I made some more progress on the skateboard truck today; unfortunately, it's pretty slow going as there are many features on the part, and I have to double-check my work continually.

I'm getting excited to start running this on Monday and will be an exciting experience. It's helped quite a bit that I did a lot of work on the Pocket NC (smaller 5-axis machine), which gives me the range of possibilities and how to do it properly. 

An excellent rule of thumb I learned from one of the first tutorials I took on the Pocket NC was always to keep the Z-axis pointed toward you, the x-axis to the right, and y-axis up. With this setup, you ensure the machine is going in the right direction and prevents mistakes like the a-axis going negative. 

I'm a little unsure of posting the gcode if there are some settings I need to play around with, like limiting the maximum rotation on the different axis. That was one thing I liked about the Pocket NC was that you could set a hard limit on how far each part of the machine went, and it would give an error when posting the code. It threw me off the first time it happened and had me stumped for some time until I realized it was preventing me from posting me bad code. 

Another feature I like with Fusion is its new simulated stock option when selecting a toolpath; it shows the stock outcome of all the previous toolpaths and instantly indicates what the new toolpath will do. The benefit of this is that instead of simulating your entire operation to see what the outcome is, you can now get away with posting the areas you want to check. The downside is that it's not super accurate and is a little rough around the edges, but it's not a problem if you're trying to see finishing passes and don't want to run through all the adaptive clearing. 

I attended my first Toastmasters meeting on public speaking today!

Toastmasters is a group of people that get together regularly to give speeches on random topics for up to two minutes and graded on your performance by the other members. It helps you with your elevator pitches and thinking on your feet. It tracks how many filler words or stutters you have throughout your speeches and gives you feedback on how you do by unbias individuals.

Unfortunately, due to Covid, the group wasn't able to meet in person and so had to convince over a zoom call. 

They start with a group leader or "toastmaster" who organizes and leads the event for that day; they are responsible for keeping people on track and moving topics along. There are several other roles in the group as well for grading and setting of the speaking topics. Someone will open the meeting with a joke to keep things lighthearted, and one of the participants will give a short inspirational speech. 

The table topics are a random assortment of questions that you have to answer and give a short 1-2 minute speech. During the presentation, one of the other group members will keep track of how many filler words you say, such as: "and," "um," "ah," "like," and yeah. There are also bonus points if you use the "word of the day" in your speech. Today it was "flexible." Each participant is given a topic and a few moments to collect their thoughts, then they give their speech

At the end, each participant is graded on how they did, how memorable they were, and how many filler words they used. And everyone votes for their favorite speech. I delivered two speeches today; one was on "What is one habit you have developed recently, and how has it affected your life?." I shared my weight loss story tieing into it some of the struggles I faced and the most important thing behind it (in this case, mindset). My second speech was on "what would the title of your autobiography be and why?" this is where I failed majorly; I shared my favorite autobiography briefly by R. G. LeTourneau and why, but ended with a defeat of "I don't know." Combined total, I had 11 um's/ahs and no incorrect grammar; my first speech lasted 2:15 and the second, 1:55. At the end, each participant votes for their favorite speech, and I got picked for the one I did on weight loss.

There were four participants (a far cry from their usual meetings of 16-18 due to COVID) and got to know each person before the meeting started. I am looking forward to the next meeting and will be more conscious of filler words and stumbling over myself. 

Working on the skateboard truck programming today and made some decent progress on it!

I've got the top portion roughed out and ready for the finishing toolpaths before moving my way down to the undersides of the wings to allow the most stability in the piece. One of the techniques I'm using that I haven't done before is taking advantage of the corner radius endmills to do many finishing toolpaths. Since many surfaces go from flat to slight curves, the bullnose endmills work really well when transitioning between them. There are two significant canyons in this piece that stumped me on how to clean out; if I used a square endmill, I would have to use a tiny one, which would add a ton of time to the operation. Alternately, if I used a ball endmill, I couldn't push it as hard and would have to take very light stepdowns. The use of bullnose endmills gives you the best of both worlds, and my runtime on that toolpath went from 20+ minutes down to 6.

Once I had the bulk of the material removed, I programmed a 1/4" ball endmill to clean off the surfaces of any significant steps or areas a smaller bullnose might have trouble with later. 

I also did some more research on finishing toolpaths and have got some new tricks I want to try out taking advantage of the 3D contour and parallel toolpaths. I would continuously get small marks on my parts where the axis changed direction and cause the tool to jump slightly; nothing you could feel, but it was visible. 

A friend of the family recently recommended "Living Forward" by Michael Hyatt & Daniel Harkavy in response to a question I had on getting to the next level of performance and intentional living. I can honestly say that it is one of the most helpful books I've read on purposeful living and setting your priorities. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for more clarity in their life and helps you see the bigger picture of your future. 

Living Forward outlines writing your "life plan," a short 5-16 page paper on your priorities in life, your reasons for them, and the steps you take to build on them intentionally. They have you regularly review your life plan and make modifications to it each week as you go. Your life plan is hyper-specific to your life and gets very personal; I like to see it as a writing down of your thoughts in an organized fashion. 

