F360 Data Panel/Data Management Improvements

[O.Tan]

Hi, so I've said before in previous treads that I'll create a new seperate thread addressing a specific topic about data management and F360. 

The Situation

Right now F360 does an excellent work when it comes to conceptual and design stage (there’s still some features that need to be added and bugs to be fixed out but in general, it’s usable for production use). However when it comes to manufacturing, though some of the features is there (CAM), most is still either non-existence or cringe-worthy (drawings)

So in this thread, I’m just concentrating on data/drawings management as documentation is more important at the later stage which is the manufacturing part.

The Problems

As of right now, I’ll state a few common ideas that I kept seeing in the IdeaStation.

• Versions hard to keep track of and can’t recover or create a new version of it from F360 Data Panel
• Not sure what file is available offline and no way to set for some files to be available offline all the time (regardless the file offline cache time)

And a few additional problems

• If assembly has multiple components, user is required to create a new component in order for CAM to work.
• Drawings on the other hand will automatically create a new separate file which brings the issue that if a component with CAM is backed up, the drawings will have to be backup separately.
• No option or method for user to have a backup of all their data in projects. 
• No method of sorting by file types in F360 Data Panel

The Solution

What I’m thinking of is a new kind of data panel, one that’ll give the user more control over their projects/files and it’ll live in its on panel/tab, so the current data panel is still available for those who want quick access to their files. 

For starters, it’ll probably look something like this, to access it, clicking on the icon underneath the data panel will open it. It’s something like a Pinned Tab in Chrome 

   

Once that is clicked, the UI will probably look something like this:

Project Status (yellow box) contains a quick glance information on the statuses of projects (it’ll be in icons), mainly:

• Locked/Unlocked (only admin can lock projects and it’s read only so opening the file will not result in additional version to be saved)
• Offline status (15 days or based on user setting)

So once a Project is selected (Project Secret in this case):

Allow me to explain on some points which I feel that needs explanation:

Project Status (editable) : this is where the user is able to customise the project status(see above)

Drawings : User is able to see if drawings for component has been created or not and is able to create one by clicking on the + icon.

CAM : User is able to see if there’s a CAM program for the component, user doesn’t need to open create a new component to create a CAM program, clicking on the + icon will automatically do that.

Generate BoM: Will open a new page which is similar to the table above except drawings and CAM will not be seen and user is able to print from that page.

Export Selected Drawings: Includes printing as well. Allows the user to do batch printing or export as PDF without having to open each of the components (imagine having to open 100 drawings one by one)

Backup Project: Allows the user to keep a local copy (only openable in F360 with the user account (depends on permission? or user level? that created it)

A few additional notes:

• Clicking on the component to copy and pasting it in another project will also bring the drawings and CAM created (if any)
• Linked files (I’m guessing this will be available once branching gets in) will have the ability to freeze or lock it (something similar to AutoCAD layers)
• In the table (not shown), there’s an option to click on versions to see all the previous versions and the ability to create a new component from version or promote version to the latest.

Case Study:

Notice in this diagram, the user created a CAM program for Component 1_MIR but only dimensioned for Component 1. Also that the user needs to create a drawing for Component 3. So having a table like this gives the user a better idea on how his/her projects is and will result in less mistakes. 

Conclusion

I hope the F360 team will consider strongly some of the points above. And feel free to discuss on and to ask if there’s some points that isn’t clear enough. Also should I post this up in the idea station? or create a link in idea station to this thread or what?

 And I probably missed out some points but this is already a long thread post and hopefully we'll get some real useful feedbacks

[HughesTooling]

You say "If assembly has multiple components, user is required to create a new component in order for CAM to work." Have you tried multiple setups, here's a simple example.

http://a360.co/1FW1rTH

Mark

[O.Tan]

Multiple setups? as in cut a few components in 1 go?

[HughesTooling]

No you make a setup for each component or body, you can orientate the origin for each part. Have a look at the link.

