[Post modified to remove "360"]
Fusion R.U.L.E #1
When in doubt, before doing anything, create a component and make sure it's activated.
All objects created after activating the component such as sketches, bodies, construction geometry, joint origins, etc. are created in that component.
This has several advantages:
When another component needs to be edited for example to add geometry, it should be activated before doing so.
the above points apply to assemblies as well.
Exceptions to R.U.L.E #1
There are a number of other workflows that are perfectly valid but the first step would not be creating a component. For the most part these are top-down design workflows:
This is also well explained in this 6 minute video tutorial.
Fusion R.U.L.E #2
Name Your Stuff!
No explanation necessary...hopefully 😉
[Post modified to remove "360"]
Fusion R.U.L.E #1
When in doubt, before doing anything, create a component and make sure it's activated.
All objects created after activating the component such as sketches, bodies, construction geometry, joint origins, etc. are created in that component.
This has several advantages:
When another component needs to be edited for example to add geometry, it should be activated before doing so.
the above points apply to assemblies as well.
Exceptions to R.U.L.E #1
There are a number of other workflows that are perfectly valid but the first step would not be creating a component. For the most part these are top-down design workflows:
This is also well explained in this 6 minute video tutorial.
Fusion R.U.L.E #2
Name Your Stuff!
No explanation necessary...hopefully 😉
@Anonymous wrote:
"No explanation necessary...hopefully ;-)"
... I see TWO *different* 'R.U.L.E #1's, and NO 'R.U.L.E #2'...
Fixed 😉
@Anonymous wrote:
"No explanation necessary...hopefully ;-)"
... I see TWO *different* 'R.U.L.E #1's, and NO 'R.U.L.E #2'...
Fixed 😉
Correct!
There are no exceptins to Rule #2. You should ALWAYS name your stuff. Period!
Correct!
There are no exceptins to Rule #2. You should ALWAYS name your stuff. Period!
The suspense over what R.U.L.E. stands for is killing me! Reliable User Life Experience? Really Understandable with Limited Effort? Raucous Undulations of Linear Extrusions? Rules for Users Liking Expertise? (Thanks to Josh.Nelson for assistance with the backronyms)
The suspense over what R.U.L.E. stands for is killing me! Reliable User Life Experience? Really Understandable with Limited Effort? Raucous Undulations of Linear Extrusions? Rules for Users Liking Expertise? (Thanks to Josh.Nelson for assistance with the backronyms)
This video was just released and adds a method to remover if a user forgot to apply Rule #1.
Thanks @Aaron.Magnin for making it.
This video was just released and adds a method to remover if a user forgot to apply Rule #1.
Thanks @Aaron.Magnin for making it.
Hi, brand new to F360; my previous experience is with I-DEAS (now NX).
I'm failing to see why have bodies at all.
I did some googling and all I saw was the ability to reference them, but you can reference components - right?
Hi, brand new to F360; my previous experience is with I-DEAS (now NX).
I'm failing to see why have bodies at all.
I did some googling and all I saw was the ability to reference them, but you can reference components - right?
I’ve often wondered that, all it seems to do is confuse things, why can’t everything just be a component?
I’ve often wondered that, all it seems to do is confuse things, why can’t everything just be a component?
@Anonymous @Noah_Katz if you start a thread on the normal Forum I's be more than happy making an attempt to explain it.
In short, the entire patch workspace would not work without bodies, the split body command then the combine command wouldn't really be useful either.
@Anonymous @Noah_Katz if you start a thread on the normal Forum I's be more than happy making an attempt to explain it.
In short, the entire patch workspace would not work without bodies, the split body command then the combine command wouldn't really be useful either.
Which one would that be?
Didn't realize I was in the abnormal one 🙂
Which one would that be?
Didn't realize I was in the abnormal one 🙂
Right, sorry for making you state the obvious; I got here by banging around from link to link, should have just looked at the top of the page
Right, sorry for making you state the obvious; I got here by banging around from link to link, should have just looked at the top of the page
i suggest requesting a feature (to be controlled in preferences) in fusion that new projects should also automatically create a component and activate it, (i mean, if this is what you usually do , just avoid repetitive action)
i suggest requesting a feature (to be controlled in preferences) in fusion that new projects should also automatically create a component and activate it, (i mean, if this is what you usually do , just avoid repetitive action)
Why you usually do depends on what you are designing. An Industrial designer such as @cekuhnen uses many bodies in this design and does not really need components to do so.
Why you usually do depends on what you are designing. An Industrial designer such as @cekuhnen uses many bodies in this design and does not really need components to do so.
That is not 100% correct.
For a concept model where I explore I select a process that is fast not as precise because the outcome is not a model to manufacture
but a model to explore the design.
When creating something that has to be send to a factory or such then I select a different approach to generate the CAD data.
In this step however the design is more or less solved and we execute the blueprint in 3D.
Only because Fusion is a parametric solid modeler does not mean you have to use an engineering like approach to the model.
It really comes down to what you want to learn and do with the CAD data you will generate.
Claas Kuhnen
Faculty Industrial Design – Wayne State Universit
Chair Interior Design – Wayne State University
Owner studioKuhnen – product : interface : design
That is not 100% correct.
For a concept model where I explore I select a process that is fast not as precise because the outcome is not a model to manufacture
but a model to explore the design.
When creating something that has to be send to a factory or such then I select a different approach to generate the CAD data.
In this step however the design is more or less solved and we execute the blueprint in 3D.
Only because Fusion is a parametric solid modeler does not mean you have to use an engineering like approach to the model.
It really comes down to what you want to learn and do with the CAD data you will generate.
Claas Kuhnen
Faculty Industrial Design – Wayne State Universit
Chair Interior Design – Wayne State University
Owner studioKuhnen – product : interface : design
@cekuhnen wrote:
It really comes down to what you want to learn and do with the CAD data you will generate.
@TrippyLighting wrote:
What you usually do depends on what you are designing.
OK. Granted! I was only 99.99% correct 😉
@cekuhnen wrote:
It really comes down to what you want to learn and do with the CAD data you will generate.
@TrippyLighting wrote:
What you usually do depends on what you are designing.
OK. Granted! I was only 99.99% correct 😉
that's why i said it should be based on preferences. if you have a user profile that usually does one thing OR another, then particular thing will be repeated by him over and over, so if a set of users usually work with components then those set of users will usually do the same procedure of creating a component upon a new project and activate it, those people can turn that option on in preferences.
that's why i said it should be based on preferences. if you have a user profile that usually does one thing OR another, then particular thing will be repeated by him over and over, so if a set of users usually work with components then those set of users will usually do the same procedure of creating a component upon a new project and activate it, those people can turn that option on in preferences.
Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.