I am trying to mill a part, but just cannot get the tool-paths I want at all.
I'm milling the part out of .5" tall, 1.5" wide and very long aluminum stock. The blocks at each end of the part in the pictures represent the aluminum stock so I could make sure I did not have any crashes during different operations.
I want to cut away the outside shape of the part with a simple .5mm step-over, but it just will not let me do this.
I have tried creating profile and pocket operations with every variation possible but can only get close... but it still wants to send the endmill like 5mm into the stock instead of doing a hatch style cut with a .5mm step-over.
Here are some snapshots of the part along with the closest I can get.
The pictures with the toolpath marked in yellow lines appears like it's doing what I would like, but if you look at the snapshot with the tool tracing (yellow circles on path) you can see how it actually enters and goes deep. Then it comes back out and cuts air. I stopped the simulation directly after entering the part to show the initial path the endmill takes since it's kind of confusing to look at without seeing the simulation actually running.
I want it to do a hatch style cut going longways with a .5mm step-over starting from the outside of each side of the part. For example imagine doing a profile cut with stepover from outside. I cannot do a profile cut however because if I do, the initial stepover requires creating an offset that will crash into the stock as it wants to go all the way around the part. If I create custom geometry for just one side of the part and try profiling again, I get absolutely crazy results because you cannot define 'open edges' on a profile operation.
I am finding this task impossible even though it seems very simple... I have already spent about 3 hours trying everything I could think of (inside, outside, approach from outside, wall offset with finish, open edges on geometry, closed edges on geometry...).
Can someone please help... I'm wondering if I should be using translated surface or contour 3D operation instead?
I'm milling the part out of .5" tall, 1.5" wide and very long aluminum stock. The blocks at each end of the part in the pictures represent the aluminum stock so I could make sure I did not have any crashes during different operations.
I want to cut away the outside shape of the part with a simple .5mm step-over, but it just will not let me do this.
I have tried creating profile and pocket operations with every variation possible but can only get close... but it still wants to send the endmill like 5mm into the stock instead of doing a hatch style cut with a .5mm step-over.
Here are some snapshots of the part along with the closest I can get.
The pictures with the toolpath marked in yellow lines appears like it's doing what I would like, but if you look at the snapshot with the tool tracing (yellow circles on path) you can see how it actually enters and goes deep. Then it comes back out and cuts air. I stopped the simulation directly after entering the part to show the initial path the endmill takes since it's kind of confusing to look at without seeing the simulation actually running.
I want it to do a hatch style cut going longways with a .5mm step-over starting from the outside of each side of the part. For example imagine doing a profile cut with stepover from outside. I cannot do a profile cut however because if I do, the initial stepover requires creating an offset that will crash into the stock as it wants to go all the way around the part. If I create custom geometry for just one side of the part and try profiling again, I get absolutely crazy results because you cannot define 'open edges' on a profile operation.
I am finding this task impossible even though it seems very simple... I have already spent about 3 hours trying everything I could think of (inside, outside, approach from outside, wall offset with finish, open edges on geometry, closed edges on geometry...).
Can someone please help... I'm wondering if I should be using translated surface or contour 3D operation instead?