Convince me to continue with Fusion 360. I am at a crossroads

[mickingaamco]

There are a lot of things I like about Fusion 360. It is efficient at making and modifying 3d parts. The FEA capability is very good. And, it is cheap. 

There are things I am not happy about. I have been developing a design for about a year now. The first big problem was with assemblies. I was making parts, then putting them in assemblies with joints. I was assembling subassemblies into larger assemblies, using joints. All of these parts and subassemblies were linked to their original files. What happened was the assemblies would frequently "blow up". Suddenly parts and subassemblies were no longer in the location that I had placed them.

I have a hypothesis on this, but I haven't put in the time to confirm it. When you locate one subassembly to another subassembly, you are actually choosing the face on one part in that assembly and locating it to a face of another part in the other assembly. Each subassembly is held together with joints or in a rigid group. If you modify a part in that group, the joints or rigid groups fall apart, and the next time you look at the larger assembly, things have fallen apart. 

It was very frustrating to have to rebuild my assemblies all of the time.

_______________________________________

So, I converted the assembly to all unlinked files. All of the parts were located in one big assembly, They could be located with joints or just aligned, etc. Now the model was stable. I could modify parts, create new parts, etc. and they never blew up.

A side benefit of this was that the model, which has around 300 parts was much lighter; I can rotate it zoom, etc much better than before.

It is a hassle to have to work on the entire model at once. I constantly have to isolate assemblies, be careful not to cut into other bodies, etc. but I can live with that. 

However, now when I make 2d annotations, I am making a drawing that is a subset of the complete model. This is doable, but if any part of the larger model is modified, when you bring up any other 2d print, you have to update it. This is the case even if the part you are working on has not been modified. Right now I have only about a dozen of the parts in 2d, but once I get hundreds of them, I won't want to have to update every 2d part drawing whenever I make a modification to any part in the model.

So, tell me what I am missing. Is there anyone out there who has experience with these issues?

Mike

[jszaboABD67]

I am somewhat annoyed at the way Fusion 360 handles assemblies and drawings.  For example, imagine the situation where you design a part, and then use that part in an assembly, and then make a drawing of the assembly.  If you then go back an modify the part, to update the drawing you need to open the assembly, update it, then save the assembly and then update the drawing.  If you go straight from the part to the drawing, the drawing doesn't know the part has been updated.

[daniel_lyall]

Have a look at this https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/design-validate-document/fusion-project-to-test-just-what-it-can-hand... and have a talk with phil, He may well be able to help you get sorted he's a out of the box thinker.

[Beyondforce]

@jszaboABD67,

The Linked component in Fusion has it's limitations and this is one of them.
If you don't have to keep the Link, then break it! Fusion's workflow is a bit different than other CAD systems.

Ben.

[O.Tan]

It's part of the software limitations, a lot of users are actually Top-Down modellers (especially those who are from mCAD) and Fusion at the moment is poor at supporting those kind of modellers. I'm not sure when will we see any improvements in that area of Fusion, since in my opinion, too many "budget" is focused on Sim. 

X-REF was first introduced like 2 years ago by now? and till today we still can't edit the component in-context of the assembly. I did suggested previously (link, see 2nd last post) that when they do implement it, they should allow users to mix both DM and TL, so in a assembly file, some components are DM and some are TL. I hope they make flexible enough for that, cause it would suck if it's restricted to a single modelling environment only. 

And doing so will solve the whole "your assembly has been modified, please press update" notification in drawings when you didn't even modify that component. Design and Branching will also benefit from it as now components is individually tracked, so you're able to "pull" back the modified component and not the whole assembly.

Alas, it seems the decision to have components only (no more part or assembly file distinction) is really starting to bite them. 

[mickingaamco]

Thank you. This means that I'm not crazy. I have been complaining about this for a year, and everyone in the forum has said that I was just doing it wrong. I guess that most of the users are only doing small assemblies or if they are doing large assemblies they are not documenting them. One person showed me that he is building a large model of a train, beautifully rendered. It is a very complex model indeed, but it doesn't answer my issue of assemblies, top down or bottom up issues.

Each time I showed the development team my model blowing up, they just looked, but I never got a solution. Still, due to the extremely low cost of Fusion, and the fact that our business is still on a shoe-string budget, I am going to have to deal with the weaknesses and soldier on. 

I have elected to keep all of the components inside the whole model and just live with the updating problem for the 2-d drawings. It is better than having all of the components built outside then linked into the assembly. That had so many problems that it was just nor workable.

I understand that this is a beta-type program, and it is not really professional ready yet. It needs to get the assembly issues fixed, get more robust 2-d capabilities, get a real document control system, and stop crashing.

Mike

[O.Tan]

Well I'm happy to meet other users who shares the same sentiment. Please keep posting in the forums and make your voice heard.

