anafranil online
IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Back tracking after high speed cuts, High speed cut
Bob Gray
post Jun 10 2014, 04:45 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



I had an o-ring grove to ruff and noticed during the simulation that as the cutter completes its first lap and is back at the beginning. The cutter rather then proceed to the next depth of cut proceeds to retrace its steps back to the beginning. Then it proceeded to the next depth of cut. I know that sounds confusing so I've attached the file.

If you go to the last operation, ruffing water line 3. As the cutter completes the circuit around the elliptical grove you can see that it retraces its steps back to the beginning. How do get the software to just do the high speeds cuts and then proceed to the next depth of cut?

Thanks
Attached File(s)
Attached File  error_in_HS_pocketing.zip ( 373.45K ) Number of downloads: 5
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 10 2014, 09:26 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



Hi Bob,

I don't think that this is an error myself. If you look at the toolpath without the 'High speed cuts', you can see that it is a rough and finish operation with optional stock. The trochoidal paths are an optional extra for the toolpath that includes the trochoidal movements, but still retains the finishing.
You can see this with the feedrate options within the waterline roughing operation, there is a 'finish feed' option.
I think that you are perhaps hoping for a trochoidal only toolpath, which I concede would be a nice option for roughing this type of feature, but that isn't how sprutcam does it.
What you could do is to use the Finish feed option to speed up the finish pass.

I was about to suggest that a good alternative would be the helical option in 2D contouring and then I saw that you already had this in the final (disabled) operation cool.gif

I hope this helps.

Dave


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bob Gray
post Jun 12 2014, 05:54 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



I tried the spiral in for both a ruffing and finishing pass. Noticed all the code was short line segments and not I's and J's. This lead to faceting of the oring grove on my first article. I turned off helical machining for the finish pass and got a nice smooth finish. Is it possible to change the post so that it will output I's and J's during helical machining?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 12 2014, 07:05 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



QUOTE (Bob Gray @ Jun 12 2014, 06:54 PM) *
I tried the spiral in for both a ruffing and finishing pass. Noticed all the code was short line segments and not I's and J's. This lead to faceting of the oring grove on my first article. I turned off helical machining for the finish pass and got a nice smooth finish. Is it possible to change the post so that it will output I's and J's during helical machining?


If you check the CLData in simulation mode, you should see 'HELIC' commands if it is calculating true helical moves (see attachment).
If the postprocessor is outputting linear moves then the 'Support helical moves' option is probably disabled for your postprocessor (see attachment).
You can try enabling this using the 'Postprocessors generator' but this doesn't guarantee that the g-code output will be correct, the 'CIRCLE' program (cmd) might need altering if the output is not correct.

I hope this helps.

Dave

Attached File(s)
Attached File  12_06_2014_20_13_59.jpg ( 88.99K ) Number of downloads: 12
Attached File  12_06_2014_20_09_52.jpg ( 102.63K ) Number of downloads: 10
 


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bob Gray
post Jun 13 2014, 04:02 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



I took a look and helical was not enabled. Turning the helical on generated the following code. See below. It looks to me that the Z is missing from the G02. What do I need to do to fix the "circle" command?

Running the parts I've noticed that were the cutter comes off the part there is a circular mark of the cutter caused by the few miliseconds it takes for the Z axis to raise the cutter up. Since there is no lead in lead out in contour operation, is there another operation that you could suggest?

We have always historically had to hand grain the oring grove. Just the spot were the cutter stops takes 3 to 4 times longer grain then the rest of the oring grove.

Thanks

G02 X-0.3895 I1.0505 Y1.0505 J-0.
G01 X0.3905 Z-0.0042
G02 X1.441 I0. Y0. J-1.0505
X0.3905 I-1.0505 Y-1.0505 J0.
G01 X-0.3895 Z-0.0112
G02 X-1.44 I0. Y0. J1.0505
G01
G02 X-0.3895 I1.0505 Y1.0505 J-0.
G01 X0.3905 Z-0.02
G02 X1.441 I0. Y0. J-1.0505
X0.3905 I-1.0505 Y-1.0505 J0.
G01 X-0.3895 Z-0.03
G02 X-1.44 I0. Y0. J1.0505
X-0.3895 I1.0505 Y1.0505 J0.
G01 X0.3905 Z-0.04
G02 X1.441 I0. Y0. J-1.0505
X0.3905 I-1.0505 Y-1.0505 J0.
G01 X-0.3895 Z-0.05
G02 X-1.44 I0. Y0. J1.0505
X-0.3895 I1.0505 Y1.0505 J0.
G01 X0.3905 Z-0.06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 13 2014, 05:19 AM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



This is not uncommon. SprutCAM postprocessors can be written using several methods, so it is not possible to say exactly what is required to get the Z depth output for your particular postprocessor, but please see the attached image which shows a common method that can be used to force the Z output. You might end up with a Z coordinate in normal arc moves too.........but this is not usually a problem.
In the attached modified version of your project you will see that I have added a short tangent approach and retraction move which might help to solve your dwell problem?
Please read the section in the help files called 'Job assignment for 2D and 3D curve machining operations' which explains how to dynamically create lead in / lead out moves for 2D & 3D contouring operations.

