I can't see the photo. Also my 4 tooth rooting now shows the same tool path as toothing!!!!!!
Phil :)
45 degree worm M2.5
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Phil:
Sry, I fixed the photo..
>>Also my 4 tooth rooting now shows the same tool path as toothing!!!!!!
Youll need to explain that one?
art
Sry, I fixed the photo..
>>Also my 4 tooth rooting now shows the same tool path as toothing!!!!!!
Youll need to explain that one?
art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
>>Also my 4 tooth rooting now shows the same tool path as toothing!!!!!!
On rereading that I think I might see what your saying. But, urn off rooting and youll see
toothing is quite different. Its still the same tangential, but it doesnt move in the Z, the old one
was trying to move around the Z to match the tangent point, this one stays at base circle.. ( Calculated base)
which means it tends to keep the tool tip below the tangent point. Since it doesnt move, the path looks a bit
different, but its the same.
Art
On rereading that I think I might see what your saying. But, urn off rooting and youll see
toothing is quite different. Its still the same tangential, but it doesnt move in the Z, the old one
was trying to move around the Z to match the tangent point, this one stays at base circle.. ( Calculated base)
which means it tends to keep the tool tip below the tangent point. Since it doesnt move, the path looks a bit
different, but its the same.
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Tool paths are the same for Rooting and Toothing!!ArtF wrote: Youll need to explain that one?
Ooops my mistake, involute bit selected by mistake.
Phil :)
- Attachments
-
-
Last edited by philbur on Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
lol.. had me for a minute.
Seriously, I know its hard doing this back and forth..but its usefull to not only us but others who view the thread. While I'm not sure how great we can make a 4 tooth, its worth trying. Keep up the good work. :)
It may be easier though, if you cut a nonhelical first, if that works and the helical doesnt we at least know where the error is. Non helicals are mcuh easier to visualize on the toolpaths display..
Art
Seriously, I know its hard doing this back and forth..but its usefull to not only us but others who view the thread. While I'm not sure how great we can make a 4 tooth, its worth trying. Keep up the good work. :)
It may be easier though, if you cut a nonhelical first, if that works and the helical doesnt we at least know where the error is. Non helicals are mcuh easier to visualize on the toolpaths display..
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
here's a very thin helical. Still seems to have that anomaly close to the tooth tip?
Phil :)
Phil :)
- Attachments
-
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Its funny, I keep trying to rotate these images to look behind. :)
Switch to a non helical, its easier to see it properly, that mess is just the helical portion derived from having to
hang the tool in front of the blank.. If you use a spur or a .1 degree helical you'll see what I mean.. As the tool moves to the fron of the blank to cut the helix, it must be definition continue the helical angle past the front and rear, so the paths look bad and overwriting the profile, ( which is in the center..). All in all it makes it very hard to intuitively see whats going on. Switching to a very very low angle helical or a spur will show how close the path is to the profile.
Im of the opinion that there is no difference between helical an non-helical in terms of how they cut, but the non helical is certainly easier to see the path properly..
Art
Switch to a non helical, its easier to see it properly, that mess is just the helical portion derived from having to
hang the tool in front of the blank.. If you use a spur or a .1 degree helical you'll see what I mean.. As the tool moves to the fron of the blank to cut the helix, it must be definition continue the helical angle past the front and rear, so the paths look bad and overwriting the profile, ( which is in the center..). All in all it makes it very hard to intuitively see whats going on. Switching to a very very low angle helical or a spur will show how close the path is to the profile.
Im of the opinion that there is no difference between helical an non-helical in terms of how they cut, but the non helical is certainly easier to see the path properly..
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Quote "that mess is just the helical portion derived from having to hang the tool in front of the blank.."
If that were the case wouldn't the tool path pattern at least be uniform all the way up the curve.
Phil :)
If that were the case wouldn't the tool path pattern at least be uniform all the way up the curve.
