Community
Fusion API and Scripts
Got a new add-in to share? Need something specialized to be scripted? Ask questions or share what you’ve discovered with the community.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

BaseFeature missing in Manufacturing Model

11 REPLIES 11
Reply
Message 1 of 12
pludikar
291 Views, 11 Replies

BaseFeature missing in Manufacturing Model

@BrianEkins 

 

Is there any specific reason why "create Base Feature" is missing from the Edit Manufacturing Model workspace?

 

I notice that if you create a base feature in the Manufacturing Model via a script/Add-In (see attached), F360 doesn't like the editing part - the top panel bar will become completely blank - obviously not right!.  If you undo (ctrl-Z) then re-do (ctrl-Y) the panels reappear, as do the created bodies/baseFeatures.  If you attempt to edit the created baseFeature from the timeline and then exit, the same thing happens.  At least that 's what happens on my machine.

 

Is this a bug?  or is it that F360/Manufacturing environment is still cooking?  (Could be either IMHO)

 

Regards

Peter 

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
11 REPLIES 11
Message 2 of 12
BrianEkins
in reply to: pludikar

I know exactly what you're talking about because I got bit with this in my dogbone add-in. The answer I got is that it's intentional that the ability to create a Base Feature is missing in a Manufacturing Model. There are issues with supporting it, and it was questionable how useful the functionality would be in that context. I don't know how hard it would be to support it, but I think it would be significant work.

I like your workaround of undo and redo. I didn't discover that. The thing I found was to switch to another document and then switch back. I think anything that forces the UI to refresh fixes it, but I didn't find an easy way to do that.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Ekins
Inventor and Fusion 360 API Expert
Website/Blog: https://EkinsSolutions.com
Message 3 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: BrianEkins

Thank you.

I suspected you probably knew exactly what was going on - hence mentioning you:-)

I still find it bizarre that the development team think that something like this is unlikely to be used much - I guess they didn't think that people would try to adapt their scripts/add-ins to the manufacturing environment. I would suggest they really need to look at the woodworking market, and realize that there are numerous types of joints (dovetails, tenons, tongue and groove and so on) that would almost certainly benefit from add-ins that also work in the manufacturing domain. All of these add-ins will heavily rely on the baseFeature in the future. I guess something like this has the same weight as the custom feature that has now been latent for almost 3 years.

Peter
I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
Message 4 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: BrianEkins

@BrianEkins


In a similar vein - I’m guessing that the manufacturing model timeline isn’t accessible via the API, even though individual timelineObjects are.  So it’s not possible to determine the current TL markerPosition, at least not that I’ve found. Am I right?

 

Peter

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
Message 5 of 12
BrianEkins
in reply to: pludikar

I believe that's correct. The design timeline is accessed through the Design object, and the Manufacturing Model doesn't currently provide access. I don't think this is intentional, but just an oversight that is hopefully remedied soon.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Ekins
Inventor and Fusion 360 API Expert
Website/Blog: https://EkinsSolutions.com
Message 6 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: pludikar

Many thanks Brian,

I think I've found the reason why the timeline is not playing nice.  

 

I assumed that the "design" variable is global (set it once and forget it!), but it seems that it's workspace (WS) context dependant!  Many people probably know that already, but it means it needs to be set/refreshed each time the WS context changes.

 

My code was working and behaving nicely - until I restarted F360, and it went back to misbehaving.  I couldn't understand why, until I noticed that my "timeline.markerPosition" gave me different values, depending on where in the code I was using it.  

 

Part of the problem could be that I had a debug session open for several hours, and, even though I reset the debugging regularly, it looks like some variables didn't get GC'd and ended up being persistent.   Setting "design" at the function level seems to have done the trick.

 

Bottom line: "design" appears to be an instantiated variable, where each WS is a separate context instance.   Not sure I particularly like that, but now that I understand what's happening, it makes life easier.

       

Peter

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
Message 7 of 12
BrianEkins
in reply to: pludikar

The Design object derives from the Product object, and all products represent related data. If you use the Application.activeProduct property it's returning the product that's currently open for edit in the UI. That Product is specific to the currently active document. If another document is active, an entirely different Product will be returned. A Design Product owns all of the design-related data within a specific document.

Another type of Product is the CAM product. If you call Application.activeProduct while the Manufacturing workspace is active, you'll get a CAM product. It owns all of the CAM-related data for a specific document. The only things that are global are the Application object and some things that are independent of any document like TemporaryBRep.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Ekins
Inventor and Fusion 360 API Expert
Website/Blog: https://EkinsSolutions.com
Message 8 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: pludikar

@BrianEkins 

Hi Brian,

That's a critically useful bit of information, that's not immediately obvious from the documentation. There's sort of a hint in the "document and assembly structure" part of the API user manual, but that's more of a bland "What" description - it really needs more of a "Why" explanation, as you've just given.  Can you get someone to include that (or something similar) into the manual?

 

Peter  

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
Message 9 of 12
BrianEkins
in reply to: pludikar

It should be documented better. I've attached the notes from an Autodesk University presentation I did a few years ago that discusses this. Hopefully, it will help.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Ekins
Inventor and Fusion 360 API Expert
Website/Blog: https://EkinsSolutions.com
Message 10 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: BrianEkins

Hi Brian

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this before, but I had obviously forgotten. Age does that to people. 

The place your document/or its contents really needs to be is in the API user manual.  It’s great for this specific thread, but it does need to be easily available/findable to the general user. I’m sure you can use your significant influence with the F360 team to the benefit of future developers. 

Thanks for your help

 

Peter

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).
Message 11 of 12
jeff.pek
in reply to: pludikar

It looks like we've found a way to avoid the problems that triggered the removal of the Create Base Feature command when editing manufacturing models, so we should be able to restore that capability in an update before too much longer.

 

Jeff

Message 12 of 12
pludikar
in reply to: jeff.pek

@jeff.pek 

 

That'd be great news.  It would save a lot of problems by eliminating the need for work-arounds, and, for F360, open up the field for more developers to create edge treatment add-ins for wood working in the manufacturing model environment.  I believe that's a good call.  I look forward to seeing the update.

 

Peter 

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to be very, very dangerous.

Life long R&D Engineer (retired after 30+ years in Military Communications, Aerospace Robotics and Transport Automation).

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk DevCon in Munich May 28-29th


Autodesk Design & Make Report