The first set of questions it asks you is "how do you want to be remembered" and has a category for each group of people in your life (ex. God, spouse, parents, children, friends, etc.). This helps you be more intentional about showing up in those relationships with the end goal in mind. 

It then has you write down your major priorities in life, ex. Faith, work, family, friends, health, etc., and has you put those in order. From there, you write what they call your "accounts," which is a more in-depth view of those major priorities and can include specific people or avenues of your life. 

It asks you why or purpose statement for this account, you outline your motivations and reasons for having this a priority in your life. The following question is your envisioned future, basically the where do you see yourself in x years, and has you write it as though it were true today, so for a health category. An example for health might go something like "I am always in a state of vibrancy and awareness, I am fully present in every interaction I have with family and friends. I work out regularly to build up my strength and generate energy..."

It's optional, but there's a spot for an inspirational quote (I found most of mine from Proverbs), which helps you build the motivation to work on that account. 

It then has you write down your current reality, basically where you are at this point in your life, what you are doing to build that account, and things you might be doing that prevents you from going to where you want to be. Some of the items for the health account might include "I am not staying as focused on my food plan and often have difficulties on the weekend staying committed," it forces you to say the quiet part out loud. It forces you to look at yourself seriously and realistically at the significant areas you failed or are building up. 

Once you have your list of current realities for each account, it moves over to specific commitments; the basic idea is you write down a list of obligations you will hold to throughout the weeks/months that will build up that account. For example, in health, it might say something like "be in bed by 9:30 pm every weeknight" and "run a 5k by 10/10/20" this gives you an obtainable goal to work on, and through regular review, you update it with new goals and commitments. 

One of the things I found especially interesting that they highly suggested was to take a full day off to work on your life plan, eight+ hours to write. A whole day is quite a commitment, but the value from it is definitely worth the investment. It has you take your time going through each life account and forces you to be very specific in each area of your life and prevents you from rushing things or from hitting blocks. Typically there are 4-7 priorities in the life plan, and 5-14 accounts within those priorities. 

One of the things that drew me back originally was thinking "a life plan, that's a fixed document and my life changes, I don't even know if I will be even in the same industry in the future." But the book takes that into account and has you continually reviewing and updating, so you're not writing your life plan of the future, your writing it of your current future.

I'm also working on the programming of the skateboard trucks, which is proving to be much more complicated than I initially thought it would be. 

My boss always emphasizes rigidity in parts making and should be one of the most important factors to keep in mind while programming. Initially, he instructed me to have enough material to surround the piece and create a wall around it; this would allow you to backfill it with clay or a casting material, reducing vibrations from the endmills. Unfortunately, I didn't realize that was what he meant until I had the stock cut and dovetails finished. So I had to take a different route and leave the lower half of the part completely connected to the base of the stock and fill it in with moldable clay rather than a liquid. 

I'm taking advantage of the silhouette machining boundary in Fusion360 to create the base stock around the part, leaving plenty of material to hold on. Once I finish roughing out most of the material, I then come in with finishing toolpaths starting from the top and making my way down. Doing the top first will give me the most stability and so decreased vibrations. Once I finish up the upper half, I will then rough out the material connecting the part from the stock leaving a small amount at the bottom base and finishing the sides. It may not make the most sense and is hard to explain, but as I go through the process, it will become more apparent as I go through the project. I'm very thankful that this part doesn't have an NDA, and I am free to show the process that I am taking.

It's more complicated to do than on my Pocket NC, and I have to keep many more variables in mind while programming that wouldn't have been an issue on the smaller machine. 

Machined my first dovetails today and started working the 5-axis program!

Cutting the dovetails was more challenging and easier than I anticipated. I wasn't entirely sure about the concept behind cutting them and how critical the depth was on it (basically how far to cut) and so took a bit longer working on that. I used a simple decking of the top, then a 2D contouring toolpath to trace the inner line of the drawn dovetail and left a little stock-to-leave if the first run didn't fit. I underestimated how much material I would need to remove and took my time creeping up on the right number, two thou at a time. Once the program was proven, I tossed the rest of the stock in the machine and finished the set. All in all, it took about 45 minutes to do from scratch, and the program run time was 90 seconds per part (had the dovetail repeat the finishing pass to remove any burrs). 

I spent the entire day today working on installing and calibrating the 5-axis trunnion on the Haas VF2.

My boss had a custom hoist system built to fit around the VF2 to allow easy install and removal of the 5th axis, and we installed it today. Right off the bat, the a-axis zeroed incorrectly, and I had to set it in the G54 with a dial indicator manually. I'm not sure how to change the machine code offsets, so it reads it as 0, which would be ideal, and will have to do some more research to find that. 

