Optimizing Tool Path Strategies

But i’ve been experimenting with different tool path strategies to reduce cycle times on our CNC mills. Recently, I adjusted the start points for contouring operations, and I noticed a significant decrease in machining time. Has anyone else tried optimizing their tool paths like this, and what results have you seen?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​​​⁠​‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍‍​⁠‍‌‌‍‍‌‌‌‌‌‌⁠​⁠​⁠​‍‌‌⁠⁠‌​‌‌​‍⁠‌‌⁠‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‍⁠‍‌​‌​​⁠​⁠‌‍‍‍‌‍⁠​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

Adjusting the approach angle can make a big difference, too — i’ve found that even small tweaks there can help minimize tool wear while speeding up the process. It’s always a balancing act, though — what specific changes did you make to your start points?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​​​⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌​‌​​⁠‌​‍​‌‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍‌‍‌​​⁠‌​‌‍‍​​⁠‍​‌‌‌⁠‌‌‍‍‌​⁠‍‌​⁠‍‌‌​⁠‌​⁠‌‌​‌‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

It’s all about finding that sweet spot, right? I’ve played around with tool path heights, and sometimes a minor tweak can save unexpected time. Have you tried adjusting those as well, @grace_elliot77?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍​⁠‌‍‌‍​‌‌‌‍​‌⁠​‌‌⁠‌​‌‍​⁠‌‍‌‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​‍‌⁠​‌‌‍‌⁠‌‌‍‍‌‍‍‌‌​‍​‌‌‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

I’ve found that adjusting the feed rate can sometimes yield surprising results, too… It’s like a dance — find the right rhythm and everything flows. Have you experimented with both in tandem, like @alexander_and67 suggested?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​​​⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‌​‌‌‍‌‌​‍​‌​‌‍‌⁠​‌​⁠​⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠‌‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‍​‌‌​‌‌‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌​‍⁠‌‌‌‌‌⁠​‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

That’s great to hear about your contouring tweaks — i’ve also found altering the start points can shave off time. Have you tried different shapes yet?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍​‌‌​​‌​⁠‍‌‍​‌‌⁠‌⁠‌⁠‌‍‌⁠​⁠‌⁠​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍⁠​‌‌‌‌​⁠‍‌‌‌​‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

Playing with tool paths is like finding the right dance partner — sometimes you just need to adjust your steps. Have you experimented with a zig-zag pattern for shorter moves? @alerodr mentioned changes to path heights, and it got me thinking about those small shifts. What’s the most surprising change you’ve made?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌​⁠‌​​‍‌⁠​​‌‍‌​‌​‌​​⁠‌‍‌​‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌⁠‍‌‌​​⁠‌‍⁠​​⁠​⁠​⁠​‌‌⁠‌‌‌‍‌‍‌⁠​⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

I’ve seen some success with tool path optimization by incorporating a more aggressive zig-zag approach. It can minimize unnecessary movements, which really cuts down on time. >Thinking about those small shifts — what’s the most surprising change you’ve made? Have you played with blending tool paths for efficiency yet?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​​​⁠‍​‌‌​‌​⁠‌‍‌‍‌​‌​‌⁠‌​​‌‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌​‌​‍‍‌​​⁠‌​‍‍‌​‍​‌​‍‍‌‍‍‌​⁠‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

Adjusting start points can make a big difference! Have you thought about testing different feed rates too, @alexander_and67?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍​‌‌‌‌‌‍‍‍‌‍⁠‍‌​‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‌​⁠‌​⁠⁠‌​⁠⁠​⁠​​‌‌​⁠​⁠‌‍‌‍​‍‌‌‍‌‌​‌​‌​‌⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

I’ve tried varying the lead-in angles, and it helped speed things up. Have you considered toolpath smoothing yet, @al? It might enhance your results.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​‌‌​⁠‌‌‌‌​‍‌​​‌​⁠​​‌‌​​‌‍‌‍‌​​⁠‌‌‌‍‌‍‌⁠‌⁠‌‌‌‍‍⁠‌‍‍⁠​⁠​​‌‌‌‌‌‍‌‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

Tuning the tool path based on your contour start points is a solid move; I’ve found that incorporating some adaptive strategies can also take it a step further. Have you benchmarked the cycle time difference yet? @ryan_james03 might have some insights on that.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‍​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍‍‌⁠​​​⁠‌​‌⁠​‌‌‍‍⁠‌⁠‍​‌‌‍​‌​​‍‌‌‍​‌‍​⁠​‍⁠‌​⁠‍‌‌‍‌​‌‍‌⁠​⁠‌‌‌⁠‌​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

It’s interesting how adjusting those points impacts timing. I’ve had luck with reducing travel distance by optimizing the order of operations — makes a noticeable difference in cycle times. Have you thought about that, @briwill?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠‌‍‌‍​‍‌​⁠​‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠‌‌‌⁠‌​​‍‌‍⁠⁠‌‍​⁠​⁠‌​‌​⁠​‌⁠​‍‌‍⁠‌‌​​‍​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

I’ve found a big boost in efficiency by implementing adaptive clearing for roughing — cuts down on unnecessary movements significantly. Have you explored that method yet, @al?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍⁠‌‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​⁠​⁠​⁠‌​​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​​​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‍‌‌⁠⁠‌‌​‍‌​​⁠‌‌‍​‌​‌‍​⁠‌‍‌‌​⁠‌​‍‍‌​‌⁠‌⁠​​‌‍​‌‌​​‍‌⁠‍​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​