Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply

Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

Looking to start at the bottom, machine , step up, machine, etc. That way I can use the whole length of my cutter to rough the part shape better instead of wearing out the tip stepping down .030 at a time.

 

NX11.0.1
13 REPLIES

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

In the graphical tool path editor, you can reverse the tool path so it machines bottom up.

Stefan Pendl, Systemmanager CAx, HAIDLMAIR GmbH
Production: NX10.0.3, VERICUT 8.0, FBM, MRL 3.1.4 | TcUA 10.1 MP7 Patch 0 (10.1.7.0) | TcVis 10.1
Development: VB.NET, Tcl/Tk    Testing: NX11.0 EAP, NX12.0 EAP

How to Get the Most from Your Signature in the Community

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

In conclusion, no Cavity Milling scheme is available yet to machine from the bottom-up in NX, although next year is 2015.

Proud Member Of The Reality-Based Community.

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

Volumill does it, so does "optipath". Cavity mill? maybe tomorrow...maybe someday.

Ray
NX9.0.3.4 MP1

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

The operation is called cavity milling, so it is supposed to machine a pocket style shape.

 

What you seem to look for is core milling, which would be machining the opposite of a cavity.

 

I think overloading cavity milling is the wrong way, since the whole processor will get too complex to maintain and fix issues.

Many users are already complaining about the reliability of CM, so lets keep it simple.

 

For the bottom-up machining a new operation type should be developed.

 

Stefan Pendl, Systemmanager CAx, HAIDLMAIR GmbH
Production: NX10.0.3, VERICUT 8.0, FBM, MRL 3.1.4 | TcUA 10.1 MP7 Patch 0 (10.1.7.0) | TcVis 10.1
Development: VB.NET, Tcl/Tk    Testing: NX11.0 EAP, NX12.0 EAP

How to Get the Most from Your Signature in the Community

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

no, we're not looking for core milling, but cavity milling with enhanced cut level options. Roughing bottom up is not core or cavity specific. I see no reason why adding this functionality should "complicate" cavity mill. Volumill offers both top down and bottom up in the same toolpath. Why not cavity mill?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ray
NX9.0.3.4 MP1

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

As I already mentioned above, the reliability of CM is low.

 

CM is an operation that can be used for roughing and finishing, so a specialized roughing operation would avoid a complex tool path processor, which will be more reliable.

 

New users are struggling with CM due to it being a multi functional operation, they often tend to set more options than needed.

 

From a developers point of view a robust processor fulfills one task and not multiple.

Stefan Pendl, Systemmanager CAx, HAIDLMAIR GmbH
Production: NX10.0.3, VERICUT 8.0, FBM, MRL 3.1.4 | TcUA 10.1 MP7 Patch 0 (10.1.7.0) | TcVis 10.1
Development: VB.NET, Tcl/Tk    Testing: NX11.0 EAP, NX12.0 EAP

How to Get the Most from Your Signature in the Community

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

I can see that..... I've learned with Cavity mill the best results come from not selecting any faces and just using trim boundaries.

 

NX11.0.1

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

[ Edited ]

I am not convinced that simple bottom-up cavity milling is the answer, given that the processor is based on volume removal. Consider these two techniques:

 

1. Add bottom-up cut order to Zlevel profile, which is focused on the faces, not the volume.

 

2. After each large depth of cut in cavity milling, remove the material between that level and the previous (the stair step) by taking smaller depths of cut from the bottom up.

 

Would either of these suit your needs better than bottom-up cavity milling?

Mark Rief
Retired Siemens

Re: Cavity Mill - Bottom up?

#2 is bottom up.

 

Ray
NX9.0.3.4 MP1

Learn online





Solution Information