Mark

[HughesTooling]

When you say multiple components do you mean several of the same component or an assembly with lots of different components. If you are talking about several of the same part I think they are adding an option to CAM to make patterns from one base part.

Mark

[HughesTooling]

Here's a work around that probuces 2 parts using 1 body using 2 setups. Here's the output as a back plot.

http://a360.co/1FW8An7

And the part in Fusion

Mark

[Anonymous]

I can absolutely get behind a well thought out project interface.

Of note is that I absolutely abhor A360 through the browser. I think it's hilarious that I cannot create a new folder in Fusion unless I go to save a part, then I can make a new folder, and from opening A360 it takes about six clicks to be able to make a new folder.

I'd much prefer part files be individual instead of jammed into a slow assembly, and have individual drawings, with part changes updating in the final assembly and drawings......... like every CAD program since the dawn of the 21st century? 🙂

CAM I would much prefer to be on an individual part basis.

I like where you're going.

But yeah, you can do multiple setups with different parts in a single file, but don't let that detract from your overall message which is excellent. Thanks for taking the time to post this, hope we can get some good conversation about it.

[fredsi]

O. Tan,

First suggestion....add one more column for the 'Branch Version' that holds the component (coming soon?).

As Luke said, I like the direction you're going . Spreadsheet navigation isn't very sexy, but it is straight forward and very effective. It's taken me a little while to understand and warm to the idea of a central design file with satelliite containers for component's CAM, component drawings, assembly animations, etc. Now that I'm getting there, ease of navigation, folder creation and the like, become paramount.

My hope is that someone from Autodesk will comment and either provide some encouragement that this is possible/likely OR that it's not going to happen for technical reasons or otherwise. In the latter case, I can proceed with designing some sort of folder structure to contain the various elements of my projects.

Thanks for taking the time to present a system to address these issues.

Fred

[O.Tan]

Sorry for the late reply, I'm referring to an assembly with lots of different components.

[O.Tan]

Yeah, I don't mind that we don't have the usual OS file browser but at least make the one in F360 mimics an OS file browser with right click function to copy/paste/cut, rename, new folder and etc. Also since it's a unique file browser, right clicking on a file name should be able to do extra stuffs that is unique to F360 (besides copy/paste/cut)

Hmm, well I understand what you're referring to as software like SolidEdge, let say in 1 assembly we got 2 sub-assembly and I only edit and do changes in the 2nd assembly, the 1st assembly is considered as inactive and basically it's only showing giving a visual representation, activating the 1st assembly will result in a slight performance hit (depends on your hardware). Though with Fusion being a supposedly "new" written from ground up software, I hoped we didn't have to resort to such method but as it is right now, Fusion performance is behind to SolidEdge when larger assemblies is concerned.

I haven't test drawings enough to see if it auto update dimensions and I guess what we want with changes updating final assembly and Etc is coming with or soon after branching?

Thanks!

[O.Tan]

Good idea! Though as branching is not yet released so I skipped it for now as I have no idea how they're handling things when I copy paste a component within the branch, will it break the link? Still linked? Am I able to re-link it back? And so forth.

Yeah, a spreadsheet isn't the most beautiful way, but it does gives a clear view on your project and in the hands of a good UI/UX designer, I'm certain it can look quite nice. I like to think this as Mission Control in OSX, where you get an overview of all project assets.

Yeah, I know some might not make it but some sounds doable or should be added in the future, so would be great to hear their reply on this.

Thanks, had this idea in my head for awhile, finally manage to write it all up.

[JamieGilchrist]

Tan, et al,

Thank you for your considered and thoughtful inputs on the data management experience inside Fusion 360.  The Fusion UX team does take your feedback very seriously and it's reassuring to us that a lot of the topics you raise validate the same topics we're discussing within the Fusion team and how Fusions experience should be evolving.  

