Configurations [Feedback Request]

Configurations [Feedback Request]

jodom4
Community Manager Community Manager
34,159 Views
56 Replies
Message 1 of 57

Configurations [Feedback Request]

jodom4
Community Manager
Community Manager

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:

Thanks!


Jonathan Odom
Community Manager + Content Creator
Oregon, USA

Become an Autodesk Fusion Insider



34,160 Views
56 Replies
Replies (56)
Message 41 of 57

agerkhardtTTLAW
Participant
Participant

Sure I will share the files 

0 Likes
Message 42 of 57

karina.harper
Autodesk Support
Autodesk Support

@jacob.michaels 

 

Looking at the logs, I think this is the same problem. Try the solution(s) from the article, and if that doesn't fix it, make a new forum post and tag me please. 

 

Thanks!
Karina

 

0 Likes
Message 43 of 57

jacob.michaels
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

The fix worked for me!

 

Thanks!

0 Likes
Message 44 of 57

tonymuka
Participant
Participant

The new Configurations feature is really useful and cool!  I wish text "strings" were valid parameters that could be used in the customizer.  It seems that would be an easy "no units" parameter data type that could be very handy to use/configure.

0 Likes
Message 45 of 57

MattJobson
Participant
Participant

Would love to be able to add driven dimensions to the configuration table. (as non-editable ofcourse)

 

There is a particular scenario where I'd like to modify a driving dimension but compare with 2 other dimensions to ensure they don't go too far out of scope. This is much easier to do in a table and with  ability to break tables into themes it would be the perfect fit for it.

 

Sure I could do an equation to do it automatically, but I want to manually inspect and adjust the results in realtime.

0 Likes
Message 46 of 57

Mublio
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Great work on Configurations! It will enable our cabinetry workshop to simplify our design process a LOT.

 

My feature request: drive configuration aspects by parameter values

 

Example

The cabinets we make have a max height of 2000 mm. If a customer requests a higher cabinet, lets say 2500 mm, an extra cabinet of 500 mm has to be put on top of the 2000 mm one. So in short, the logic has to be like this:

 

If parameter value >2000 mm, then unsurpress features of cabinet 2

 

This does not seem to be possible right now, and its a feature more people would like to see: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-design-validate-document/configurations-surpress-unsurpress-ba...

Kind regards,

Koen

0 Likes
Message 47 of 57

emanuel.cesarino
Participant
Participant

I'm really enjoying the flexibility the configurations enable.
From my user experience, I would like to be able to create a Theme with both design and appearance columns.
For example, if I want a Theme to include an aesthetic component that isn't included in other appearance Themes.
Also, being able to include appearances added to faces in the configurations table would be very nice for modeling painted parts with the base material showing in some faces.

0 Likes
Message 48 of 57

jameswVTJ5V
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

Hi, I posted this in the manufacturing forum but as it involves configurations....

 

So I have a model which is configured as follows:

 

Config 1 - Block model of the component

Config 2 - Block model modified for concept design approval

Config 3 - Model split into components with additional features applied to each component.

 

When selecting source components to nest there is no option to choose configurations of a model (only the first created config).

 

Am I missing something or is there a way to select configurations of a model for nesting?

 

I can save Config 3 out as a separate model and select the source components but then the model has lost it's link to the block model and concept configurations. 

 

TIA

0 Likes
Message 49 of 57

temple_dawson
Contributor
Contributor

This is a little late, but configurations in Fusion have been great! When I came to my current workplace that uses Fusion one of the key features I missed from Inventor was the configurable iParts. We have a few projects that could have really benefited from configurations before they were added. It's great to see a feature I will be using lots!

 

After having used configurations in two small/medium-sized projects (1-4 main configured parts with ~20-30 adjustable user parameters + ~50 small external parts, many of which are duplicates) there's one thing that has come up in each project that required a workaround over what could have been a direct solution.

 

In each project I have three patterns that make up a larger pattern (different spacings and quantities between each of the individual patterns) which reference one sketch and set of extrusions through a surface on the part. This part surface has 3 depth and 4 length variants, so I have configured the pattern to fit each size. The issue I've run into is that one of the depths requires the pattern to be slightly offset to remain consistent across the parts (the depth on this part is larger in difference between the other two where the pattern is referenced from the centerpoint of the face). The one solution I have done is seemingly easy enough, add a suppression feature to the configuration, suppress the original sketch/extrusions/pattern on the third depth variant, and add a new sketch/extrusions/pattern with the offset that is suppressed on the first two depth variants.