I hope this helps.

Dave
Attached File(s)
Attached File  13_06_2014_06_17_05.jpg ( 142.74K ) Number of downloads: 11
Attached File  error_in_HS_pocketing_dp.zip ( 183.63K ) Number of downloads: 6
 


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bob Gray
post Jun 19 2014, 03:52 AM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



I took a look at the modified file that you supplied...I must be missing something but I just see the ruffing operation. I do not see the two finishing operations with a change to the lead in lead out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 19 2014, 04:56 AM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



QUOTE (Bob Gray @ Jun 19 2014, 04:52 AM) *
I took a look at the modified file that you supplied...I must be missing something but I just see the ruffing operation. I do not see the two finishing operations with a change to the lead in lead out.


I'm not sure what finishing operations you are referring to? Your original project didn't have two finishing operations. I have added a lead in / lead out to the 2D Contouring.


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bob Gray
post Jun 23 2014, 04:18 AM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



Sorry finished the project and forgot that you were working with and older version of the file that I had not yet put in the finishing operations in.

See attached .jpg.

I put in a short lead in lead out that is on the horizontal my question is more and arc on arc off that would be on the vertical or perpendicular to the bottom of the o-ring face. I read threw the section on job assignment 2D and 3D but didn't see a way I could make the lead in Vertical or perpendicular to that bottom surface of the o-ring.

My thinking is that I can use what is on screen till there is about .01" left then do an vertical arc on and arc off to eliminate the marks left by the cutter. Going threw and looking at the different finishing operations I was thinking of trying finishing plane as it has arc available for both lead in and lead out. Any thoughts?

Attached File(s)
Attached File  Horizontal.jpg ( 322.91K ) Number of downloads: 1
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bob Gray
post Jun 23 2014, 04:19 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 22-January 14
Member No.: 3,592



If I ask for this as a future feature or option do you think they will implement it?

QUOTE (Sprut_UK @ Jun 10 2014, 12:26 PM) *
Hi Bob,

I don't think that this is an error myself. If you look at the toolpath without the 'High speed cuts', you can see that it is a rough and finish operation with optional stock. The trochoidal paths are an optional extra for the toolpath that includes the trochoidal movements, but still retains the finishing.
You can see this with the feedrate options within the waterline roughing operation, there is a 'finish feed' option.
I think that you are perhaps hoping for a trochoidal only toolpath, which I concede would be a nice option for roughing this type of feature, but that isn't how sprutcam does it.
What you could do is to use the Finish feed option to speed up the finish pass.

I was about to suggest that a good alternative would be the helical option in 2D contouring and then I saw that you already had this in the final (disabled) operation cool.gif

I hope this helps.

Dave

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 24 2014, 01:37 AM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



QUOTE (Bob Gray @ Jun 23 2014, 05:19 AM) *
If I ask for this as a future feature or option do you think they will implement it?


I have no idea if they would implement it. I believe that they consider whether the feature would be useful for the majority of users when considering any new features.
The best method for making these suggestions is via your SprutCAM reseller.


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sprut_UK
post Jun 24 2014, 01:47 AM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 1,091
Joined: 12-December 07
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 4



QUOTE (Bob Gray @ Jun 23 2014, 05:18 AM) *
Sorry finished the project and forgot that you were working with and older version of the file that I had not yet put in the finishing operations in.

See attached .jpg.

I put in a short lead in lead out that is on the horizontal my question is more and arc on arc off that would be on the vertical or perpendicular to the bottom of the o-ring face. I read threw the section on job assignment 2D and 3D but didn't see a way I could make the lead in Vertical or perpendicular to that bottom surface of the o-ring.

My thinking is that I can use what is on screen till there is about .01" left then do an vertical arc on and arc off to eliminate the marks left by the cutter. Going threw and looking at the different finishing operations I was thinking of trying finishing plane as it has arc available for both lead in and lead out. Any thoughts?


2D and 3D contouring apply the lead in / lead out moves in the horizontal plane.
The 'Finishing plane' operation will not be suitable for finishing that type of feature because of how the toolpath is calculated; (generally) zigzagging in the X or Y axis.
For finishing the bottom face you could try the 'Finishing drive' operation which includes lead in / lead out moves in a vertical plane.


--------------------
"Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake..." - Napoleon Bonaparte
www.sprut.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st July 2019 - 09:02 PM