Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

CAM Gouge check

Status
Not open for further replies.

wiggum

Mechanical
Nov 20, 2019
25
Hi.
I have a workpiece, it contains my original part geometry, blank and fixtures. So simple.

For roughing I need another workpiece, with some additional geometry for the second setup, some patches for the holes to get some better toolpaths. There is a third workpiece for prefinishing, patches or deleted faces or regions. A fourth one, for finishing the parting surfaces, with some offset on the cavity surfaces. A fifth for the cavity finishing. etc.

What is the best way to compare toolpaths with the original part body? If accidentally model away some geometry in one of the auxiliary bodies, which check option will show that?

And there is the second, third etc setups..
How should I build up the geometry hierachy?
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Could someone please show me some examples?

I do mold inserts programming. These usually have four setups, roughing from two sides, finishing from the same two directions. There are regions, which I have to machine ready before hardening, as there are no tolerance and surface quality requirements. In some cases, I have to leave extra material by technology purposes.

As I see, cavity_milling do not like cut_area definition, as it works like a milling boundary also. So it looks to me, that a new workpiece with the extra bodies or with some modified body is easier to define, then use the original part geometry and selecting mill_areas. But, in this case I see no way to compare toolpaths with the original geometry.
Help please.
(Happy new year)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor