In the CAM demonstration starting around 5:35 into the video you talk about first creating holes, then creating threads, and then creating a chamfer with a circle operation and an angle of 45 degrees.
Could this have been done a different way? In other words could you have simply done a Fusion 360 Chamfer operation? I think the answer is no because the threads were added first. Could we therefore have made the hole, then run a Fusion 360 chamfer op, and then created the threads? It would seem that a chamfer operation after the threads where created would have a decent chance of bogeying up the start of the thread.
An additional suggestion may be to enable comments in the video itself…I realize that could quickly become a hot-bed of discussion and a management nightmare…But it would at least allow for comments/questions directly in the video itself.
2 Likes
i would have done hole, chamfer then thread if I were machining it. I to would think that the hole, thread, chamfer would have messed up the thread.
1 Like
@WilliamCassanova You can do it how you want. remember that these projects are made to show you how to do things so that take great pains to show many different ways to do the same thing.
1 Like
Thanks for the replies…After watching the CAM operation that followed that is exactly what was done. I think the point of the CAD design showing the chamfer operation was more of a teaching opportunity. Let me extend the question by asking…If the hole had been much larger, say a 1" diameter threaded hole with the eventual goal being that the top was chamfered would the chamfer have been done first in the CAM and also before any threading operation in the CAD? My presumption in this case is that the threads would probably have to be created with a thread-mill as opposed to a tap.
A related question is…Do most designers include the chamfer in the CAM design or is it typically left to the programmer to add it during the CAD step?
2 Likes
You are correct in that was a teaching opportunity on how to get a complete model the way it was intended to look once machined.
Some designers/engineers will call out a chamfer spec. Tend to see it more on the Aerospace side of things tho.
1 Like
I agree it is best to chamfer before tapping.
Also I agree with Billy some engineers do call the brakes but a lot of times you will just see it in the general notes break all sharp Corners x amount.
1 Like
Thanks, Billy, Great instructional videos…I am dreaming of a Haas Mini-Mill at this point. Currently I own a CNC router which is a totally different beast but the lessons certainly apply as at this point its a matter of differrent feeds and speeds and a crucial step of leveling the spoil-board.
I posted a question in another part of the forum but it sorta applies to all cases…Its a bit long-winded but I will try to be concise…In the CAD portion I assume that much of the work of tramming the X-Y-Z access has already been done when the machine was initially setup. The next crucial step is tooling. You guys have presented a tool-library that is used for most of these projects. My presumption is that for most shops there is a relatively hard and fast rule about what gets loaded in the Haas Carousel and that this does not change for each operation. My only real question is that T1 in the carousel is equal to T1 in the library…In other words, T1 is always a facing mill, T2 is perhaps a 1/2" end mill, and perhaps T3 is a chamfer/spotting drill.
During the CAD portion of these videos Titan creates the tool-paths…At the end the tools are re-ordered. The setup sheet then reflects the sequence of tools that will be used…My presumption is that it is up to the operator to insure that T1 is actually what is expected, T2 is what is expected, and T3 is what is expected?
Does not changing the ordering dis-associate the tool that is expected? So if we chose to do a chamfer op first, followed by a drill op do the tools in the carousel have to not be adjusted? Let’s assume that we then decide that the drill-op should be first. Do the tools in the Carousel have to be be adjused?