CLOSED - "Next Relevant Feature" Suggestions

[TimeraAutodesk]

**Feedback on this item is now closed.  Thank you all for your input!**

We have been working hard to make sure Fusion is as easy to use as possible and we understand from our community that certain feature sequences could be shortened. We have been investigating for a while how we can do this effectively and provide the best experience for the community.

We have been working with an idea called “Next Relevant Feature” where fusion would suggest the next best feature to apply to the design while you are creating the last feature. For example, if you're creating an extrude, the extrude command could allow you to create a shell at the same time.

What we need from the community

1. Do you currently find yourself having to use multiple features to achieve the desired result?

2. Is this something that you find intriguing?

3. What worries or fears might you have using this kind of technology?

We are also looking for partners to be involved in the early phases of these feature sets, so if you would like to share more information on how you achieve this now and want to be involved in the early phases feel free to reach out directly to harv.saund@autodesk.com

[JulianGroeli]

OK, so I got a little carried away with the title of this thread, and not the actual post. My apologies for going off topic there.

Autosuggesting the next feature you might want to use could be useful for beginners, and if done correctly could speed up workflows for experts. At the same time there should be an option to disable so that it doesn't get in the way if I have a different intent than the AI is expecting.

If compute power was infinite, showing ghosted previews of what features would look like if applied would allow users to just pick the one they want based on the resulting geometry. Easy to do for a sketch with one enclosed loop + ghosted extrude, or a sketch with one enclosed loop and a straight construction line = ghosted revolve. 

The trouble is that there are so many different reasons for creating features and you'd have to capture more about what the task at hand is at a higher level before dealing with features. ie "I'm making an engraved piece of artwork" or "i'm making a part for plastic injection molding" or "I'm making a part for CNC machining" and work down from that so that suggestions make sense. 

If making a part for CNC machining, sharp internal corners could be auto-filleted after an extruded cut.

If making a part for injection molding, extruded features that look like ribs could have draft turned on to 0.5 deg by default instead of checking that box and entering that number every time.

There are also stages of modeling in terms of creating high level overall features that capture major shapes and then lots of smaller features and finish out overlaps, snaps, mounting, sealing, etc. You'd have to have a higher level system of defining those intentions first.

Sorry again for my earlier off topic posts that were just feature requests based on reading the title only.

[TrippyLighting]

@JulianGroeli Can you please read the initial post, then pause for a while thinking about what you posted and evaluate its relevance with respect to the initial post? 

If after that process you feel somewhat foolish that would not be entirely unjustified 😉

[JulianGroeli]

My apologies - I got carried away with new feature ideas. I realized my error earlier today and will be more careful about that in the future. 

[TrippyLighting]

---

@JulianGroeli wrote:

... I got carried away with new feature ideas... 

---

That is indeed easy to do 😉

[marchancomponents]

Hello,

I have 3 suggestions.

The first one is concerning the simulation. The major limitation I see is the rigid body options. Can you improve this option? and, at the same time, a very good feature will be a simplification transformation. For example, transform the unnecessary bodies into rigid bodies with a punctual mass in the CDG. For some preliminary studies, this kind of assembly simplifications is very good.

The second one is concerning lattice options in design workspace. In the 3d print era, the internal lattice is a very good option to design good strength to weight ratio structures. the problem is that do it with the traditional tools is very cpu consumming, but a tool write specifically with the right matrix operations to reduce the machine consumption will be a very good idea.

First step, external shell creation --> Parameter: Thickness, and then, lattice creation. A contextual menu similar to the one in Meshmixer will be a very good option

The last suggestion is, for me, a game changer. why not an iOS version (Or Android version) at least of the design workspace?

You have the web browser version of fusion 360, so I see two options, the first one, an improves web version compatible with safari and other mobile versions --> This option open fusion 360 to linux too

A dedicated iPad version. In fact, if you can improve the web version, you can use it directly in the iOS/Andoid version as a embedded window. For example, in the regular version of iOS, a button with "edit" who loads the web interface embedded. The latest arm tablets has a good graphics power so, why not?

