[Swemill]

A friend struggles with doing surface (outside) with Mcam V8 and i try to help him... There seems not to be any wireframe surface and with the available alternatives, it doesn't be right. He has like a rectangle (with corner radius) at Z0 and a smaller circle at Z150. and tries to connect them with surfaces for machining (in a rotarytable). Kind of like a round-oval "tube". The toolpaths isn't going to be full 3D, more like 2,5 (milling along X & Z - manually rotary / angle movement).

Is there any easy way for this surface / wireframe on the V8? The surfaces we get looks very strange.....

[Limpan]

TJENA, har aldrig kört version 8, började köra Mastercam X3 förra året så jag vet inte om jag kan vara till nån hjälp men det jag funderar på är ifall ert problem är själva skapandet av bearbetningsytorna eller om det är att få ut verktygsbanor på schyssta befintliga ytor? mvh Thomas

[Swemill]

Hej! Det är ytorna (till att börja med i varje fall). Vi får inte de till att se bra ut - blir helt fel form = vridna och inkonade på mitten. Har försökt med: Loft, Regel, Svept, Draft m.m m.m men inget får rätt form. Har läst lite om att de senare versionerna som har "nätyta" / wireframe funkar bättre - är lättare men det borde ju gå att få till endå....
/Swemill

[Limpan]

Okey jag förstår, ska testa i X3:an om det går att få till nåt vettigt så kan jag återkomma imorrn. Hade du mått o hörnradie på rektangeln samt diameter på cirkeln och även höjdskillnaden mellan dessa så jag får rätt förutsättningar... /Thomas

[Swemill]

Ok. tror dessvärre att det inte alls är samma i X3. Jag har inte några exakta mått, tror de måtten han använde bara var för test. Det var ca:
Rektangel 50 x 70 med hörnradie 10, på Z0. Cirkel med diameter 40 på Z150. Sedan försökte vi få fram en yta liknande ett rör, mellan dessa med mjuk - jämn övergång mellan rektangel - cirkel.
/Swemill

[Swemill]

Anyone that knows V8? How to do a quick wireframe - smoth transition surface between a rectangle and a circle?
Thanks.
/Swemill

[Superman]

--Circle to be broken at 0 deg
--Rectangle to be broken along same horizontal line ( midpoint if circle is centred on rectangle )
----this syncronises the entities to be in line and eliminates a "twist" in the surface that is created

Create > Surface > Ruled > ( contour1=pick top circle going CCW ),( contour2= pick rectangle going CCW ) > Do it

[ObrienDave]

Here is a MC8 file for you.
The trick I used is to break the 2 wireframe contours into individual pieces so the endpoints can be synchronized.
The contours have been scaled to the metric equivalent and color coded so you can see the relationship.
Since I do not speak or read Swedish I am assuming, from your previous post, you want a 70 x 50 mm rectangle with 10 mm corner radius at Z0.
Also, a 40 mm diameter circle at Z150 mm.
I am not sure if this is what you wanted.
If it is not, please clarify your requirements and I will try to fix the MC8 file

[Swemill]

Thank you very much for your help. We now have tried both methods and it worked out great! We didn't thought of the "brake" function and that seems to be the way to go. Tried earlier with lines between the circle and rectangle, to help get the surface "straight" but yet, it got "twisted"...
ObrienDave: I actually didn't have any exact measure and gave "Limpan" an approximate measure when he asked. This was only to get "wiser" about how it should be done.

Thanks again, this is a really great place to get help!

[ObrienDave]

You are quite welcome.
Having been a member for almost 5 years, I am still amazed at the quality of the help that has been given by other members.
Most of us here have been in the same situation as you with, probably, no one to ask for help.
Even though I don't do this for a living anymore, I still try to help as much as I can because, I had to learn MasterCam the hard way.
Fortunately, I had a few years of experience with another CadCam system so the transition was not as bad as someone who has never had any experience with CadCam would have gone through.

Anyway, I am glad my example was able to help you.

[Limpan]

Hej! Kul att det löste sig till slut, har försökt i X3:an och inte lyckats - det blev bara värre å värre för varje försök... men om jag förstått detta rätt så har han segmenterat cirkeln så att den innehåller lika många element som rektangeln, smart! /Thomas

[Swemill]

New "problems", and i need your help ObrienDave! I'm going crazy about this but you must have done the wireframes / geo different from how i do.

When i try to turn the result down - from the "z-height", to lay down through x instead, my geo just turns / twists around its own axle.... (not lays down).
Our geo looks almost the same but doesn't act the same.... With yours it turns / lays down exact that i want!

