Rival MT10 Castle Copperhead Sensored System

[Jerold]

View attachment 192819

That is rookie machining right there. Terrible toolpath with the wrong endmill - results in a very ugly part.

This is quality machine work
View attachment 192820
View attachment 192821

M2C stuff looks much, much nicer.

This is garbage. Some very terrible tool chatter. Again, wrong tool, wrong depth of finish cut, and wrong speeds and feeds. In my career, this part would have very abruptly met the scrap bin.
View attachment 192825

I didn't even think about that but now that you mention it, I see what you mean. They probably did that thinking it was aesthetically pleasing.

It looks like they followed the contours AFTER the holes were drilled. Wouldn't it make sense to do straight passes to flatten it, then drill the holes? Seems like a much simpler process.

Also how would you remove the machining marks, maybe a tumbler?

 

[WickedFog]

I didn't even think about that but now that you mention it, I see what you mean. They probably did that thinking it was aesthetically pleasing.

It looks like they followed the contours AFTER the holes were drilled. Wouldn't it make sense to do straight passes to flatten it, then drill the holes? Seems like a much simpler process.

Also how would you remove the machining marks, maybe a tumbler?

A tumbler would give it a more consistant finish for sure. I always loved that look, which is somewhat a hammered finish depending on the medium used.

The worst part of their toolpath is their finish path around the boss. They just plunged straight in from the side, drove around, and pulled out. Kinda like this.

Every CAM software I ever used, MasterCAM, DelCam, SurfCam, SolidCam, etc allows you to not only do arced entries, but also helical entries (or heli-arcs), moving in three axis as it enters and exits the cuts. These options would eliminate that swirly mark left by the tool when the side of the endmill makes contact with the wall of the boss, which is the center of the radiused endmill dancing as the tool basically slams into a wall.

The rest of the toolpath is a standard contour facing/pocketing type path, and isn't bad. Except their multiple passes around the bosses is something I would not have done. I would have ran the facing toolpath up to the bosses, leaving .010" material on the bosses, and .005" on the floor. Then ran the toolpath to finish the floor, then a simple contour path around the bosses using an arced entry/exit exactly at the horizontal edges of the part. Entering at the 2 o'clock position there is just lazyness. But the feeds/speeds/tooling has left a really terrible finish on the part also. Possibly also not a proper finish pass.

It's mostly coming from working in Racing that I developed this mentality. Parts 'almost' had to look pretty first, function second Not really of course, but looks were just as important as tolerance sometimes.

 

[332_RC]

A tumbler would give it a more consistant finish for sure. I always loved that look, which is somewhat a hammered finish depending on the medium used.

The worst part of their toolpath is their finish path around the boss. They just plunged straight in from the side, drove around, and pulled out. Kinda like this.
View attachment 193370

Every CAM software I ever used, MasterCAM, DelCam, SurfCam, SolidCam, etc allows you to not only do arced entries, but also helical entries (or heli-arcs), moving in three axis as it enters and exits the cuts. These options would eliminate that swirly mark left by the tool when the side of the endmill makes contact with the wall of the boss, which is the center of the radiused endmill dancing as the tool basically slams into a wall.
View attachment 193371

The rest of the toolpath is a standard contour facing/pocketing type path, and isn't bad. Except their multiple passes around the bosses is something I would not have done. I would have ran the facing toolpath up to the bosses, leaving .010" material on the bosses, and .005" on the floor. Then ran the toolpath to finish the floor, then a simple contour path around the bosses using an arced entry/exit exactly at the horizontal edges of the part. Entering at the 2 o'clock position there is just lazyness. But the feeds/speeds/tooling has left a really terrible finish on the part also. Possibly also not a proper finish pass.

It's mostly coming from working in Racing that I developed this mentality. Parts 'almost' had to look pretty first, function second Not really of course, but looks were just as important as tolerance sometimes.

Yep +1

 

[Jerold]

A tumbler would give it a more consistant finish for sure. I always loved that look, which is somewhat a hammered finish depending on the medium used.

