On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Steve Blackmore <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:37:51 +0200, you wrote: > > >>Not entirely, I've been working with CAM-systems where the engagement >>strategies were too bad and violently snapped mills when entering the >>material. > > Also poor programming - choice of tool/feed/speed. > > Some cheap carbide tooling likes to snap no matter what :) >
Also new materials can be a learning curve, and when the roughing tool gives out, the semi finish and/or finish endmills go too. Sometimes it's cheaper to spend a little more on the tool, if you know you can get 1 part done per ball end mill, rather than rerunning long surfacing passes after you find the broken finishers, caused by a rougher giving out. >>Or even worse, when there was material left in the corners of the >>mould, next time the mill came to the corner - snap... I mostly see the CAM software trying to do what we tell it to do, and us forgetting we changed a corner radius on a tool, causing the existing finish pass to no longer work w/o an extra pass to whittle out the now larger radiuses in corners. If there is a CAM package that would adjust the finish pass based on my other change with a simple "rebuild", no matter what finishing method i chose, yeah, i'd be thrilled, i know ours wouldn't right now, it's also apparent they spend a lot of time on improving those each version. > > Could be bad CAM strategy, could simply be wrong choice of roughing > strategy and tool. FeatureCam is pretty good in remembering what it > didn't cut on roughing and will adjust finishing to compensate, but > everything can be overridden and it's possible to screw anything up if > you try hard enough <G>. > I agree, it's mostly a lack of knowledge of the relationship of all options for rest machining, combined with just trying to push tools too hard. Running programs through "VeriCut" can at least catch those movements where a rapid does come too close (ok, into) to the material, i can't imagine running a program without first checking it with Vericut first anymore. Not complex surfacing operations at least. Although Vericut is a java application, it takes less effort to simulate there and check for gouge/excess/crash than the same operation would take inside the CAM package (Esprit) we use. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
