HSMWorks & Fusion CAM How-To: The Ultimate 3D Surfacing Toolpath.

Let's explore the Ultimate 3D toolpath, what it would include and how it would behave. Then let's see how close we can come, and take a look at some beta functionality to get an idea of where Autodesk is headed in this regard.

[@whatmoughwedding]

Rob, you are a master at this stuff. You do a very good job explaining why things work the way they do! Keep up the good work. We need more people watching your videos.

[@ScottMoyse]

AlNDes Whatmough they are great... but it highlights a long standing issue with CAM software... as easy as HSM can be... it's still a bit of a black art.

[@zodiaceng]

Used a lot of this type of stuff in SURFCAM when I was doing mold work. They had a "steep/shallow" toolpath which was basically a combined parallel/contour broken up by whatever angle limits you desired similar to how you did in the beginning. Used a lot of sketches to drive their 3D Offset pass which is basically the same as scallop. I don't think enough people know about using sketches to drive paths so it's good to see you point it out. That was how I did my Fusion F using morph spiral, contact only and had huge sketches so the areas where the path would change directions was way outside the surfaces to cut. Worked out really well.

[@kevinkillsit]

You're the man. Big fan of your videos Rob. thanksfor letting us inside your head for a bit.

[@DeedsEngineering]

Awesome video! The most helpful part was the info on what the software uses to drive its calculations. This makes what your showing us very adaptable to different projects. Thanks!

[@pakman422]

Awesome information!! This was very helpful. Thanks Rob! Looking forward to future videos!

[@bernhard_derProtoTyp]

wow! thanks for the great video! I never thought of deriving or drawing my own curves... so great. thanks!

[@inoovadz]

very informative, long time not wacth such interesting vedio, thanks a million.

[@Ghglover1]

Great video! What a huge help this is going to be. THANKS!

[@nziniz25]

Thanks for the awesome tip of using an offset curve to drive scallop, it fixed a troublesome operation

[@Steve_Just_Steve]

Great video Rob. Thanks

[@jaypierson5955]

Good explanation at 13:06 on how to set up a nice scallop toolpath used later on.

[@rlockwood2]

+Jay Pierson thanks!

[@rtwolfrt]

Great stuff, learned a lot.

[@antshark]

Wow, so much info! Thanks!

[@Max_Marz]

Two questions, why cant we learn this stuff directly from Autodesk in an intuitive way and second, why are 4th axis (XYZ-A) toolpaths so difficult for them to implement?

[@jimnnobody]

Great stuff. Thank you.

[@daveprecise6915]

nice explanations and takeaways! 🙃🙃🙃

[@cobraframebuilding]

wow! Great stuff!

[@Nohlicnab01]

Really interesting thanks

[@ScottMoyse]

Cheers Rob

[@atomkinder67]

My largest issue with the Blend beta so far is its awful smoothing usage, and so as much as I want to test it more, it creates massive amounts of code and Flow doesn't, so I use Flow. Hoping for some news soon on its refinements though. Skål & takk!

[@bertr5650]

Nice vid Rob #roblockwood . Thanks for your time. My mind works best when I have at least a basic understanding of how someone has designed something or the "why" of how things work. Then you can work around and find solutions to better it just like you have with the offset sketch. I guess from an IP point of view the companies cant divulge too much info but some basic info or pics to allow those of us who want to use the tool to its best ability would be great and in turn save playing Russian roulette of trial and error with settings to debunk. It would probably help their product development too with deeper level feedback. Cheers Bert

[@Max_Marz]

Big issue I've ran into when employing these techniques, what happens when my fillets "end" on flat surfaces, in other words it doesn't wrap around the part to form a closed contour? This really messes me up when using the scallop and morph tricks you showed because now my tool isnt going "along" the fillet. It also seems that they took stepover control out of flow in beta :(

[@jdrinkh2o]

"In a world without flow....", check please, I'm out - gonna just chill and wait for that Swiss video to drop.

[@ScottMoyse]

jdrinkh2o I'm keen as mustard to see that

[@crossroadguitars]

Hey Rob i was wandering if you could help me with machining a guitar neck i am used to master cam but got now Fsm autodesk with in solidworks 2016 i struggle with the 3 d shape of the back of neck hope you can help or now where i could go to Thanks

[@mihoubiali1402]

Thanks Freind is it possible with hsmworks 2012

[@bahadruzun576]

Hi MR. Rob. I have a question .I want non-stopping tool path . Especially surface milling operations for best surface quality ..I want NO TOOL PATH TRACE on workpice .How to AUTODESK ? ..Meantime I dont use AUTODESK ,only I'm doing research. Thank You....( My English some bad , excuse me )

[@What-is-thehandle]

Look into HyperMill. I believe its more adapted for high quality mold making with no tool marks. But its probably expensive...