I have elected to keep all of the components inside the whole model and just live with the updating problem for the 2-d drawings. It is better than having all of the components built outside then linked into the assembly. That had so many problems that it was just nor workable.

Yes, at the moment we'll have to live with this, once In-Context X-REF edit comes online, then I hope they'll create a tool that'll automatically convert all/selected components to individual files and link it for users like us.

I understand that this is a beta-type program, and it is not really professional ready yet. It needs to get the assembly issues fixed, get more robust 2-d capabilities, get a real document control system, and stop crashing.

Yeah, we used to have a guy in the forums that gets furious when the marketing dept calls Fusion as a professional ready software that can replace SolidWorks

[kb9ydn]

---

@O.Tan wrote:

X-REF was first introduced like 2 years ago by now? and till today we still can't edit the component in-context of the assembly. I did suggested previously (link, see 2nd last post) that when they do implement it, they should allow users to mix both DM and TL, so in a assembly file, some components are DM and some are TL. I hope they make flexible enough for that, cause it would suck if it's restricted to a single modelling environment only. 

And doing so will solve the whole "your assembly has been modified, please press update" notification in drawings when you didn't even modify that component. Design and Branching will also benefit from it as now components is individually tracked, so you're able to "pull" back the modified component and not the whole assembly.

Alas, it seems the decision to have components only (no more part or assembly file distinction) is really starting to bite them. 

---

When external part linking was first introduced I thought it was going to be awesome.  But then I discovered that it won't let you edit in-context, which severely limits its usefulness.  I also find that having to use TL mode for assemblies is more annoying than useful.  The vast majority of the time I don't care what order my components were assembled in.  Being able to use DM for assemblies and TL for components would not only make assembly editing easier, but it would also significantly reduce the problem of TL bloat.

So yeah.  I'm right with you guys.  I'm lucky in that I have Solidworks available for the real heavy lifting.  But that may not be the case forever and I really hope that Fusion makes significant progress on some of the core modelling functionality over the next year or two.

C|

[jszaboABD67]

---

@Beyondforce wrote:
@jszaboABD67,

The Linked component in Fusion has it's limitations and this is one of them.
If you don't have to keep the Link, then break it! Fusion's workflow is a bit different than other CAD systems.

Ben.

---

I understand that Fusion's work flow is different to other programs, however some of the stuff that the other programs do is actually very good.

When I design things in our company I try to use existing parts where possible, it saves so much time and money!  So breaking the link doesn't make sense, the reason I imported the part was so that I could use the same thing in multiple places.  If it changes it needs to be updated everywhere.

[TrippyLighting]

The XREF functionality was added purely by user request and was a bit of an afterthought.

The Fusion 360 team has many times indicated that they will release improvements e.g. in-place editing, however, some of these improvements require upgrades to other areas.

This has also been posted many times.

So when you guys are "making your voices heard" maybe make sure you do't drown those out that are speaking to you 😉

[TrippyLighting]

I won't try to convince you!

You've given the tool a good, hard, fair try and with drawings have come to an area where Fusion 360 still is relatively weak compared with other tools.

Maybe give it a year and evaluate again. Fusion 360 is still undergoing heavy development and that also very much relates to drawings.

The improvements I've seen in the last 2 years and that also very much relates to drawings have been very impressive.

Due to how things are sketched and modeled in Fusion 360 I am not sure it will ever be as efficient of a tools as, say Solid Work or Geomagic Design of which I actually prefer the latter for Technical production drawings of mechanical and often machined components with tolerances, GD&T and surface symbols.

I personally hope Fusion will never become the next cheaper version of Solid Works, Solid Edge etc, and for me personally the cloud functionality has proven to be invaluable for the work here on the forum and for paid collaborative projects that otherwise would be very difficult to do. 

[mickingaamco]

Thanks for your thoughts. Fusion is what it is, and for now it is free.
That appeals to me for financial reasons. I have appreciated this thread
because plenty of people have concurred about the problems with assemblies
and drawings, just to name a few. In the past I just got people telling me
that I was doing things wrong. I suppose most of them were hobbyist who
weren't acquainted with other software, with group collaboration, large
models that need some segmentation, etc.

When I worked at Xerox the model for one of those printers contained so
many parts and details that no one computer could ever open the whole
model. People had to be able to work on only their section without loading
the whole model. ProE could do that. It could also maintain the part
connectivity, permissions on who could modify which part, etc. Don't get me
wrong, ProE had many, many issues that I hated, but at least you could get
the job done.

So, I'm not comparing Fusion to ProE. I don't know if it will ever be
that. If I ever get my company off of the ground, I will certainly dump
Fusion 360 for something more capable.

Mike

[O.Tan]

The XREF functionality was added purely by user request and was a bit of an afterthought.

The Fusion 360 team has many times indicated that they will release improvements e.g. in-place editing, however, some of these improvements require upgrades to other areas.

This has also been posted many times.

