Scalloped Results with Finish Toolpath - HELP!

I’m have some problems. I have a simple curved form that has a slight bevel on the outside edge. I’ve got it modeled as shown

When I do a finish toolpath a ball bit, it’s creating this scalloped surface that is not supposed to be there. I’ve tried changing the stepover (made .22, .125, .05, .005) and the results are roughly the same (except the smaller stepover takes a lot more time…but the scallops are still there).

I tried making two finishing passes at 90 degrees to each other…and the result is still the same:

How can I model the slight beveled edge and NOT have these scallops?

Thanks,

  • Gary

Maybe a 3D Roughing toolpath with a tool set to have a Depth per Pass greater than the cut and the Stock to Leave set as small as is possible?

Usually I resolve this sort of thing w/ a really high stopover.

I don’t understand what you mean by “Greater than the cut”… The piece is 1.5" thick…do you mean a depth per cut greater than 1.5"?

The bit is .25" ball. I’ve used .22 — as well as .125, .05, and .005 and have not seen a substantial difference in results

Huh…I set the amount left to .0005 and it looks like that worked…but I don’t quite get why I"m bothering with a finishing pass…?

The idea behind the large Depth per Pass is to avoid a lot of time making small cuts.

The reason not to start with a small value for Stock to Leave is to avoid the roughing operation chipping something out or deflecting into the part itself and leaving a gouge.

If the simulation looks good, that doesn’t rule out the gouging or deflecting…right?

So I might destroy my stock?

Yes, the simulation assumes that the cut is executed without error and doesn’t take into account the possibility of the stock chipping or the tool deflecting.

Well, damage it in some small way, unless a chip was really large.

The scallops are in the vertical section, not the bevel right?

I had something similar when cutting a 3D part. Seems like I ended up creating a tiny offset inside and having that limit the 3D cut. Then used a profile to clean up around the outside.

I am sure there must be a better way.

Probably when one starts to run into limitations such as this, the answer is to move up to a 3D CAM tool such as MeshCAM.

Or maybe adjust the 3D model to have a flat area at the level of the lower edge of the bevel. So that the ball nose doesn’t fall off the edge. Then do your profile.

Maybe I am not interpreting the problem correctly.

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