The really nice part about the time line is the overview I get plus I can go back in time and change the design.
Now TS is a terrif technology however because of its nature being more precise and other poly sub-d modeler being longer on the market and thus having more tools under their belt I would propose the following:
While it is great to be able to go back and edit the TS mesh it would be an amazing benefit if you can also swap out the TS mesh you create.
Now with the timeline you create an object a TS object and than apply further feature tools onto it.
Why the suggestion? Because some other modelers like Modo or Blender are vastly faster and like Blender also having a stronger modeling toolset they offer real benefit to rapidly sculpting design variations. I would see this as I used this with Rhino as the start of the process. Fusion with TS and now the timeline would be part generating a BREP model and finishing it for manufacturing.
The nice part about TS is that it allows designers to use other tools and methods than surface and solids.
And it would be a shame if the inability of not refreshing the mesh input would be possible because it would really put the finishing touch onto the TS philosophy.
If you only start in TS or finish in TS does it really matter? You still use TS.
TS technology is also very interesting for all the other none-solidworks 3d designers that like to experiement with software and use various products for certain tasks like algorythmic poly mesh generators for architecture jewelry etc.
The biggest value of Fusion 360 is not the tool set but the workflow it allows and I think with the mentiond addition the workflow would be unbeatable.
Here is a quick video: https://drive.google.com/a/ckbrd.de/file/d/0Byzv_N
When you say this: "While it is great to be able to go back and edit the TS mesh it would be an amazing benefit if you can also swap out the TS mesh you create."
Are you describing this workflow?
1. create a form (TS) and finish the form. A BRep is created.
2. do some down stream modeling, such as shell, holes, etc. (other BRep modeling)
3. go to the timeline node for the TS (step 1), edit it
4. completely replace the TS body with a new TS body
5. on Update, the new TS body is converted to BRep and all downtream modeling attaches to it, such as shell, hole, etc.
Software QA Engineer
Fusion Quality Assurance Team
I think that this is a fair expectation. If you edit a Sculpted feature and replace the Tspline body, we should try to re-compute downstream features using that new body. I wouldn't expect topology references to survive (a Fillet created by selecting an edge, a workplane created by selected verticies, etc), but any operations that reference the body (such as your Split operation) could theoretically survive. We'll look into this. Thanks for the suggestion, and for the video!
On a related note, we would love to hear more about what drives you to use other applications to create/modify Tspline bodies. We are continually improving our Sculpt tools, and it would be great to have you help us fill in any gaps.
Fusion 360 User Experience Designer
This is put into much better English than what I tried to say.
You should have a TS container and when leaving the edit mode let the design timeline update the down stream features.
Because when you can go back in time and manipulate the TS mesh why not also simply replace it with a new mesh in case
you sub-d model in a different software.
I think I might be an odd ball here because I started in graphic and motion design and later got more into industrial design 3D. So I am very familiar with poly modeling and animation but also with the traditional industrial design workflow.
TS for me is like the god send tool to bridge both school of thoughts together.
I am not sure what might be the best way to elaborate the tools of features. Some software packages like Blender which is for animation simply has mesh modeling for animation as a focus. Luckely because it is object based it emulates actually emulates a design tree well like in Alias.
Maybe you want to meet online and bounce some questions and answers forward and backwards and I demonstarte how I use the applications in my workflow?
I feel this might be easier.
Very interesting workflow. Thanks for sharing. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on how Fusion360 TS could be enhanced to meet your needs.
Where are the gaps in the TS workflow for you? Or is that you are more comfortable/proficient in Blender?
Product Manager - Fusion 360
While I know Blender quite well, that is actually not the reason. The fast sub-D modeler and the animation toolsets which I use however for object modeling is what makes it interesting to me and of course because unlike Modo it has modifiers which enable me to work a little more interactive and feature based.
3DMax is somewhat similar to that while Modo is a plain dump sub-d modeler.
In the video for example you saw how I did the surface texturing with spheres. In Rhino I would create a nurbs surface and then fill that surface with a geometry master. This I think could be a nice tool for Fusion to have as well. Simple linear or circular planar arrays work well for some mechanical situations but are not as creative. And a poly surface input driven array tool like in Blender is quite fantastic because I am more in control where to place duplicates.
So there is no real gab in TS. What I would love is just haveing maybe the ability to swap out the TS / OBJ model so I can explore design variations more. This is such a strong tool in SolidThinking for curve inputs and also in Blender when swapping out the mesh data.
If a person just needs some digital clay I feel Fusion already offers the tools they need - and now with the timeline this is a perfect combiantion. However I like to also experiement and cross over the disciplines which is why I also find Blender very useful.
For example the soft body deformations etc are interesting to use to make random varioations or using textures to displace the surface but I am not sure if that is something that would make sense in Fusion.