Update joints in an assembly with linked parts.

[Anonymous]

When working with a big assembly, >100 components and sub assembly’s all linked so all component’s and assembly’s has an own file. I used joints to connect them. If I change a hole in the component, save it and update the assembly where the component is place in. The hole in the component change but the joints won’t update, so the component in the assembly doesn’t move. If I edit the joins one by one and doesn’t change anything the joint will update. My idea is to make a button for updating all joints.

[Anonymous]

Therefore, figuring out how and why joints get located in different places such as the Top of the browser tree and within different components would be very helpful for your idea because it can become a mess trying to update a collection of joints when they are scattered all around the browser tree's. So having an option to place all joints in a single folder on the browser might be very helpful for managing joint issues and re-configurations of the model especially when a user gives the joints in that designated folder proper names for identifying them and it would help with joint errors which seems to happen a lot in complex parametric (timeline) modeling.

[Noah_Katz]

@Anonymous

So true!

I spend so much time looking for things in the browser, and joints in particular.

I'm wondering if you should submit that as a separate Idea, as I wouldn't assume AD would implement it with this one.

[TrippyLighting]

Like many the ideas here in the idea station this sounds to me like either a wrong workflow or a bug. Then it might be a good idea to post an example of the behavior on the normal forum.

[Noah_Katz]

@Anonymous

It appears to me that joints are located in the browser with the components being joined, so if components are in the same subasy, their joint will be in that folder.

Where components belonging to different subassemblies are joined, the joint is located with the subasy closest to the root level.

So currently the only way to have all of the joints together would be to have only one level of hierarchy, which would be an organizational nightmare for an asy of any complexity.

@TrippyLighting

Therefore I don't think it's a workflow issue, but inherent to F360, at least as currently written.