Parametric Patterns

[ritste20]

I work with assemblies as much as I do individual parts so eventually, sometimes inevitably, I end up with rectangular or circular patterns of components. It would be great if the patterned instances of the parts were constrained to some geometry (ideally the source component) and have the pattern be editable to update those constraints.

The issue is when I place the first component and apply the appropriate joints, that doesn't carry through the pattern so all additional instances can be accidentally moved out of position. I can see some situations that may be preferred if you plan to rotate or apply new joints to the copies so maybe this could be added as an option to the dialog box. Personally I would like to have it remember my selection from the last pattern or be a global setting that I can select as a default preference and change only when necessary.

Does anybody else see enough merit in this to add as a suggestion?

[g-andresen]

Hi,
I would just like to say something here about individual independence from instances in patterns.
1. a variety of options is conceivable. How are we to decide which are to be considered and which are not.
2. even now you can individualize single instances by copy&past new inserting them and hiding the dependent instance.

günther

[TrippyLighting]

---

@ritste20 wrote:

Does anybody else see enough merit in this to add as a suggestion?

---

I've communicated the need for a solution for this a number of times to the Fusion 360 team.

Increasing the number of instances will leave the additional instances un-assembled and decreasing the number of instances will break subsequent joint operations.

In 90+% of the use cases case, the correct assembly process would be to use a "regular" joint to assemble the seed component. Then the pattern tool should have an option to rigid group the patterned instances to the seed component or another selectable component.

That would make parametric bolt patterns, for example, much more efficient to design.

@brianrepp Who's the PM for assemblies/joints? I'd like to tag him/her in these threads 😉

[JamieGilchrist]

Hi @TrippyLighting ,

I'm the experience design lead on modeling/assembly modeling and Harv Saund is the PM.

[TrippyLighting]

@JamieGilchrist Very good to know. Thanks for the quick feedback!

The pattern command could really use some TLC, not only for assemblies as in this case but also for modeling.

In this case, the nature of Fusion 360 where all components by default are "floating", regardless of which hierarchy level of the assembly the user is working in, can create quite a bit of additional work for the user. 

Adding the rigid group option I described above to the pattern command(s) for components would be very useful, regardless of whether a user actually would like to change the number of patterned instances.

[gometricusa]

So...  the workaround is to apply a joint again for each instance of the pattern?  For example all the instances of a bolt pattern to the mating holes upon which they reside?  In my case i have mechanized components upon which fasteners are applied. When the mechanism moves only the seed component of a pattern moves with it.   As such, whats the point of circular vs rectangular pattern arrays?  In fact, why pattern at all?  Just re-insert and apply a joint repeatedly?  Any workaround?

[TrippyLighting]

The proper way to join patterned component instances is to create a rigid group joint with the first instance, which hopefully is also assembled using a joint.