 

This ultimately works, but it slightly defeats the purpose of having the sketch configured. As there is no dimension to the reference on the first two (because they are centered on the face) but there is an added offset dimension for the third one I can't just use that dimension as a configured parameter. I first thought to modify the reference point to the sketch by dimensioning from the top/bottom edge of the face and making that a configured dimension, but there are other features in the part that cause that edge reference in the sketch to be lost in some variants.

 

My suggestion/request, if it is possible, would be to have a "break link" feature in a configured file similar to how you can insert a part into an assembly and break the link to the original. Essentially, the ability to "break" a feature (sketch/extrusion/pattern/etc.) in the configuration you have activated. The thought behind this is that I could "break" the sketch for the third depth where an offset is necessary, make the adjustment to the sketch, and then still use the extrusion/pattern features which are configured across the parts on the adjusted sketch. Or have both the base and offset references in the same sketch, and "break" the extrusion so that I can select one set of profiles instead of the other, and keep the configured pattern.

 

If something like this is possible that I've been oblivious to, or there is a more direct solution someone more intelligent has thought of please provide feedback, I'm very open to it. If this request is too far-fetched then I'll continue to use the method I have thus far. Thanks for all the work you folks pour into Fusion!

0 Likes
Message 50 of 57

Mikhail_Romanov
Contributor
Contributor

The configurable design option is a good idea. But it crashes on the sketch solver. It works extremely unstable. And switching from one configuration to another does not work correctly if the sketch cannot be recalculated correctly. And this is very sad.

0 Likes
Message 51 of 57

TrippyLighting
Consultant
Consultant

@Mikhail_Romanov wrote:

The configurable design option is a good idea. But it crashes on the sketch solver.


Your post, or at least what you are showing in the screencasts is not the topic in this thread.

However, it looks like a pretty big bug in the sketch offset functionality! @Phil.E to the rescue!


EESignature

0 Likes
Message 52 of 57

Mikhail_Romanov
Contributor
Contributor

I did't make a video where I was switching the configuration and got the message about error in the sketch. And this sketch was a base of my configured design. But I'm sure I'll see it again and I'll send you. And you'll see how sketch solver spoils configured design. And it'll be for this topic.

0 Likes
Message 53 of 57

Phil.E
Autodesk
Autodesk

The videos show what appears to be a bug in the sketch solver. Has nothing to do with configurations, as reported. If there is something to report related to configurations, outside of this workflow, I'm happy to take a look. For now I'll log a bug for the fact that the second sketch is not parametrically connected to the first sketch in an expected manner.
(FUS-152594)





Phil Eichmiller
Software Engineer
Quality Assurance
Autodesk, Inc.


Message 54 of 57

moritzLCGFK
Contributor
Contributor

I really appreciate all the work you guys put into developing Fuision always further!
I was hoping for a long time, for something like the configuration Tool!

 

One thing I am now missing is some kind of configured manufacturing!

I have made a highly configurable shelf, which results in some different strategies to manufacture it.

It would be very nice to create an own tool path/ a whole new setup "board" for each config, or to configure them just like in "construction" (better: for each subconfig / style table (in german: Stiltabelle) because I just use one main config and choose for every project a specific combination of sub configs, and numbers would explode if I create a main config for each possible way)


 

Also, I had to find some work-arounds, because it is not possible to control configuration points via others (if subconfig "A" is selected from style table "1" then suppress paramenter "x" in style table "2") / or via parameters ("if some condition is true=> suppress this feature)
It´s a little hard for me to explain it and if needed I can try to specify this closer, but I need to suppress some features listed in one style table, of course depending on the style choosen, but ALSO depending on the style choosen in another style table.
Of course this could be easily solved by combining everything in just one style table or just in the main config, but then again, numbers would explode and I would have 600+ configurations instead of just four style tables with each 5 styles

 

 

I hope some points I´m saying make sense and will maybe added at some point in future.
If some of you have ideas of how to fix those problems in some other ways, please tell me, I´m very open for some ideas to try!

Message 55 of 57

Phil.E
Autodesk
Autodesk

The Fusion update today to build number 2.0.19204 fixes the sketch offset issue reported with FUS-152954. Thanks for reporting the issue in this discussion.





Phil Eichmiller
Software Engineer
Quality Assurance
Autodesk, Inc.


Message 56 of 57

Mikhail_Romanov
Contributor
Contributor

Great!
By the way, I use configurations and I like It. I use it mostly to show the different stages of producing parts. So mostly I use suppress for features.

Message 57 of 57

Mikhail_Romanov
Contributor
Contributor

Short note.

I use configurations to show stages of production. An it woud be nice if I could show them on the sheets of one drawing. But when I change Configuration, I have to start a new drawing.  

0 Likes