Component references to drawing

[wbraat]

Good day everyone. I am using Fusion360/Eagle and I am quite happy so far.

Is it possible to generate a drawing from a 3D-PCB and have the components references (like U1, R1, R2, C2) also on the drawing?

This would be very convenient when producing documentation.

Kind regards,

Willem Braat

[HelenChen-ElectronicsQA · Accepted solution]

Hi @wbraat, 

Thank you very much for your feedback. 

You are able to get the drawings from 3D PCB directly in Fusion 360, also with the components reference in the drawings. Please make sure you are using the latest Fusion 360 build 2.0.7824. (It just released today).

Just in the 3D PCB environment -> switch to Drawing workspace -> From Design, then you will get it. Hope it helps.

Regards,

Helen

[Anonymous]

Hello Helen,

As you can see on your 2D drawing, we don't have any reference of component (R1, J1, ...).

On the 3D PCB model, we have Canevas layers (silkprint) and these layers are missing in the 2D drawing !

Is there any solution or modification of parameter to upload canevas layers on the 2D drawing ?

Thanks

[wbraat]

Hi Helen!

Same (still) here. I use bNames and tNames as silklayers.

Also on the drawing you show in the picture I do not see any component references...

We really need to get these references on the drawing!

Willem

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @wbraat,

I hope you're doing well. The types of drawings you are trying to generate are best done in the 2D PCB. Make sure that only the layers you want on the final document are visible. Then in the electronics command line type PRINT, followed by enter.

You can print the current view to PDF. That will get you the drawing with the reference designators that you need.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

Hi Jorge,

I'm agree with you by using printing function in Eagle but several actions are necessary to produce a complete set of drawings.

With the oldest version of Eagle, we used CAM configurations to produce them in only one action. It was better.

Actually, the oldest CAM can be upload in the newest version of Eagle (as legacy) but they can't be modified.

So your prosal should be used as safety action but not as normal operating.

The best way, I think, should be to create our drawings in Autodesk and use te integrated drawing tools (different view, detail view, cotation, ...).

The communication between Eagle and Autodesk is not completed, it's a shame.

[Anonymous]

Hi Jorge, thank you for giving your suggestion.

But I do agree with Nicolas Paul. This is a ( non professional, work intensive -like disabling layers etc-) workaround and not a long term viable solution. The result can indeed produce a PDF, but with only a picture of the PCB. 

Eventually this way we will be left with two documents....one PDF for the designators and one PDF for the physical drawing.....

Why is it not possible to show the component designators in the drawing? The information is available in the files....

Best regards,

Willem

[Anonymous]

Jorge....very silent over there; no additonal advise?

Best regards, Willem

[Anonymous]

Hi Jorge,

In the assembly CAD (in fusion), we have Canevas folder in the conception tree. In this folder , we have the silkscreen layers.

These layers (or the Canevas folder) are necessary to create PCB and assembly drawings.

Is it possible that Fusion upload Canevas folder with the CAD model in the drawing  ?

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @Anonymous,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Currently, we don't have better options than what I mentioned above, the drawings functionality in Fusion hasn't been setup to work with Electronics so that would be ideal but it doesn't work yet.

Thank you for the suggestions this is something we'll continue to work on.

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

Hi Jorge,

Thank you for your comment and I hope that EAGLE/FUSION should be able to create quickly profesionnaly drawing in the future.

[Anonymous]

I agree, this is something that needs to be resolved.  Electronic assembly drawings rely heavily on the reference designators (printed in the silkscreen), often the ref des is the only way to easily identify a component on the PCB.  For example if a design as a lot of capacitors or resistors, on the 2D drawing these parts could look identical, and if there are numerous parts placed close to each other, parts can easily be confused with one another. 

[wbraat]

Thanks for supporting this also Clint. I find it unbelievable that after more than a year nothing has been changed by Autodesk. Oh well, I suppose they do not think this is an important issue. I am reconsidering using Eagle, looking around for an alternative.

@Anonymous: any news?

[jorge_garcia]

Hello Everyone, 

Everything is important and in this case it's not entirely in the Electronics team's hands since we are relying on the drawings functionality that comes with Fusion 360. I agree wholeheartedly that this needs to be addressed but we'll need to collaborate with another subteam to get it resolved.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[HelenChen-ElectronicsQA]

Dear all,

Thank you so much for all your feedback.

I have logged an improvement about this and we will keep you be posted if we have any update about this.

Really so sorry about any inconvenience.

Regards,

Helen

[wbraat]

Gorge, thanks for your swift response.

Do you (or Autodesk for that matter) have a timeframe?

Willem

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @wbraat ,

I hope you're doing well. I wish I had a timeline for you, I really want to see that feature too but for now we don't have a timeline for it.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[wbraat]

Hello all. We are more than 3 years further into Fusion 360 now, and this issue is still not resolved.

I am currently using a screen grab of the 3D view of the board with the packages hidden.

This is not ideal but it is manageable.

Still no progress on a definite solution Jorge?

Kind regards, Willem

[melisa.kaner]

Hi @wbraat , 

Thanks for being active on the forum, we read all of these! I'm sorry you've had this experience - I totally agree this is a gap. It is something we're actively investigating and is at the top of our mind to resolve. I appreciate the timeline is less than desirable...this issue required a multi-faceted approach to resolve and is unfortunately not a quick fix. I'm not permitted to divulge timelines, but I will come back here to this thread with news as soon as possible. 

In the meantime, I'll DM you to hear some more general feedback about your experiences and expectations- hopefully we can jump on a quick call to discuss. 

Best regards, 

Melisa (Electronics Product Management) 

[wbraat]

Hi Melissa, thanks for getting back to me. Really appreciate this.

I'm glad it has the attention of Autodesk.

Waiting for your DM.

Kind regards, Willem