Help with pocket tooling efficiency

I’m working on a design where I plan to cut a large pocket, but there are small details near the edges. I’d like to avoid using a small tool to carve out the bulk of the pocket and use that just where it’s necessary. Similar to Advanced VCarve where another tool can be selected for pocketing larger areas.

I know assigning a tool to cut a pocket with areas that are too small for the tool, it will cut what it can and leave the areas too small uncut, but is there a way to handoff the remaining work to a smaller tool, so it skips what has been done and cuts what’s left?

I don’t want to change the design into multiple area based on the level of detail each tool can cut, but I also don’t want to wait for a 1/16" end mill to carve out 4" pocket that has fine details only around the edges. That’s a general example, not what I’m actually working on.

Would be handy to be able to assign a hierarchy of tools to an area where each cuts to its capability before switching to the next tool.

Does CC have a feature to accomplish this, or is there a “trick” to repeating tool paths with a succession of smaller tools?


CC Pro V7 has “Rest Milling” which does exactly this.

If you don’t have PRO, I think the easiest way is to offset the vectors by a small amount (1/2 diameter of smaller tool), Then cut both the offset vector then the original vector using a contour path.
You’ll get a little bit of redundant cutting, but not nearly the whole pocket.

1 Like

Can you run Contour cuts instead where you need the higher detail? If your smaller bit is >= 1/2 diameter of the larger bit, a pocket + a contour will remove all the material that pocketing with the smaller bit would.

1 Like

Well that figures LOL

I’ve been holding off on upgrading to V7 until I’ve got more time to understand the changes; sticking with the devil I know(ish) for now.

The contouring with the inside offset for the smaller tool seems to make the most sense if the tool reaches the same depth (otherwise, open eBay link).

Thank you both!

Good point. I read it as, “going from a 1/4” to a 1/16" bit"…
If you step down by half, 1/4" pocket, 1/8" contour, 1/16" contour, it should work out.

1 Like

That is how I was thinking of it when I wrote my question. Even with the stops for tool changes, going from 1/4", to a 1/8" contour and then 1/16" contour would save time over 1/16 doing the whole thing.

Thanks again.


This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.