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
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.
Critical feature, especially for those of us doing things (like furniture design) with lots of curved parts meeting at weird angles. It's common to need a plane at an intersection point or aligned with some geometry essentially floating at a random point in space. Thanks!
Sorry - haven't seen your answer referring to my comment.
Your construction sketch is already orthogonal to the desired plane. Thats not always the case but makes creating the cruicial line easier. So: there are worse cases. At least that's what I think.. Anyhow problem is solved for me in this specific design.
In other (more cubical) constructions I use the same solution as you provided. 🙂
And still: I don't get it that this totally basic feature is missing.
A resounding +1 Wound up asking how to do this elsewhere, then I was pointed to this old idea suggestion. This is an important omission, I hope Autodesk take care of it soon!
I still use fusion from time to time to do a quite example or so (for private individual use).
But because of these constrain related options I would I simply work better and faster when it come to complete geometries in Solid edge, inventor, solid works etc where these options are available. Too bad the programs I mention here I don’t have licenses for (restricted to use at work).
Recently I have had to learn ironcad and Catia for my new job, further adding to the list of programs that seem to be easier to work with than fusion
No one in this thread understands why it's missing and why Autodesk carries on implementing new stuff (which is always great of course) without correcting missing features like this.
So if Inventor 360 existed, same pricing model as Fusion 360, would Fusion 360 still be a compelling package? That's a genuine question, I have not tried Inventor personally.
Every time someone replies to this need, my heart skips a beat because I see the headline, and momentarily believe that it has been fulfilled. Then I realise it's just another justified moan, and get depressed.
Great video @pavmed! I don't understand russian, but it's easy to understand what you are refering to when you say "novo fusion itakogo instrumenta niet", so I'm puzzled why the developers haven't understood the need for such a basic requirement.
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")