Great tip for a lot of diffrent CAM software users! NX CAM has this feature built in, you can check the box to skip those "posts" and machine them with helical toolpath. Hopefully more CAM developers will add this option to dynamic milling
Personally prefer milling down to a 20mm diameter spigot and then taking it in 4-5 z passes , this is quicker more secure and dosent need slow af ramping that wears the end of your tool 👌
For such a huge top level professional team to take the time to make such videos which whilst i use a piss ass little 3018 it still transfers knowledge to us for potential future jobs. Thanks!
Fusion's Cam software actually does support a toolpath that includes this quite well. You can turn a helix on in the middle, do a curtain area then come out and do another from the outside if you just copy past same one then change geometry
@@bf4chode2 Maybe try to change the helix's angle and tbh, the taper doesn't have to be there. Just having a hole in the middle helps a lot, long as you have coolant to help with chip evac there should be no problem
@@Kermie_The_Frog just to be clear, by helix angle do you mean helix ramp angle or the helix taper angle? What I’ve done for the program I’m going to get run in an apprenticeship I’m in is just simulate the tool path and watch my xyz coordinates and cutting method so when it switches from ramp to cutting feed rate, I see what my xyz coordinates are, post process the program and delete the part of the program after the ramp is finished.
This is a really cool strategy. The principle of creating a structurally strong local area can also be applied to reducing the chances of chipping off brittle materials near edges like plastics. This needs to be integrated into CAM tool paths as an option for both outside to inside and vice versa strategies.
Exelent video Barry, I see some of the people didnt get it reading down in the comments but this is a life saver if you are cutting a lot of tough materials. Nice work TITANS of CNC
Great idea, but just use a facemill or shell mill lol, increase feeds and speeds to make up MRR. Avoids this all together. Or have material cut to the correct length so you don’t have to mill all that extra material possibly adding unnecessary stress to the material.
I have created many programmes with PTC Creo, but I have never had the problem described. But I have also never machined large volumes with twice the diameter of the cutter as the infeed in depth. I would use a larger milling cutter for the part shown, or if I absolutely want to use a small milling cutter, I would machine the material to two infeeds. Or I could use a milling cutter for roughing. One that doesn't have smooth flutes, but instead has waves on the cutting edges.
Ye, I'v been doing this for about 50 years. No, I am lying. This is a brilliant idea even for a manual milling machine. Do you have any more? Thank you for sharing.
I started my career on a manual Bridgeport with play in the screws, talk about breaking tools, climb milling was a problem for sure. 3D additive machining seems so logical.
Hy Titans of CNC, How's It going? I'm Aaron and I'm CNC operator, I'm Brazilian and where I work tools broke every time especially when we're trying to make a long hole , and I would like to see a vídeo from you about tools that are being sold in the market that you use to do this kind of hole. Thanks you so much
I use that approach to prep the hole if thread milling an NPT,. If I recall you can chain the Circle and use pocket, in the pocket options you can leave walls tapered as an option.
I think it may be better to mill the center in that way but after you mill the outside, leaving enough that you know it'll be a ridge you can spiral down and mill the post out gradually. My thinking is that while you aren't dealing with as much catching on the endmill, there are still thin walls that could potentially catch, tear, and then chip the side of the endmill using the way shown. I could be totally wrong though
I use a similar method when forming deep walls when roughing a contour. It helps to stop squealing and gaulding if you are deeper than the flutes, and just as you show, makes the breakout much better for the cutter life.
I have a suggestion, you should make some videos about the cutting regimes for different tools in different materials explained simply, it would help us people who are in the field to understand better when it comes to choosing a cutting tool for a material
Friends, we take an end mill, a line-by-line trajectory and quietly mill if there is a lot of time and a lot of tools. If you save on tools and time, then we give it to a saw or an electric erosion machine.
Great tip! My question is, why would you adaptive this out anyways? Why not face at multiple depths? Or why not just use the face toolpath, resulting in never a thin sliver of material? Thanks!
You could even ramp in to maximize engagement. The problem is you need the right tool and the right machine to run a face mill at a higher MRR than an end mill. So if you don't have the HP and good inserts this could be more efficient.
@@theorangebaron1595 I was just about to write this, Using the entire flute is both stronger for the endmill and least amount of wear. Though, why it wasnt just saw cut to size correctly in the first place... beyond me :)
@@theorangebaron1595 Good point, however, woudln't you be better off just using a facemill for that instead? That way you wear the part thats intended to be worn...no need to wear your endmill on such a simple operation. Facemills are indexable so if you wanna wear something its the facemill.
Unrelated to the actual topic of the video but why did you choose your speeds and feeds the way that you did? For reference (I’m sure you folks already know) but the 1/2 TE for 1018 called for 1.5D axial by .5D radial. Max SFM at 660 and FPT at .0037. That’s a total MRR of 11.25 vs your total MRR of 10. Is it for testing purposes to see if the TE can handle bigger axial/smaller radial at bumped up speeds and feeds?
Not bad. Seems like an odd scenario, I hope that's second ops and not oversize stock. This may be a stupid question, but why wouldn't you use a facemill?
NX CAM has a feature for this problem. And many others... Siemens really does listen to feedback and even if it takes years to get from request to feature, they are constantly implementing them. And until then, there are so many ways to "hack" NX to automate basically anything you want. I know you love MasterCAM and changing CAD-CAM systems is quite the hassle, but man... it's worh every penny and hours you have to invest upfront. These germans know their engineering.
1. Strange scenario of turning whole block into bunch of chips 2. Isn't drilling enough or all its about taper form? Sometimes I'm using predrill to ease up the mill's work, but it good not at all cases 'cause sometimes additional plunging actions are worse than straight smooth milling and even tangent/trochoidal cuts have to suffer because of walls.
i wonder what would happen if you just cut the blank to the right size instead of chipping the excess material. otherwise very good advice, would be needed at the right time.
Or you could just take several passes with a face mill or better yet get the proper sized material or saw it to the proper size before going into the mill so you aren't trying to face off an inch deep from the top of the part. Using a blank that far oversized is wasteful, maybe ok for a one off part on occasion but it should be the exception not the rule. The other option would be to mill it to the point where to have either the fairly thin wall or post as in the first part of the video taking it to full depth then taking the last part in several different passes with reduced step down depth, in other words instead of having a one inch depth of cut on the final passes you reduce it to four quarter inch depths of cut.
