Editing Mirrored Components-No Timeline Copied
Mirroring a component does not copy the timeline or the sketches of the original component. That is so by design!
Features added to either component after the mirror feature in the timeline will apply to that component only.
Features added to the original component before the mirror feature in the timeline will also apply to the mirrored componet.
@fsonnichsen wrote:
Sorry for the late reply (and your responses are always appreciated!).
Your comment is understood and what I am seeing when I test--a mirror image is necessarily associated with its parent up to the point of creation. That is not what I need however. I need to create a separate-but mirrored- copy of the original with these properties:
1) It appears on the timeline-not as a mirror-but as an object complete with all of the edits in the original so that I can make edits to the copy.
2) No association with the original-editing the original will not change the copy.
Thanks
Fritz
In that case I would not mirror the component or use copy-paste/new. This does not look like it's going to be an overly complex part, so I would simply "manually" design a mirrored copy and keep main dimensions and features the same with user parameters.
In the end that little bit of extra work will pay off, because it is much easier to understand than some "trick-workflow.
Once you are done, please post your result.
@fsonnichsen wrote:But to my understanding, the bottom line is that Fusion is not capable of mirroring a part with its necessary editing statements--what is called a "mirror" command in fusion is not far removed from just a non-editable static pixel copy.
A component is a collection of those features required to create the solid or surface body of that component. SO far so good
The data for that component exists once. When you create a copy of a component, that is just an instance. The original and the instance are pointing to that same data set. Instancing is a key concept in all of computer graphics and 3D modeling and all CAD systems, not just Fusion 360.
The effect is that editing an instance is simply the same as editing the original, because you are editing just the one data set.
When you copy/paste a component a completely new data set is created, requiring additional memory. That is not an instance and can be edited independently. What you want to do is to make a mirror of a component and then edit it independently.
Is there going to be any geometry that will remain common between the original and tee mirrored component ?
@fsonnichsen wrote:
But to my understanding, the bottom line is that Fusion is not capable of mirroring a part with its necessary editing statements--what is called a "mirror" command in fusion is not far removed from just a non-editable static pixel copy.
To the first part of that statement, the answer is "yes", Fusion is not capable of this kind of mirror. If you think about it, you should be able to see why, and why (to the best of my knowledge - I could definitely be wrong) no other CAD system does this, either. Creating a "mirror recipe" for the general case of any component is quite a challenge. Each sketch would have to be re-created, but in a mirrored orientation. Each feature would have to be evaluated whether it needs to be mirrored or not (for example, an extrude might have to have its distance negated, or a workplane at angle might have to have a complement angle, but both of these would depend in the geometry orientation with respect to the mirror plane). As an exercise, try doing it manually - I suspect it would be very difficult, and maybe even more so programmatically. Not impossible, obviously, but very hard. While mirroring the "results" (the bodies) is quite simple - a mirror transform can be applied to the geometry.
The second part of your statement, in my opinion, is a bit of exaggeration. Clearly a mirrored body result is much more useful than a pixel copy. It has mass, it has geometry, that component can be connected to other components with Joints, etc. All CAD modelers that I am familiar with work basically the same way, so clearly there must be some value in it...
Jeff Strater
Engineering Director
Looking again at your design I think you really don't fully understand the purpose of components in Fusion 360.
There are 4 components in your design, but only one has the component geometry in it. That does not make any sense.
This screen recording explains what I think you want to do. If but at least you've learned a few other things that might help you in the future. The HD versions are still converting, so perhaps give it another hour or so.
