Dimensions on drawings loose reference, automatic hole callouts no good

[aleksei_ovsienko]

So I noticed this happens all the time if you change anything in the model and get latest in the drawing. A bunch of dimensions loose references. I could understand some of that. If for example I changed something that was referenced in a way the system can't really comprehend. Lets say I deleted a chamfer - then you can to a degree cut the drawing some slack for loosing the dimension reference. 
But sometimes it just happens for most mysterious reasons. 

For example I had a perfectly fine drawing with not a single faulty thing in it. Then I went back to the model and embossed the part number onto one of the faces of the model. At this is the result after I updated the drawing. This is ridiculous. Half of all dimensions now have broken references. 

The thing that breaks pretty much every time I update anything is the hole callout. 

Because Fusion refuses to automatically put hole call-outs on normal dimensions and insists on doing it with leader annotations instead, I am forced to manually type those callouts into the dimension (and yes, you can't even copy/paste from an automatic leader annotation for some reason unbeknownst to me).
And this thing just breaks almost every time you have to update the model for any reason. 

Also I am totally not satisfied with automatic hole annotations. I may be wrong or I may not understand something but doing drawings for 18 years I never wanted to put a hole callout on an leader note like Fusion suggests I should. 

This is wrong: 

This is much better: 
 

Reason being I don't want to rely on a overcomplicated convention to let people know how deep a hole I need with how much thread. And I want to be able to tolerance the hole depth and thread depth the way I need them. So I would much rather provide manufacturers with a proper seciton view with proper dimensioning. In some places this is a requirement to section all blind holes for clarity.
I my mind - the more obvious you make a dimension, the less chances someone would screw it up.

Usual questions:

Am I doing something wrong here or is it just Fusion? Why does it keep loosing references?

Is there any chance to get a tool that would put a hole callout on a normal dimension and also let you customize how much stuff you actually want on that callout?

[anirudha_kulkarniHVD7C]

Hi @aleksei_ovsienko ,

Sorry to hear you’re running into these issues.

For the first part, regarding dimensions losing their references: from what you’ve described, it doesn’t seem like anything that should cause references to break. To help us dig deeper, could you please share the data set if possible? That’ll help us check exactly what’s going wrong. Also, does this happen consistently across multiple models or just this one? Also Can you please confirm this disassociation issue is only with manual created dimensions  or only with normal placed dimensions? 

As for the second part -the hole callouts — right now, Fusion doesn’t support placing hole callouts directly on regular dimensions, only through leader annotations. I agree this isn’t ideal, especially when you’re trying to control tolerances and keep things clear in section views. 

I’ll double-check with the team on this. IMO, this sounds like a good candidate for an enhancement request.

Thanks for bringing it up — really appreciate the detailed feedback. 

[aleksei_ovsienko]

Thank you for your reply. 

Yes, I've shared the drawing here  - https://a360.co/3GgxhFk

I have noticed that manually created dimensions tend to disassociate almost every time I update model for any reason. Normal dimensions for the most time behave. This one seems to be a particularly bad case.

I understand that this is caused in large part by Fusion architecture and the way it does drawings and dimensions in general. Probably can't be helped. Because dimensions are not directly associated with the model they will want to keep loosing references when drawing graphics updates. For example any attempt to move a section line causes all dimensions referenced to the sectioned features to fall off.

I would say this approach to drawings is inherently inferior to a fully associative architecture where most drawing dimensions actually come directly from model sketches and features.
For example in Creo drawings dimensions that are placed arbitrarily the same way Fusion does it will loose references the same way Fusion looses them, but dimensions that are passed from actual sketches and features will either update or disappear if they are no more.
It also makes for a better drawing workflow as you're not wasting time dimensioning things on the drawing that are already dimensioned in the model. You just show these dimensions feature by feature on relevant views, tidy them up and add GD&T. You can never miss anything. It does mean that you often have to go back to the model to change a drawing even if there's an option to do it arbitrarily like Fusion does, but it keeps dimensioning consistent between drawings and model and even allows to change and regenerate the model by changing the dimension from the drawing.

Whereas with Fusion I basically have to do dimensioning twice. The model sketch environment makes it obvious if something's not fully defined. In a drawing however dimensioning is basically the old AutoCad/drawing board workflow where it's up to the drafter to make sure every feature is defined. And it's really easy to miss something, especially if the geometry is complex and there are several drawing sheets with a dozen views.
And a minor but really annoying thing - when you dimension a hole or a cylinder in Fusion it's really easy to forget to put ⌀ in. Coming from Creo where it just happens without you paying the slightest attention, I feel like I'm back to AutoCad 2000. And again it's because Creo knows what the feature actually is, whereas to Fusion it's just two random references.

[bwalker145]

I've had the same issue: dimensions disassociate with model updates, even if the dimensions aren't part of the geometry that was updated. I mainly see the disassociation with FCF's though.

I also came from Creo (which, to be fair, had its own quirks); there's definitely some major deficiencies & missing QoL features in Fusion Drawings that I hope are added/corrected in the future.

[anirudha_kulkarniHVD7C]

Hello @aleksei_ovsienko I tried to reproduce the issue of loose references using the provided dataset, but I was unable to replicate the problem. Could you please share more details about the exact steps to reproduce it? If possible, a video demonstrating the issue would be very helpful for further investigation.

[anirudha_kulkarniHVD7C]

@bwalker145 Please provide the dataset and steps to reproduce the issue, or share a video if possible.

[aleksei_ovsienko]

Sure. I made a video. Sorry about the sound, it's just some office hum. I tried to reproduce the issue by rolling the drawing and model back to when it was alright. Then embossing something on one of the faces and getting latest in the drawing. This time it actually crashed the drawing. So I open it again and get latest and there you go - all centerlines loose reference and dimensions and so on.
Here's a screengrab
https://www.loom.com/share/ff9ba49ea8d244d19f4099b37b04eccb?sid=7aae1768-483f-4e4e-91cc-fbd0a029e44c

[John_Wright]

I found this thread after ANOTHER of my drawings had a number of dimensions disassociated this morning. I have seen this so many times myself and it is such a recurring issue that I can't believe that anyone on the development team hasn't come across themselves?! 

Drawings in Fusion are so far from usable it is getting beyond a joke. The fundamentals are so lacking it is quite astonishing.

(A tad off topic) - I have no idea why developer time was spent on AI assistance, other than the higher powers at Autodesk insisted that the AI badge had to be slapped on somewhere?  This time could have been spent on fixing the shortcoming (a perfect example is above) instead. Just to note, as a professional CAD user and draftsman for over 20 years I have no need at all, none, zip, zilch, use for a AI laid out, or dimensioned drawing. And I am also certain that when AI is capable of producing a correctly laid out and dimensioned drawing, then the world will probably not need 2D drawings anymore.

Long rant, but please fix the basics so that we can use what overall is a brilliant product.

[aleksei_ovsienko]

Yeah, I understand your frustration. I also think this underdeveloped drawing module is a major obstacle for Fusion expansion into companies that are at least medium size. I can understand how someone may not particularly care about being able to maintain good quality drawings if lets say its a small scale business doing rapid prototyping and small production runs only. Then you just do a drawings, send it out and forget about it.
But as soon as you start getting into the territory of serial production where drawings have to be regularly maintained and updated - Fusion is going to become such a pain. 
I had experience of working for a large corporation and I would have been absolutely furious if a drawing that takes up 5 sheets, with dozens of views and sections and details, behaved like this every time some minor change is introduced. Like you go in to run a simple change request - lets say delete a chamfer - and end up fixing dozens of references across the whole drawing.
Auto-dimensioning is horrible. I would never ever trust it. Especially considering the fact that Fusion drawings are disassociated from models.
The drawing is the final authority on the part in the end. Even legally speaking the drawing is king. That's why check engineers and approval processes exist. I'm not going to jail for AI drawings, and I'm not embarassing myself before colleagues and suppliers either.
And the "Tidy up" feature is terrible too. Always completely messes everything up. I ended up unpinning it and forgetting about it.

[anirudha_kulkarniHVD7C · Accepted solution]

Thanks for sharing the details. I’ve logged an internal defect to track this issue.

[anirudha_kulkarniHVD7C]

@John_Wright @aleksei_ovsienko  Sorry to hear you’re facing these ongoing issues with Fusion Drawings. Please know that we are actively reviewing all feedback related to disassociated dimensions. This issues are being taken seriously, and we’re working toward identifying root causes. We truly value the feedback you’ve shared around overall Fusion functionality.

Thanks again for raising these concerns. We appreciate your input — it’s essential for helping us improve the product.

[nathanTSBUT]

Any updates, I still experience this issue daily and none of the basic features that have been discussed in this thread have been implemented. Thanks.