Poor performance on fixture plate design

[Anonymous]

Hello all,

I'm just putting together a simple fixture plate and I've been struggling with the performance of my sketch and was wondering if there is a more performant way that I should be doing this design?

I've attached a screencast of adding a concentric constraint as an example but most sketch operations are slow.

The hole grid was implemented using the Rectangular Pattern tool (that has a few flaws of its own but that's out of scope of this post) and the mounting holes in the middle are dimensioned in a simple way.

Regards,

Mark

[Anonymous]

Screencast (didn't seem to attach to the original post):
http://autode.sk/2zPX5zI

[HughesTooling · Accepted solution]

Try not to use patterns in sketches, make one hole then pattern the face\faces using pattern from the create menu. Also use more than one sketch.

Mark

[davebYYPCU]

There are a few things come to mind in the screencast, 

it is well known that sketch patterns degrade performance compared to the performance of similar patterns in the modelling areas.

until you get used to Fusion, I suggest you use one sketch per feature / operation.

you plate has symmetry in both directions, so consider making one quarter then mirror twice.

You have not shown us which way the sketch pattern was created, 

the delay in the processing of that sketch is as would be expected, (is reasonable, seen worse.)

i would Extrude the plate, with a centre rectangle on the Origin,

create a sketch for the perforating pattern holes, extrude them, and pattern in the modelling area, for 1/4 of the plate, 

create a second sketch for the centre pattern with 2 holes, again 1/4 plate, 

Use Origin planes to mirror the patterns, vertically, and mirror the result horizontally.

Might help....

[Anonymous]

Mark & Dave; thank you, I'm going to try both of your suggested methods now.

So far I've been importing STEP files and using the CAM workflow (the CAM is excellent, no complaints there) so thought I'd try doing the CAD for this part in F360. It's a little disappointing to have to workaround these performance quirks in F360 but I will persevere as it would be much smoother to have my full workflow in 1 application.

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

..... It's a little disappointing to have to workaround .....

---

File>Export your *.f3d file and then Attach it here and someone will demonstrate how it should have been done.

Once you see the comparison of solutions I think you will agree that the solution is not "a workaround", but rather more efficient and robust modeling technique.

I use several different CAD programs - and the correct technique is transferable across various CAD apps.

[Anonymous]

I'm happy with Mark's suggestion (thank you), it's easy and has a low number of clicks.

Seen here:
http://autode.sk/2zQSJIO

It has the added benefit of being able to go back in the timeline and edit the hole suppression. "More efficient and robust" indeed!