, you all pointed me in directions I wouldn't have gone on my own. I had to come back and let you know how it went.

 

Thanks everyone.

[SpacePilotPro]

I used waterline with a containment instead of flowline just today to defeat a similar problem. Toolpath looked pretty nice, just as good or better than flowline in this instance.

[slyym]

If all else fails I always turn to surface project and create my own geometry for the tool to follow. It might seem like a lot of work at first creating the geometry but for stuff like your talking about it works great.

[jlw™]

You can also buy a $30 HSS radius cutte and cut it in one pass.  I prefer to use surf contour for stuff like this.  You can get a nice lead in/out and if you use check can get away with out creating containment.

[Thee Awbade™]

You got me there... I dislike contour surfacing because of its consistent depth making the top look bad and the bottom super smooth. I thought the Parallel had a consistent surface stepover. Sure enough, you're right. Its the same as the contour but it has a consistent X-Y stepover making the top look super smooth and the bottom look bad.

 

I did get what I wanted to work out.

 

I ended up using waterline ( which looks the same as contour ) but it has the ability to add cuts and dictate a maximum profile stepover. A little tinkering with this and I get a clean, uniform climb cut all the way around with no lifting. Oh and a pretty consistent stepover.

 

Thanks for the help guys. You all generally pointed me in the right direction and I ended up where I'm supposed to be.

 

 

P.S. don't know what I can post... doing Aerospace work and been at this job 2 weeks. not looking to get into any trouble yet. Been about 3 years since programming and with X4. A few things have changed and doing a bit different work. Great that you all are so willing to lend a hand.

 

Ah I was in the right ballpark. Surface-Hybrid behaves much the same As Surface-Waterline does, but waterline has troubles with flat surfaces, hybrid kinda mixes Waterline and Raster In my opinion.