changing origin position

[tomae]

I want to change the position of the origin triad in a design.  Imagine an extruded oval where the origin is currently in the lower left (and front) in the corner created by the convergence of the lines tangent to the two sides of the oval.  Say I want to move the triad to the right side of the oval.  Ok, so I select the body (or component) and select Move.  The dialog does not give me the option of moving the triad to the convergence of the lines tangent to the other side of the oval.  How can I move the origin there?

-Tom

[innovatenate]

Have you tried using the Set Pivot option in the move command?

Thanks,

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

As far as I know you can't change the actual position of the triad, but you can easily change the position of your model. To do this while snapping to the origin, I would recommend drawing a sketch creating a corner that you want to snap to on the object. Then move the object using the point to point option and selecting the corner and then the origin. The screencast shows a step by step. I hope this helps!

[Anonymous]

Oops. Sorry, I thought the op was talking about the origin triad and not the one present when moving an object.

[tomae]

Thanks, I was hopig I didn't need to create additional geometry in my sketch but it solves the problem.  I can live with that.

-Tom

[Anonymous]

No problem, glad I could help!

Maybe create a post in the Ideastation about creating a snap box around the object you want to move? As in a box that encompasses the full model no matter the shape so that any corner or center of the object can be moved to the origin or a point on another object would be useful. One instance that comes to mind is moving objects point to point where one has a fillet and the other does not but the theoretical corners should align?

[mtriffon]

I know this is an old post but I just had the same issue while working on a franken model that went through several hands.  

As previously, and correctly, stated, you cannot move an origin, only the component or bodies position relative to it.  

BUT:

You can take advantage of the fact that bodies will take on the origin their parent component and that bodies can be moved between components.

This is what I did:

1) I  moved one of the component bodies to its proper location using a combination of set pivots, moves and alignment commands (this is not necessary, you can do it after).

2)  I activate the parent component

3)  I selected the repositioned body

4)  I created a new component from selection.

5)  I then dragged all the bodies into the new component

6)  I deleted the old and empty component, banning that crazy origin from my life forever.

This works for children of the top level component, but probably not the other way around, it may depend on your models configuration.  The good thing is that it's easy to create new parents and then move them around.

You may have to play around a bit but its worth a shot if you really need to get rid of an irksome origin.

Hope this helps someone.

[Anonymous]

Why is this so hard?

(Rhetorical)

[Anonymous]

I guess I need to:

1) make a new (trash) sketch to be able to project from the applicable geometry and generate a new point that I would like to be my origin

2) select move tool -> bodies

3) select bodies

4) click "origin point" in move dialogue box, select new origin point

5) click "target point" in move dialogue box, select old origin point

6) click OK, delete trash sketch

Okay, well it works

EDIT: Nevermind, deleting trash sketch throws errors due to missing reference.

My head is spinning ha!

EDIT2: Just keep the trash sketch. Works.

[etfrench]

Why do you need to move the origin?

[Anonymous]

If the question is why would one need to move the origin of a component, then maybe it would be more appropriate to ask why the origin is needed at all? They are the same answers. That is why it seems odd that the origin is so tricky to move.

Some reasons why having an appropriately placed component origin is helpful/important

• when moving (and especially rotating) a component, it's the default place where the move tool pivots

• it sets the axis orientation of sketches contained within the component

• it makes objects easier to share/import when the origin is placed in a useful location

• it provides an easy location for a component that needs to rotate around a point which does not contain geometry

• it can be used to demarcate symmetry in many components

• general organization and tidiness

I can think of more.

A very good solution to this issue would be to add:

"Assemble" menu -> Set Component Origin

There would be three inputs:

Input 1: "Component selection" (component selector) * multiple selections possible

Input 2: "Origin Point" (point selector)

Input 3: "Set Orientation" (boolean Yes/No)

– Input 3a (only visible if Input 3 = Yes): "X axis" (axis selector)

– Input 3b (only visible if Input 3 = Yes): "Y axis" (axis selector)

– Input 3c (only visible if Input 3 = Yes): "Z axis" (axis selector)

Hopefully this is pretty clear, sorry if not. I'm going to post it in the idea section

[TrippyLighting]

There is no doubt at all that an appropriately placed opponent origin is helpful.

Before posting this idea in the idea station, please make sure you fully understand the ins and outs of parametric and history based design workflows!

[etfrench]

Those are all good reasons to have a component origin, but I'm not sure they're a reason to move a component origin.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the support @TrippyLighting. I come from Grasshopper/Rhino, and as well I regularly use Cinema4D w/ Python. Don't let the femme vibes throw you for a loop 😉 I can hang

@etfrench- A properly positioned origin goes hand in hand with the need for an origin, and the ability to move the origin goes hand in hand with a properly positioned origin. I don't quite understand what there is to be unsure about...

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for the support @TrippyLighting. I come from Grasshopper/Rhino, and as well I regularly use Cinema4D w/ Python. Don't let the femme vibes throw you for a loop 😉 I can hang

---

I did not sense any femme vibes other than your name 😉

I've worked with CAD and 3D modeling professionally for almost 30 years. That includes the earliest forms of CSG modeling through text files (DKBtrace, Radiance) and  Sub-D modeling in Blender for roughly 15 years. 

