Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Submitted byAnonymouson11-28-201408:31 AM
Status:
Implemented
Construction Plane Parallel to Plane through point.
I would like to see many more options for creating construction planes. One that I find missing that I've used constantly in SolidWorks is parallel to plane at point. The plane for reference can be either a datum plane or planar surface. The usefulness of this is that you can create a sketch and use any sketch point as a reference for placing the plane, without having to have the plane be normal to the sketch.
It seems like when selecting features on a body to position the offset plane, the softwre just enters the numerical distance to this feature in an un-parametric way. When I change the feature i selected, the datum doesnt update. What we really need is a way to position a plane parametrically at features like points or edges or faces while remaining parallel to a datum plane (or other constraints like that).
Lack of options for creating parametric constuction geometry might be the most frustrating issue to me in Fusion 360 as an engineer coming from Solidworks and Creo. There's usually some workaround, but sometimes they take a ridiculous number of steps to achieve something that should just be one feature.
Yeah, I agree with dan.pfautz. The current solution does not do what people really need. When selecting geometry (such as a vertex) for referencing an offset plane, it simply measures the distance, and inputs that into the offset box. But this is just a dumb value that will not change. We need something that will change as the upstream features are changed to change the location of that vertex.
That's right. The plane needs to be associative with the selected point, so that if the point moves the plane moves. Otherwise it's completely useless.
This option is sorely missed. It is a foundation to plane construction options. It must also be parametric and linked to the point so if the point moves the pane must also move.
In Solidworks, you have the ability to create a plane that is parallel to an existing face or plane but then you can select an edge or point to place that plane at. For example I could set the plane to be parallel to the top plane but have a point that is 150mm above the top plane. I could then select that point and the plane would be 150mm above the top plane. This would be useful when you are working off geometry that you may not know the exact distance from the offset plane and would be faster than measuring that point and typing in that distant.
I have found fusion to be extremely powerful in that it has basically done away with the need to trim lines in sketches and absolutely require construction lines. I have a major sketch that is on one of the origin planes which I can go back and update as I add things and project these features onto future planes. In this respect fusion has really sped up my modelling.
However, I have found in their quest to make things simpler that omissions such as work plane options are lacking. Note however that it is no impossible to parametrically drive plane positions. The work around is going into the parameters menu and pull out the parametric datum there. For example if d1 happens to be the diameter of the cylinder I am working on I have to use d1/2 for my offset plane to be tangent to its outer surface, or I have to think it through and use a formula referencing d1 or any other parametric measure I want to relate the plane to.
Thing is that they should just expand the options as suggested here since it would improve workflow. For example pulling a plain from an offset and then referring to another feature on the fly such as tangent is beneficial, rather than having to cancel the action looking up the datum in the change parameter menu and using it.
This sort of thing seems to be all over the program in that it is a bit too simplified and this making things more complicated since you have to work around its simplicity. Another example is the lack of a fasterner library or pluggin to construct them on the fly, and pulling features... they only have a To "object" option and not just a To option (which we all usually use as to face), which I have noticed give strange artefacts when the mirror command is used, and there is also no through next or all. These last ones might not be entirely problematic in general use, but when it comes to changing the design it can break things or worse yet not update as one might expect and be missed entirely.
I see great potential in the product, but I do not thing I would ever really trust it entirely, and rather work in inventor or SW or SE where my sketching might be slower (loads of trimming and construction lines) and yet experience consistent and reliable modelling when it comes to the 3D experience.
