topic Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot in Fusion Support Forum

direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:10:18 GMT

Tried to change the length of a slot in direct modeling mode -> see desired result

I tried to move the face

Fusion did not change the legth, but moved the slot -> message:

What did I miss?

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

davebYYPCU — Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:09:59 GMT

Direct modelling is just that, not parametric, no history, no going back, just forward from here.

you will have to redaw the slot the right size, and cut it again, as far as I know.

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

jeff_strater — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 00:18:18 GMT

Yeah, this is a known limitation in direct modeling. It is specific to these kinds of shapes (where connected faces are tangent). I've lost the details of why, and I cannot find the thread in which this was discussed (it was probably 4 years ago). But, it had something to do with the way we treat tangent cylindrical faces as "fillets", which are then removed and re-applied, while in DM.

Sorry I don't have a better answer, but @Anonymous's is probably the best - model a new slot on top of the old...

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

kb9ydn — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 15:06:47 GMT

This seems like a ridiculous limitation. It's also not limited to direct modeling mode either. It will do exactly the same thing in design history mode.

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

TheCADWhisperer — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 16:53:46 GMT

@kb9ydn wrote:
This seems like a ridiculous limitation.

If you have a frequent need for direct editing of base solids that have no feature history - you might consider Autodesk Inventor Professional. Students can download Autodesk Inventor for free from http://www.autodesk.com/edcommunity

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

kb9ydn — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 18:34:22 GMT

@TheCADWhisperer wrote:
@@kb9ydn wrote:
This seems like a ridiculous limitation.
If you have a frequent need for direct editing of base solids that have no feature history - you might consider Autodesk Inventor Professional. Students can download Autodesk Inventor for free from http://www.autodesk.com/edcommunity

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement for Fusion is it?

Fortunately I do most of my modeling in Solidworks so it's not THAT much of a problem. But occasionally moving faces is a useful feature when I've brought a part into Fusion for machining and need to make some minor alterations for clearance or whatever. Of course I can find other ways to get the job done, even in Fusion. But what really bugs me about this (and a lot of other things in Fusion) is that Autodesk really doesn't seem to care. It's like they've decided that 90% functionality is good enough and that last 10% is just, meh whatever. Yeah it's a limitation but we don't really feel like doing anything about it. Seriously? I totally understand that software development is hard and sometimes takes a long time. But it really feels like they just don't care to go that last 10% of the way, and it makes me sad. I REALLY REALLY hope this is just my perception and not the reality. But given that others have made this same observation, I can't help but feel like I'm hoping in vain.

In fact this is annoying me so much I just posted in the ideastation for this to be fixed.

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-360-ideastation/fix-move-face-command-so-it-can-lengthen-slots-instead-of-only/idi-p/8146203

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

jeff_strater — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 20:18:03 GMT

Re: "Autodesk really doesn't seem to care" and "But it really feels like they just don't care to go that last 10% of the way, and it makes me sad". I apologize if my response made you come to that impression. I hope this doesn't come across as too defensive, but, that is not an accurate characterization. I can speak for the whole development and product team when I say that we care a lot. That's why we are on this forum evenings, weekends, and holidays trying to help customers. We would absolutely love to fix every defect that exists in Fusion. But, sadly, we are only human, and we do not have an infinite staff. We fix dozens of bugs every update. But, because we have limited resources, we have to prioritize. We address the bugs that affect the largest number of users, or which cause data corruption, first. I hope you would agree that this approach is reasonable. And, for better or worse, this bug is not one that comes up all that frequently. I finally did find the forum thread where this was referenced: fusion-360-quot-stretch-quot-using-move-face-command. As you can see, that was in 2015. And, as near as I can tell, there have not been a lot of posts about this since. So, while I agree with you that this bug should be fixed, and I would like nothing better than to fix it myself, I just cannot promise that. I assume you would not want us to promise a fix that, realistically, we cannot provide any time soon. There are workarounds, none of which are ideal, I know.

Anyway, again, I apologize if my initial response came across as if implying that I, or we, don't care. That could not be further from the truth. I probably was in a hurry, and did take enough care with the wording.

Jeff

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

kb9ydn — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 17:11:05 GMT

Hi @jeff_strater,

I wasn't intending to beat up on you personally, so sorry if it came across that way. And I know the development team really does care a lot about the product. The frequent after hours and weekend replies to issues support this and definitely do not go unnoticed. Indeed the strong developer presence in the forum is one of the most awesome aspects of Fusion and should not be understated. Really all I was trying to say is that sometimes it feels like there is a tendency to gloss over issues and say "that's just the way it is" instead of acknowledging the issue as something not intended that needs to be fixed. How long it takes to get to the fix is a separate question, but the main thing is simply the acknowledgement that there is an issue to fix. Granted I'm ~~probably~~ most certainly focusing on a few specific instances and unfairly ignoring the million other times when issues have been immediately flagged as bugs and fixed promptly.

But anyway, enough of that.

In order to add some actual value to this post I do want to bring up something that I think is a genuine problem and not just me shaking my fist in the air. The error message about having to move additional faces is profoundly not helpful. If this is going to be a limitation of the software for any length of time (so far it's been 3 years), there should at very least be an indication of which other faces have been affected. In the case of this closed slot it's pretty obvious, but if you were to chop that piece in half so the slot is open on one end, and then try to move the face again, you would see the same error even though no other faces have moved. This is a problem because now you have no clue whether or not something else on your model has changed, which is VERY BAD when you're trying to accurately machine a part to a model. Yes there are ways to work around this but depending on the complexity of the model it can be quite difficult.

If there was at least an indication of what else has been affected, we could then decide of those changes are acceptable and act accordingly.

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

HughesTooling — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 17:52:19 GMT

@jeff_strater I have a question related to this, why is there no copy option using the Move\Copy command? I have added a request for it on the ideastation but just wondered why it's not there from the start. Although as I've only got 3 votes perhapes no one wants it.

Mark

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

jeff_strater — Sat, 25 Aug 2018 17:28:46 GMT

Just catching up on some very old flagged items. Interesting that the IdeaStation item got so few votes. I guess that does kinda mean that it is not all that interesting to people. It would be technically possible, I think. That is essentially what Pattern Faces is doing. Interesting idea...

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

TrippyLighting — Sat, 25 Aug 2018 22:23:07 GMT

@jeff_strater wrote:

Just catching up on some very old flagged items. Interesting that the IdeaStation item got so few votes. I guess that does kinda mean that it is not all that interesting to people. It would be technically possible, I think. That is essentially what Pattern Faces is doing. Interesting idea...

It's not surprising that the more advanced ideas that are posted there by users that because it really takes that daily experience to understand the value of some of these ideas.

As such Iv'e stopped adding ideas.

Re: direct modeling mode - problem changing length of slot

TrippyLighting — Sat, 25 Aug 2018 22:29:52 GMT

@kb9ydn wrote:

@TheCADWhisperer wrote:

@@kb9ydn wrote:

This seems like a ridiculous limitation.

If you have a frequent need for direct editing of base solids that have no feature history - you might consider Autodesk Inventor Professional. Students can download Autodesk Inventor for free from http://www.autodesk.com/edcommunity

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement for Fusion is it?

Until you compare price tags. An Inventor subscription is ridiculously expensive.