Possible to unlink copied components?

[Noah_Katz]

I believe I asked this either in its own thread or as a tangential question in another thread, but either I didn't get an answer or have memory loss.

Is there a way to convert what was a copy/paste new to an unlinked copy?

[Anonymous]

Right-click on the component in the browser, select "Break Link".

Regards,

Ray L.

[Noah_Katz]

I don't mean instances of external linked designs, but an (externally) unlinked component I did a move/copy of.

When I right-click there's no option for Break Link.

[daniel_lyall]

@Noah_Katzdouble post

[daniel_lyall]

@Noah_Katz right click copy the component and right click on the top of the tree and past new 

[Noah_Katz]

@daniel_lyall

 It's too late for that; I've done a fair amount of work since making the copy, and now I need to change one of the copies w/o changing the other.

I could delete it and do a copy/paste new, but then some things will fall apart because of the joints that have been added.

[daniel_lyall]

Bugger

[Scoox]

So... apparently nobody else has noticed this. This is a huge problem, actually. Just as imported external components can be un-linked, there needs to be a command to un-marry copied components within the same project. I've come here after using the Rectangular Pattern tool to replicate a component within my design, and then wanting to apply different appearances to different instances of said component. The Pattern tools would be more useful with a checkbox to 'Create as New Components', too.

The Paste as New trick is the workaround of the year.

[daniel_lyall]

---

@Scoox wrote:

The Paste as New trick is the workaround of the year.

---

It's not a work around it's an option 

[CapGuy]

I agree this should be possible to "unlink" a pasted thing after it is pasted and worked... Maybe a good idea to request it in the IdeaStation ?

[TrippyLighting]

---

@CapGuy wrote:

I agree this should be possible to "unlink" a pasted thing after it is pasted and worked... Maybe a good idea to request it in the IdeaStation ?

---

The software would basically have to do the same as "save copy as" but instead of saving int to the data panel save it into the same design.

However, there are multiple trap doors if you dod not pay very close attention when designing. 

In other words the wish is easy to verbalize, but the implementation of it is not at all trivial if even possible.

[Noah_Katz]

@TrippyLighting

> In other words the wish is easy to verbalize, but the implementation of it is not at all trivial if even possible.

Perhaps that's the case because of F360's code construction, but I believe it's a necessary feature of a competent Assembly modeler; in my previous s/w the function as applied to an instance of a part in an asy it was called "Make Unique".

[TrippyLighting]

No, my statement has nothing to do with Fusion 360’s code construction. It does have to do with the concepts of how you can design in Fusion 360, which I likely have explored to a degree few people have. The many unusual ways something can be designed and end up being a component in Fusion 360 provide great flexibility.

The flip side is that flexibility results in many combinations of operations that would need to be covered.

The best way to make a component independent is to export it into the data panel to be it’s own component, then see if anything broke and fix it.

Then delete the original component. See if anything broke in the original design, fix that and then you can re-insert The copied component.

I also would like to see this as a feature, but I’ve looked at hundreds of user designs. Simple ones and complex ones and based on that experience I can say that implementing this would be a monumental task. There are benefits to have a timeline that is covering every operation, but there are also some pretty strong disadvantages. This is one of them!

[Noah_Katz]

@TrippyLighting

Fair enough, thanks for your thoughts and insights.

[Scoox]

The interesting thing is, if I export a component, re-import and break link, I get the result I'm after, so clearly Fusion can already do this, though the UX is very clunky. Wouldn't it be possible to create a command that does this with one click?

As user daniel_lyall noted, components being linked can hinder workflow, while non-linked components can't, since you can emulate linked components by means of the timeline.

Say you have a component with multiple instances and you want to add a fillet to it. Assuming the component was created early in the timeline, would you a) append the fillet at the end of the timeline and rely on the fact that component instances are linked, or would you rather b) roll back the timeline to the point where the component was created to keep related features together, even though technically there is no need to since components are linked anyway?

[daniel_lyall]

it makes it easier to find features if you roll the timeline back to the component they are attached to and it keeps the timeline cleaner.

[Scoox]

Daniel, that is 100% correct, and I'm sure every seasoned Fusion 360 user will try their best to keep their timeline as neat as possible. Now, I'm nowhere near a power user and, while I understand how the whole linked components business works, I still don't see how it could be of use because the exact same result can be achieved using just the timeline. In fact, if you stick to the "keep related things together in the timeline" principle, you probably will never even notice components are being linked behind the scenes—until you want to cut a hole through just one of them, that is. That's why I had never, not once, encountered a situation where I was grateful to Autodesk for endowing the software with linked components, and yet I—and evidently other users—have found ourselves struggling to circumvent this 'feature'. The only time linked components could be very useful is in direct modelling, which has no timeline, alongside a Make Independent command, all of which is already implemented.

So, in short, in parametric modelling mode, whether we care or not about the fact that components are linked, the best-practice workflow is: If you want to apply, say, a chamfer to all copies of a body/component, apply it before copying, otherwise apply it after. Assuming components were not linked, users would then be free to adjust the scope of the chamfer by applying it at carefully selected points in the timeline; Linked components takes away this freedom.

[daniel_lyall]

There are always exceptions to the rule.

I do it like this

If its a dead end item and its a single item, whatever goes it does not matter.

If its a dead end item with many parts, components for each part done roughly to rule as it does not matter to much.

If its a single item that will be used again, do it to rule as its important.

If it has many parts, components and done to rule.

If it has parts that need reused in the same model or other models down the line

1) will any be change as single objects.

Yes = do it as a copy paste new 

No = do it as a past or past new depending on how you bring it back in and break link at the end.

2) see No

I do it like that at the planning stage unless it's off a drawing then I know allread what needs to be done.

If I am not sure I do a test model and work out what to do that way then do the real mode to what's needed.

One exception I use, if still not sure do a save as a break links in the new version so you have both. then when you know delete one or the other.

I have some models that have linked parts in them simply because what it gets attached to does not change and I am not the person who does the change so I have to leave it linked, the person who does the change is in the US, this is where linked components and the cloud are banngers.

[Anonymous]

Not sure if anyone has said this option yet or if anyone is even still searching for this but since I needed it now someone must also be in the same situation.

I tried copy and pasting my component and then editing the copy. Saw the changes on the parent and realized I needed to break the link. 

After searching and not seeing any completely useful answers I came upon the realization that if you just copy the 'body' specifically inside the drop down menu in the component and paste that it will create a new 'body' instead of a linked component therefore not making any changes to the original copied body inside the component. 

voila. 

[Noah_Katz]

@Anonymous 

That's an interesting idea, but then why not just copy and Paste New?