Order by island not working??

[WhiteRoomSkis]

I am setting up a bunch of nested parts that need to be cut out of MDF. I want to cut each part individually before moving to the next to decrease the machining time due to excessively jogging around raw table. I have used this function many times before without issue. But tonight after updating F360 to the 4/17/18 update and then setting up my parts, the order by island command seems to be not working. I'll share the file and generate a screen cast in a bit but I wanted to get this up in case anyone else is seeing the same thing.

 I have even deleted the 2d contour tool path and tried setting it up from scratch thinking I did something wrong but it still ends up with the same result.

If you have any idea please on what I'm doing wrong or if maybe the update made this a bit buggy let me know.

you can play with the file if you want FILE

Thank you!

[masa.minohara]

Hi @WhiteRoomSkis,

Thank you for reporting the issue! "Order by Islands" seems to work if I select a smaller diameter tool in your design but I couldn't figure out why this is happening. I've logged this issue with the development and will post more information as soon as I hear back. (CAM-9911)

[Mykhailo_Fanta]

I have the same issue.

I cam confirm, order by island does notwork!

[WhiteRoomSkis]

As far as I can tell this is still not working even after the follow up updates. Is there anymore information on this bug?

[masa.minohara]

Hi @WhiteRoomSkis,

I just heard back from the development and it seems like this behavior is by design. In this case, the profiles between different bosses are less than tool radius away. If cuts are overlapping it will still cause a dependency to be safe. When cutting soft materials this doesn't matter that much. However, you may consider submitting your idea to the Fusion IdeaStation forum, which is constantly monitored by developers and product managers, and is currently the most effective way to request a product enhancement:

• Autodesk Fusion 360 IdeaStation

Other forum users will have the opportunity to Vote or add Kudos to the Idea. Votes on an idea will increase the likelihood that an idea will be implemented.

[Anonymous]

I tried leaving 2 tool diameters between parts but it still creates the dependency and machines a few depths at a time, not following each part to full depth. I would like to add my vote to fixing/improving this. 

For now would it be possible to have an explanation on how it works to adjust spacing between parts. Should it be 3D? 

James

[Lambodesigns]

I made a simple change to a file I've been using for years and now the order by island is totally messed up.  I vote for "fixing" this.... and by "fixing" I mean making it work like it used to because that is the way it should work. I'm cutting a lot of the same small parts and had to make separate contours for each part to get them to cut in the right order.  Production type cuts so time is money and this slowed things way down.

Worst part is now if I make a change to any of them I have to go in and change each and every one.  Spacing the parts out is not an option either as these have to fit within a sheet of plywood and there is no room to separate the parts.  

[WhiteRoomSkis]

I’m still seeing this issue also, I may try to increase the space between parts to see if I can get this to work.

[Lambodesigns]

Looks like "preserve order" is also broken.  I also have a bunch of pockets that are cut and it used to walk around and do them in the order I picked which was the most efficient way to do it.   When it regenerated that path when I made the changes to the contours and reposted it now goes in some random fashion that takes much longer to cut as the cnc has to rapid from one side to the other to make cuts instead of going to the next closest.  I made no changes to that operation other than regenerate the path.  I unchecked the order by selection and it at least goes in a decent order but it starts with a cut that is half way across the table instead of the one next to the last cut.  At least it will only add a little time to the job but it would be nice if these functions worked like they used to.  

I also found that my parts were separated in the x axis enough that the would order properly but in the y axis they were too close.  By skipping every other row I now only have 2 contours to work with instead of 18.  Not ideal but at least it is better.  

[Anonymous]

If not a bug (?), this is a very annoying feature.

At least an option should be present to really do a "by island" path and not all the mess it is doing now.

I coud understand the need while cutting hard materials but why we should get all this mess while cutting soft material? Other option is to not optimize the placement of the piece and let them far away from each other, which doesn't make sense neither...

Please, fix this.

[mail]

just spent quite a bit of time trying to resolve the same problem until I came across this thread and can't believe this has been a reported problem since 2018!!! Can someone please action to resolve this issue. Moving parts further apart is not a solution as it wastes material. What's the point in having the option if the software overrides my instruction?

Please fix this soon.

[mail]

Hi Masa,

It seems this issue still persists. When will a fix be implemented? It seems the Idea Station mentioned below is now archived and I don't have privileges to post a comment on the Feedback Hub. As you indicate this is a built in feature so there seems little point in looking a support call because they won't be a able to advise on a fix?

[Anonymous]

Has there been any development on this? 

This is one of the reasons holding me back from Buying 360. SolidWorks seems to be able to do it no problem. 

