It's fairly straightforward, using the techniques I described above- though it involves a lot of churning and clicking.
First Activate one of the Components (everything else will fade out). In this case I started with part 2, but each of these procedures will need to be done with each part activated in turn:
Then create the construction features you need to define the alignment. I ended up using a plane, an Axis between Two Points, and a Point at Vertex- I could have skipped the last.
Here's where I placed the axis.
Then a plane at zero offset for the mating surface.
This is what it looked like with both planes placed- I moved the parts into sort-of alignment just to help visualize where to put things. You can also see the construction point at vertex I put at the end.
Then activate the other component
And place the corresponding features inside that component.
Then activate the root component again, so all are fully visible and not faded out.
Once you are in the root, select a pair of matching elements you want to align (you can, apparently, select only two at a time). In this case I selected the zero offset planes.
Once both are selected, a right click in space will bring up the Align Components option in a menu. Select that option and the planes (and components) will snap to alignment. After the planes, I selected the two Axis- that was sufficient to bring the geometry into alignment- I didn't need the point at vertex.
Here it is with the visibility of the construction features turned off.
And, just to be clear, here is the browser structure showing the construction elements inside the components.
It would be a lot easier and more intuitive if we could just select points, edges, axis, or surfaces on the objects directly and use the align tool, without having to activate components and create extra construction features.
27" iMac Core i5, OS 10.8.5, 8GB RAM
Suggestion to the Fusion 360 team:
You should have a collection of use cases (s.a. Ron's above) that remain throughout the product's life cycle and are "tested" against the existing UI for ease of discovery and ease of use. It serves as a measuring bar on whether you're making the UI easier or harder.
I hope you already do this. I hope in the "September" release the above workflow is easier.
IT guy into Cleantech. Aiming to bridge public transport to 21st century solutions.
"... in the end we want to be able to take two points on objects we know should be alignable ( or even an option for mid / left / right where they are not ) and constrain the objects together."
I wholeheartedly agree. This is essential. Some kind of snapping for edges and points would add a lot to existing commands such as Joints or other assembly workflows.
Just to be clear about how the measure command can help, I've made a video showing this. The only addition to using a joint is a sketched construction line.
I fully understand that while this works for a simple block pairing, it may be difficult to use in more complex situations.
Software QA Engineer
Fusion Quality Assurance Team
At a minimum I learnt something new about measure for angles from that video!
For my immeadiate purposes, I now know that a single joint will support alignement of aligned faces between the two components.
So if I move my joint in my original problem to the front faces that are aligned, rather than the back faces that leave at different angles, then I will get exactness from minimal steps.
It is alignement of overall bodies where their underlying faces are not aligned, that we need the exact steps you have captured.