Phil :)
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Phil:
Youd think..but its another of those visual effects. What your seeing as non uniform motion is the delta of an involute angle amplified by the almost horizontal plane of the profile. Another optical illusion of sorts.
Im pretty sure about the helical angular code, which is the only difference between a non helical and a helical. Thats why I say look at the equivalent spur. The exact same code generator makes the toolpath, the only difference between the two is the helical angles added in. So if a spur works and a helical doesnt, it can only be the angular changes for helicals that are a problem, and since Im pretty sure about the helical angle, the only question remaining is "does a 4 tooth helical with .1 degree helix ( or a spur) cut properly".
Should a spur fail, then it points to one thing, should a spur work it points to another. The problem with looking at a helical toolpath is the assumptions youll make about the way it looks, which is very non-intuitive unless you think better than I in 3d space. The spur is much easier to tell and easier to see where its failing. Im still pretty sure the normal tooth count gears are cutting fine ( at least up to the changes Ive made for this problem..but even those shouldnt have affected them.). Its warming here, soon Ill be able to cut a couple myself to see where I can make things better. ( Christ I hate the cold..). In the meantime, if you test, Id test a spur of equivalent size, if its fine, the helical should be as well.
Art
Youd think..but its another of those visual effects. What your seeing as non uniform motion is the delta of an involute angle amplified by the almost horizontal plane of the profile. Another optical illusion of sorts.
Im pretty sure about the helical angular code, which is the only difference between a non helical and a helical. Thats why I say look at the equivalent spur. The exact same code generator makes the toolpath, the only difference between the two is the helical angles added in. So if a spur works and a helical doesnt, it can only be the angular changes for helicals that are a problem, and since Im pretty sure about the helical angle, the only question remaining is "does a 4 tooth helical with .1 degree helix ( or a spur) cut properly".
Should a spur fail, then it points to one thing, should a spur work it points to another. The problem with looking at a helical toolpath is the assumptions youll make about the way it looks, which is very non-intuitive unless you think better than I in 3d space. The spur is much easier to tell and easier to see where its failing. Im still pretty sure the normal tooth count gears are cutting fine ( at least up to the changes Ive made for this problem..but even those shouldnt have affected them.). Its warming here, soon Ill be able to cut a couple myself to see where I can make things better. ( Christ I hate the cold..). In the meantime, if you test, Id test a spur of equivalent size, if its fine, the helical should be as well.
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
No optical illusions, it looks like the tool path in post #70. Its cut on the same blank from yesterday. Todays tooth flanks are at 12 o'clock and 2 o'clock
Phil :)
Phil :)
- Attachments
-
-
-
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Was that a helical or a spur? Im confused now..
I think I may have to wait till I can cut one myself to see whats up.
I have no clue as to why the clearance is making
the root wider.. on my screens it makes it narrower..
Ill give it some thought..
Art
I think I may have to wait till I can cut one myself to see whats up.
I have no clue as to why the clearance is making
the root wider.. on my screens it makes it narrower..
Ill give it some thought..
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Its my 4 toothed, M2.5, 45 degree helical, you can see the flanks in the photo.
Phil :)
Phil :)
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Phil:
Somethings bad for sure.. I just cant figure what yet. A helical is a leap of faith gear. You get a spur working,
then spin it as it cuts. Thats the leap of faith. :) , you cant easily analyse the aspects of the toolpath when its
in a helical, so you test the spur. If the spur fails, you fix IT, then the helical should work. If the spur works, it leaves
only the spinning functions. Im still figuring whats wrong, but its warming here so within a couple weeks I should
be able to cut a few tests. Single stepping usually shows me the error. All my tests seem to show its working, the spur
gear screens show toolpaths that do not touch the profile, so how its cutting too wide with clearance I cannot yet explain. .. but I will. :)
I DID notice one bug.. ( if its a bug, I cant recall if its a limitation.). On spurs you can set depth and the gear gets thicker.. in Helicals there is no effect, they are only whatever they were created as. Ill look into fixing that as well unless it turns out to be a limitation based on the internal calculators.