[@exactengineeringllc5254]

Hi Rob, New to your channel and much appreciate the detailed explanations of your methods. Do you have an email account by which I can contact you regarding Fusion and HSMWorks? Thanks!

[@rlockwood2]

Yes, but i'd rather not post it publically, and the KZbin messaging system is garbage. Any chance you're on Instagram? @lockedtool there, send me a direct message.

[@170cuda]

Very nice video. There is no perfect 3D tool path, period............. Yes, some tool paths can be better (more efficient) depending on part geometry. Many new to CAM learn this the hard way. It's knowing (having CAM experience, having manufacturing experience) that will determine what tool paths you should select. Regardless of what software you are using. Unlike CAD, learning CAM is more than just reading a manual or knowing what buttons to click. Simple example: No one should use 3D surface tool path for flat areas on a part. That's one way to not be efficient. You won't find that in a manual or online help. It's also important to note in regards to efficiency, knowing what the product is going to be used for and the tolerances that need to be met, should drive the what the finish should look like. Imagine spending hours programming and cutting chips for a perfect finish when the part is going to used as a door stop.

[@170cuda]

Please note that the tool path at 16:00 is NOT close to a perfect 3D Tool Path. Yes, the transition from the center boundary to outer boundary is nice. But the surface finish will not be constant. When finishing a part like in your example, the scallop height will be different if your spacing is constant. Are you confusing evenly spaced passes as "close to perfect" tool path? For this type of tool path, the tool path spacing should not be even. The tool path spacing should indeed change depending on the slope angle of the surface for a more uniform surface finish. For a more uniform scallop height.

[@rlockwood2]

So Cal Plymouth and Dodge Posse in the case shown, the geometry has constant curvature and the toolpath maintains a correctly constant 3d stepover, which will result in a perfectly constant scallop.

[@170cuda]

Hi Rob, that is incorrect. Because the the surface slope is more straight up and down on the sides and more flat on the top, the spacing of the tool path should not be constant to produce a more even scallop height. If you want a more constant, uniform scallop height, the spacing of the tool path should change as the surface transitions from straight up and down to flat. Machine that part using that tool path and look at the surface finish and you will see this. The scallop heights will vary. My point is that if you want the scallop heights to be the same, then the tool path step over will need to change based upon slope angle. However, if scallop height is not a concern, then a constant step over may be desired.

[@rlockwood2]

We'll just agree to disagree; with 30 something years of teaching experience, i'm assuming you can find your way into a 2d sketch and figure out you're wrong in no time!

[@170cuda]

Its OK, its not me that needs a sketch. In fact, it does not take 30 years to understand something as simple as this. I am surprised you don't understand this. You are mistaken as you (for some reason) think you are cutting with a sphere. You are cutting with a ball nose or a bull nose that has vertical sides. As the ball nose or bull nose begins to cut the curved surface near the bottom, the side of the cutter eats into the previous scallop. This reduces the height of the previous scallop. If you were cutting with a sphere (Like a Lolli Pop Cutter), then yes, the scallops would be the same height. Tell you what I will do to assist. I would hate for you to keep misinforming your subscribers. I will create a video for you and post the link on this time line. As soon as you realize you are incorrect, you can delete the post or keep it so others can learn. BTW, part of being a good teacher is admitting when you are incorrect and learn from it.

[@rlockwood2]

Ah, no need. I'll give you that point, the scallop itself will wind up shortened on the lower passes due the side of the tool. I misunderstood the argument you were making, assuming you were oversimplifying, when it was myself doing so instead. It's a valid point and something I probably should've touched on.

[@EwanSupple]

Great video...you need a better mic. Lots of ambient "buz" and your swallowing is gross, lol.

[@rlockwood2]

Thanks for the feedback. A few seconds worth of audio correction would have taken care of the buzz. In the future, i'll try and swallow more attractively.

[@gusbisbal9803]

The quality of the content massively out weighs the sound defects. Tom, try not to get distracted by every F@#$in thing that passes your ears.... Rob.... keep up the good work, I subed because of this video.

[@EwanSupple]

Hey Gus, I also subbed. Sorry my half joking, constructive criticism, has you in such a tizzy, lol.

[@stuart99299]

That's the best 3d explanation I have seen. Is it possible to share the model and path so I can play and run it on my Haas?. thanks.