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
Fusion 360 desperately needs true 3D sketching. The ability to create a sketch not associated to a plane. The ability to connect a couple tangent arcs to get from one sketch to another. The ability to sketch something like the runners of an exhaust manifold that aren't planar.
I agree that proper parametric 3D sketching is essential, I can see that you can move a line endpoint out of plane using the "Move" function but this line is not able to be constrained with dimensions or constraint.
For the record, I would also like to see proper helix and spiral curves or sketch entities.
Trying to draw some simple tubing routing (exhaust) and its a nightmare! Given that I need straight sections and set bend radii - this is absolutely lacking in any 3D sketch functionality. I haven't needed to do this since committing to Fusion a year ago but this is ground for going back to Solidworks.
Its a common trend with a lot of software dev these days - companies loose sight of functionality over UX needs and "feature lists" forgetting the core need for these "tools"
You can industrial design the hell out of a hammer - but if its hard to hit the nail on the head with it - its a bad tool.
I hope the Fusion team is working towards this being a tool above all else. Simple, basic features MUST be present for this to be used by professionals.
@dmitriy They are working on improving it but because fusions spans sketching to modeling to sim to cam the process often feels slower for a particular module.
For exhaust routing and similar work the best workaround that I have found is to make my tubing bends as a component or separate part file and then use joints to link them together. Using a revolute joint allows freedom of motion as you put it together and then you can lock the joint when it's exactly where you want it. It's kind of frustrating in the beginning but once you get used to it it's kind of a convienent workflow. I designed a header using this method and it worked really well. Then you can use each bend for your cut angles. I always kind of hate posting workarounds because it gives the AD team more excuse to ignore feature requests but it's not like the idea station is effective anyway.
@cekuhnen To me that is a half baked excuse. AD cares more about making shiny marketing features than they do about making a comprehensive CAD program. The fact that we have had rendering for years and things like generative design before NPT threads, 3D sketching, full featured drawings, or many of the other core functionality issues and lacking features shows just how backwards ADs priority list is.
While that's interesting, I'm afraid there is almost no efficiency or sensibility in that compared to what a proper 3D sketching tool set allows. I might as well get those PVC header design kits and do things by hand!
I appreciate the suggestion and I can see it being userufl but the user base needs to apply pressure collectively to get this product to where it needs to be. Just as you said - workarounds are not solutions!
Well I share the frustration with the sketch engine stability and roll set. It is one of the weaker areas. But technology like generative design or rendering are different developer teams and also products AD shares like with Inventor etc.
I am also new to Fusion 360 coming from Solidworks in my aerospace engineering undergrad and graduate degrees. I have designed and flown multiple fixed wing sUAS and modeled each in Solidworks. I consider elegant and intuitive 3D sketching tools a foundational part of modeling. This the most significant limitation I have found in Fusion 360. Having to start with a 2D sketch entity and then use a move/copy tool to move a point out of plane to start a 3D sketch just doesn't cut it.
Functionality I would like to see in order of importance:
3D sketch tools
Line tool: I want to be able to start a line by selecting a point on a sketch entity or plane, and then select another point off-plane to terminate the line. The ability to terminate lines in free space (not on a plane or connected to another sketch entity) and then apply constraints is also a great tool. I suggest 3D lines of this type should be drawn perpendicular to the viewing direction. I think requiring the line start connected to a defined plane or sketch entity is reasonable and would likely simplify development.
Circle tool: should require selecting a center point on a sketch entity or plane to start and then draw the circle perpendicular to the camera direction.
Rectangle tool: similar to the circle tool, start on defined point and draw perpendicular to the camera direction.
You get the idea for the rest of the tools...
3D constraints should work, and work intuitively: right now if I have a 90 degree corner between two lines (3 points defining a plane), I cannot create a line perpendicular to this plane even with 3D sketch checked. I have not tested if I could make a line perpendicular to a circle but suspect you can't.
A checkbox toggle for 3D in the sketch palette is alright but not my preference. Truly separate 2D and 3D sketch options/buttons/environments helps organize my thinking.
@cekuhnen, as long as there is an efficient way to make a 2D sketch within the 3D environment I don't care that much. Like selecting a plane and being able to sketch in that plane until it is un-selected. I don't want to waste time constraining the 3rd dimension when I know I want a 2D sketch.
There is something to be said about the 2D case being a subset of the 3D case and there are multiple ways to implement the functionality. The path of least resistance for the developers depends greatly on how the current code base is architected. It seems making that decision is a fork in the road that could have far reaching effects in terms of user experience and code maintainability. 3D geometric math and constraints is whole different ball game. That's another reason I would at least explore creating a separate tool if I was writing the software.
The ability to create a sketch not associated to a plane.
As an aside, every time you rotate your sketch, solidworks creates a new plane in angular relation to the last one automatically. Some 3d manifolds I have made based on a 3d sketch line path loft in solidworks had probably 100 or more planes related to them. So, at this point, really, if someone were decent in I think Python, they could almost write their own add-in to perform true 3d sketching/relational plane generation.
ok, so, it seems to be that in the last few updates someone has been mucking around with the 3d sketching implementations. for the better I might add.
So, obviously, its not as good as Solidworks. Ok, we get it, it isn't Solidworks. However, that being said, I figured out a few workarounds for manifold work as follows:
1) draw a sketch... In my case, a line, followed by a curve that represents my manifold.. or you can start with an arc, thats fine
2) Ensure that there is a small section of straight ie .065 or so between each arc.. If you don't, you won't be able to move each sketched arc section.. Yes ,this is a workaround, however, not much else can be done for it.
3) Move each section into its angular relation that will be required...
So, the reasons I don't like this are many...
1) it is time consuming and 2) no way to print out an assembly angle and axis schedule and 3) if you have to edit it, life is gonna suck
by making various angular tube sections and connecting them via Joint, you effectively can get an angular and axial schedule by which to make your headers etc using the joint relationships in the tree and parts you made ie 10, 12.5, 15, 25, 30, 45, etc. then you know how to cut your bends and their axial relations from one to the next, PLUS, you can DRAG the jointed sections and the software will attempt to maintain their connections as you move it! Its actually pretty cool and can definitely be helpful if you are going for a certain header length and then you can shift and move the runners around to fit the various obstacles and it will simply reposition the joints to attempt to match the ending location.. Sometimes simply telling it to JOINT two sections at a distance will see it solve the other joints and allow it to connect without having to move a bunch of seperate sketch entities. Since I already know aprox number of degrees that will be required to allow a mate up to the collector, and I know the distance, I essentially start with the same number of bends and straight sections on each header, then simply manipulate them until they fit and don't interfere and still allow me to bolt them up and perform the welding tasks.
Here is a video examples of some of the workflow. This example is with 1.5 ss stovepipe castings. Of course, some of the smaller sections that align axially after the routing is solved will likely be replaced with larger whole sections, I typically use lots of 15s and 30s initially, but, once the routing is done I reroute some sections where its obvious there is not off axis for a few sections and replace them with 45s 60s and 90s so I don't have to cut as much.
