. .

Thread: Stock on facing

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Quote Originally Posted by Neale View Post
    First of all, You haven't given us quite as much information as I would like - a screenshot showing the CAM model with the various heights shown would help, along with a copy of the setup/operations list on the LH side of the screen. So what I say here is guessing at what these might show but this is based on my own use of F360 (which I use a lot for design and CAM).

    Based on what I think you are doing, two quick answers. First of all, F360 is doing exactly what you told it to. No more and no less. Secondly, it will cut your pocket to exactly the correct depth as you have it; the simulation shows the pocket depth being 2.45mm deep. That's not an error - in the operation tab, you told it to work with top height equal to stock top - and the pocket is 2.45mm deep from stock top. Best way to fix this is just to change "top height" to reference model top, not stock top. That should work OK.

    What I am not sure about because I can't see exactly how you have set up your operations is whether it will start cutting from stock top (so cutting air for 0.45mm) or from model top. I would create one setup and then under that create two (or more - not sure what else you are doing) operations. The first is to face the stock and second is to cut the pocket. I've just thrown a quick F360 model together and tried the CAM operations. I used facing and pocket under 2D (you can use 3D pocket clearing but this just complicates things when you are really cutting a 2.5D feature) and running the simulation it seems to do exactly what you want - the pocket cut starts at the top of the model, not the stock.

    I would disagree with Nick - you might only be doing 2.5D operations (that is, essentially 2D but with a single defined depth of cut) but I don't see any issue in putting the 3D model together. It takes a minute or two to do, gives you all the F360 advantages (although this depends on what you are comparing it with) such as being able to go back to the drawing and change a dimension and have everything dependent on that automatically change or be marked to be recalculated. Nick is much more experienced than I am, as I always assume that I am going to make mistakes and F360 gives the best chance to go back and make changes without redrawing. In addition, of course, this might be just one component of a more complex 3D design in which case designing in F360 and then applying CAM to individual components for CNC manufacture is a sensible way to go. Practising on individual components makes this a good training exercise anyway.

    My model took only a few minutes to generate; it can be edited trivially, can be rotated on screen for visualisation, etc. I, personally, like working with a relatively simple-to-use 3D tool like F360, but there's plenty of scope for other views and a lot depends on what you are used to. I've been at a model engineering exhibition today, talking to quite a few professional engineers from various backgrounds from aerospace to watch-making, and everyone has their own favourites. Largely determined by what their employer has bought and standardised on, but not many people buy their own Catia or Solidworks!
    Hi Neale

    Thank you for your reply.

    Sorry i am still new to fusion and current use aspire which i know functions totally different.

    You are correct in staying the the pocket operation does hover over the part if it has already been faced. I have tried to set the tool path to the top of the model which does work on the simulation. The thing that is confusing for me is that on the simulation the pocket z height still cuts to -2.45mm. (maybe this is correct)

    I did look at how to do the simple outlines function as nick asked but couldn't see how to set the cut depths but again that is probably me still not sure how the software works. With the little time i have. I spent watching online videos showing how to use fusion but i haven't yet found one where the stock is set to a fixed size because the material i will be using has these fixed dimensions.

    One thing i did notice is if i set the facing operation the last thing i did and selected the one face that would be left after the previous tool paths then there are no issues. Perhaps this is the way the software is designed and the facing is meant to be the last thing you do?. Again still learning how to use the software.

    heres a copy of my fusion file if you want to have a look.

    http://a360.co/2mUUlN4

  2. #2
    It sounds as if you have your Part Zero set as the top of the stock and the program is detecting the depth for the pocket as the difference between Part Zero and the bottom of the pocket on your solid model, are you choosing the top of your pocket as the top of your solid model without adjusting the pocket depth manually?
    You think that's too expensive? You're not a Model Engineer are you? :D

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by magicniner View Post
    It sounds as if you have your Part Zero set as the top of the stock and the program is detecting the depth for the pocket as the difference between Part Zero and the bottom of the pocket on your solid model, are you choosing the top of your pocket as the top of your solid model without adjusting the pocket depth manually?
    That would make sense.

    I'll see if I can set a new z position at the top of the part rather than the stock.

    After the facing operation the z psoisition would no longer be at the stocks surface but that of the part.


    Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    I think i have resolved this now.

    the issue has been my lack of understanding the "heights" within the tool paths.

    thank you to everyone who has had any input on this.

  5. #5
    That's great. I had a feeling the problem was lack of understanding of a bunch of parameters around heights. They make sense, but it does take a while to get to grips with what they really mean. Now you can move on to interpreting all the rest of the CAM parameters and settings - good luck with that! You do eventually reach the point where you know the ones that are important and the ones where you can happily leave the defaults.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. roundbar stock
    By dfox1787 in forum Vectric
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-01-2018, 02:51 PM
  2. where to buy stock aluminium
    By dfox1787 in forum Marketplace Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 27-12-2017, 11:27 PM
  3. Metal Stock Purchasing UK
    By paul_m in forum Metalwork Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25-05-2015, 04:42 PM
  4. RFQ: RFQ: Keyslot milling in alu round stock.
    By Saracen in forum Projects, Jobs & Requests
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-09-2013, 09:42 AM
  5. Method for holding Stock
    By Chaz in forum Machine Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24-06-2013, 11:41 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •