Upcoming changes to the HEIGHTS tab for milling toolpaths and the RADII tab for Turning toolpaths

[craig.chester]

Changes are about to be made to the HEIGHTS Tab for Milling Toolpaths and the RADII tab for Turning toolpaths. It has been suggested to me that this might cause confusion for some customers.

• Why have we made these changes?
• Is there any benefit to the user?
• How do I use it?
  
  Please note... All old toolpaths should recompute the same after this change has been delivered.
  
  I hope these short videos (One for Milling, one for Turning) explain what we did, why we did it and how to use it.
  
  Your feedback is always of great value to us.

[Stuart-H]

thank for the update 

but by Ekk is the volume low had to turn up the wick on my MBP to hear anything at all your cough was 20 times louder that your speech 

[craig.chester]

Sorry... I tested playback in Windows Media Player and the audio seems reasonably loud and clear in this player

[DarthBane55]

Sorry Craig, but OP is right... usually, on the forum, we don't download the videos on PC and then watch using Windows Media Player, we click the link and watch right in the forum (in Chrome for example).  The audio is barely audible, I cranked my speakers to MAX to hear it, and then the other notifications I got nearly gave me a heart attack lol.

Not that big a deal, just an observation on how most people would probably watch videos from the forum. 

[craig.chester]

On my laptop, I played the video from directly inside Chrome too and the audio was clear.... Perhaps I have something on my PC that you don't.

Thanks for the feedback... I'll get advice from the regular posters of videos in the future. I obviously need to change something as several customers have reported the problem.

[DarthBane55]

Thanks Craig, and I forgot to mention that I think this change is great! (the heights, not the sound haha).

[andy_woodward66]

Yep, another feature that wasn't broken which has now been well and truly 'fixed'. Fixed to the point where CNC's don't cut to the require depth anymore. Mine undercuts by 0.7mm and I just read about another user who's machine overcut by 3mm.

Now I'm worried that my machine isn't going to work as predicted. There was no warning of the changes and the tool tips haven't been updated to explain what you were trying to achieve. And what happens to machining strategies created before the mod? Do these all now need to be regenerated?

Even better, why don't you roll back to a point where it wasn't a problem in the first place?

[programming2C78B]

All existing toolpaths and programs will be entirely the same. We've done dozens since. 

[DarthBane55]

Try and take 2 minutes to watch the 2 little videos in OP, it will answer all of your questions.

[nubrandao]

I'm using the new heights here in simoldes Portugal, at first it was strange, there were so many options, I usually set my heights once,  all the heights are base from from our block/stock

In this situation, I don't mind to have more options, is better to have that don't have 

In my case I just make user default  stock model and fixture, so I never have to worry too much, just work on top height and bottom height.

But fusion is working in the right direction. Keep going.

[seamus]

Yeah Audio very bad in media

[andy_woodward66]

I maintain that this update was crass and unnecessary. If you're trying to machine a model with 3D cuts on the top surface, then flip over and cut 3D surfaces on the back, the height setting process now takes 10x longer than it did before. That's because the original strategy was intuitive, now it is not.

I've just wasted 5 hours defining a milling strategy which took 30mins prior to the update.
One very angry user.
Expletives deleted.

[joey_angelotti]

Is there any way you can post these videos on the Autodesk youtube account? Not for the audio, just for ease of getting this information to everyone so they don't have to search for it as much.

[captaingamez]

This is absolutely by far the most frustrating and totally unneeded change that Autodesk has made since I have used Fusion.

You guys fixed nothing and overall made the entire thing more convoluted. It worked perfectly if you arent entirely uninitiated.

Hopefully you guys take the feedback from your users for once and fix this because the way you have it is crap. Mine just got me stuck to the point I had to just copy and paste it from another program. This made my life zero percent easier.

[andy_woodward66]

Don't hold your breath mate. The Fusion team are about as tin-eared as you can get.

It looks like they run a kind of Six Sigma system - they only get a bonus if they change something, regardless of whether it's any good or not.

So, a bunch of SME's have their productivity trashed just so some kid can have a new mountain bike for Xmas.

[seth.madore]

---

@andy_woodward66 wrote:

It looks like they run a kind of Six Sigma system - they only get a bonus if they change something, regardless of whether it's any good or not.

So, a bunch of SME's have their productivity trashed just so some kid can have a new mountain bike for Xmas.

---

This is laughably incorrect on literally every level 🤣

[andy_woodward66]

Well it's all about the optics Seth, and I'm glad you found it funny. It's not so funny for the users who've found this 'update' unnecessary and a complete pain in the ass. Not to mention the thousands of dollars of stock that's been trashed because Autodesk made any easy process completely unintuitive.

It's also ironic that it takes a sarcastic remark to elicit a response from an Autodesk Manager - even if there is little scant possibility of the issue being resolved.

If you want to stick with this update, why don't you add Stock Top, Stock Bottom, Model Top & Model Bottom to the drop down menus, along with the function to offset from those levels.

Everyone wins - Fusion machinists can stop wasting time on useless complications, and you can go back to chuckling about those quaint little people on the internet.

[seth.madore]

In hindsight, our implementation of this improvement (and it is and was intended as an improvement) certainly missed the mark and made things more complex than they needed to be. While Fusion users did need to adjust how they did things, it didn't prevent anything that was possible before. (just made it more complex)

We are listening to all feedback and crafting some modifications to the Heights tab that should return things to a more palatable state 🙂

[craig.chester]

"If you want to stick with this update, why don't you add Stock Top, Stock Bottom, Model Top & Model Bottom to the drop down menus, along with the function to offset from those levels.

Everyone wins - "

That is what we plan to do based upon the feedback we have received.

This change certainly did solve problems for milling users that had been reported... However, it also added complication which we were aware of... We just were not aware of the severity of the added complications and erred on the side of using a minimum of options to obtain all possible outcomes. In hindsight, that was a mistake on our part and is a mistake that we plan to resolve. 

[programming2C78B]

so it was just a long roundabout way of making it...more complicated? As I said before, if you had simply changed the name to TOP of selection and BOTTOM of selection you would've had a much smoother onboarding process with the older folk. Also consider a pop-up tutorial after every update that says "Hey, btw this was changed but behaves the same way as last month!"