The worst part of their toolpath is their finish path around the boss. They just plunged straight in from the side, drove around, and pulled out. Kinda like this.
View attachment 193370

Every CAM software I ever used, MasterCAM, DelCam, SurfCam, SolidCam, etc allows you to not only do arced entries, but also helical entries (or heli-arcs), moving in three axis as it enters and exits the cuts. These options would eliminate that swirly mark left by the tool when the side of the endmill makes contact with the wall of the boss, which is the center of the radiused endmill dancing as the tool basically slams into a wall.
View attachment 193371

The rest of the toolpath is a standard contour facing/pocketing type path, and isn't bad. Except their multiple passes around the bosses is something I would not have done. I would have ran the facing toolpath up to the bosses, leaving .010" material on the bosses, and .005" on the floor. Then ran the toolpath to finish the floor, then a simple contour path around the bosses using an arced entry/exit exactly at the horizontal edges of the part. Entering at the 2 o'clock position there is just lazyness. But the feeds/speeds/tooling has left a really terrible finish on the part also. Possibly also not a proper finish pass.

It's mostly coming from working in Racing that I developed this mentality. Parts 'almost' had to look pretty first, function second Not really of course, but looks were just as important as tolerance sometimes.

Great explanation!

I saw that chinger in on the edge and thought it might be for clearance, but I've never seen it on any of the steel parts either.

Last time I touched a CNC was in a class in 1987.

 

[WickedFog]

Great explanation!

I saw that chinger in on the edge and thought it might be for clearance, but I've never seen it on any of the steel parts either.

Last time I touched a CNC was in a class in 1987.

I have always told kids and younger people, it doesn't matter what you do in life - take pride in your work. Do a good job, and you will be rewarded. I worked with a janitor at one machine shop that wore a nice shirt and tie every day to work. Evety day he went around after his other duties and cleaned every doorknob in the building with Lysol. That's taking pride in your work, and I had tremendous respect for that guy, as did everyone else that worked there. In machining, taking pride in your work will move you to the top of the food chain very quickly.

I was the prototype guy at most of the shops I worked at. If we got a new part, I developed the processes and fixturing for making it, which was a lot like engineering work. I also revamped current processes to improve the finished part and/or production time. So my taking pride in my work benefitted me by allowing me to take on the most fun, and challenging projects. I absolutely loved my job. But had I been like others, who just got the job done, and got stuck on the lowly production jobs, I would have hated it, even though I was still technically machining.

 

[Greywolf74]

A tumbler would give it a more consistant finish for sure. I always loved that look, which is somewhat a hammered finish depending on the medium used.

The worst part of their toolpath is their finish path around the boss. They just plunged straight in from the side, drove around, and pulled out. Kinda like this.
View attachment 193370

Every CAM software I ever used, MasterCAM, DelCam, SurfCam, SolidCam, etc allows you to not only do arced entries, but also helical entries (or heli-arcs), moving in three axis as it enters and exits the cuts. These options would eliminate that swirly mark left by the tool when the side of the endmill makes contact with the wall of the boss, which is the center of the radiused endmill dancing as the tool basically slams into a wall.
View attachment 193371

The rest of the toolpath is a standard contour facing/pocketing type path, and isn't bad. Except their multiple passes around the bosses is something I would not have done. I would have ran the facing toolpath up to the bosses, leaving .010" material on the bosses, and .005" on the floor. Then ran the toolpath to finish the floor, then a simple contour path around the bosses using an arced entry/exit exactly at the horizontal edges of the part. Entering at the 2 o'clock position there is just lazyness. But the feeds/speeds/tooling has left a really terrible finish on the part also. Possibly also not a proper finish pass.

It's mostly coming from working in Racing that I developed this mentality. Parts 'almost' had to look pretty first, function second Not really of course, but looks were just as important as tolerance sometimes.

Hey now, dont make fun of my machine work.... I only use one hand and I'm down to my last 3 brain cells.