Are components/subcomponents the same as assemblies/sub-assemblies?

[jeevesme]

I've heard them called both and they both appear to be the same.

[jeff_strater · Accepted solution]

Hi @jeevesme,

Fusion doesn't really use the terms "assembly", "part", or "sub-assembly".  Everything is just a "component".  An empty design has a "root component" (which you can see in the browser).  A component can function as a part (as in Inventor/Solidworks), if it has only bodies, sketches, etc, but no child components.  A component can function as a pure assembly if is has no geometry of its own, but only child components.  Or, it can be a hybrid (it has bodies, but also has child components).  That one is a little weird.  It is useful sometimes, but maybe not that common.  But, when we designed Fusion, we did not want to limit you to the traditional parts and assemblies concepts, we felt that it was more flexible this way.  I suppose that's a matter of opinion...

Hope that clarifies it somewhat.

Jeff

[Noah_Katz]

> Fusion doesn't really use the terms "assembly", "part", or "sub-assembly". ...when we designed Fusion, we did not want to limit you to the traditional parts and assemblies concepts, we felt that it was more flexible this way.

I think F360 is amazing and fantastic, but in my opinion, you threw the baby out with the bathwater on this one.

Assemblies/subassemblies concept is an organized way of thinking about and building designs; too much flexibility just makes something hard to grasp.

[jeevesme]

Thank you.  I assumed that this was the case, but i have heard assemblies and sub-assemblies in many of the AU videos so I just wanted to make sure I was not missing anything.