Fusion Electronics
Working an electronics project and need help with the schematic, the PCB, or making your components? Join the discussion as our community of electronic design specialists and industry experts provide you their insight and best practices.
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Hey Autodesk can you please fix the bug where, if a part is marked "spin" it is not oriented correctly on the 3D PCB?

Message 1 of 1
184 Views, 0 Replies

Hey Autodesk can you please fix the bug where, if a part is marked "spin" it is not oriented correctly on the 3D PCB?

First off, the 3D PCB feature is of outright unacceptable, poor quality, it's pretty brazen of you folks to advertise it as a feature, let alone ask people to pay for it...


Second, c'mon Autodesk, this one is a no-brainer, I am starting to suspect that your devs aren't performing any testing, at all, period.


When you have a component in your PCB design that you have the "spin" checkbox checked for, which is the only, convoluted, seriously poorly thought out, way to flip the direction of the component name, it causes issues for the 3D PCB, namely that all components marked "spin" ignore the orientation you set in the PCB design and default to, well, the default orientation of the component as designed in the footprint. This is clearly a bug, but while you're in there fixing things (since I assume that happens only once or twice a decade), could you please also fix the following bugs:

  • not all of my components load and show up on the 3D PCB, producing error messages of course. This is not the result of any error on my part, as:
    • I have used the exact same set of steps for every component in the library.
    • The library was created in its entirety within Fusion, not Eagle.
    • For the problem components I have gone back, unlinked everything, deleted models, and repeated the whole process (which is laughably convoluted, and there are dozens of posts on here that agree with me) multiple times, no change.
    • If I have 10 of component A on my board, 1 of 9 will show up, or 2, or 7, or on a rare occasion all 9, but never for more than 2 pushes in a row (speaking of pushes to the 3D PCB HELLO? Notice any obviously necessary functionality that is conspicuously missing? Like, I don't know, maybe a big red button that says "push changes to 3d pcb" that, upon pressing, does just that)
    • I could go on for three pages, because I am persistent, and don't like having to resort to a forum post.
  • Either force us all to use the terrible quality "canvas" version of the 3D PCB or make the non-canvas version actually functional (not to say that the canvas version is any better, it is just as poorly implemented) What is the deal with the change ups and inconsistency? Parts of the 3D PCB, or rather sides/layers seem to occasionally be some weird mix of the two, why? Don't answer that, just fix it. Please.

I have dozens more, however I need to wrap this up before my blood pressure gets too high, I'll do so with two last points:


1.) Clearly Autodesk is not a fan of my style of posting about these bugs, otherwise they wouldn't ignore every single one of them. It doesn't make Autodesk look good, and it probably makes a bit of an a$$hole out of me, but that's the price of being the squeaky wheel. I would like to make a compromise: I will stop writing posts like this if you provide me access to, or if not necessary, direct me to the appropriate place where I can skip the middleman and just file bug reports? (I promise to be nice, and to meet all requirements and standards you have in place, every time)


2.) Hypothetical question for you, Autodesk: say you're at a restaurant and you order the roast chicken, the photograph and description in the menu make that dish look amazing. So say a few minutes later the waiter arrives with your food and upon looking at the plate set before you it is immediately apparent that the dish hasn't been cooked, heck, there are still feathers on the bird. You stop the waiter and say "hey this doesn't look anything like what was advertised, and it looks like the chef decided he was done and plated it before he even finished removing the feathers", seems reasonable, right? To make matters worse, this is all taking place in a dystopian universe where you had to pay exorbitant prices just to get into the restaurant, AND they still want to charge you for the bird, and, had you refused to pay to just get in the door of the restaurant, they would flip a switch which instantaneously, retroactively, removed 90% of all calories you have consumed over the past five years. How would you feel about all of that, Autodesk?

Labels (1)

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums