design history not highlighting features after a body is converted to component

design history not highlighting features after a body is converted to component

WyzeOwl
Advocate Advocate
475 Views
2 Replies
Message 1 of 3

design history not highlighting features after a body is converted to component

WyzeOwl
Advocate
Advocate

Recently, I have noticed that Fusion does not highlight features (3 dots above the design feature) in the design history timeline after a body has been converted to a component. Features that "pre-date" a component creation command are hidden from the "find" ability of fusion.  This behaviour goes both ways in that if hovering over a feature in history, that feature does not highlight in the model.  If I move the slider to before the create component command, the features in the model will then be visible to the highlight ability of Fusion.

 

In years of using Fusion, I have never seen this issue and in thinking back I am sure I must have followed the same work flow (bodies to components after investment in design time) without running into this Other than following a methodology of always create a component before investing too much time in a body only design, is there a way to turn this feature highlighting back on after a body is converted to a component?

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (1)
476 Views
2 Replies
Replies (2)
Message 2 of 3

jeff_strater
Community Manager
Community Manager
Accepted solution

I am fairly certain that Fusion has always worked this way.  It is just a limitation in the feature identification code that, once a body has been converted to a component, the features lose the ability to track their geometry.


Jeff Strater
Engineering Director
0 Likes
Message 3 of 3

WyzeOwl
Advocate
Advocate

Yes, I remember watching a video years ago by (can't remember his name) who was demonstrating how to do Fusion. In that video he mentioned that best practice was to always create a component first, then start modeling. I am sure in that demo the presenter must have stated various good reasons for that work flow which must have included avoiding this issue. Thanks for the reply Jeff.

0 Likes