After that, I had to bolt the 5th axis trunnion to the table and dial it in; this took quite a long time (45+ minutes) and had got frustrating toward the end of it. The basic idea was to bolt one screw down on one back and leave the other loose, then pivot off of that one until you got to the desired rotation, and secure the second one down. 

From there, I probed the center of the B-axis using the Heimer probe and then checked it with a dial indicator to ensure it was correct. I then installed the Heimer tool probe and went through the whole calibration system to get all working correctly. For some reason, the right to left rotation of the tool probe was offset by quite a bit, and no matter how much you tried to adjust the set screws, you couldn't get it perfectly flat. I ended up placing a small shim at one end underneath the tool probe to raise the lower side and level it from there. 

(A few months back, my boss took the trunnion off to send back to the Haas team to get one of the parts repaired. There was an issue before where surface finishes would have a weird spotty look to them when using the A and B axis.)

I am still having the same height issues on the Haas minimill 4th axis. 

My boss suggested I place the 4" gauge block up against the fixture plate and see what the height differences are. Hypothetically if all was correct, it should be within a few tenths (0.0001"). However, when I took a look at it, there was a noticeable height difference. This was good in the sense that it was a fixable issue, and I moved the design down in Fusion360 about 15 thou (0.015") and recut the top plane of the fixture plate. I re-ran the same program to bore the holes out and got the setup piece precisely the right height; I was pleased with this and thought my problems were over. 

However, when I ran the next part, it came out ten thou higher than it should (ex. part should be 1.00" deep, came out 0.99"), which was almost identical to what I had before recutting the surface of the fixture plate. I was baffled as to why it's only ten thou off, and the previous wasn't twenty off. I re-ran the same program several times to see if the strain on the 4th axis was causing it to shift slightly, but to no avail, each pass was identical. I decided to just manually offset it by the amount it was off and get them finished up; this was no big deal and completed all the parts without any issue. I mainly wanted to figure out the cause of the problem more than the solution, which was easy. 

While I was cleaning and deburring the parts, I realized that the bottom of the hole had a slight upward bevel to it. I asked my boss about it and took one look at the tool I was using and mentioned that the square endmills have an inward angle (which I was aware of on some level but didn't think about it in this context) them to help with chip evacuation. The endmill I was using was a 1/2," which I was using to cut a 3/4" hole (not actual diameter), which meant that the surface of the hole wouldn't be perfectly flat. The solution, of course, was to use a smaller tool, which I did. The strange thing was that I got no difference in the height; it was still ten thou off. I ran out of time by this point, so I had to finish up the parts and get them out of the way for the next set in the assembly. I hypothesize that the tool height differences are slightly off between the 1/2" and 1/4" being higher. 

Running the second and third operations on these skateboard parts today!

I had some weird sound issues right out of the gate when roughing out the pocket on the second operation. Had a high pitch hollow sound each time it took a pass; as it turns out, one of the teeth broke off and was dragging along, pushing the aluminum instead of cutting it. 

For the finishing passes, I copied over the same toolpath settings I used for the first op and got an excellent surface finish on the bottom and side faces; however, the corners weren't all that great; you could visibly see each stepover the tool took. I've never used the pencil toolpath before, but it seemed to look pretty good in the simulation and was precisely what I was looking for. The pencil follows along the corner intersection of the vertical and horizontal walls cleaning those edges up with a single flowing motion. I am honestly shocked by how good it turned out after I tried it. In the past, I would try and use the trace toolpath and manually draw geometry to have the tool follow along, but this one makes it so much easier. 

I also had some difficulties when I put the part on the 4th axis fixture plate. There are two holes on this piece at weird angles, and instead of trying to make some elaborate fixture plates for them on the 3-axis mill, I decided to do it on the 4th axis. For some reason, the tool heights are weirdly and consistently off; I've got each of the tools set right (four inches from the top of the table, in centerline with the a-axis), but they all cut too high. I did deck the surface of the fixture plate to ensure it was at the right height, and I'm almost wondering if maybe I didn't set the endmill correctly on that, and so the plane I cut is lower than it should be. 

Working on the second operation for these skateboard parts and getting it all set up to run. 

For the second op, I had an interesting setup with how I held the part in the vice because I only had access to thin parallels of the right height, I had to space them out from the walls of the jaws. If I had them flush up against them, the part wouldn't sit perfectly flat due to the slight radius on the edge of the flat. 

Another issue I ran into was setting the tool height on the second set operation. Because the part is on parallels, I hand no "known" height in my CAM software because the face was uncut and so had an undefined distance between it and the flat of the part. The solution was first to deck the top surface of the part upsidedown, then measure the thickness of the remaining stock and offsetting the origin in Fusion360 to match the same height. 

The last thing I need to do is find the origin, which is as simple as putting a gauge pin in the existing hole and sweeping it with a dial indicator. With the known height and origin, I set up a hard stop on one end of the part to allow for repeatability without having to sweep the pin on each swap out of parts. 

I love how easy it is to set the work origin in fusion360, and using sketch geometry makes it easy to create quick boundaries and location points.