Path 3D pocket removing too much material
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Path 3D pocket removing too much material
I have a complicated part that will require CNC machining on one face and then flipping over to complete the opposite face. The path 3D pocket tool is creating an internal path as expected but also a path on the opposite face. The simplified attached file shows a sloped surface with material that needs to be removed from above and below. However when I use 3D pocket for the top face it generates a tool path for the top and bottom faces. Is there a way of stopping 3D pocket from generating a tool path on the opposite face?
OS: Windows 10 Version 2009
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.19.24291 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: releases/FreeCAD-0-19
Hash: 7b5e18a0759de778b74d3a5c17eba9cb815035ac
Python version: 3.8.6+
Qt version: 5.15.2
Coin version: 4.0.1
OCC version: 7.5.0
Locale: English/United Kingdom (en_GB)
Thanks
- Attachments
-
- Screenshot.png (102.96 KiB) Viewed 1946 times
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
The simplest thing would be to switch to the 3D Surface operation. You shape is not really a "pocket". The Pocket operation can be made to work, but the Surface is made for this type of shape.
Gene
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
Thank you for the help. I've applied it to my design and it has solved the problem. It does however result in rough edges which I've struggled to clean using other operations. This was the main reason I previously tried 3D surface but gave up on it hoping that 3D pocket would work, which it did until I added the internal sloping edge, which it failed with.
What operations would you recommend to clean the internal edges after the 3D surface operation, particularly around the three curved faces at the front?
What operations would you recommend to clean the internal edges after the 3D surface operation, particularly around the three curved faces at the front?
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
First, I do not fully trust the simulator for complex operations like 3D Surface. It is probably correct in this case that the ends of the pockets are not fully cleared out.
You will need to play with options like Boundary Enforcement and Stock size. I do not believe that extensions are included in the 3D Surface at this time. Also, go into the Property panel below the model tree. Then right click and select Show All. A number of additional parameters will be shown. Most will not be relevant in this case, but you can experiment.
If you can attach a sample file I am sure someone here will take a crack at it.
Gene
You will need to play with options like Boundary Enforcement and Stock size. I do not believe that extensions are included in the 3D Surface at this time. Also, go into the Property panel below the model tree. Then right click and select Show All. A number of additional parameters will be shown. Most will not be relevant in this case, but you can experiment.
If you can attach a sample file I am sure someone here will take a crack at it.
Gene
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
Coming back to OP: Even if I make it a real pocket, 3DPocket does it wrong. Regression or mistake?
- Attachments
-
- sloped_edge_cb.FCStd
- (44.6 KiB) Downloaded 24 times
-
- SnipScreenshot-d047be.png (81.93 KiB) Viewed 1707 times
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
There definitely appears to be a problem/limitation with 3D pocket, which is beyond my capabilities at the moment. I've spent too much time trying to resolve this problem and I can't get 3D surface to do what I want either.
I've gone back to using the 3D pocket operation but removing the bottom sloping face, which is what it struggles with. It's a bit long winded but does produce results close to what I was hoping for.
I start with the design as before but without the bottom sloping face, so that the bottom face is completely flat over the whole area of the design. I then use several 3D pocket operations to generate the gcode for the top side milling.
I then flip the design over, make it solid, add the bottom sloping face and then use a single 3D pocket operation to generate the bottom side gcode.
Although not ideal because I have to change the design between generating the top side gcode and bottom side gcode, it does appear to work and that is the most important thing and I can get on with making things.
I've gone back to using the 3D pocket operation but removing the bottom sloping face, which is what it struggles with. It's a bit long winded but does produce results close to what I was hoping for.
I start with the design as before but without the bottom sloping face, so that the bottom face is completely flat over the whole area of the design. I then use several 3D pocket operations to generate the gcode for the top side milling.
I then flip the design over, make it solid, add the bottom sloping face and then use a single 3D pocket operation to generate the bottom side gcode.
Although not ideal because I have to change the design between generating the top side gcode and bottom side gcode, it does appear to work and that is the most important thing and I can get on with making things.
Re: Path 3D pocket removing too much material
Evening,
Fix in the mix as PR #5424, Path: Fixes 3D Pocket overcut on underside of selected faces.
Similar report in 3D pocket anomaly thread a while back.
Russell
Fix in the mix as PR #5424, Path: Fixes 3D Pocket overcut on underside of selected faces.
Similar report in 3D pocket anomaly thread a while back.
Russell