[TedHamilton]

I'm routing MDF raised panel doors. I've been stumped, so I figured I'd try here.

I'm using 4 tools -- a .500" compression bit to clear the central channel, a wide V to create the inner raised panel, and an ogee to create the outer channel profile, cleaning up the corners on the outer with a .125" downshear.

My methodology so far is to create 5 offset rectangles, constrain by center distances (of tool), and place each on a different layer. I then assign my User Tools based on the layer in Machning Styles, and finally save it as a "block" (in the CAD world) to insert into whatever geometry I'd like the rectangular panel to fit in.

Obviously this works well, and saves time once the initial constraints are defined. However, this seems like too much work.

I'm hampered by lack of a real technical ACAM manual....but I don't have access to one, so figured I'd try here.

What I'd LIKE to do, is define a single profile path, then send all 4 tools down the path at different offsets, rendering the correct geometry of cut for a raised panel. I'd like to make it a single (or couple) click operation. So, the real question is how to save a "machining style" that incorporates offsets for tool tips....

Thoughts? Or do you all do it like I did...

I did reason a "hack" -- if I defined each tool width as double the required offset, and told it to follow "inside" instead of "on center", they'd all chase each other in the correct orientation, but that would involve misdefining them on my controller or in ACAM, and I'm not sure that's a wise machining practice... I'll resort to it if I have to.

Appreciate any assistance. ACAM v8 doesn't seem to offer some things that seem pretty basic, or perhaps I'm just missing it.... Lemme' know.

Cheers,
~Ted

[headscraper]

In the same way you create a Style by right clicking and selecting Save As Style you can also select Add To Existing Style. This way you can create one style that has all your toolpaths in. Then you will be able to apply all your operations in one go to one geometryas long as you have the correct depth and stock settings. A better way to do it might be with Auto Styles. Not sure if this functionality existed in 2008... Alphacam is at 2016 R1 now so V8 is the best part of a decade out of date. I would most definitely look at upgrading.

[TedHamilton]

I ended up redefining my toolset (as a copy) with the new paths created by the diamaters and tool direction set to "INSIDE". This makes the simulator unusable, but otherwise works fine. I have multiple tools in the style, as you noted. Unfortunately, I was hoping for styles to include multiple toolpaths using "correct" tool info, and they do not. Maybe later versions do, but since it's working for me, I have no complaints. Sure speeds up parametric shutter and door designs....lol

[headscraper]

What do you mean by "multiple tool paths with correct tool info"?

[TedHamilton]

Headscraper --- I want to define an exterior geometry and one interior geometry, and when I pick the interior geometry and apply the machining style, have the path offset (centerlines) import from the original defined paths so that if I have, say, 5 tools, each with a different centerline path, the corresponding constraints and paths all import in, not just applying the tool and depth and feed into onto a new geometry. So far, the best way has been to define the tool diameters such that the centerlines of the paths end up where they need to and let them all chase each other down a common geometry line. I'd rather have the tool info "correct" and have the geometry import in with the machine style, relative to my "new" single geometry line. I'm not sure what ACAM is doing for styles these days, but it seems like it would be a pretty common task, especially in the routing world, to have multiple tools on different paths to create a specific moulding profile, and it would be nice to have that grouped and able to be imported and applied to a single path, so the correct moulding profile gets applied to whatever path you want. If ACAM doesn't do this now, they should think seriously about it...