Some of us use the laptop out of the office only for design purposes, with a tablet version, it will not be necessary 🙂

Regards,

J

[bryan5]

I agree with using the browser for smart phone and tablets. A game changer.

[Anonymous]

How about none at all?

Autodesk keeps adding more and more features to the software, to the point that it's now getting bloated.

I use F360 for CAD/CAM operations and have seen the software getting more and more sluggish on a standard PC. When I say "standard" I meant Intel i7 quad-core running at ~4Ghz, 16Gig RAM, and everything on a SSD, with nVidia GTX980 4Gig.

I've watched the perform tank lately, and even on this machine (not a true design machine, but far from sluggish), it's starting to get to the point where I'm considering other software.

I've tried other software and they run like a dream.

So how about, just stop! If you want to create a 3D slicing app, create one, and leave F360 as a CAD/CAM package. Or you could help me purchase a new $4000 machine.

I'm not grumpy, I just hate seeing great piece of software turn to ####...I know, I'm a software engineer and see it often.

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

How about none at all?

Autodesk keeps adding more and more features to the software, to the point that it's now getting bloated.

I use F360 for CAD/CAM operations and have seen the software getting more and more sluggish on a standard PC. When I say "standard" I meant Intel i7 quad-core running at ~4Ghz, 16Gig RAM, and everything on a SSD, with nVidia GTX980 4Gig.

I've watched the perform tank lately, and even on this machine (not a true design machine, but far from sluggish), it's starting to get to the point where I'm considering other software.

I've tried other software and they run like a dream.

So how about, just stop! If you want to create a 3D slicing app, create one, and leave F360 as a CAD/CAM package. Or you could help me purchase a new $4000 machine.

I'm not grumpy, I just hate seeing great piece of software turn to ####...I know, I'm a software engineer and see it often.

---

Is it possible that you read only the title of this thread but not the introductory post and then came to a rash conclusion as to the nature of the thread?

[buzzcola3]

Nice feature would be to have a "command line" same as in "electronics part of fusion" (eagle) in all parts of fusion.

Especially if I work on my laptop its quite slow to select like mirror or stuff like that. And since most people have keyboard in muscle memory its usually faster to type than to use trackpad:

mir+enter  -to mirror for example

Or

Revo+enter -to revolve

It would auto complete, basically same as eagle. 🙂

[ercwtsnHDS]

Would be nice if I could flip the chamfer feature. And if the tool looked more like the fillet feature tool, grouping multiple chamfers under one operation, for example. Maybe throw in some transitioning options like Creo has?

[JetForMe]

Can you clean up a lot of the niggling little UI details? Like:

• How tab and text selection work
• Double-clicking on CAM operations is different depending on selection state
• There are at least three selection states for a Setup in Manufacturing, and simulation and post-processing behave differently depending on which it is.
• Units specification in fields varies between Design and Manufacture
• Show dual units in more places (e.g. the Inspection details, can we see mm and inch simultaneously)

[treysmith]

Hey, I'm  not sure if this is the spot to ask for this, but it would be super helpful if there was a "Make Selected Component Active" button, or an activate function where i could select a component in the model to activate?

Currently to activate a component that I see in the model, i have to select a face in the model to figure out which component it belongs to, then locate the component in the browser by following the underlines, and then activate that component in the browser to work on it. It would just make it so much easier to have an option in the model view to make the component of the selected face/body/etc. active.

It sounds excessive, but I deal a lot with nested components, so it just adds to the amount of time to work on something. 

Does that make sense?

[jeff_strater]

@treysmith - this particular thread was actually started around a specific proposed enhancement to recommend the next feature for the user to create - for instance, if you do Extrude, perhaps Fusion would suggest Fillet as the next feature.

