Stock on facing

[magicniner]

Sadly not harsh, repeated explanations ignored culminating in-

thats correct. i would it expect it to know i already removed .45mm from the facing operation. I have to add a offset of -.45 for the tool path to start at the correct depth but it still pockets -2.45 which is going to make the the pocket deeper than it should be. At the moment the only way i can see is to leave it cutting nothing but it adds machining time. . To me it should know have took that into consideration.

Unless there is a setting im missing.

but if the fusion doesn't calculate it that it just adds more time for me creating paths. thank you for your response as always :)

Fusion 360 should know he's taken .45 off the stock (the top of which he's set as zero) and compensate for him but unfortunately Fusion 360 has the same problem as me, it's Crystal Ball is in for repair! :D

[Neale]

Sadly not harsh, repeated explanations ignored culminating in-



Fusion 360 should know he's taken .45 off the stock (the top of which he's set as zero) and compensate for him but unfortunately Fusion 360 has the same problem as me, it's Crystal Ball is in for repair! :D

One of the reasons I wondered what was in the LH side of the screen is that F360 works in terms of setups, each of which can contain multiple operations. I believe (but have not checked) that some operations can be instructed to use the "as machined" rather than "raw stock" as the starting point, but only for multiple operations within the same setup group. I further believe (but have not checked) that typically this applies to 3D operations which tend to be rather more complex but not 2D but I'm happy to be told I'm wrong. So here we have someone either using 2D operations or using 3D operations without specifying that this operation should use the "as machined" state as starting point. Combined with the fact that the OP actually and very specifically told F360 to use the stock as starting height (by missing this one parameter in the operation definition) I'm erring on the side of user error rather than stupid software.

Actually, I'm sympathetic to the OP because it took me quite a while to figure out what a lot of the CAM settings were for (and I still don't understand all of them, but usually enough to make it do what I want) and missing the significance of this one is understandable. Mild "tut, tut" rather than making him stand in the corner with his back to the class

[magicniner]

Mild "tut, tut" rather than making him stand in the corner with his back to the class

I have strong doubts that someone not bothered to read the reference for one of the tool paths he's using has the slightest clue about any of that, he should read around the subject some ;-)

And yes, RTFM and re-engage, I ate a big slice of Humble Pie over at the BobCad forum early in my inexperience and was generously helped, now I help out others where I can.

But repeatedly telling others what the software should do without having read the documentation isn't just unproductive, it's lazy, and it's rude! :D

[m_c]

It's probably worth mentioning, 2D and some 3D operations rely solely on user entered heights, and it's up to the user to decide what has/hasn't already been machined, and set heights accordingly.

Some 3D operations give the option of REST machining, whereby Fusion will base the toolpath of remaining material, not the original stock, and will handle heights automatically within the tolerances set.

It all depends on what you're trying to achieve. Basic 2D is better for some stuff, 3D is essential for some stuff, some stuff 3D makes life a bit easier/better (I.e. adaptive and trochoidal), and some stuff 3D just overly complicates things for no/marginal gain.