So when you guys are "making your voices heard" maybe make sure you do't drown those out that are speaking to you 😉

Hmm, when you mentioned user request, it became a user request cause Fusion didn't provide a solution to allow assembly/part that's used across multiple assemblies to be shared. Since each time we import the file into a project/assembly, it'll be independent. Again, this is known as Top-Down modelling. It's more like the other way round, that Fusion idea of only components and no parts/assembly file type wasn't thought/mapped out properly. 

Regarding upgrades to other areas, yes it's true that this has been mentioned before, though when X-REF was first released, it was mentioned that In-Place Edit will be out in a few months time, then we get information that backend data stuffs need to be upgraded (which it did), but 2 years later, we don't hear any updates or mentioning about it. Instead, we kept hearing SIM tools getting more advance.

At least for now, the issue isn't about we are drowning those speaking to us, it's more of the people drowning us and saying we're doing it wrong or just ignore our voices. 

[jszaboABD67]

---

@daniel_lyall wrote:

Have a look at this https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/design-validate-document/fusion-project-to-test-just-what-it-can-hand... and have a talk with phil, He may well be able to help you get sorted he's a out of the box thinker.

---

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for the link.  I am in awe of the skills involved in making such a nice picture.  However it makes me think of some questions.  Let's say we actually wanted to make that train.  We'd have to get a multitude of suppliers involved, as well as make stuff in house and transmit a massive amount of data to different people/companies.  What's the work-flow that Fusion 360 offers to get that train off the screen and into reality.  Surely comprehensive drawings are required?

To get to the limits of Fusion 360 I don't need (and I must say I wouldn't even know where to start) to draw such a complex picture, I just need to sketch a simple triangle with different length sides, fillet the corners and then extrude it to a solid.  If I create a drawing from this I won't be able to dimension the length of the sides of the triangle.

Now don't get me wrong, I think Fusion 360 is incredible for the price and there is lots that I like and even love about it, however it appears that some of the simple stuff has been overlooked.

[mickingaamco]

Thank you for your comment. When I was commenting about the 2d limitations,
along with the assembly problems, the same person posted the same picture
of a very nicely rendered train with many components. Your points about
what that would take to turn into reality are spot on. Many people have to
work on the design, and they can't all be modifying all of the parts at the
same time.

This thread has generated lots if great comments. At the same time we are
all grateful for the value of Fusion 360. You just need to understand this
is not a professional program yet. Still, I continue to use it because it
is cheap.

Mike

[mickingaamco]

Thank you. I was not trying to start a flame war. I was seriously asking if
I was the only one. Some people are very protective of Fusion 360. I get
that. They like it. I am glad for them. I am actually going to keep using
it myself. My problem was that I was always told that I was using Fusion
wrong by people who didn't understand what it takes to make a real
complicated project work.

Now, I just want this thread to stop. I'm not at war with anyone. I will
continue to contribute as best as I can.

Mike

[daniel_lyall]

That's fine, I had nothing to contribute other than suggesting you talks to someone I know can do some real crazy stuff with fusion and it works.

And I have seen your posts before so I know you have tried your best.

[PhilProcarioJr]

@mickingaamco

I too am not one to convince anyone of anything, I still feel everyone needs to make their own decisions based on their needs. I have told many people if Fusion can't do what you need you should look elsewhere for tools that do. I am also not going to say that Fusion doesn't have problems or that development is going in the direction that I would like to see it go, but I have seen (Inside the machine) so to speak. I am very connected with the dev team and have had many very lengthy discussions with them. I know a lot of people don't believe this but they are good people with good intentions, unfortunately their hands are tied on a lot of things. A lot of the problems you mention are being worked on and someday they will get fixed, but for now the tool is what it is. One thing I can tell you is Solidworks has it's own huge issues...I can say this because i have used it for over 15 years...I know the program inside and out.. So the jist is every piece of software has it quirks you just need to find the right tools for you to get the job done.

On a side note the entire Forge I work for runs off Fusion 360, Prints, Models, CAM, Catalog Renders...etc and better now then it did on Solidworks and Gibbs CAM that cost $18,000 plus $4,000 a year maintenance which is now back dated......

Another HUGE POINT I can promise you Solidworks could care less about their customers and only how much $ they can bleed you for.....Fusion devs at least care about us and what we need and their constant involvement proves it. Software takes time to develop...

Anyways I have done very very large projects from model to finished products using Fusion and in collaboration with others. So it is a very capable software, but not without flaws and I will be the first to admit that. I guess the big point I want to make is you can spend thousands of dollars for software with flaws or hundreds of dollars with flaws and ultimately the choice is yours.

I definitely don't blame you if you need tools that don't exist in Fusion and want to look elsewhere. Fusion is but one tool in my toolbox because no one tool can do everything I need.

Don't want to open any can of worms here and I mean nothing negative just thought I would add my experience to this thread.

Cheers

Phil