Configurations and subtraction bodies - Fusion

[marc_schindewolf]

Hi, 

I am still early on in my learning Fusion learning journey so please bear with me.  I was playing around with the configurations feature and hoping it has some functionality that I was not able to find.   I would like to subtract bodies in the configured component from bodies in the host design.  I can use the combine but that makes me pick the bodies from the configuration to subtract.  Unfortunately the number of bodies in the inserted configured component changes between the different configurations.  Although the combine runs it does not find any additional bodies from what was selected at the creation of the combine feature.  This of course leads to a modeling error and rework to fix the combine operation. 

A possible solution might be having the combine operation select all of the bodies in a component inside the configuration.  That way the configuration can add/remove bodies at will and the combine in the host design will be sure to get the complete set, whether there are more or less bodies when the configuration changes.

Apologies for mixing up terminology, still trying to get a handle on the configuration feature.  fwiw, I think it is a very cool feature and would love to use with the FIRST robotics team I am mentoring. 

This post has been edited due to: @navya_gelli added the product to the title to help more community members find this topic.

[EvanGu]

Hi @marc_schindewolf,  my idea is to include all the required configurations within the assembly and use suppression to control which configuration is displayed. Then, use the bodies in that configuration to perform the subtraction operation with the assembly. Please refer to the attached file for reference.

[marc_schindewolf]

Hi Evan, 

I see how that can work.  It is a definite possibility.  I was hoping for a more "set and forget" type action.  With your approach, if the designer changes which configuration they want to enable they have to go into the history and change the suppression.  I was hoping for something that does not require additional steps or checks when the designer changes the configuration.

fwiw, I have attached a sample design with an example of the type of configuration I am hoping to not require updating the combination.  

[TrippyLighting]

This is pretty easy to achieve. See attached model and don't hesitate to ask questions.

You realize that none of your fasteners are assembled properly?

They can still be dragged around freely in the viewport.

Edit: Well, of course I forgot to attach the model. 15 minutes in, the export still hasn't completed. I'll circle back once it has.

Edit 2 : It is attached now.

[marc_schindewolf]

Whoa, that's a cool trick.  Thanks for your help on that one!  (image below)  

It would still be create to see the combine tool allow the selection of a group or even just select the "bodies" in the tree.  But I will definitely take this.

As for the fasteners moving around.  You are right.  Was hoping to solve that later, I guess now is later.  🙂 Played around with that for quite a while.  Thought I had a solution to use a rigid group and include children but that does not appear to keep up with the add/remove of components that happens when a different configuration (more bolts) is selected.  Any thoughts on how to handle that would be much appreciated.

Screenshot 2025-11-20 125541.png

 

[TrippyLighting · Accepted solution]

Here is a video that explains how this works with the fasteners.

[marc_schindewolf]

Thank you so much for putting that video together showing exactly how to accomplish the goal!  Your help is going to allow us to adopt this configuration (bearing & retaining screws) in our design process this year.

[TrippyLighting]

If you use this workflow more often in other situations, there is an Add-in available in the Autodesk App Store that will make this much more convenient.

[marc_schindewolf]

The solution is working nicely and is something I am looking forward to deploying to the robotics team.  

In the latest version of the file ... 

• I rebuilt the file to cleanup a number of things like names, origins, etc.
• The trick you did to create a single body for cutting turned out to help improve the overall model, more below on that.
• I got the app you mentioned and that is going to make the modeling process really easy for the students.

Regarding the improvement for the overall model.  The team is working to improve its modeling capabilities and speed.  We have a very short period of time to work out the entire design and have spent a lot of time on modeling details to early in the process.  We are moving towards a paradigm where we work with blocks as we work out spatial relationships and mechanisms.  Once that is in good shape then we will cut holes in plates, put in all the details and make sure it is manufacturable.   Having the sort of "cap" on top of the bearing that captures that space will help with the design process and potential collisions. 

Getting through this helped me sharpen my Fusion skills.  Still a long way to go, but they are definitely better!

Thanks for all of your help.