However, because of a somewhat ambiguous title, it seems to have been taken over as a "next feature to implement for Fusion in general"...  

Relevant to your question, though, there are a couple of tricks that could be helpful:

1. double click on a face or edge will select the parent component of that edge
2. holding down the left mouse button for ~1/2 second will bring up the Select Other UI.  On the "Parents" tab of this UI, it shows the hierarchy.  For a Face, the immediate parent will be a Feature, then a Body, and then everything above that should be components, in reverse hierarchical order.
   

Once a component is selected, you can right click, and the top menu entry is Activate:

[mmckay]

Hopefully this is the place to suggest this. One thing that bugs me is that when selecting Move/Copy if you start putting in dimensions or directions before selecting "Make Copy" it automatically goes to the move mode, and the ability to select "Make Copy" goes away.  It would be helpful to keep the "Make Copy" selection available until the user is done and ready to click OK.  In other words keep the "Make Copy" available as long as the Move/Copy dialog box is open, and if the user does not select it then the move command is assumed and carried out when OK is selected.  If the user intends to copy then that option is available up until the OK is selected.  Thanks.

[TrippyLighting]

---

@mmckay wrote:

Hopefully this is the place to suggest this....

---

No, it isn't. The post that started this thread should be an excellent indication of what the feedback the OP was asking for 😉

[mmckay]

Thank you for letting me know.  This is the first time I have made an effort at suggesting a change, and made an incorrect assumption this was the place.  The follow up is where is the proper place to make suggestions for changes such as the one I am proposing?

[Scoox]

Ironically, I think this "Next Relevant Feature" idea is also the next most irrelevant feature (pun intended) and it should be obvious users would be more interested in the myriad of half-baked features and issues that take the joy out of using the software being taken care of. Please allow your developers to use their time to solve actual problems instead of creating new ones. Just to give you an example, the user parameter list still cannot be sorted, even though it has been requested many times—now THAT would be a tremendous workflow improvement, and I bet it'd be technically less involved than "Next Relevant Feature".

Could this be a desperate attempt to jump on the "AI" bandwagon? It's like suddenly all tech companies feel an uncontrollable urge to slap the latest buzzwords on their marketing material lest they be viewed as "outdated". If that's the case, don't bother: I think Fusion 360 users are smart enough not to be impressed by that sort of thing.

This wouldn't be the first time a software company tries too hard to "look modern", to come up with new bells & whistles that look fantastic on marketing blurb, or to re-invent the wheel/themselves, whilst unfinished core features are consistently neglected. Don't be that kind of company. Just my 2c.

[splarv]

One of the most confusing feature of Fusion 360 that you can not pan and orbit model with one right hand. You must or keep you left hand on the keyboard to press shift or constantly keep the mouse on the "cube" or switch to non Fusion 360 "Pan, Zoom, Orbit" shortcuts. But I dislike later, I like to have gesture menu on right button.

So I have suggestion how to improve Fusion 360 shortcuts schema. What about add shortcut "middle+right mouse" to the orbit action. This will be compatible with the classic schema (nothing will be changed for old), but now will be possible do all viewing action with one right hand: pan - middle mouse, zoom - wheel mouse, orbit middle+right mouse (first middle and in the pan mode right mouse turn on orbit), menu gestures - just right mouse, select object - left mouse.

[TrippyLighting]

---

@splarv wrote:

One of the most confusing feature of Fusion 360 ....

---

One of the most confusing and frustrating "features" of many users appears to be that they completely fail to read the initial post of this thread, which explains the purpose of the thread and spurt out any "next feature" possibly relevant only to them.

In the general preference settings, you can set your "Pan, Zoom, Orbit shortcuts" to "Tinkercad". Then you can use the mouse only and don't need the shift key. It has other implications, however 😉

[splarv]

Yeh, you are right about offtopic. I hope the moderator will delete t, I can't. I'll repost to the discussion then.