Stock Model - "remove chips"?

[neurosis]

Is there an equivalent in stock model to the old "remove chips" in verify? 

 

This comes up once in a while and it is a pain in the a$$.  Is the only way to get rid of these floaters to add a phantom tool path? Its annoying when rest roughing routines try to machine these floating pieces of material.

 

[jlw™]

I wonder the same thing!

[crazy^millman]

In regular Mastercam you have figured out the best way. Now with Verisurf Reverse as an add-on you can export as STL and then clean up the stock model. Might be able to do it with PMESH in Mastercam is saved as an STL and they come in a separate entities, but anything that can edit n STL will be the easiest way I can think of if the PMESH doesn't work. RHINO has a free license and is a good STL editor even if you had to but it is pretty cheap.

 

HTH

[neurosis]

I wonder if this has ever been discussed or brought up as an "enhancement".  Seems strange that something so important has to be worked around.  :shrug:

 

I was looking in Verify and there doesn't appear to be a "remove chips" equivalent in there either.

[crazy^millman]

I wonder if this has ever been discussed or brought up as an "enhancement".  Seems strange that something so important has to be worked around.  :shrug:

 

I was looking in Verify and there doesn't appear to be a "remove chips" equivalent in there either.

 

Well I have to disagree here. Stock Model is supposed to represent all of the operations used to machine a part. If the operations didn't finish all areas of the part how is stock model supposed to understand that the person didn't do their job correctly? If the operations removed all the material then stock model will show that if they didn't then you would want to know that. Now logic is supposed to be written to support people who don't complete machine the part? I don't see it as important because I make sure all my operation remove all the material for a part they are supposed to.

 

Since you have not shared a file and just have a screen shot that is how I am looking at. Thinking differently someone could do all of the operations to remove all the material and get what you are seeing. If that is the case where you have all the operations correct and you get this because Stock Model is not correctly removing Material then I say it is a bug and should be submitted.

[neurosis]

Well I guess that we will have to agree to disagree on that. 

 

More often than not we will try to mill away leaving drops when it is more efficient.  It seems that it would be common sense that these drops wouldn't end up in a stock model that is used for future operations. They aren't even attached to the rest of the stock model.  Hell, even the old verify had the option to remove them.  Not to mention "other" software on the market allows removing these drops as an option which puts the control to leave or remove in your hands.  

 

I can give you several examples where leaving drops rather than turning stock to chips is far more efficient but it really is irrelevant at this point. I know that there is no option to remove these floaters without either creating extra tool path or using 3rd party software,  but I  appreciate you taking the time to answer. I thought that I may just be missing something somewhere.  Maybe I'll post in the other forum and see if this may be a consideration for enhancement.

[Watcher]

Well I guess that we will have to agree to disagree on that. 

 

+1 here Ron. The software does not have to suppose anything. That´s why users need the option - They can decide for Mastercam whenever an detached stock becomes present.

 

Almost all software that do allow the removal of similar drops don´t have to decide anything for the user - They just provide the option when they detect detached material.

 

I say almost all because VERICUT has a smart logic to deal with this and is able to do it on the fly (If you activate this option) whenever the material becomes detached. The logic the system uses to decide which side stays is simple but efficient: The side that remains connected to a fixture or stock component is the one kept by VERICUT.

[Watcher]

An example of what would not be profitable or even safe if we attempted to cut off all the area that is going to be detached:

 

Before you ask, this is done on a dual spindle NT5400 DCG so we clamp the portion that will become detached in the counter chuck and then safely cut the profile that will separate both sides.

 

The O.D. on this part is 400mm (15.748"), AISI 4130, so you can have a notion of size.

 

 

[civiceg]

Verify->remove chips->save as STL->stock model from STL?

 

Verify has remove chips

[kunfuzed]

Add my name to the list of people that want Stock Model to remove the chips itself! As an option of course...

[Jayson Kramer]

Verify->remove chips->save as STL->stock model from STL?

Ok so due this, run your verify and remove the chips at the end . Then go to the option "File" then select "Save Stock As" in the Verify were it will save it as a STL.

Now go back and create a Stock model using the STL do not pick any ops . now you have a Stock model based on the part without the chips and can be used from there.

[crazy^millman]

Well I guess that we will have to agree to disagree on that. 

 

More often than not we will try to mill away leaving drops when it is more efficient.  It seems that it would be common sense that these drops wouldn't end up in a stock model that is used for future operations. They aren't even attached to the rest of the stock model.  Hell, even the old verify had the option to remove them.  Not to mention "other" software on the market allows removing these drops as an option which puts the control to leave or remove in your hands.  

 

I can give you several examples where leaving drops rather than turning stock to chips is far more efficient but it really is irrelevant at this point. I know that there is no option to remove these floaters without either creating extra tool path or using 3rd party software,  but I  appreciate you taking the time to answer. I thought that I may just be missing something somewhere.  Maybe I'll post in the other forum and see if this may be a consideration for enhancement.

 

There are methods to get what you are after and if the people who make the software agree with you then you might see the option if they agree with me then you may not.

 

I can give you many examples of broken tools where I have seen that done and the extra seconds if not a minute to remove the material is much safer than leaving chunks of metal to go flying somewhere or get logged into my cutting tool during an operation. Also chip conveyors are real picky about chunks of metal like.