Can I vote for this idea somewhere? Has the idea been created in idea station? 

I don't see the point of having the order by islands option if it doesn't work. 

This is also 2 years old!

James

[seth.madore]

@Anonymous 

As stated earlier in the thread, some of this behavior is by design, and will likely not change. However, if there is a bug, we will chase it down in due time. Do you have a sample part you can share that shows this issue clearly? If so, kindly attach it here and we can review it.

File > Export > Save to local folder. Return to thread and attach the .f3d file in your reply

[mail]

Hi Seth,
The point is that Fusion360 is designed to ignore the  "Order by Islands' command if it decides the parts are too close together. What too close together means and why this is even so, is not defined anywhere as far as I can see.
I regularly nest parts that are cut with a 16mm cutter spacing them 20mm apart and this is deemed to be too close together by the software. I suppose I could create individual tool paths for each contour but that still doesn't explain why the command is ignored and why no fault message is displayed saying the command has been ignored.

I have attached a file for you and a million others like it.

The interesting point that James made and you might have missed is that this is a blocker for him investing in the software, so naturally he can't respond and send you a file, as he doesn't have Fusion 360 to create one.

I look forward to you comments.

Regards

Knut 

[seth.madore]

That file has 7 setups and many toolpaths in it. Which one am I supposed to be looking at?

And no, I didn't miss the reasoning that James presented. I assume that he's tried it for his own needs (30 day trial and all that good stuff) and run into the issue. Otherwise, he's just going on a "I heard it didn't work, but haven't tested it myself"

I am a bit confused by the "SolidWorks can do it" bit, as SW is a CAD package, not CAM. That doesn't tell me what he's using for the CAM plugin; MasterCAM for SW? HSM Works?

[mail]

Hi Seth,

Sorry for confusing the issue by too many parts and tool paths in the file.

Any of the 2D contour operations in any of the setups will show the issue.

Having gone back to the top of this very old thread I now realise that the tool diameter drives the default ignoring of the command, but why?

I realise that the incremental release of updates and additional features means that the software is always a work in progress and the customer paying for licenses are in effect beta testers, but it's frustrating that when issues like this get highlighted but are never get addressed in subsequent releases. 

[Lambodesigns]

If this is "by design" it is a bad design.  We are having to do work arounds to make the tool go on the same path it would do if order by island worked properly.... and as stated earlier... it used to work properly with no issues from placing parts close together.  This is standard practice to place parts as close as possible to not waste material.  The bit ends up going on the exact same paths eventually so why is it "by design" to have it do it in a random pattern that takes much longer to machine?  

[engineguy]

@mail 

There is a "workaround" of sorts, as long as you are only cutting out the shapes and are not needing to use "Tabs" then the "Trace" toolpath will cut correctly with "Multiple Depths" used.

It does work using the "Trace" down to the level of the top of the "Tabs" and then just using the "Contour" for the last depth at which it will run correctly and do the "Tabs", they will however be required for them to be set opposite each other using the Points option so they meet up 🙂 :):)

Not the best but better than trying to do multiple "Contours" IMHO, one for every shape and you can use your 15mm cutter on all paths as the "Trace" doesn`t observe the distance between the solids as the "Contour" does 🙂 🙂 🙂

First image is the "Trace" multiple depths that works with "Preserve Order" so it is down to careful selection of shapes and positioning of "Start Points" 🙂

Second image is the "Contour with "Tabs", or you can of course use your original method of leaving the 0.01mm thickness all round, your choice 🙂

I actually moved a couple of the Blocks over to a 16mm gap and the 15mm tool was happy with it and it closed the opposing "Tabs" right up, overlapped actually.

Just to get the hang of it I did this a few times and found that with a little practice it was pretty easy, does get around the problem with the Multiple Depth problems not running in the correct order 🙂 🙂 🙂

Aplogies for the long ramble, use or not as you see fit, just an example of a (dare I say) decent "workaround", it will never really replace what should be working but going off what Seth posted there may well be a long wait for that 🙂

Anyway, if this helps someone even a little then the time spent will have been worth it 🙂 Most folks will probably have found their own "workaround" that is good for them, this is just another for folks to play with, your modified file attached, up to the user to do the Feeds/Speeds/Leadins/Leadouts etc, etc, etc 🙂 🙂 🙂

Stay safe

Regards

Rob

[engineguy]

@Lambodesigns 

It still works fine, just doesn`t like to play with "Multiple Depths", single depth is good 🙂

Have a look at the easy "workaround"  in my previous post, it works and is easy to do, just the same selecting of shapes and start points (if used) !!

Stay Safe

Regards

Rob