Components versus Assemblies

[kmilam]

I'm coming from a SolidWorks environment.  Typically, I would create multibody parts in a part file, save out the individual bodies as linked part files and then reassembly in an Assembly file to add mates.  It was all so straight forward and enabled top - down design (albeit with a frustrating "reconstruciton" step at the assembly level.  Now, I'm trying to learn Fusion. 

Can you please tell me the difference between a component (multibody with mates...or joints) and an assembly?

Thanks in advance.

[jeff_strater]

Fusion does not have a hard distinction between Parts and Assemblies.  Instead, there is a single concept:  Component.  A Component can be "part like" if it only contains bodies.  A Component can be "assembly like" if it only has child components.  Or, a Component can be kind of a hybrid if it contains both bodies and child components.

Components can be local (self-contained in one design) or external (more SWX-like, defined in a separate design).  Local or external components can be mixed and matched in the same top-level design.

If that doesn't answer your question completely, let me know.  This is a fairly broad topic.  There are lots of Youtube videos that I'm sure expand on this distinction.

[jeff_strater]

here are a couple of possibly useful links:

• components-bodies-for-new-designers 
• 5-things-you-should-know-about-components-and-bodies 
• SOLIDWORKS-TRANSITION-GUIDE 
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzG2deElWqI 
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBJMgkzkaas 

[kmilam]

Thanks for reply.  So, what's the purpose of an assembly if the intermediate component does it all?  What is unique about the assembly?  Thanks

[jeff_strater]

I'm not sure I understand the question.  If you can clarify the question a bit, that would be helpful.  There is no "assembly" in Fusion.  Thanks.

[etfrench]

Perhaps Rule #1 would help.

[kmilam]

Sorry, for the confusion, and thanks for your earlier reply.  I was using the term Assembly due to my background in Solidworks and Lar's use of the same term. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBJMgkzkaas 

So to draw a comparison to SolidWorks:  Solidworks has part files that can be combined with mates in an Assembly, and then that Assembly (and others part or assembly files) can be combined in a higher level Assembly file.

In Fusion360, I just need to swap the term Assembly for Component and Part for Body.  Is that about it?  

Thanks

[jeff_strater]

@kmilam - close, but not quite.  Both Solidworks terms (Part and Assembly) map to Component in Fusion.  Body is the same concept (a self-contained group of geometry) in both products.  A Component can act as a Part or as an Assembly (or a sub-assembly), simply depending on what it contains, and how you use it in your design.

Here is an example of a component which is "part like":  it has a single body:

Next, I added a new Component to the design. (sub-assy 1).  It has two child components (SA part A, and SA part B).  That object is still a component, but because it has child components, you can think of it like a sub-assembly.  This hierarchy can continue as deeply as you want it to go

Does that help, or hurt?

[shahriarsifat1802164]

Hi @kmilam ,
The good thing is you do not need to worry about lost the link of multiple components during assembly.