Toolpath Generation

I am having a problem with a particular feature. Attached is a file for a hydraulic cylinder end cap which has a boss on it. The feature that is labeled 70mm boss has a rough pocket that I used adaptive roughing on. Then I go back with a finishing end mill to finish the face using an advanced pocket without adaptive roughing and it looks fine in simulation but when I backplot it is not covering the whole face. I have attached the .bbcd file, .txt file, and (3) MP4 files. One is the simulation, one is the backplot and one is just a screenshot of the toolpath which is blue that I generated from the code in Version 20. I'm using Version 27 Build 1547 posting to a Haas VF2. Thanks in advance for any and all help.

Stephen

Are you using cutter comp? When you do the back plot with predator the Comp setting may not be picked up.... Just so we are clear the stock left on on the wall of the boss shown in the back plot simulation is what you're having an issue with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aldepoalo

Are you using cutter comp? When you do the back plot with predator the Comp setting may not be picked up.... Just so we are clear the stock left on on the wall of the boss shown in the back plot simulation is what you're having an issue with?

---

I am using cc due to the tight tolerance on the diameter of the boss and predator doesn't pick that up and that is OK. The issue is the face from the rectangle on layer named profile to the Diameter on layer named 70mm boss. One of the attachments is a screenshot of the toolpath that V27 generated that I opened in V20 and created the toolpath from the code V27 generated. As you can see in this screenshot the code isn't coverind the entire face. This is a problem I have encountered before and if I change the settings to do adaptive it is fine. I just would like the toolmarks on the face to be a more symmetrical pattern. I am just recently upgraded from V20 to V 27

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aldepoalo

Are you using cutter comp? When you do the back plot with predator the Comp setting may not be picked up.... Just so we are clear the stock left on on the wall of the boss shown in the back plot simulation is what you're having an issue with?

---

I am using cc due to the tight tolerance on the diameter of the boss and predator doesn't pick that up and that is OK. The issue is the face from the rectangle on layer named profile to the diameter on layer named 70mm boss. One of the attachments is a screenshot of the toolpath that V27 generated that I opened in V20 and created the toolpath from the code V27 generated. As you can see in this screenshot the code isn't covering the entire face. This is a problem I have encountered before and if I change the settings to do adaptive it is fine. I just would like the toolmarks on the face to be a more symmetrical pattern. I just recently upgraded from V20 to V27 and am working on the learning curve. Thanks for your help.

If you don't mind my asking, why are you bouncing between versions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben S

If you don't mind my asking, why are you bouncing between versions?

---

I only used V20 to isolate and generate the toolpaths from the code written by V27. Something I am unsure is even possible in V27.

If you were to supply a solid model of what you are making,I will attempt to show you a way of doing this.

Otherwise I am lost,sorry

To avoid confusion I have redone my original files with a solid model and have taken out the cutter comp moves and everything else that doesn't pertain to my problem. I also left more stock on the face with the roughing tool so it is easier to see what is being left by the finishing tool. Thanks for the help.

OK,,if you are on support,now would be a great time to call.
Preditor can take a little time to setup,,and I have not done it in years.
I know some here probably can help you,,but I would call support,it would be much easier,,,unless you have a Haas,which I am led to believe you do not.

Oh,it works for me perfect,with a Haas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqcc...ature=youtu.be

[QUOTE=jrmach;1760694]OK,,if you are on support,now would be a great time to call.
Preditor can take a little time to setup,,and I have not done it in years.
I know some here probably can help you,,but I would call support,it would be much easier,,,unless you have a Haas,which I am led to believe you do not.

Oh,it works for me perfect,with a Haas

Jr,
Unfortunately I do not have support. Penny wise pound foolish. I did run a sample part this morning and am attaching pictures of the result. I was under the impression that predator was only simulating the result of the code which is written. Will fixing my issues within predator fix my problem at the machine? Or is this a PP problem. And yes I am running Haas VF2.

Upload a copy of your PP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrmach

Upload a copy of your PP

---

I really do appreciate your help. No doubt your time is similar to mine, in short supply.

