Jay Kramer @ Precision Programming

2018 Public Beta open now

59 posts in this topic

When you use the chain method don't use chain as your methods, but use partial. Then keep picking your chain like normal, but when you get to the start point you go around again. You can do it a couple different ways, but I find this the easiest way to teach people to do it.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you use the chain method don't use chain as your methods, but use partial. Then keep picking your chain like normal, but when you get to the start point you go around again. You can do it a couple different ways, but I find this the easiest way to teach people to do it.

 

Ron, that is exactly what I have done. Especially with engraving, to avoid excessive hop ups. Using a high federate, I sometimes re-trace the contour(s). Way quicker that way :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By using the enter on first depth cut only, it allows you to add or subtract spring passes on the fly, simply by adding finish passes with a zero step over.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't downloaded 2018 so I can't see what you are seeing, but what does this feature do that you couldn't do with multi passes in the regular contour toolpath? I set finish number to 2 and leave the spacing set to 0 to do spring passes now, and it works fine. If the feature is critical I often have to create a separate tool path anyways as I probe in between the two to set the wear comp.

 

attachicon.gifspringpass.JPG

 

In your example if your rough pass was set to .100 then your finish pass is taking .100. I have had instances where the rough tool pass creates chatter and if you have your finish set to 0 it will not remove the chatter. You can now leave .005 for your finish pass then spring pass it with out creating another op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Just like in pocketing finish pass. You can now select a button for a spring pass. I have just always called it a free pass.

Spring pass, free pass and Ghost pass. I have heard a lot of different terms. In other words another finish pass to reduce tool pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No when. You cannot knock the knees out of anything and expect it to stand. The legacy toolpaths are still good toolpaths and still do better in a lot of situations. Surface Rough Pocket well that is a different conversation since I have not used in years. That use to be my go to toolpath. I will still use surface finishing contour when I want to mimic the HST toolpaths for semi finishing bottom to top. Flowline and Parallel along with Scallop. We need the holder and holder avoidance added to the legacy toolpaths along with the newer interface.

Ron,

I work for a company that makes exhaust systems for Polaris.  We build all of our own Stamp tooling. We mainly use high feed tools to rough our punches and dies. Surface rough pocket is our go to toolpath. The die that I am working on today I roughed it with surface rough pocket the part took 18 minutes. I did the same part with optirough and the part took 24 minutes same tool same step over same step down.  We have been trying to use the new toolpaths but cant seem to make them run as fast as the legacy toolpaths. I would like to hear your thoughts on bigger parts that are 4.00 to 6.00 inches deep.

 

Howard    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,

. I did the same part with optirough and the part took 24 minutes same tool same step over same step down.  

 

Howard    

 

There's your issue right there....

 

Your step downs should most likely be 100 to 200% of dia and depending on material, assuming something like 4140, 7-10 stepover with a chip thinning calculation applied to push your feedrates..

 

With more info on material and tools used a closer starting situation could be offered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's your issue right there....

 

Your step downs should most likely be 100 to 200% of dia and depending on material, assuming something like 4140, 7-10 stepover with a chip thinning calculation applied to push your feedrates..

 

With more info on material and tools used a closer starting situation could be offered

We are using Sandvik 210 high feed cutters. The die is 4.00 deep the material is A2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,

I work for a company that makes exhaust systems for Polaris.  We build all of our own Stamp tooling. We mainly use high feed tools to rough our punches and dies. Surface rough pocket is our go to toolpath. The die that I am working on today I roughed it with surface rough pocket the part took 18 minutes. I did the same part with optirough and the part took 24 minutes same tool same step over same step down.  We have been trying to use the new toolpaths but cant seem to make them run as fast as the legacy toolpaths. I would like to hear your thoughts on bigger parts that are 4.00 to 6.00 inches deep.

 

Howard    

 

For high feed tools try using Area Rough. it is more for shallow depths of cuts. Optirough is more for large depths of cuts, then stepping up (Tho it can be made to work like Area Rough.)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get this when I try to run MCam 2018. I did try to reinstall, but same problem.

 

You will need to post this on the official beta forums.

Edited by Mick from CNC Software Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,

I work for a company that makes exhaust systems for Polaris.  We build all of our own Stamp tooling. We mainly use high feed tools to rough our punches and dies. Surface rough pocket is our go to toolpath. The die that I am working on today I roughed it with surface rough pocket the part took 18 minutes. I did the same part with optirough and the part took 24 minutes same tool same step over same step down.  We have been trying to use the new toolpaths but cant seem to make them run as fast as the legacy toolpaths. I would like to hear your thoughts on bigger parts that are 4.00 to 6.00 inches deep.

 

Howard    

 

Howard, I answered you other topic and have to agree what I have been seeing has been my results, but on that part I can't say what you are currently doing is a bad way to go about it. A see a strong case of that toolpath being updated to the new interface with your sample file.

 

I stand corrected and I thank you for sharing the file I really appreciate seeing how someone else goes about their work. :unworthy: :unworthy: :unworthy:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4-6 inches deep, you are entering plunging territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL that's what I just said in the other post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I just read your post, son of a betch. It was the next topic I looked at....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you use the chain method don't use chain as your methods, but use partial. Then keep picking your chain like normal, but when you get to the start point you go around again. You can do it a couple different ways, but I find this the easiest way to teach people to do it.

Ya know, I've been using Mastercam since V8 and it never once occurred to me to do this!  Seems like it would be quicker than what I normally do and that is to extend the end of the contour in the Lead in/out settings so my tool runs off the part on my finish pass and don't end up with that dreaded vertical blend line.

:wallbash:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Gunther

For All You Do With your X+ Software I Will Get it going in MC2018 As soon As Possible !

GREAT SET UP SHEET!!!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks Günther!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just noticed something in MC2018

When a file needs saving there is a * at the end of the filename

CimcoEdit and SolidWorks have done this for years and I always missed that feature in Mastercam

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is "X+"

 

Just wondering.

 

are there any videos out there to use X+?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is "X+"

 

Just wondering.

a third party add-on that automates the creation of setup sheets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And other stuff, Rickster, you can find s9me links on the official website... if you speak Deutsche.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us