Back soon.
Art
Somethings bad for sure.. I just cant figure what yet. A helical is a leap of faith gear. You get a spur working,
then spin it as it cuts. Thats the leap of faith. :) , you cant easily analyse the aspects of the toolpath when its
in a helical, so you test the spur. If the spur fails, you fix IT, then the helical should work. If the spur works, it leaves
only the spinning functions. Im still figuring whats wrong, but its warming here so within a couple weeks I should
be able to cut a few tests. Single stepping usually shows me the error. All my tests seem to show its working, the spur
gear screens show toolpaths that do not touch the profile, so how its cutting too wide with clearance I cannot yet explain. .. but I will. :)
I DID notice one bug.. ( if its a bug, I cant recall if its a limitation.). On spurs you can set depth and the gear gets thicker.. in Helicals there is no effect, they are only whatever they were created as. Ill look into fixing that as well unless it turns out to be a limitation based on the internal calculators.
Back soon.
Art
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Here's a 45 degree helical M2.5 involute I just cut by manually editing the GT gcode to do the following:
1. Run the end mill straight across the middle with a user defined step down per pass to the base diameter.
2. Run the tangential shaving above the base diameter with a user defined step up and across per pass.
3. Run rooting below the base diameter with a user defined step across and down per pass.
Seems to work fine. I could have used more segments on the Tan shave. I had 8 but I can only count 4? Also the notch at the root was caused by an editing error on my part. I also clipped the back part of the right tooth top with a G0, due to a missing line of code. Other than that it seems to work!
1. Run the end mill straight across the middle with a user defined step down per pass to the base diameter.
2. Run the tangential shaving above the base diameter with a user defined step up and across per pass.
3. Run rooting below the base diameter with a user defined step across and down per pass.
Seems to work fine. I could have used more segments on the Tan shave. I had 8 but I can only count 4? Also the notch at the root was caused by an editing error on my part. I also clipped the back part of the right tooth top with a G0, due to a missing line of code. Other than that it seems to work!
- Attachments
-
Last edited by philbur on Mon Apr 28, 2014 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 45 degree worm M2.5
Interesting...
1. Run the end mill straight across the middle with a user defined step down per pass to the base diameter.
So does that mean the root side moves were responsible for the gouging in the end?
2. Run the tangentia l shaving above the base diameter with a user defined step up and across per pass.
When you say step up, what do you mean? Did you keep the depth tot he base circle no matter the Y position?
3. Run rooting below the base diameter with a user defined step across and down per pass.
Same here, was the rooting effectively changed or just some clipped out?
Might be easier if I could see the before and after editing... Not a bad result.. too few tangentials maybe. ( Strange, I get 8 when I ask for 8.. ). I guess the question is how much did you edit out and what.. :-).
I mean its great this cuts that way with the edits..but I cant count on all systems being able to remove in the tangential stage what wasnt removed in the rooting stage. ( That was the common support problem in GM...which is why the rooting is trying to take so much..
Looks like the right track though...
Art
1. Run the end mill straight across the middle with a user defined step down per pass to the base diameter.
So does that mean the root side moves were responsible for the gouging in the end?
2. Run the tangentia l shaving above the base diameter with a user defined step up and across per pass.
When you say step up, what do you mean? Did you keep the depth tot he base circle no matter the Y position?
3. Run rooting below the base diameter with a user defined step across and down per pass.
Same here, was the rooting effectively changed or just some clipped out?
Might be easier if I could see the before and after editing... Not a bad result.. too few tangentials maybe. ( Strange, I get 8 when I ask for 8.. ). I guess the question is how much did you edit out and what.. :-).
I mean its great this cuts that way with the edits..but I cant count on all systems being able to remove in the tangential stage what wasnt removed in the rooting stage. ( That was the common support problem in GM...which is why the rooting is trying to take so much..
Looks like the right track though...
Art
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest