cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Need to share some code when posting a question or reply? Make sure to use the "Insert code sample" menu option. Learn more! X

Translate the entire conversation x

HSM vs Volume Milling cycle time

asifcad
14-Alexandrite

HSM vs Volume Milling cycle time

 

 

Hello Creo Experts, I have a question regarding volume milling. I typically choose volume rough milling sequences for my roughing operations. But now trying to use HSM Milling.. However, I've noticed that the cycle times of HSM sequences are not as efficient as I expected. Despite their name, high-speed milling cycles are actually longer than those of volume milling for the same pocket size. Could you please advise me on any parameters I might be overlooking to achieve a shorter cycle time with HSM or rough sequences compared to volume milling for the same pocket size? Please check the attached MFG file its creo 11 mfg file

 

 

Regards, Asif Fisa

4 REPLIES 4
bmuller
12-Amethyst
(To:asifcad)

The short answer is yes, unless you adjust parameters, it will be slower, so you will need to change how you set your cutting conditions.

 

With the same parameters, the HSM toolpath (constant load)  will be slower than the roughing toolpaths for volume milling. This is because it spends more time gently entering a cut, repositioning, and adjusting step-over to keep cutter engagement constant. Parameters shouldn't be similar between the two. This HSM toolpath is much more sophisticated than the relatively simple algorithm used in conventional tool paths. It allows much more aggressive cuts and allows you to get better life out of the cutter.

 

In your volume roughing toolpath example, it varies roughly from 90 degrees cutter engagement to 180 degrees. Most likely, you will set the feed rate and depth of cut to the 180 degree condition, to avoid breakage and chatter. That means that everywhere the 90 degree engagement prevails, you are going too slow. In addition, the 180 degree engagement is not ideal for tool wear, since it rubs before cutting. In your example, you have a 12mm end mill with a 40mm length of cut. However, you only take approximately 1 mm depth per pass, which means that the most of the cutting edge of the tool is not being used, and it will be worn out long before its time.

 

I would start the HSM parameters by going the full depth of your 20mm depth. I would then adjust stepover to 5-10% or so of the diameter. If all is good, you can increase that until you get chatter or breakage or back off if you think that's too much, The feedrates, due to chip thinning, can be increased as well. The nice part is that once it starts off good, you don't as often have to worry about a surprise chatter squeal or overload. You might look for a good online calculator.  The HSM toolpaths are just much smarter in other ways too, and I always reach for them first.

 

 

asifcad
14-Alexandrite
(To:bmuller)

Thank you again for the detailed explanation.

 

From what I understand, depth of cut is the primary factor that significantly impacts both cycle time and tool life when comparing High-Speed Milling to Volume Milling. Without properly optimizing this parameter, we cannot fully realize the benefits of HSM or achieve extended tool life.

However, I have some concerns regarding tapered surfaces or other complex 3D profiles, where we cannot use full-depth cuts due to the geometry. On these surfaces, applying a large depth of cut leads to larger scallops (cusps) that require additional semi-finishing or re-roughing operations to maintain an acceptable machining allowance for finishing.

As a result, the overall machining time increases because of the need for extra passes after roughing.

My questions are:

  • How do you manage HSM parameters when roughing near 3D shapes or tapered profiles?

  • Are there best practices for balancing depth of cut versus scallop height to minimize the need for semi-finishing?

  • In these cases, is it better to reduce depth of cut and prioritize uniform stock for finishing, even if it sacrifices some HSM efficiency?

Thanks again for your time and valuable advice!

 

 

Regards,
Asif

 

bmuller
12-Amethyst
(To:asifcad)

I consider making decisions on machining strategies to be about balancing many conflicting needs against the tradeoffs to all those decisions. As  such, I don't think there is a exact answer to your question. You will have to take each instance case-by-case.

 

For myself, I would probably still use the HSM for roughing even shallow cuts. It's just better for the cutter. I do use some of the traditional toolpaths, but generally just for light finishing.

 

The particular case that you mention, (3d shapes and tapered profiles) makes me wonder if some of the newer HSM toolpaths that PTC offered in Creo 11, namely 4 and 5 axis roughing, would eliminate making many light passes. I would probably look into that if you have a 5 axis mill.

Hello @asifcad

 

It looks like you have some responses from our community member. If any of these replies helped you solve your question please mark the appropriate reply as the Accepted Solution. 

Of course, if you have more to share on your issue, please let the Community know so other community members can continue to help you.

Thanks,
Vivek N.
Community Moderation Team.

Announcements

Top Tags