Configurations [Feedback Request]

[jodom4]

Hey everyone,

Configurations are live and we want to hear from you! james_mann47GPZ is here to respond in this thread to your questions and comments about the feature. 

Some useful links to check out before you post:

• Configurations FAQ
• What's New: Configurations

Thanks!

[g-andresen]

Hi,

---

@MikeCroPhone wrote:

Are there talks of including configurations in single user storage hubs in the future? 

---

I do not think so, because Single user storage was already discontinued last year.

Günther

[MikeCroPhone]

What? Does that mean every single file that needs references (all my assemblies, drawings, and anything else) made over the last few YEARS in the single user hub now needs to be redone just to access any features in the teams hub? 

Is there a way to transfer those files over from single user to teams that I'm not aware of? 

Edit: I just created a new project with assemblies and drawings as a test. That transferred over  from the personal to the team hub just fine, with no referenced file loss. 

My misunderstanding happened because I tried to copy an entire folder inside one project into another project within the single user storage space for redundancy purposes. I wanted to make sure that when I transferred a project from the personal hub into the team hub, any potential data loss wouldn't be a big deal since I created a backup. Files that need references could not be transferred to a different project, but I see now that this isn't the case when transferring an entire project to a different hub. 

[TrippyLighting]

See this link:

https://www.autodesk.com/support/technical/article/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/How-to-move-projec...

[MikeCroPhone]

I see. I was aware of this link but I was also afraid of data loss. I tried to make a backup project within the personal hub but the files that referenced other files wouldn't transfer over. I feared that it would be the same case when I transferred the project over to the teams hub. I've just done a test and found out that wasn't the case, thankfully. I appreciate your helpfulness nonetheless.

[MikeCroPhone]

What is the recommended workflow for extruding patterns in configurations?

Currently, I have one cut extrusion feature and one join extrusion handling every necessary extrusion on a rectangular pattern. The configurations (1-5) only change the number of instances in that rectangular pattern. The part length updates with each configuration according to the number of instances in the pattern - this happens without issue. There's no issue when I go from 5 instances down to 1. 

The problem occurs when I go from a configuration with fewer instances of a sketch in a pattern back up to one with more instances. The extrusion is only saved for the configuration with the least amount of instances. I'd prefer not to create an extrude feature for every single new instance in the pattern since it's extra time and it clogs up my timeline. 

Is there a better method for handling shared extrusion features in a configured sketch pattern?

[g-andresen]

Hi,

---

@MikeCroPhone wrote:

Is there a better method for handling shared extrusion features in a configured sketch pattern?

---

Create patterns of features/body .... and not in sketches.
Just sketch one profile, extrude it and pattern the feature in solid mode.

This is generally true and not only for configurations.

günther

[MikeCroPhone]

That works. Thanks!
Out of curiosity, what other reasons would I have for choosing a patterned feature rather than a patterned sketch?

[g-andresen]

Hi,

---

@MikeCroPhone wrote:

Out of curiosity, what other reasons would I have for choosing a patterned feature rather than a patterned sketch?

---

You get „cleaner“ sketches that can be constrained with less effort.

Günther

[Christoph_360]

Hello

---

@Victoria.Studleywrote:

How's the experience been so far?

---

This is the virtual simulation of a simple MillTurn part, which is machined in 5 setups.

 

In the Document CAD Stages of Design for Manufacturing i have created the Configurations for 5 Clampings.

In the Document CAD Stages of Design for Manufacturing i have also created the two Configurations Small and Large

In addition, I have defined the two Configurations Small and Large in the CAM.

It also works perfectly with two Configurations in the CAM, thank you for the great work of the development team.

Since Nested Configurations cannot yet be exported, the attached files refer only to the Configuration Small.

Christoph

[jacob.michaels]

Hey Devs!

Loving the configuration feature. It's been pretty much exactly what I've been needing for my workflow.

I use Fusion mostly for custom cabinetry and storefront assemblies, and I think that enabling edit in place would be really great. I have made a master cabinet case model that I copy, and create new sketches for custom drawer layouts and whatnot. 

