New Mastercam Auto Toolpath

[steve f]

Down the lines of what MayDay and Charles are talking about, I've been hoping for awhile that Mastercam would start heading in this direction. The problem I've always foreseen with fully automated programming is I don't want to program an entire part, ussually just some or most of the features. (ex: mold base components or a cast part).

 

So this is my wish list

 

Once AFR develops a little more I think it'd be great to have a "feature manager" that recongnizes all possible machinable features and builds a list that would be sequenced in a logical order. The programmers job is to deselect the geometery features that don't need machining (since there's ussually more that do than don't) and re-arrange the sequence if necessary, kinda like Lathe v9. Once all the features and sequence was established, Mcam would go through the manager and apply toolpaths from an operation database that had been saved from previous toolpaths programmed. If the feature manager encountered a feature that didn't have any toolpaths associated with it's type yet, then mastercam would resort to the ussual toolpath parameter window, generate the toolpath and prompt to save it to the database. The whole programming engine would be governed by sets of rules read from a customizable config file where everything from speeds/feeds, cutter size, stock allowance, etc would be established.

 

Initially it would take as much time as programming now but as the toolpath database expanded and the "rules" became more detailed toolpath generation would take less and less time.

 

So how about it Santa Claus...next Christmas maybe?

 

steve

[Tony]

Steve

Kind of how a Cache works?

 

As your features are reconized it would

prompt you "Hey this is what you did last time,

here are your operations"

 

Charles I was mislead that CamWorks

Was a True solidworks product

I wonder about All there other

(insert title here)Works?

 

[ 12-20-2003, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: Tony ]

[steve f]

tony...yeh, something like a cache. I think after programming for a two or three years most people know just by looking at a part how they would machine it. The trick is to capture that skill of "knowing how" which is a combination of knowing what works from past experience and memory. I've encountered very few occasions where I can use the same toolpath from a previous part on a current one without changing parameters at all. I think it'd be great if we could capture the rules we use to make our decisions about programming and save them to a database instead of just the operations.

 

It's hard to beat an example to get a point across so here goes:

 

Let's say mastercam encounters a straight walled pocket with a 3D contour floor and two holes in the bottom of the pocket. The "feature manager" would show the features in an order like: 3D Pocket, 2 Holes. The rules in the config file would dictate that: the largest tool possible should rough, the largest tool smaller than corner radii should finish, drilling needs to start in material lying in an xy plane, surface rough pocket should be used for roughing 3D cavities, don't adjust stepover in operations, etc, etc. A saved operation from the library would be pulled in that used the same tool and operation that mastercam had established must be used. It would adjust any parameters in any ops that needed it according to the config file and re-generate all toolpaths at once to be associative with each other for things like leftover stock.

 

In this case the operations generated might be like this: surface rough pocket (rough cavity), drill holes on z plane material left by roughing op (mcam would adjust cut depths parameters in rough op so drill would have minimum material to remove but still start on xy plane), remove leftover (with largest tool smaller than or equal to corner rad), and finish cavity (with largest tool smaller than corner rad).

 

The saved operations would be a starting point for mastercam to adjust from to come up with the best solution according to the rules for machining that the programmer had established.

 

Maybe I'll just have to hold out for ver

X.1

 

steve

[Charles Davis]

I'm interested in real, practical tools that demo well and truly help the guys in the trenches making parts.

 

Right now, you can classify our toolpaths as follows:

1. Wireframe

2. Surface

3. Multiaxis

 

What I propose is adding:

4. Features

 

and, adding a Knowledge Base button to the Tool Parameters menu.

 

Features:

This could be Anbu's stuff (which takes care of holes which, to me, is about 80% of the benefit of Feature recognition).

 

I might add a few things for pockets & slots (say, automatically find pockets with multi-height islands and islands that share walls with the pocket!). But I wouldn't get to esoteric at first because I'm not sure a lot of practical benefit is there.

 

But let's say you are going to pocket (either with Wireframe, Surface, or Feature function, which basically selects the geometry). Now that you have the geometry that defines the pocket, you need some strategy to machine it, right?

 

Click on Knowledge Base. This would analyze the pocket and give you a summary of critical parameters (top, final depth, smallest internal radii, etc).

 

You could see a list of all pocket functions in the library; just a big 'ol dumb long list. You could then narrow the list using certain criteria, like Finish Tool size, etc. That narrows it down to just a few options, which the programmer (with their superior decision-making ability) picks. Maybe modify a few params, and regen.

 

Finally, we must have some way of reprogramming different Revs of the same part without having to rechain all the geometry! Check my last message about keeping track of sketches (that is, when you select something, it should be kept as a group of entities; sort of like put on it's own level, if you will).

 

 

Just a thought, too. I don't see why some of these functions can't be more of a guided process rather than panels of dialog boxes. While I like the "free form" method, it may not be appropriate or necessary. Look at the way PDMWorks operates in Solidworks. You fill out a dialog box, hit Next, fill out some more info, hit next, etc.

 

This may make more sense for some of the feature stuff. I've played with Mastercam Solid Drill a lot -which isn't really bad. The only thing is I'd like the ability to intervene at some point, and say, hey, these 1/4" holes are tapped, these 3/16" holes are drilled, these .75 holes are circ milled... etc.

 

Sorry again about the book. Final point, THE FOUNDATION IN MASTERCAM IS ALREADY THERE!!!! We have Op Libraries, we have Autodrill and Soliddrill. We have associative toolpaths-geometry. That is, we have the infrastructure! We seem very close to being able to put together some really useful and practical tools.

[Müřlıń®]

Looks like MC is keeping up with the jones.....i.e. WorkNC

 

 

Murlin