Browser Tree: Multiple Hole Improvement

[O.Tan]

1. Multiple holes that's created from the same multiple-holes command should be grouped together by default

2. Individual/selected holes is able to "break" away from the group in a similar way as reordering the browser tree, holes that's of similar features should be allowed to grouped together as well.

3. Once the grouped hole is selected in browser view, it'll highlight all the respective holes in the model view

4. Changing the hole will affect all holes in the same group

Why vote?

Imagine if you have 100 holes in your model (and it's actually a group of 20 M4 C'Bore, 20 M5 C'Bore, 60 M3 Holes), and you needed to change the M3 holes to a (20 M3 Holes + 40 M4 Holes), change the M5 C'Bore size to M6 C'Bore. The current solution now requires you to individually update all 80 holes! That's is just too inefficient and time consuming. 

Please make it happen, thank you!

[TrippyLighting]

What "multiple hole" command are you talking about ?

It soulds like you are using one of the the "cerate->pattern" choices.

There is a multiple hole tool. When selecting a "create->hole" tool there is an option available to create either one, or several holes.

This does not create multiple hole instances in the browser. 

In general the hole tool and the pattern tools would however benefit from improvements.

[O.Tan]

Nope, I'm using the feature that you used. 

I'm guessing, you don't have this problem is because you're working in History mode while I'm working in Direct Mode

[TrippyLighting]

Yes, that is possible. I never work in direct modeling mode. For the kind of mechanical components you are designing I would not use direct modeling but parametric modeling aka history mode. It will make you life uch easier.

[O.Tan]

Not necessarily, they're situations where one is better then the other. And in many situations, I don't need the ability to back-track.

Now if Fusion allows me to switch between direct and history then it's a different scenario and if I recall correctly, Fusion don't even opening history based model in direct assembly.

What I'm suggesting is much easier to be implemented then allowing direct and history to exist in the same environment

[O.Tan]

Here's an example of how it should be done, take note that this will only appear if you work in Direct Modelling environment (no history). So what I'm suggesting is an improvement over this (attached picture) and the workflow is very similar to what's in Fusion right now where I move 1 component into another, it'll make an assembly, so if I move similar holes, it'll group them up, change one in the group, it'll change the rest. (programming wise: It'll check if the hole is similar in the first place, if it's not it'll not allow the grouping).

[Oceanconcepts]

I also find that working in direct modeling provides me with a lot of freedom when developing designs where I don’t quite know where things will head, or for trying alternative approaches in parallel. If it’s just a question of managing hole sizes, or other such parameters, then clearly parametric modeling is a better solution. But sometimes other considerations drive the choice to work in direct modeling, and direct modeling can be very fast and free. That the choice is available is one of the best things about Fusion. 

[haughec]

Hi O.Tan, All,

We presently have no plans to revise the Hole feature behavior in direct modeling.  You may want to consider a hybrid workflow that would allow you to place parametric holes (and other features) on a history-free body.

1) In a parametric document, choose Create Base Feature from the Create menu.  This will place you a direct modeling mode within a parametric design.

2) Create the direct modeling portion of your design, then choose Finish Base Feature from the toolbar.  You'll see a Base Feature node in the timeline.

3) Create parametric features (Holes, Chamfers, etc) on top of the base body.  These parametric features will group more logically and will be far easier to manage/update.

4) Edit the Base Feature as necessary from the timeline to change the underling direct modeling body.

Hope this helps.

Charles