How are most of you handling tool descriptions of relieved tools?
I've always just used the main tool dialogue of flute length and total length but it seems since NX10 I've been getting a lot of false or such small collisions by doing it this way.
This could be a solution but how are you going to describe tools that have a relieve and a shank with the same diameter as the cutter like the tool below?
If you don't describe the full diameter shank there could be collisions without showing up...And describing the shank as holder isn't the right solution I think.
A solution would be that the shank is discribed in 2 sections like below.
How do you describe the shank in two sections?
I've always just used length because my thoughts were it gives me more of a buffer in reality when using a necked tool.
It just is that starting in nx10 I get a lot more collision errors that I didnt see before. Maybe I need to change some tolerances
This was just a model that I gave the right colors just as an example how it could be solved.
I've got the same problem, maybe it could be solved with tollerance settings but I haven't found good settings. Hopfully someone with better results can help here?
Maybe its better in NX11, I heard there are a lot of improvements around ISV.
But I've not yet made the transition to NX11.
You could use solid tools and in the simulation dialog select "use solid tool" for the collision/gouge check.
But for regular end mills thats not an option for me, I would have to model hundreds of tools.
For indexable tools, this could be an option...
I've though about that but diden't try it...
What are the drawbacks of doing it this way?
Is it possible to use all operations where a normal end mill can be used?
The only drawback that I have found is that weh you export the tool to your library is that you cannot specify a class of tool. This ony seems to cause trouble when you want to filter tool selection using tool type.
If you manage your tools in Teamcenter Resource Manager, you can specify there 3 shank steps. (see image below)
Unfortunately NX CAM currently supports only one shank step. When you retrieve such a tool in NX the first shank step is transferred to the NX shank and the second and third shank steps get "converted" to holder steps. In that case the shank clearance is used for the first step, but the holder clearance for the second and third...
It would be great, if the NX CAM shank functionality would be enhanced to support multiple steps.
I just had this scenario show up, I'm using a replaceable tip ball endmill with 2.600 stick out but only 0.750 relieved. I had to define the cutting portion, the shank, and the rest as part of the holder. Siemens needs to allow reduced shank tool in the standard definition, at least in the shank definition so it doesn't corrupt legacy files.
Production: NX10.0.3 MP13, VERICUT 8.0
Development: VB.NET, Tcl/Tk Testing: NX11.0, iMachining 2.0, Adaptive Roughing