A Dynamic Mill vs. Traditional Toolpaths Experiment
How does the new dynamic mill toolpath really perform? To find out, we conducted an experiment to compare Mastercam’s new dynamic pocketing toolpath against the older zig-zag toolpath.
An open pocket was selected for the experiment to highlight how the 2D high speed toolpaths can handle open pockets with islands and multiple entry points. Following are some results of the experiment.
Zig-zag toolpath: At a feed rate of 30 IPM (inches per minute), the tool failed as soon as the cutter made a full material cut on both sides for any extended amount of time. At 15 IPM, the pocket cut successfully, but it was close to the tool failure point, and it took over 4 minutes to cut. The full depth of cut method couldn’t be used for more than a few parts. The third part failed due to excessive chip loading.
Dynamic toolpath: The experiment used a dynamic toolpath with core roughing passes enabled. The tool never cut on both sides and always used a climb cut to peck away at the material and maintain a constant 45% engagement when cutting. The experiment tested the toolpath to failure. Then the feed rate was adjusted to 40 IPM, and the toolpath produced a reliable pocket operation in less than 3 minutes! The chips also cleared consistently and reliably.
To read more about the experiment, watch some video, and also see the conclusion of the experiment, please click here.
| 
We’re conducting a survey to get your impressions of the Mastercam X4 release process. To participate, please visit 
