An honest plea to Fusion 360 Development team

[O.Tan]

Hi,

so I've been using Fusion 360 for a year now and I've actually seen Fusion early days (when it was called Inventor Fusion) and I must say that things has evolve or improved quite a lot, I really appreciate how active the developers are in the forum, answering questions and solving and giving bug fixes. Fusion today is much more stable then last year, I don't get that often crashes so kudos to the development team in getting Fusion to be more stable and for the features added.

However, drawings is still pretty much incomplete since last year and I don't know how Fusion team is organised internally but I feel right now what Fusion needs to focus more is on Drawings, it's very incomplete and even with all the additions of the recent update, it's easily broken like getting unsolveable "A balloon can only be placed on a component" error, when I triple checked to ensure I've used the component selection and created a new drawing, yet the problem repeats. Perhaps it wasn't programmed to handle drawings that's generated from a sub-assembly.

Then there's basic drawings/drafting features that's found on other CAD software but not in Fusion, below is an example of how easy and fast it's to generate dimensions.

1. Basically I use coordinate dimensions for most of my drawings, notice how easy it is to generate coordinate dimensions.
2. Notice how each time I click on a feature it auto-aligns
3. I'm able to easily change dimension orientation
4. Dimensions is able to re-aligned with simple click + drag
5. Hole Callouts
6. Custom Callouts (symbols and etc)

And this is just a small preview of the software capabilities.

A simple analogy I'll use to describe Fusion Drawings is like, a pizza store made the pizza from the dough to baking and only to end up with not having a proper pizza box, and having to go next door to the competitor to get pizza box.

The whole drawings module is a mess, I'm not sure what Fusion team envisioned (or if any thoughts was even given on drafting/drawings during the initial Fusion conceptualisation) on how user should use or manage their drawings cause I notice that a single part drawing is linked to the assembly, so if I update the assembly and not the part, I'll have to update the part as well when nothing has changed on the part. The way how drawings is done now clutters the data panel since Fusion encourages multi-body environment (mixing both assembly and part files). So maybe we need something like a multi-drawings environment as well?

Finally, all that I mentioned is something that all other CAD software is able to do and for the most part, basic features, so I don't think this should be in IdeaStation as there's just too many things and it'll end up spamming the service.

Eventhough Fusion lacks many features like proper mirrored components, there's still some less elegant workaround, but when it comes to drawings, there's no workaround as the tools isn't there. Sure drawings might not be the most flashies of things but it's what seperates between an end-to-end CAD solution and not. Right now I'll have to export my work as STEP only to be opened in another CAD software to do dimensioning, not everyone owns their own CNC machine, so proper drawing tools is very important.

Apologies if it sounds harsh but this is something I felt that needs to be said once in awhile. Perhaps Fusion team could focus the first 6 months to improve on existing features (direct modelling needs more polishing, hole generation tool, bolted connections[supposed to be well in development last year but mysteriously disappeared]) then adding new flashy ones and the other 6 months to add those flashy features/fix rare bugs. This will also give more time to those working on bigger projects to get it done right (gather real-user feedback and etc) then rushing it up.

[daniel_lyall]

some machines are value for money even if they cost $500,000.

[Anonymous]

Magic, and inefficient design/antiquated production processes, that's a big one too.

[daniel_lyall]

only the copy of copys are like that

[Anonymous]

Shoot, I'm going off to dream about fatty design gremlins now, good luck with your productions!

Jesse

[Anonymous]

Shoot, forget the copies, only posers who cant design for themselves copy.

[Anonymous]

Well, sleep well my ambitious dyslexic creative friend 🙂

[promm]

Hello,

I see that this thread has some questions around joints.  When you assemble components together you have traditionally apply constraints between planes locking down degrees of freedom.  This approach requires multiple constraints and often has to be redone when analyzing the motion of an assembly.  With Joints you are addressing how components move relative to each other and often one joint can lock down all of the degrees of freedom between two components.  

Kevin has done a great job explaining the advantages of joints in the link below:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/design-validate-document/let-s-talk-about-joints/m-p/5493889

Cheers,

Mike Prom

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Hey Daniel drawings are no problem.

That's awesome you have a nice big cnc router like that.  Some other production equipment though, especially when you get into full automation, can be often insanely expensive.  There's nothing magical about it though 😉  Just largely huge markups because most think it is magical or something.   

Jesse

---

That is a misconception many people have! If it is is expensive then there must be huge markups on it.

My first job out of college was as a manufacturing machine design engineer. I've worked in and with the custom automation machinery industry for most of my 25 year career. That included the worlds largest and US largest automation system integrators. In these companies I developed detailled concepts , calculated cost for materials, labor etc. and wrote proposals.

That is a high risk low margin business!

[Anonymous]

Wow that sounds like really cool background you have Trippy!  

