Positioning objects in terms of parameters

[kenahoo]

I'm a relative beginner with Fusion 360.  I have a personal project I'm hoping I can get some help with - my daughter and I are creating bunk beds here: https://a360.co/3i19fMN .

There is a parameter called "underBedHeight" which defines the height below the bottom bunk.  I used this parameter to define several positions, including the cut placement on the large plywood piece to the left of the bunks, and the heights of the bed boxes themselves, by doing a "move" command on the bed components.

However, when I redefine "underBedHeight" from 12" to 10", only the plywood panel is affected, the bunks don't move down at all.  I also get warning messages about lost references:

 

The heights of the bunks were set using this timeline element:

How can I rescue this file so that we can play around with changing "underBedHeight" and see how that affects the rest of the design?  Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks.

[jhackney1972]

You will get a lot better response if you attach your model to your post.  If you do not know how, open the model, select the File menu and then Export.  Place the resulting file on your hard drive and then Attach it to your post using the Attachments section on the lower part of the post window.

[laughingcreek · Accepted solution]

Components cannot be parametricly placed by using "move" followed by "position capture."  (You generally want to try and avoid having either in your timeline, IMO)

There are 2 ways to parametriclly position components.  Use joints, or build them in place.

You can salvage what you've done so far by deleting the position capture, and using joints to place the bed units.

This type of design works well with a strong top/down, skeleton sketch approach where everything is built in place.  I might post an example of that in a bit if your interested.

[laughingcreek]

here's an example of how I would suggest approaching this type of design.  You can change most everything from the 2 sketches.  let me know if you have questions-

[kenahoo]

Thanks everyone for the suggestions.  I misunderstood and I thought that joints were for moveable relationships between components.  Indeed, when I changed the design to use joints, all was well and the relationships persisted as I continued to make changes to the design.

Thanks!

[chrisplyler]

Just for clarity...

Many of the joint types ARE for defining movement relationships between components. However, the one called Rigid is for a NON-movement relationship.