I keep running into the same issues over and over while programming with Fusion360. There is some hurdle that I can't see that I keep running into, and I can't quite put my finger on it.
Backtracking a little bit, all my previous CAM (machine programming) consisted of putting together a random assortment of toolpaths until I got my desired result. Unfortunately, I don't have a specific process in how I program, and isn't a noticeable problem on simple objects. Still, when I get over to 5axis parts or even those with complicated surfaces, it really becomes apparent.
I keep finding myself in situations where I need to test several toolpaths to find the right one and often waste a ton of time trying to tweak certain ones to fit my parameters, only to throw it out when I find a more efficient way of doing it. This problem leads back to my time at the makerspace, where I would try out many different methods and used what "worked" but wasn't the best solution.
I've hit a rut or plateau where I've got a decent understanding of the toolpaths available but not the best way to manipulate them. I've been working on the rocket project for a week or so now and have come up with several CAM programs for it but scrapped those and re-did them. I feel a little as if I am regressing instead of progressing; I'm don't have a strategy and am "finding my way" each time I program a new operation. I'm spending larger and larger amounts of time for sub par results; I'm honestly embarrassed how long it's taking me to get some of these parts going and keep thinking to myself it will be different next time because I know how to do it now. Still, I seem to fall into the same trap over and over.
If anyone has any insight into resources that may be useful for going through a specific process when programming new parts or working on complicated surfaces, I would greatly appreciate it! I know there is a better way of doing things than my current method, and I know if I can figure out a series of questions I can ask myself, I could become highly efficient.
Above I have a quick example of one of the areas I'm working in. I have to contour a piece with minimal side to side clearance and still get relatively small stepdowns for a 0.04" ball endmill to finish. When I use the 3d Pocket clearing toolpath, the problem I am having is either giving me consistent stepdowns that I define. Still, the height isn't going to match up with flat surfaces on the part necessarily, so I deal with the ball endmill cutting too much material. On the other hand, if I enable flat area detection (reads the flat surfaces and machines to them vs. consistent stepdowns), I run into the problem of it taking super light cuts when contouring raised surfaces and adding to the run time.
The difference between the two toolpaths is approximately 20% longer with the flat area detection vs the consistent stepdowns. It's the difference of about a minute in this case which isn't all that much but when you scale it up to the rest of the part it adds up quickly.