let people edit sketches without jumping in time

[roambotics_scott]

I think I submitted this idea before but one of the annoyances that makes me turn off the timeline is that without doing that it's impossible to edit some sketch without getting pushed back in time.

So often I find myself wanting to create a sketch, do something in a perpindicular plane, and then use things from that to define more in the previous one. If I try doing that with timelines on, I either have to accept that F360 pushes me back in time to before the new sketch was created (which defeats the purpose), or I have to create a new sketch in the «present» that overlays the first sketch, then project geometry in, then use the second sketch.

Either way is convoluted and annoying, and if I have to turn off design history then I lose all of the timeline dependent functionality

[Anonymous]

Hey Scott, wanted to see if you're aware of two of the most straightforward ways for dealing with this 1) Can often move in this case sketches around in timeline, so in this case dragging the latter sketch in front of the former, provided the latter doesn't have projected geometry from the former (if it does, have the option to Break link for it).  And 2) In Model workspace go to Create > Create Base Feature and work with sketches in direct modeling mode in that, and when finished just click on Finish base feature in upper right and will be back to timeline/parametric mode with a base feature in timeline containing those sketches.  Note you can copy sketch geometry from previous sketches while in base feature mode to quickly put into new direct modeling sketches. 

Jesse

[roambotics_scott]

Thanks, Jesse.

The problem with (1) is that both sketches should exist in the same time (or, my real preference - sketch features would actually exist in the timeline as they were placed rather than having entire sketches exist at a single point in the timeline).

(2) is good and definitely works but I don't get enough out of the timeline to justify the bother with the extra steps.

[Anonymous]

I think one main reason latter timeline events disappear when editing former is to prevent say an earlier feature from referencing a latter, that also referenced the former, creating a bad feedback loop so to speak.  Also with such history/timeline based modeling, where sequence of things is often important in terms of end results, that maintaining clear linear delineation is important to prevent temporal chaos!  

As for timeline/parametric sketching, by my estimation that would add an additional layer of complexity for the user.  It's a tradeoff decision, but I think probably for the most part parametric sketching is not worth it.

Jesse

[roambotics_scott]

I think one main reason latter timeline events disappear when editing former is to prevent say an earlier feature from referencing a latter, that also referenced the former, creating a bad feedback loop so to speak. Also with such history/timeline based modeling, where sequence of things is often important in terms of end results, that maintaining clear linear delineation is important to prevent temporal chaos!

Yeah I'm sure that's why they do it, but it's also precisely why I don't want to get kicked into the past.

If I have derived geometry from a sketch, then go back and add a line to the sketch to do something else, it has all sorts of knock-on effects that I never intended (which I'd assume is surprising and frustrating to many users).

It'd be trivial, trivial, trivial to do multilayered sketches like onion skin layers in photoshop (which would also have the added benefit of not leaving me with hundreds of coplanar sketches when I finish anything moderately complicated)

As for timeline/parametric sketching, by my estimation that would add an additional layer of complexity for the user. It's a tradeoff decision, but I think probably for the most part parametric sketching is not worth it.

You're wrong there.

The user doesn't need to be aware of it any more than they are when they draw a new cube (or that drawing a new line gets pushed on the undo stack).

They could even autocondense all of the edits to a sketch at any given time to a single expandable step in the timeline.

[Anonymous]

Interesting ideas Scott!  From my experience such major changes are not necessary, but regarding layers, I have suggested there needs to be better indication of what belongs to what in the "press and hold" superimposed selection list, specifically for end points when selected in that list highlighting the curve it belongs to.  That's amazing you've had literally hundreds of superimposed sketches?  I wonder if there's not some change to your workflow that would make things more manageable!

Jesse

[roambotics_scott]

Yeah there is definitely a change I could make to my workflow - go in knowing a priori exactly what I'm going to build through designing the same thing 50 times (like the marketing team when they do their «you can make an X in < 20 minutes with F360» demos), or by doing a lot of whiteboard or paper sketches first.. but if I did either of those, I might as well just use Autocad or Solid Works.

[kb9ydn]

I have to agree with Jesse on this one.  It seems odd that you would ever need to have so many sketches on the same plane.  I've done some pretty complex designs (in SWX though) with many hundreds of parts and never had to do anything like you describe.  How are you using these sketches?  Are you using them as master layouts for other parts or something?  I also wonder if maybe you wouldn't be better off with a true 3D sketching environment where you don't have to switch back and forth between orthogonal sketches?

I can see some value in having layers available for sketches.  Although I wonder; what is the real difference between having a single sketch with 100 layers and 100 sketches on the same plane?  Either way you still have 100 things to manage and having 100 layers doesn't sound any easier than having 100 sketches.

But getting back to the original point, Onshape has a cool feature where you can toggle back and forth between the before and after while you're editing the sketch.  This at least gives you a preview of what you're about to do.

C|

[kb9ydn]

One other thing I should mention, is that I REALLY HATE the timeline when it comes to assemblies.  Going back in time while in an assembly lets you do some interesting things, but most of the time it's just obnoxious.

C|

[O.Tan]

all Fusion team needs to do is add more intelligence into their Direct Modelling environment and this will be solved 😛

[promm]

Thank you for your idea, this is getting archived due to the nature of the request.  One thing to consider it naming the parameters that you would like to change and then open the parameters dialog box end edit them there.  This workflow does not roll the model timeline back to the sketch.

Cheers,

Mike Prom

[Anonymous]

Is this issue going to be fixed? I downloaded Fusion 360 as a quick tool to use at home because it's cheap. I use SW at work and am sort of baffled by how cumbersome Fusion interface is. Editing the sketch of a component should be where the component is. I've tried Onshape as well which also is sub par at in context editing. I do like the fluidity of creating components like you would in Rhino but the timeline in Fusion360 needs some work. 

[roambotics_scott]

Judging by the thread and conversations I've had with people on the team, they don't see that this is an issue and consider that it works properly (which is properly maddening)

[Anonymous]

Yup, I see this as a reason to return the product if they can't even figure a basic thing like this out. Another program with some seemingly cool features from the sales/demo videos but launched too soon/not much interest in making a real competitor to SW at a much lower cost.

Also, the move the sketch/feature to the end works, but is by far no solution. It doesn't work with multiple extrudes etc after first sketch, doesn't slide past move command. And editing a component brought in like you would a part into an assembly is just the same. 

[roambotics_scott]

It's maddening because the solution is so obviously just to make the sketches timeless and the sketch elements timeline aware.

I get that that's nontrivial to build, but it would fix this and prevent the reductions proliferation of coplanar sketches that plagues the program

Used to try pushing for improvements but I've kinda given up on them figuring this s hit out