[jrmach]

So now there is a glitch ?

[mmoe]

I've already posted two files for people to play with, one of them with the toolpaths I would use. Here's one with a comparison between using "All" and "Inner Most Only" that I think clearly illustrates how the OP and myself ended up with lower initial plunges.

https://files.secureserver.net/0ssqqVC355tmwq

I've always used "Inner Most Only", so I just do so by habit, but then I only use Z-Level Roughing on complete pockets, and more commonly use Advanced Roughing for any roughing.

[mmoe]

I only call it that because it would probably be better if it used the taller adjacent surface to determine how deep to start the first pass in the step down rather than the lowest. It can be completely avoided by using boundaries and selecting "ALL" instead of "Inner Most Only", so it isn't a significant issue when you know about it I suppose.

[Force]

Sorry no bccd files. Must learn how to do that.

Also sorry again but the sprus are programmed by the machine operator in MDI mode. These are normally done before he machines the cavity which is the only (3D) prog I am involved with. As stated previously, similar to a hemisphere in a block.

Also in the settings I have never used Boundary, purely import the block either IGES or Solidworks file and select the cavity surfaces only (drag box over the cavity) and Inner Most only always selected.

[jrmach]

You posted one with no tool paths and one with advanced rough.
I thought this was about Z Level Rough?
I got lost somewhere.

[Force]

[BurrMan]

What it comes down to is you have to understand that z level rough is a "material removal" toolpath strategy and not a "surface cutting" strategy. It's a common mistake.

What that means is the toolpath is cutting the "stock" and not the surfaces. You cant do "finish cutting" with it without very specific models and steps and most definitely not any curved surfaces. If you take the time to grasp that, then all the options you are selecting can become very apparent.

I dont really need a model to play with, and without any setups to address there's not much discussion that can happen on it....

Here's a video to give you some insight on it....

z_level rough constrained - YouTube

[BurrMan]

Further to this topic I have just realised something as I use set Features first created in V23 then saved/converted for use in V25

With the transition of V23 to V25 .

Hey force,
Another thing to take note of, and will have various things behave a little different is the new system will take advantage of the "stock defined" in many more circumstances, where the old system had no effect....

Just a note.

And as a side note, I would re-create all my features. Even many of the old ones have differences... You'ds just be doing yourself a favour.

[Force]

Thanks Burr for both posts, after 100+ moulds using Z level rough to remove 95% of the material it's still a learning curve. I do not use it for finishing but leave that to Planar features.

Maybe I did re-create the Features but omitted to include that setting.....my 60 year brain is on the slow down. Must check though next week.

thanks

[bobcad guy]

Further to this topic I have just realised something as I use set Features first created in V23 then saved/converted for use in V25

With the transition of V23 to V25 the Features created in V23 would not work with V25 so I had to load them and save them without changing anything. My V23 Features all had the Top of Job (-Z) figure set to match the cutter Depth of Cut settings. So what happened in the change over i.e. was that figure lost when doing so. I must verify this when back at work.

I know that when I went from build 895, to 996, any part I had drawn in 895, and tried to post in 996, had somehow thought there was extra stock on the part, and it was mostly noticeable in canned cycles like pocketing, or advanced rough, it would start the z axis cutting above the part by some additional amount, I think if I remember, it was twice the amount you defined as extra stock in the stock wizard. meaning if you told it you an extra .100 on top, it would think you had .200. I didn't do much posting of older jobs, but on the couple I did, I had to just copy the old file into a new file, then save all the toolpaths, and move them over, and reselect the geometry and it was fixed. sean daughrety help me with that. don't know if that might be a factor here.

[Force]

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/bobcad...sible_v25.html

I think I may have just forgotten to add Top of Job....

[jrmach]

Hey Force,
I went from 23 to 25 also,,no 24.What Burr said "Just a note.

And as a side note, I would re-create all my features. Even many of the old ones have differences... You'ds just be doing yourself a favour."

That is what I do.Too many things have changed.Some big,some small,and some things are no longer supported.HSP is no longer with us(ughhhhhhhhhhh)probably60 percent of my 23 files have that,so I have no choice on those.It goes pretty quick for average size files.

[SBC Cycle]

I would also suggest that you recreate features from previous versions.

[aldepoalo]

I would have to agree, there must be an issue with the Z level rough from V23 running in V25....

I opened your file and copied your settings using a new Z level rough created in V25. Everything looks better...

Attachment 197754

[aldepoalo]

If you are a pro users I would recommend trying the adv rough, as it's tool path is "better" ... More options to learn, but I think you will like them.

[Aaron5Bend]

I opened your file and copied your settings using a new Z level rough created in V25. Everything looks better...