[MrFish]

I wonder if this has ever been discussed or brought up as an "enhancement".  Seems strange that something so important has to be worked around.  :shrug:

 

I was looking in Verify and there doesn't appear to be a "remove chips" equivalent in there either.

The first part of this statement could apply to numerous bugs that are present for release to release in Mastercam !

[guitar]

I wonder if this has ever been discussed or brought up as an "enhancement".  Seems strange that something so important has to be worked around.  :shrug:

 

I was looking in Verify and there doesn't appear to be a "remove chips" equivalent in there either.

 

 

I brought this up a few weeks back.

[neurosis]

Verify->remove chips->save as STL->stock model from STL?

 

Verify has remove chips

 

 

Ok so due this, run your verify and remove the chips at the end . Then go to the option "File" then select "Save Stock As" in the Verify were it will save it as a STL.

Now go back and create a Stock model using the STL do not pick any ops . now you have a Stock model based on the part without the chips and can be used from there.

 

 

This is actually exactly what I was looking for.  I haven't spent much time in the newish verify because my pc is getting a bit dated and the new verify doesn't perform well for me.

 

Thanks!

 

I still can't say that I wouldn't like to see this added to stock model creation but hey.. 

[civiceg]

I wasn't sure how saving the STL, after removing chips would go, glad it worked out for you. I agree why not make four steps into one. 

 

 

 

I can give you many examples of broken tools where I have seen that done and the extra seconds if not a minute to remove the material is much safer than leaving chunks of metal to go flying somewhere or get logged into my cutting tool during an operation. Also chip conveyors are real picky about chunks of metal like.

 

I have seen quite a few machines with axis covers, smashed to hell from cut outs. But, there is a place for cutting out chunks and needing to remove them from the stock model. Its simply not practical to machine out 4' x 8' pockets when you are making glorified window frames. Sure as sheet, the cut outs are getting secured though. 

[Rocky16]

When verify for creating stock in next operation, you can use  remove chips option to delete chips

https://photos.google.com/search/_tra_/photo/AF1QipNYru3rsEcd0_Zmm-3JiwWG1XBy9dju_OXz5mXP

[crazy^millman]

I wasn't sure how saving the STL, after removing chips would go, glad it worked out for you. I agree why not make four steps into one. 

 

 

I have seen quite a few machines with axis covers, smashed to hell from cut outs. But, there is a place for cutting out chunks and needing to remove them from the stock model. Its simply not practical to machine out 4' x 8' pockets when you are making glorified window frames. Sure as sheet, the cut outs are getting secured though. 

 

That is the best answer I heard about why you should have the ability. On that front I can agree it would be a good addition to stock models, but for leaving un-machined chucks of metal sorry I cannot.

[Jayson Kramer]

Verify->remove chips->save as STL->stock model from STL?

 

Verify has remove chips

For some reason I did not read this right as this is the short version of what I said. You had right there sir.

 

I to agree with most of you that that option would be nice to have. There are time when you want to slug a part out.

[neurosis]

 but for leaving un-machined chucks of metal sorry I cannot.

 

 

Its not for everyone.   

 

We always secure drops so that they dont fall in to the conveyor or get trapped in the way covers.  Some of the drops have been up to 20lbs.  I'd rather not turn that in to chips if I dont have to.

[Müřlıń®]

Most of the time when roughing passes are leaving little chunks of material all that is needed to do to get rid of them is to move the window over a little...

 

Those little chunks like Ron says break tools, get hung up in way covers...all kinds of stuff....if I am slugging something out where I cannot secure the slug I will just reach in there and grab it...or leave tabs if its too heavy and cut it out with a cutoff or hacksaw...

[crazy^millman]

Its not for everyone. 

 

We always secure drops so that they dont fall in to the conveyor or get trapped in the way covers.  Some of the drops have been up to 20lbs.  I'd rather not turn that in to chips if I dont have to.

 

That is a better explanation of what you are doing than the picture you showed. I consider those remnants not slugs or chunks when you have pieces of material that will be secured and be left over during the machining operation. Many ways to make a stock model and I will use all options available. Some have been talked about and others are taking the finish model using Model Prep to make it look like what I want. I think this is a good topic and I am on board for this being an good enhancement. :thumbsup:

[neurosis]

I agree, the photo was a horrible example.  That particular job was frustrating me because I was removing quite a bit of material with a 2.5" button facemill and the remnant was very insignificant.  It was just left in the stock model so the rest rough path wanted to remove that floating piece of material.  To be honest, in cases like that, it takes too much time to verify, save an stl, use the stl to create a stock model, then use that stock model for rest roughing.. for one little tiny floater? 

 

My frustration probably came through in the posts..   apologies.

[crazy^millman]

I agree, the photo was a horrible example.  That particular job was frustrating me because I was removing quite a bit of material with a 2.5" button facemill and the remnant was very insignificant.  It was just left in the stock model so the rest rough path wanted to remove that floating piece of material.  To be honest, in cases like that, it takes too much time to verify, save an stl, use the stl to create a stock model, then use that stock model for rest roughing.. for one little tiny floater? 

 

My frustration probably came through in the posts..   apologies.

 

LOL welcome to my world sometimes posting on here. I get you and agree something I do it as well.

[jlw™]

20lb drop? I have one coming up to run in a week or 2 that will have about a 800lb drop. Yes, that's 2 zeros. Better than putting 20 hours in roughing it away. It's hard to say my average drop, I "saw" stuff off all the time.