Because "I'm an engineer"...I've got that one a few times... I chuckle these days. That said, the company where I'm at the engineers actually listen to me, and ask questions about how they can engineer things to be easier to machine.

Was hired by a guy that thought that. Funny thing is I was hired after he gave the job to someone else, he was trying to prove the point, and I was his backup plan. Guess who is still here and which 2 are gone...

That can be done so much easier and simpler from the machine...

You guys have done a much larger variety of jobs than me. That's why this forum is amazing, the amount of experience is staggering.

Ive always wondered if this could be done.

Same, sometimes I need to machine plastic prototypes or weird features on a mold, then I might convert to surface so I can manipulate it. Other than that, I get the models from the engineers and program from there.

I don't convert solids to surfaces anymore. You can fill holes directly on the solid model, no need to convert to surfaces.

Carbide insert drill, TSC and no pecking...

Having a PHD doesn't mean that they have real world experience. They can design anything they want, but if what they design cant be made, are they any good? Not only that, they need to understand production as well, if your groove adds 30 minutes of runtime to the part they're costing the company money. IF I was the CEO they could shove their PHD where the sun don't shine. Problem is most CEOs know jack s**t about manufacturing and the first thing they do is blame the machinist/programmer. I'd be a millionaire if I had a dollar for every time I said "this designer needs to spend a year in the machine shop". I make molds these days(amongst other things) and I get tired of having to program .01 radiuses where a .015 could have done...

Flowline... Or if you want to go old school( I know you said surface toolpath) you can 2D swept it.

You can flow line it, scallop it, even surface contour. But from experience, 2D contour with a taper is the best option. Much better finish, and more control, as you can add tool comp.

You can always save the backplot as geometry and draw the tool yourself

Thank you!

Can you post it for MC 2021? Bean counters didnt think the maintenance was worth it...

That gave me an idea... I actually put the guys at CCCS to work and they fixed it for me. I'm sure they have more time than you Thanks Ron!

I'm having problems with a STEP file that we got from one of suppliers. Its a mold cavity that we need to modify. Its just a sheet body. I tried to do Surface From Solid, then Solid From Surfaces but its not helping. I even tried on SW, still no dice. Any ideas? Thank you!

I did it right from the machine control, I had to add some lines of code, but it was very easy. Just saw what the machine wanted to do, and from there I figured out what it needed from me. Thanks for this though. And thanks to everyone that offered help

Thats exactly what Im making. Havent had a chance to work on the project since the post. Ill update you guys when I go back to it. Thanks for all the help so far.

I only use tellurium copper for our electrodes, I have used graphite in the past though, and it does wear a bit more. But if you lose the sharp corners, you're leaving material behind, you're not taking any extra out. On top of that you can always use a rougher and a finisher. And if it doesn't work for you, then it doesn't, you don't have to use our suggestions, do what works best for you.

I mat have to cut some molded parts on a mill for a second opp. Its a round part with a bore. Bosses want to have each part indicated, I know how to do that. Problem I'm seeing is that the Indicate Bore routine on the Haas doesn't ask for a depth, you have to take it to the depth and then run the program. How would I go about doing that? Write the coordinates BEFORE the probe program ?

Or if you have sharp edges, or really small radiuses in hard to reach areas. Ive had people look at me like when I suggest a flat EM.

Another way to do it is use flowline with a -.005 stock to leave, and flat endmill. Its a bit more work, as you have to create surfaces and extend them. Something that I see a lot is programmers forgetting that flat endmills can also be used for surfacing, and many times its the better option. For roughing surfaces I use flat endmills exclusively. electrode test (2).mcam Check this electrode out. It was machine on Haas Mini Mill, no high speed spindle, nothing fancy. V9_electrode.mcam

Ah! Model Prep... I always forget!

You don't have to worry about it, just cut it the way you did, minus the surfacing in the walls. The problem with scaling the model is the are features that you might want to scale the opposite way. If you have a cube and you scale it you're ok, but if that cube has a pocket in it, and that feature needs to be burned as well, by scaling it your blowing your dimensions. So you have to make the outside smaller and the inside bigger. I usually don't have to time to model it that way, so I just scale it down and I use stock to leave on the pocket, to make it bigger. Just takes a bit to wrap your head around it, once you've done a few you're going to get it.

I'm a mold maker as well, and I often machine electrodes, and run the EDM. And yes, it can get tricky sometimes. Like Ron said, no need to surface vertical walls. Ill usually scale the model to give me the outside dimensions that I need, and for the inside of the electrode I use stock to leave with a negative value, and sometimes I do have to lie about the size of the tool. Its not that difficult once you wrap your head around it