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
I would like to see a costing calculator in the CAM module. This can be a very interesting feature for some and a strong reason to use the program instead of other CAD/CAM software. Solidworks 2014 and later got one that is extremely unstable and buggy to use so if it's better implemented in Fusion 360 I would much rather use it.
Costing estimation needs to be there right from the modelling environment. Designers often make changes in design which might mean efficiencies or improvements in a subassembly but increase overall cost. It has for years puzzled me that neither Solidworks nor Inventor do this. To make a cost estimation one has to pull out a BOM from a drawing and save or pasted it into Excel then assign modifiers to the parameters to arrive at a total. It is a procedure that in my experience many designers constantly try to avoid. However everyone designs within certain cost constraints, so I don't see why this isn't a headline feature.
At the very least it should be possible to have a customisable field associated with every material. It would be the responsibility of the design team to populate this field with a dollar value which takes into account material cost, manufacturing, and overheads to factory gate level, usually by weight. Every design change would be followed by a headsup notification of the cost change at subassembly and product level. This would make it much easier to focus on the design target and reduce time spent on technically interesting but commercially unfeasible design.
A more sophisticated option would be the ability to declare a manufacturing style for a particular component eg formed or cast or cut and welded, and a relevant markup used over the material cost. All the values entered would be the responsibility of the design team, not Autodesk, but the values would be managed from the department/company level to ensure consistency in estimates. These techniques can never exactly predict what a supplier will charge, but would be immensely helpful in working out the relative costs between different current options and can be compared to the history of previous products designed and already quoted.
I think job cost calculator would be a good addin for fusion. Based on material selected, machine time and tooling. You would basically be creating a quote while creating your tool paths.
I think you're getting pulled in by the detail and missing the big picture.
The design process contains many stages which necessarily (because the product does not exist) involve approximations. The details are usually only worked out at the end of a process of making choices between different options. All the same, the direction of choice is usually aided by guide rails derived from the product criteria, and cost is one of them.
During design ideation and virtual testing, tools are readily available to give an indication of weight, form and strength. Strength analysis, though it gives a very specific result visually and numerically, is not accurate - it is a model with limitations derived from assumptions entered by the designer on the boundary conditions and the method parameters chosen, as well as limitations of the software. Yet we use such FEA methods all the time, knowing their limitations, because they are a good guide, and another perspective compared to hunches or practical testing with a limited number of events. It is this kind of assistance in costing that I am talking about, not a pin-point accurate prediction of the price that will be offered to the potential customer. Designers need to know whether choices they make are having a positive or negative impact on costs, and whether certain strategies are more high-risk in raising costs or not. A rise in costs is not necessarily a bad thing if it is associated with a greater rise in value, but designers need to see the effect on costs to make these judgements.
@yebyps I could not agree with you more in regards to costing and sourcing beeing an integral part of the design process. I share your passion of wanting to have heads up information on pricing and availably during the design process.
Archiving this idea is simply an honest reflection that is isn't something we can commit resources to in the next 6-9 months.
Ok, thanks, maybe I'm getting confused between archiving and burying 🙂 . Does the archiving process have a time reminder to it so that it pops up at a later date?