For these larger assemblies I work on, edit in place would be a great time-saving feature to add something that I forgot, just so that I don't have to go back into the original design > make changes > save > navigate back to the full assembly > link with most recent.

Thanks!

[Christoph_360]

Hello

Great thing, creating a Left and Right Assembly with Mirror and Configurations also works.

What surprised me, however, was the procedure for mirroring a component -> Mirror Component with Scale 

Thanks

Christoph

[AlexanderYates]

@jodom4 

I've found this tool to be so useful in presenting different option to customers. I can quickly go down a list of different pre-configured designs and appearances with them.

Enabling website integration would be a huge bonus for me. Autodesk Teams already has a 3D viewer, so it would be incredibly useful if a customer could play around with a configuration table, and then use the 3D viewer to visualise the results.

Even if customers were just able to use a configurator before filling out a quote form that would be very useful i.e. it can be a standalone feature in the website, and wouldn't need to integrate with the checkout process etc.

You'd probably have to put rules in there so that customers couldn't break it though.... e.g. IF diameter is <20mm, max. radius is 3mm. IF diameter is >20mm, max. radius is 5mm. 

Just my personal opinion...

[Christoph_360]

Hello

---

@Christoph_360wrote:

In the mirror command, there should be the possibility to convert a right part to a left part by means of a mirror.

---

I got a valuable tip in the forum, now mirroring (without copy) of a component -> Mirror Component with Scale also works.

Thanks

Christoph

[evilc]

@JamesMannFusion  I would also like to request that configurations be opened up to free license users.

I pay for a licence and use it exclusively for hobbyist use. Most of my designs I consider "Open Source" - that is, if I post something to sharing sites such as Thingiverse, Printables etc, I will link to or attach the source Fusion360 project.

I include plenty of User Parameters to allow people to configure the project to their needs (It also saves me from having to post numerous variant STLs on the sharing site), and being able to leverage Configurations would allow me to take this to another level.

However, there's no point, because then only people who pay for licenses could create variants or remix my projects.

There's so much available in the free version of Fusion (That your average hobbyist would never even need) that one wonders why Configurations is locked away behind a paywall.

PLEASE, consider making it part of the free license.
This also seems to be shooting yourself in the foot somewhat. If it were part of the free license, it would drive adoption of Fusion because there are lots of people out there releasing stuff on sharing sites, and this makes life so much easier. Hell, IMHO you should add the ability to pick a configuration and export an STL from the Fusion web interface.

If you do need to make restrictions on it, then why not make it so that if you only have a free license, then you can only save projects using Configurations as Publicly visible.

As it stands, beyond having a quick play to see what it's like, I have not used Configurations at all for an actual project because of this very reason 😞

[karina.harper]

@evilc 

We are making Configured Designs importable, readable, and to some extent editable by hobbyist users. They'll be able to open the design and edit the model directly, but they won't be able to edit the configuration table or create new Configurations. They can save individual Configurations as Standard Designs and continue to work with them in that way as well. 

There is currently a bug where Hobbyist users can't import a CD, but we are in the process of fixing that. (which has made it impossible for hobbyists to access Configured Design data yet, which is why it seems so restricted.)

Hope that helps,

Karina

[evilc]

Thanks Karina, that's definitely a step in the right direction 🙂

It only really helps though for people to be able to export STLs of the variants which have already been designed.

If people wanted to contribute to the project and add new configurations, then they would not be able to do so, which kind of precludes it from being used for an Open Source design

[agerkhardtTTLAW]

Am I the only person that once I make a design configurable it locks up my computer when I try to create a drawing?

[jacob.michaels]

I experience this too. Its bad enough that I have stopped using configured designs.
Sometimes adding the model to the offline cache fixes this issue for me, sometimes.

[karina.harper]

Hi @agerkhardtTTLAW @jacob.michaels 

Would you be able to share diagnostic log files with me? I haven't seen others report problems creating Drawings, but there is a performance issue that we are working on right now that may be the root cause. The workaround for now is to remove a particular file from the local cache - the solution is documented in this article.

Thanks,

Karina

[jacob.michaels]

Here's the diagnostics.