Stock on facing

[magicniner]

Your time creating paths would be normal if you follow industry conventions.

Top of Part should be the top of your part, your stock should be defined correctly within the software and your CAM can then see what is required for a facing cut on the top of the part, without you defining the depth of material to be removed, because it knows the depth of stock above the part. You just tell it the depth of cut you want to use with your cutter and the CAM will work out if it needs one or more passes.

[dfox1787]

Your time creating paths would be normal if you follow industry conventions.

Top of Part should be the top of your part, your stock should be defined correctly within the software and your CAM can then see what is required for a facing cut on the top of the part, without you defining the depth of material to be removed, because it knows the depth of stock above the part. You just tell it the depth of cut you want to use with your cutter and the CAM will work out if it needs one or more passes.

I should be able to tell the tool path to start the at 6mm and pocket -2mm. At the moment no matter what i change it always pockets -2.45mm.

here is the part if you want to take a look http://a360.co/2mUUlN4

[magicniner]

It's a 2.5D part and you've modelled it in 3D and are using the 3D model in CAM?
There's your extra work! :D

To generate the paths you need in CAM for true 3D parts you will at some point need additional geometry as well as your 3D part, this geometry can be as simple as a perimeter to limit a cutting path to exactly the area you want or as complex as extending a compound curved surface beyond the edge of your model to allow a smooth finishing tool path to transition off and back onto the part for an axis feed rather than stopping exactly at the edge and creating machining artifacts.

Similarly for 2.5D parts you rarely need much if any part modelling and can control your tool paths with very simple, easily constructed geometry, this is why there are still people out there who think CAD/CAM for a single simple part is slower than manual machining, most often it's not ;-)

Just draw all your geometry at Z zero and generate paths to your required depths for
1. Facing cut
2. Rectangular Pocket
3. Through Hole

The geometry for your facing cut will be larger than the part perimeter by just more than your cutter diameter
The geometry for your rectangular pocket will be larger in two directions by just more than 1/2 your cutter diameter
The geometry for your round pocket will be unchanged.

In my CAD/CAM that takes me around 8 minutes to draw and tool-path

Modelling simple 2.5D parts in 3D is not required unless -
You need the part for a complex 3D assembly in CAD,
You can't visualise the part without pretty pictures,
The customer wants pretty pictures,

[dfox1787]

It's a 2.5D part and you've modelled it in 3D and are using the 3D model in CAM?
There's your extra work! :D

To generate the paths you need in CAM for true 3D parts you will at some point need additional geometry as well as your 3D part, this geometry can be as simple as a perimeter to limit a cutting path to exactly the area you want or as complex as extending a compound curved surface beyond the edge of your model to allow a smooth finishing tool path to transition off and back onto the part for an axis feed rather than stopping exactly at the edge and creating machining artifacts.

Similarly for 2.5D parts you rarely need much if any part modelling and can control your tool paths with very simple, easily constructed geometry, this is why there are still people out there who think CAD/CAM for a single simple part is slower than manual machining, most often it's not ;-)

Just draw all your geometry at Z zero and generate paths to your required depths for
1. Facing cut
2. Rectangular Pocket
3. Through Hole

The geometry for your facing cut will be larger than the part perimeter by just more than your cutter diameter
The geometry for your rectangular pocket will be larger in two directions by just more than 1/2 your cutter diameter
The geometry for your round pocket will be unchanged.

In my CAD/CAM that takes me around 8 minutes to draw and tool-path

Modelling simple 2.5D parts in 3D is not required unless -
You need the part for a complex 3D assembly in CAD,
You can't visualise the part without pretty pictures,
The customer wants pretty pictures,

are you saying to make a 2d model and create tool paths from that? i cant see how it can know the depths i need to face and pocket from a 2d model. I thought i could make my own model within the model and the machine it out in cam.

[magicniner]

are you saying to make a 2d model and create tool paths from that? i cant see how it can know the depths i need to face and pocket from a 2d model. I thought i could make my own model within the model and the machine it out in cam.

No, you don't need any models at all!
I'm saying that all you need is two rectangles and one circle drawn at Z = zero and use them to control tool paths.

i cant see how it can know the depths i need to face and pocket from a 2d model.

Autocad state that it is possible to 2d pocket from chained contours, that's lines to you and me, not solids, not 2d faces but lines.
One of the options for Bottom Height is Stock top: incremental offset from the Stock Top. so you set your depth as an offset from Z Zero, which is also top of stock, making things easy for yourself rather than trying to make it complicated then trying to make that work!

Here's a link to a relevant page on TFM, give it a read -
http://help.autodesk.com/view/fusion...D-B28D938D146E

[dfox1787]

are you saying to make a 2d model and create tool paths from that? i cant see how it can know the depths i need to face and pocket from a 2d model. I thought i could make my own model within the model and the machine it out in cam.

sorry i dont understand why it cant be done the way im doing it and why its complicated. i've seen plenty of videos of people creating a model on fusion 360 and then using the cam to machine it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-GBpUZ3piY&t=134s)

I know i can do the same operating in aspire where i can surface the stock first and then set the start cut depth. so if i remove .45mm from the stock i can start the cut -45mm but to me fusion seems to make the same operation more complex or not very easy to understand.

aspire is simple:



Fusion does appear to have better tooling operations so i am keen to understand it more and use it for future projects. i am still new to it but something as simple as removing some materiel and then start the cut from the depth i want seems impossible at the moment.

[magicniner]

Your work flow is illogical and doesn't work with the software you want to use.
You refuse to use a work flow which does work with the software you want to use.
You discount a quicker workflow which would achieve your requirements.
Good luck with that, you really crack me up :D
Roger & Out!

[Clive S]

Fusion does appear to have better tooling operations so i am keen to understand it more and use it for future projects. i am still new to it but something as simple as removing some materiel and then start the cut from the depth i want seems impossible at the moment.

This is one of the best places to learn Fusion360 https://www.youtube.com/user/cadcamstuff/playlists

[magicniner]

This is one of the best places to learn Fusion360 https://www.youtube.com/user/cadcamstuff/playlists

Got a link for people that don't like how it works, haven't read the manual or tutorials and expect it to be changed to suit them? :D

[m_c]

Nick, in Fusion360, you can create a model, then use 2D toolpaths on that model by picking chains.

The only real benefit over using just a 2D drawing, is it allows you to see how the toolpaths are in relation to the model, which is handy for highlighting any issues (usually operator caused!). Regardless of 2D/3D toolpaths, you still have to ensure heights are correct for each toolpath, and you've set the part zero at the correct place.

Industry standard is you set Z zero on the surface and work downwards, but in Fusion you can set part Z zero wherever you want and adjust heights accordingly. If you're unsure about the heights, you should be able to go to a side view, and when altering any of the depths, they should be shown on the model.
Not all the settings may make sense if you're unfamiliar with the settings though, as there are options to alter where the heights are relative to.