I used: Create - Rectangular - wrote the measures in the "window" (one point) and chose Origo, then Create Circle - wrote measure diam. 40 enter and then cordinates X0Y0Z150. (3D construction plane).

To rotate - turn the result i used (after done the "breaking" and surface job): Frontview - Xform - Rotate (window) - Origo - "move" & "90deg"......

Can you please tell me exactly how you did your geo / wireframes or maybe what i do wrong? I'm feeling really stupid now......

I managed to do what i want with translate direction (Xform) - between vws, but i cant understand why there's a difference between our result.....
I have also tried with different breaking - surface etc, but cant get it to work like your file....

Thanks in advance.
Regards / Swemill

[ObrienDave]

After re-reading your post, it seems you are NOT setting the construction plane to "front" before you do the rotate.
This is why your geometry is rotating along the "Z" axis.
If you can, please post a 'Zipped' copy of your MC9 and current configuration file and I will take a look at it.

[Swemill]

Ahh... Thank you, that is most likely the mistake! We choosed "front view", but not "front constructionplane" before the rotate (kept the 3D)!
Again thank you and i will try out this tomorrow at my friends work.

Edit: Is this similar on the X versions, or is it maybe easier?

Regards

[ObrienDave]

Yep, not setting the proper construction plane first, causes BUNCHES of headaches!
I also learned that one the hard way.

And yes, it is exactly the same with the X versions.

[Swemill]

Then we have tried with the right settings and that worked out great!
Now i’m sorry, but I thought I should bother you again ObrienDave, with some questions….

We planned to do the milling along the X-axis, and turn the 4’th axis only as an indexer – with an even (own choose?) degree movement between the axial milling.

What toolpath should we choose? With: Multiaxle – Rotation4ax, we only can get toolpaths along Y – including 4’th axis turning / milling….
We only want the 4’th axis as an indexer (it’s a “stand alone” unit) and do axial (X) milling!

Should we maybe use conture or wire/netframe despite the 4’th axis? I see a lot of ”Rotationaxle” and 3D choice in many toolpaths.…?

Thanks in advance!

[ObrienDave]

Ok, understood.
I will re-do my sample database and show you how to do this.
I can't promise it to you really quick because, like I said, I don't really do this for a living anymore.
I am now a long haul truck driver and have to do these things on the side after I am done driving for the day.
I will however, give you a hint.

1. Re-do the outside form from individual surfaces. You should end up with 8 surfaces. 1 for each flat to circle transition, and 1 for each corner fillet to circle transition.

2. Using the long flat ends of the rectangle for indexing, do the milling on 1 flat side and 1 fillet next to the 'flat'.

3. Index the part on the 4th axis to the next 'flat' on the rectangle. Repeat step 2.

4. Doing it like this, you will be able to mill the entire piece in 4 indexes.

Will send you a sample as soon as I can.

Gotta go, have a delivery to make.
It's 2AM here.

[Swemill]

Ok. This is absolute not a hurry, but i'm really grateful if you can help me!
The trick with only 4 indexing seems nice and i'm happy to get more info about it, but that is not really what i had in mind...

I thought we should do the milling with maybe 360 indexing or maybe 180, dependence of the result, and only mill axial along X (and Z) and with no Y movement....

Another friend have done this, offcours with a radiustool and it looks really cool (runners for a manifold). It would also be nice to test the indexing control we built with this.
He says he do this very simple in MC X, just choose 4th axis rotary toolpath and "axial" direction, but we cant get it to work on the V8.....

Happy if you could help me....

[ObrienDave]

Ok, here is a file I think will help you.
I had to change one thing because I was not happy with the result.

Before I describe what I did, here is the DISCLAIMER:
Please use this file as an example ONLY!
THIS FILE CONTAINS A FINISH PATH ONLY.
There is no provision for roughing the stock.
Do NOT try to cut an actual part with this file without first making ABSOLUTELY SURE you understand what the toolpath is going to do.
I cannot stress this point enough!
I will not be held responsible for any CRASHES, BROKEN TOOLS, FINGERS, BODIES OR MACHINES.

1. Had to change the 1 ruled surface into 8 coons patches.
This really helped the 'smoothness' of the resulting toolpath.

I am not sure if you will be able to read this file because I have to export it from V9.
If you have any trouble reading this file, we will have to do it a different way.

***FILE REMOVED***

[Swemill]

Thanks, but unfortunately i cant open the file.... Is there any way that i can convert it? Have tried but with no luck....
I'm sorry for the work i have caused you....

/Swemill