From my perspective though markup doesn't just stop at the automation engineering firm.  Always try to look at the holistic picture.  So on the material side, what you'll see is tons of off the shelf components being used largely exclusively, each with the same kind of holistic markups now being discussed.  This is as apposed to rethinking every little aspect and component of the design from the ground up, looking where convention can be defied at every turn.  Believe me, I've seen the massive laziness of big capital traditional industry, which traditionally is just the way it's always been done, as apposed to being able to accomplish the same thing in much more sophisticated modern ways, such as by completely rethinking what an actuator is, the very foundational mechanics of an actuator, for the intended purpose, or the computerized control system, etc.  This big money laziness also bleeds into the very foundation of the design and processes as well, which haven't largely changed in many areas since the 50s and 60s.   On the labor side, that's even more so where our ineffectiveness, both business wise, and health, happiness and community wise comes into play.  China has whole industrial districts specifically intended for aiding in business efficiency and proliferation of integrated "company towns."  Now for the most part they look like penitentiaries with a new coat of paint, and except for the concept of efficiency integration/wholistic thinking resemble nothing of the thriving, agricultural-structural-energy-health-education-utilites...integration futuristic community manufacturing centers I'm talking about.  But honesty we are not going to survive as a society, economically/industrially or otherwise unless we cut the silliness and unimaginative stasis now associated with modern costs of living.  

I don't have time to argue about this now, just my short two rambling cents.  

Jesse

[daniel_lyall]

@Anonymous dont dig to deep 

[Anonymous]

Digging deep is the only way you ever get to the bottom of anything 😉

[TrippyLighting]

Amen to that brother!

I also agree with your previous post.

[daniel_lyall]

it might stink if ya go to deep

[yoshimitsuspeed]

---

@promm wrote:

Hello,

I see that this thread has some questions around joints.  When you assemble components together you have traditionally apply constraints between planes locking down degrees of freedom.  This approach requires multiple constraints and often has to be redone when analyzing the motion of an assembly.  With Joints you are addressing how components move relative to each other and often one joint can lock down all of the degrees of freedom between two components.  

Kevin has done a great job explaining the advantages of joints in the link below:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/design-validate-document/let-s-talk-about-joints/m-p/5493889

Cheers,

Mike Prom

---

That is generally true and generally gives joints a lot of advantage over mates but sometimes you just want to slap a planar mate on something.
I have also had situations where joints did not work and mates would have because they are more flexible. As someone mentioned up above that may just be because joints are still developing but I am still not convinced that they eliminate all need for mates.

[yoshimitsuspeed]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Wow that sounds like really cool background you have Trippy!  

From my perspective though markup doesn't just stop at the automation engineering firm.  Always try to look at the holistic picture.  So on the material side, what you'll see is tons of off the shelf components being used largely exclusively, each with the same kind of holistic markups now being discussed.  This is as apposed to rethinking every little aspect and component of the design from the ground up, looking where convention can be defied at every turn.  Believe me, I've seen the massive laziness of big capital traditional industry, which traditionally is just the way it's always been done, as apposed to being able to accomplish the same thing in much more sophisticated modern ways, such as by completely rethinking what an actuator is, the very foundational mechanics of an actuator, for the intended purpose, or the computerized control system, etc.  This big money laziness also bleeds into the very foundation of the design and processes as well, which haven't largely changed in many areas since the 50s and 60s.   On the labor side, that's even more so where our ineffectiveness, both business wise, and health, happiness and community wise comes into play.  China has whole industrial districts specifically intended for aiding in business efficiency and proliferation of integrated "company towns."  Now for the most part they look like penitentiaries with a new coat of paint, and except for the concept of efficiency integration/wholistic thinking resemble nothing of the thriving, agricultural-structural-energy-health-education-utilites...integration futuristic community manufacturing centers I'm talking about.  But honesty we are not going to survive as a society, economically/industrially or otherwise unless we cut the silliness and unimaginative stasis now associated with modern costs of living.  

I don't have time to argue about this now, just my short two rambling cents.  

Jesse

---

There are some elements to this that hold truth but I feel like many things are being left out of the equation.
A decently outfitted machine shop will have spent hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars on just the big machinery alone. Just paying this back takes a lot of time and a lot of jobs.
Now yes you can build your own stuff to do some of this but it requires a ton of time and if you do it to the level of quality that the pro machine is then it won't cost much less. In fact you talk about supply chain markups. They are going to have the wholesale pricing. You will spend a lot more just on your components than they will.
Then there is development time. I built my own small CNC machine because I coudln't afford one. Since it was my first machine though I have had to go through several design iterations and make a number of modifications to get it working better and doing the jobs I need acceptably. Just money wise I am still slightly ahead of where I would be had I bought a small similarly sized machine but if my time was worth anything I would be far behind.
I definitely think that there are ways to improve on the system but I do not believe that generally speaking there are these large margins you speak of. If so somoene would have come in and filled them. I definitely haven't found them in my area of business.

[Anonymous]

Hi that's fine @yoshimitsuspeed we have different points of view. 

Kudos on your CNC machine! 

Have a great day,

Jesse   

[yoshimitsuspeed]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Hi that's fine @yoshimitsuspeed we have different points of view. 

Kudos on your CNC machine! 

Have a great day,

Jesse   

---

Just sayin, if there is a market someone will figure out how to fill it.
If you do find any holes in the market where markups are crazy high and if you don't plan on taking it on please do let me know.
My margins are way too tight on most things I do.

[Anonymous]

Sorry to hear about your margins 😞  If I were to try offering any simplistic bit of advice it would be in everything you do, look from a "holistic" point of view, and think big from there.  Make of that what you will 😕

Jesse