work subsquadri con fresa torica

[ascaro]

Hi.
I'm hanging hard because I can't make a roughing of a piece (similar to a boomerang put upright, to understand...) with a toroidal tool. I lost one day to slew and I don't jump out. the strategy is a model roughing, not vortex, with which I should clean the under-squadra area, always with progressive passes around the piece. I can set a variable angle of the cutter, with the direction 'to the point', in the management of the machine axles, but it always alarms me with the message 'this strategy can only create a multi-axle tool path with a spherical tool' or something similar.
the same processing, with a semi-spherical tool, calculates it. Where am I wrong?

 

[ale47p]

Hello, version?

 

[ale47p]

I confirm that it is not possible. I tried with 2019, I don't think the version counts anything.
now I'm from mobile, as soon as possible I write something more

 

[ale47p]

Nothing wrong.
when, in a roughing, instead of "vertical" on the tool axis, put anything else, it seems that you can only use a spherical tool.
is like trying to make a parallel past or offset3d finish using a male. Just don't calculate it.
the roughings are the work that you have to learn to tame better in powermill, I use it since 2002 and still there are things that make me turn the bales.
Then, a professional, he knows how to turn around, because he does it work and has to bring home the result.
You can open a self-desk report, they will surely tell you that "well, for us it's okay, we've spent the potato to developers."
Things like that happened in two years.

If you want me to give you a few tips on how I would do it, but I don't want to be intrusive

 

[ascaro]

version 2019 ultimate.
I did it, but with a parametric spiral finish. practically the roughing strategies manage the tool axis always normal on the xy plane (active), while the finishes allow to freely set the tool axis tilted at will. is a mathematical distinction, they explained me in autidesk assistance.

 

[ascaro]

Thanks for the interest.
to my point, it is not intuitive... but I understand that there is no way of distinguishing a roughing from a finishing with overmaterial more or less often. they have decided this criterion, the calculation bond, at the level of how the program interprets what I want to make him do, and amen.

 

[ale47p]

I in semi-finishing (and sometimes in finishing, but it is necessary to push of tolerance because the crest does not come as from values set) use "avoid collisions automatically -> perpendicular-poi-lungo". the important thing is to have sharp, stem and pliers drawn right.
sin not there is in roughness
other thing that makes the difference in the rippings is to use the residual material model.
This is something that has improved a lot over the years

 

[ale47p]

Thanks for the interest.
to my point, it is not intuitive... but I understand that there is no way of distinguishing a roughing from a finishing with overmaterial more or less often. they have decided this criterion, the calculation bond, at the level of how the program interprets what I want to make him do, and amen.

the roughnesses are treated differently for the dangerousness, according to them.
they feel dangerous also the undo key, which in powermill there has never been

 

[ascaro]

I understand.
Yes, I have seen that they have added several things, the footage of the residual material work with the calculation of the model, but it is possible however to use as reference the previous path of roughing or semi-finishing.
the grapes would be very appreciated... You're right.