OK,
first off I only have V28 with a license and 27 is Demo only,no code or backplot.
When I first looked at your file,in 28,I just put in my PP and posted.That is the video I uploaded.
I took an in depth look at your file and this is where it becomes long winded.
I re-computed and then posted and the ugly came out.Same as you.Don't know why it did not do it at first,but it definitely shows problems when I re-compute.
There are multiple problems with your file.
The biggest one is you cannot use 2D advanced rough/adaptive with the pocket open(dashed lines) 360 degrees.There has to be some solid line around some of the pocket or crop circles and other bad stuff appears.I believe it is the way the algorithm works.
So if I understand correctly your goal is to rapidly remove material,,but then you want a good looking tool marks for finish.
My suggestion is use a profile side roughing,and then your advanced rough to follow for the desired look.Or just 2 advanced roughs.

Some other notes,,watch your tool numbers and tool sizes carefully.You have the same tool number with two different diameters.

I also like to leave my clearance plane at 1inch,,that way when it rapids to the clearance plane you can see if all is ok for a split second.And for the plunge feed I usually set to 10,that gives the coolant a split second to actually start flowing.
If it is like a stepped hole this does not apply.This is all assuming your Haas works like mine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joxbCZBCW2s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrmach

OK,
first off I only have V28 with a license and 27 is Demo only,no code or backplot.
When I first looked at your file,in 28,I just put in my PP and posted.That is the video I uploaded.
I took an in depth look at your file and this is where it becomes long winded.
I re-computed and then posted and the ugly came out.Same as you.Don't know why it did not do it at first,but it definitely shows problems when I re-compute.
There are multiple problems with your file.
The biggest one is you cannot use 2D advanced rough/adaptive with the pocket open(dashed lines) 360 degrees.There has to be some solid line around some of the pocket or crop circles and other bad stuff appears.I believe it is the way the algorithm works.
So if I understand correctly your goal is to rapidly remove material,,but then you want a good looking tool marks for finish.
My suggestion is use a profile side roughing,and then your advanced rough to follow for the desired look.Or just 2 advanced roughs.

Some other notes,,watch your tool numbers and tool sizes carefully.You have the same tool number with two different diameters.

I also like to leave my clearance plane at 1inch,,that way when it rapids to the clearance plane you can see if all is ok for a split second.And for the plunge feed I usually set to 10,that gives the coolant a split second to actually start flowing.
If it is like a stepped hole this does not apply.This is all assuming your Haas works like mine.

---

Jr,
After reading your reply yesterday and realizing that it was not a programming mistake on my part, I remembered that The Engine Guy had posted a PP for Haas on another thread. So I downloaded it and re-computed using his PP and it posted as it should. The only relevant difference that I can see in his PP and mine is I had modified mine to post using "R" instead of "I and J" on G03 and G02. Again I want to thank you for your help.
I do have another favor to ask. I had run into a similar issue awhile back and being in a rush just ended up using my older version to get the job done. When I read your reply I remembered it. It is a similar problem only it is an internal pocket. I drew a simple example up this morning and when I try to generate the toolpath It acts like it is thinking about it but doesn't produce any toolpath. I assume that this isn't a PP problem since it never gets to that point. Could you see if your V27 demo will produce a toolpath. Thanks.

Stephen

No it does not
BUT
really,me do not care
you
may want to send it in as a bug report

I try to use the best tool path I own for the job at hand,,,and once again I find your not.
That is my opinion,so your mileage may vary.
That is a simple profile side rough tool path to me.There are other choices too,but sorry adaptive is not one of them.

It is another one of those cases,I don't know if it is a bug or not using the software as the developers intended.Not a bug to me because knowing all the tool paths available,it is not the best choice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrmach

No it does not
BUT
really,me do not care
you
may want to send it in as a bug report

I try to use the best tool path I own for the job at hand,,,and once again I find your not.
That is my opinion,so your mileage may vary.
That is a simple profile side rough tool path to me.There are other choices too,but sorry adaptive is not one of them.

It is another one of those cases,I don't know if it is a bug or not using the software as the developers intended.Not a bug to me because knowing all the tool paths available,it is not the best choice

---

As I stated earlier I am working through the learning curve. I was confused by the diagram that went with the toolpath and mistakenly thought that it was to work outside in not to use both ways. Pardon my short sightedness. Thanks for solving these issues for me. If you ever go through the bluegrass state, I'll buy your dinner.
Stephen:wave:

No Problem,,,BoB has a whole slew of tool paths now.Learning how they each work and getting the most out of each one is key.Just takes some dedication and investment of time.
Use to be years ago you only had one or two choices of how to skin a cat,,Now we got lots of choices of how to get the job done.That's a good thing once you learn them,,,I am still trying to catch up on all the in outs of the latest 2 versions.