Using the 3D Finishing Toolpath for ROUGHING vs using the 3D Roughing Toolpath

[carolinasmith]

After searching the forums I am going to start a long overdue project, a 3D model ~ 8x20 on old growth redwood (Praying Cowboys from Design & Make).

I was intrigued by the idea (if I understood correctly) of using the Finishing Toolpath for Roughing vs using the 3D roughing Toolpath.

I ran both simulations, using for this stage, a 1/4" bnb with 30% stepover. The Roughing Toolpath showed over 2 hours time with 5 passes across the grain, and the Finishing toolpath, using the same bit and SO showed 25 minutes and one pass.

Is this truly more efficient, or am I missing something?

I think the difference in time is that, using the 3D Roughing Toolpath, I had chosen a depth of 0.125 for a max depth 0.6779, thus all the passes.
In the Finishing Toolpath, if used for roughing strategy, there is no option to do incremental depths, so it does the max depth (0.6779) in one pass, so to speak. Is that too much for one pass?

I realize the purpose of roughing is to hog out material and make it 'easier' for the final bit.

My strategy is: A) run a profile pass first (1/4 bnb, SO 30)
B) Run a roughing strategy crossing the grain ( 1/4 bnb, SO 30)
C) Run a 1st Finish with the grain ( 1/4 bnb, SO 30)
D) Run a 2nd Finish with the grain (1/16 bnb, SO 5)

Comments appreciated.