Is there a chamfer toolpath for 5-axis that would behave similar to swarf cutting?

I was assigning toolholders to my tools in the operation manager and I had to assign the holder in every operation, regardless if it used the same tool or not. For tool 4 I had to assign the holder several times. Is there a way to assign holders once so it sticks with the tool? I use this so I get a more accurate verify. It really helps with 5-axis parts where things get tight.

I figured I could do it that way but it is a cosmetic part so the transitions need to be perfect. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. I am doing it 5 axis because that is all I have. I will lock the A axis though.

I need to machine a part very similar to this and I'm not sure what the best approach is. I will be machining it with a 5-axis machine i na 5C collet but I need the surfaces to be perfect with no seams etc... I could swarf around the islands but I'm not sure what the best method would be to blend that with the rest of the surfaces. Any insight will be appreciated.

Remember folks, Gary's prices are in Aussie dollars, not US dollars. What is $140k Aussie dollars in US dollars?

quote: From a time saving standpoint, the best tooling investment for my customer could arguably be a faster spindle. Since the finisher will be sticking out 4.5" I have been told to back off the rpms to reduce chatter. Any thoughts on this? I will be finishing with a 1/2" ball mill. Would you finish to 2" with a short ball mill, then go back with a longer ball mill at lower rpms? I plan to get the roughing really close to keep the finishing chip load to a minimum.

I will be doing a fair number of these and I would like to minimize the cycle times but it isn't critical. I don't believe the roughing will take that long but I don't have that much experience with larger parts. I expect the finishing to take a fair amount of time and I do plan to load up both machines and let them run lights out until finished. Did you get my earlier email Colin?

I will be doing some mold machining in the near future and I need some tool recommendations. These are simple gate molds but they are fairly large compared to what I am used to. These are gate molds with drafted pockets dropping down 4.5" from the parting line and I will be removing 500 cubic inches of material. I can finish these with a 5/8" ball mill without the need to rest mill. I had planned on roughing to 2" with a 1/2" MA Ford 135 series will and then go with longer tools for the deeper cuts. My mill is a Haas VM3 (12k spindle) and I have Volumill as well. I also plan on using shrink fit holders. I have had IMCO tools recommended but I don't have any experience with them. I would like some insight on the best performing tools for roughing and finishing in this application. Any help would be appreciated. These are aluminum molds. Thanks, Bob

I use dynamic facing on a regular basis because it can remove a huge amount of material quickly without overloading the tool (much like dynamic milling). If I am removing .050" from a work piece it will mill it with a face mill. If I am removing 1" I will use dynamic facing in one pass (with an end mill) to .01" then use a face mill. The scallops are a real PITA and I hope they resolve that soon.

I use it and I love it. It makes roughing a snap even for 2.5 axis parts. If there is a part with several pockets, steps, and radii, I can have the entire part roughed in one toolpath and all I have to do is select the surface geometry and tool parameters. My only complaint is the number of retracts. If they could get it to stay down like dynamic milling it would be unbeatable. One thing I have trouble with is copying a Volumill toolpath to create a rest-roughing toolpath. For some reason they are connected so all Volumill toolpaths need to be generated from scratch. Customer service is EXCELLENT!

I have seen the recent posts regarding bugs in MU3 and I was wondering what the motivation is to 'upgrade'. Are there any major issues fixed? X4 MU2 has been working fairly well and the last time I could really say that was X2 MU2. What has improved with MU3? Thanks, Bob

I had the same thing happen with a typical I do every day. Basic program using one work offset and whammy, a G55 showed up in there. Now I take nothing for granted and I run EVERYTHING through dry run in the machine before starting. If it was a systematic thing Mastercam does I would have seen it hundreds of times given how I program. It happened once in four years of programming and I hadn't done anything out of the ordinary. I also told Chris Rizzo about it and he ran accross the same issue a few days later. My experience with this was in X3.

Everything is running in inverse feeds and the brakes are off. I think Greg's ansrwe is the solution. It made a huge difference.

I changed the rapid moves to feed moves and it is much better. In the rapid mode the X, Y, and Z axis were reaching the rapid position much faster than the A and B axis so they were stopping abruptly to wait. In the feed mode they reach their destination simultaneously.

I am running a 5-axis part and it is pretty choppy during the rapids. This is on a Haas VM3 with a trunnion and the A axis is pretty much set. I am spiraling down the part with the B axis rotating. I have the linking clearance strategy set to cylindrical and the max angle increment is set to 5 degrees. Ideally the tool would retract and the B-axis would simply rapid to the next position. Are there settings or values I could try to smooth this out and speed it up? Thanks, Bob

I am running Windows 7. Where do I look for the imaging utility and what is it called?

Chris, Did you ever solve the lag issue? My computer benchmarked at 2:21 and I expected a little faster. This is after transferring everything over to the new system. I never did run the test before transferring my files.

2:21 Dell Precision 6400 laptop Intel 2.1Ghz quad core 4 Gb ram Nvidia FX 3700M graphics SS hard drive Windows 7, 32 bit

quote: While a m/thread op is busy doing its thing, you can - for example - regen a "standard" operation (the type which stops you using Mastercam) and it can fully regen while the multithreaded one is still calculating in the background. Good point, I hadn't thought of that. I was looking at it from a purely benchmark point of view.

quote: Dont misunderstand my gripes...the intent is to promt somebody at MC QC to strive to get it right the first time...pretty much the same standard I hold myself to...in the "real world". +1

you can also open your post and search for "stagetool" and there should be a switch set at either 1 or 0

quote: For every one guy screaming there are 20 that aren't. I'd be willing to bet that most of the guys screaming are the ones that paid for Mastercam on their own dime. If I used Mastercam as an employee at a large machine shop and everything was paid for by the boss man, you wouldn't hear any screaming from me.

quote: Despite the fact that so many users dislike this layout, I just don't get it Seems to me that CNC is more focused on its competition than the needs of its existing customers.

quote: and anybody doing surfacng is seeing great time savings because of multithreading. From what I understand multithreading only saves time if regenerating several multithreaded toolpaths at a time (one processor per toolpath). If you edit one multithreaded toolpath and regenerate there is no advantage. Do most programmers create several of these toolpaths and then regenerate them all at once? I typically do them one at a time and they calculate right away. I don't use the HST very often anyways. The roughing has been taken over by Volumill and I will finish up with a HST scallop or similar.

quote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's only been that way since May 2009 ?? You are probably right but I thought these came with X3. At any rate, I have been using them since they first came out, which feels like well over a year and I haven't begun to like them :-)