The two software packages you are mentioning are more or less direct modeling environments without parametric and history based modeling. There it is easy to just move an origin wherever you want it. I do this in Blender all the time.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@etfrench- A properly positioned origin goes hand in hand with the need for an origin, and the ability to move the origin goes hand in hand with a properly positioned origin. I don't quite understand what there is to be unsure about...

---

You are not telling us anything new here and we are fully aware of the importance of origins 😉

The difference between the direct molding environments you are used to and most of the main stream parametric CAD modeling software packages incl. Fusion 360 is that you don't move the origin after modeling something. You start designing around the origin, e.g after some consideration what symmetries and pattens are present in an object you try to align these axis of symmetry around the origin. In Fusion 360 that usually starts with a sketch.

You can of course model geometry and then later simply move the geometry so the origin aligns with another vertex, edge, etc. But that will leave the sketch at its original position and the move feature for that move will be part of the recorded design history. The moved geometry, however,  will still be fully associative with the sketch and changes to the sketch will properly update the geometry.

A nice feature would be the ability to assign a new origin to a component.

I can do that for example in ZW3D. If I want to export the component I can pic which origin is to be used on the exported component.  But that cannot be done in Fusion 360.

If you simply need another better point to join components that does not coincide with any geometry, then that is what explicit joint origins are for. A joint origin carries its own coordinate system.

[Anonymous]

---

@TrippyLighting wrote:

---

A nice feature would be the ability to assign a new origin to a component.

---

^^ That, yes! Agree to... agree? Haha, oh man. We are literally talking about the same thing.

13 years of post graduate professional experience here... BTW grasshopper is fully parametric by nature and so is C4D in many ways when used like I do (give me 2 keyframes and a python editor)... True that neither program has history based modeling, but that is a simple concept to understand- as would this feature we are both agreeing upon be easy to implement in such an environment.

Just to clear up any doubt about what you think I might be asking for, it would be an operation that would show up the same as any other operation does in the history/timeline. So let's say you had built a component, and later decided that you wanted to update the origin to a different spot.... 1) You would just click "Set Origin" or something like that 2) it would ask you to choose a component, a point, and an orientation then 3) it would assign the component its new origin placement & orientation, and the operation would show up as an icon in the history. Going back in the history before the operation was applied, the set origin operation would not have an effect.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Some reasons why having an appropriately placed component origin is helpful/important

• when moving (and especially rotating) a component, it's the default place where the move tool pivots

• it sets the axis orientation of sketches contained within the component

• it makes objects easier to share/import when the origin is placed in a useful location

• it provides an easy location for a component that needs to rotate around a point which does not contain geometry

• it can be used to demarcate symmetry in many components

• general organization and tidiness

I can think of more.

---

You have given the best answer yet to my post Component Origin location asking "How important or rather when is it preferable or perhaps even necessary to have the component origin close to or on the component ?"

It would be great if you had the time to reply to that post with your list of reasons and any more you can think of.

Possibly expanded a bit for us newcomers?

It would be great to capture that as a solution. Thanks!

[aaron.nall.77]

Arise ancient post!

In case anyone else is just starting with the latest version, I have observed that moving a component changes it's origin, therefore also changing it's construction entities such as offset planes, as well as all sub components and their origins and construction entities.

When I start a new project I always (usually) first create my components under the root component and any sub components of those components hierarchically. You can also drag these "events" to the beginning of the root history in the events timeline if you add new components later. This changes their ordering on the component tree at the left. When I create a new unforeseen component or sub-component later in a project, I'll focus to the root timeline and drag that create "event" backwards as far as it will go (they can only move back as far as immediately following their parent's creation).

Anyways, the point is that if you always work in sub-components of the root component as a best practice, you'll be able to reposition any component's origin by simply moving that specific component from the root focus.

IMPORTANT to note that moving a component will change not only it's own origin, but all origins of it's sub components, and everything contained within. So, be careful of how you create your components' hierarchy.

[etfrench]

You haven't changed the origin, you've just moved the component 😀 When you move a component, the its origin moves with the component.  If you move a body within a component, the origin does not move.  There is no need to move new components to earlier positions in the timeline. 

p.s. The "component tree" is officially called the Browser.

[aaron.nall.77]

---

@etfrench wrote:

You haven't changed the origin

---

A) If the component's Origin entity hasn't changed exactly as I've described in my post, explain to the community why the component's Origin entity I've highlighted is in a new location. Well, you can't, because we can all see by the screen annotation that it has actually changed position, anyone can verify this is true by using the Inspect->Measure tool to see the new coordinates of the component's Origin after performing a move operation on a component and ensuring it's specific Origin is ticked as visible.

B) I never said anything about moving bodies to change a component entity. However, I did mention that if you move a component that the bodies within it will move. I think I did an excellent job of describing the functionality of the software.

C) Yes, moving your component creation and sketch events to the beginning of the timeline can be very beneficial to more advanced users who want to take full advantage of all the organizational and timeline features. That's why the

ability exists, for advanced users who want to take advantage of advanced features.

Please don't negate people's explanation of how the software works or discourage people from using the software to it's fullest capabilities simply because you don't understand the functionality or the capability benefits.

I hope this clears up any misunderstanding you had about my explanation of the software's functionality.

PS - The Component Tree is contained within the expandable/collapsible pane labeled Browser.