Some of the key points you raise regarding basic data management were due to a technology limitation of the backend we were using for hosting the data; things we take for granted in typical desktop OS's, like copy and paste, rename, etc. were limited by our own technology stack.  This is why we have designed a new data service infrastructure, as Kevin indicated in his Roadmap blog post.  This new data service sets the foundation for us to implement not only basic functionality that you expect, like: rename, copy and paste etc.; it also gives us the right system to implement more advanced and robust capabilities (in a meaningful way): content libraries, distributed designs (cross referenced parts, assemblies and sub-assemblies), and our pending branching and merging strategy as Will explained in the Future of Collaboration in Fusion 360.

So on that note I can speak to a few of your problem statements:

Versions:

• Are undergoing a rethink of how we present and allow users to manipulate them.
• In the short term allowing users to promote (to the latest version) a previous version easily from within your modeling window
• Branching and merging will bring in a full data view where you can investigate a projects status, in a single full application window view, a particular branch and down to an individual item.

Offline:

• We all agree that the offline experience is a bit below average and we will be addressing this experience in future releases.
• In the near term we are hyper focused on distributed designs, branching as well as performance and stability of our new data service, so please bear with us in moving forward on improving the offline experience.
• The UX team generally agrees with your points about clearer indication of data that is available for offline use and providing a means of choosing what can be available offline.  There is some complexity there that we have to contend with in supporting x-referenced data, but this is something we will address and you should see improvements here, we will be looking into how we can prioritize some of these "easier" improvements sooner rather than later.

CAM, Drawings and other data elements:

• As we move into more meaningful data relationships with cross referencing, or distributed designs, and branching it has become clearer that we need good presentation of what sort of content is created within a given design.
• With drawings as separate items this is easy and we are already doing this in the data panel and in the data view inside A360.
• We do need to do a better job of showing the other types of data embedded within your Fusion designs, whether it's CAM, Animations or Renderings, Simulations (as identified in the Roadmap), Sheet Metal, or other facets of a design that may come in the future.

BoM:

• This is one area where we are not currently focusing Fusion 360
• Drawings will be capable of handling parts lists, but, true BoM and BoM management, are best handled by dedicated tools like Autodesk PLM 360.
• This is certainly something we could consider down the line, and we’d appreciate you thoughts on this topic
• How are you currently handling BoM’s with Fusion or other applications you use?

General Management:

When we removed the A360 front end (or “dashboard”) from Fusion we wanted to streamline how Fusion users were getting to their data and how easily they were accessing the various workflows (modeling, CAM, drawings, etc.). With the new data panel experience we are trying very hard to be deliberate in curating an experience that is not overwhelmed with functionality and that is serving, in a very narrow amount of real estate, the most common and meaningful tasks users need to get their work done.

As we move towards more advanced data relationships, management and workflows the burden of that small panel is being stretched; it’s akin to an overstuffed suitcase, sure it’ll hold everything, but that zipper’s going to fail at some point. So the UX point of view has always been to give users a full window view into your projects and let you do the kinds of management that you need to do and for Fusion to work the way you want. As branching starts coming online you’ll see that flexibility start to take shape and we will certainly want to absorb your feedback as Fusion progresses down the road

So thanks again for taking the time to share your feedback with us. We are listening and much of what all of you say does make it into the product. Keep the feedback coming.

[Anonymous]

BoM is something that I don't think should be overlooked. Most uses wont need a full PLM tool, but being able to export a comprehensive parts list (much like how you can export a Setup Sheet in CAM) is a good thing to work towards.

I actually found the exportable setup sheet in CAM to be one of the things that made me want to buy Fusion when I was testing it out. Those are the sorts of things I used to spend an hour or so writing by hand and trying to keep updated. No need anymore, huge time saving.

[O.Tan]

Yeah, I'm with Luke when BoM is concerned as my usage at least is to have a list of components of the assembly, the quantity of components and this includes situations where there's more then 1 instances of a component and when situation where mirrored component is involved. I'll usually export it to an excel format where I can tweak the generated BoM even further.

Regarding the PLM 360, is that in any way associated with F360 or do I have to subscribe to use it? Given if I'm the only user? And I guess A360 is a different from PLM 360?