Pulling from fusion to Eagle.

[Anonymous]

Dear forum members,

Two observations.

1. This operation (pulling from fusion to Eagle)  mangles PCB layout (traces and vias ripped out) even when no changes have been made to the PCB model within fusion. All I did was to rotate another mechanical component, which does not belong to the PCBA model, around the PCBA.

2. Also, upon a push to fusion from Eagle, it seems that the entire model (PCBA + mechanical) is being overwritten by the new document version loosing any pending modifications to the mechanical model. Should it not modify only the PCBA component? Maybe I am doing something wrong here. 

[innovatenate]

Have you projected anything from other components into the PCB board sketch? If you are using projected sketch geometry, that is associative to the geometry that created it. Moving things around could impact the board (as well as other Fusion features). If you open the Fusion Design, and review the PCB board, does everything appear okay?

When you first sync, does everything appear okay? If you could record an Autodesk Screencast of what you're seeing/doing, that could be really useful to help diagnose or recreate the issue.

I hope this helps!

[Anonymous]

Thanks for your response. I have not projected anything. In fact, my only other component in the design was a solid model for a battery. To my recollection, these were the steps:

1. Created solid model for battery.

2. Created simple rectangular sketch for PCB, and created a PCB object.

3. Pulled PCB outline to Eagle (I encountered no problems with this step, but this was a month ago).

4. Placed components (no managed component library at this point) completed layout. Pushed a few time to fusion without any issues.

5. Completed layout.

6. Pushed to Fusion again. No problems.

7. Created Managed library and uploaded several 3d models for components. Pushed to Fusion again, No problems.

8. Rotated the original model for the battery 180 degrees in Fusion. Saved document. Pulled to Eagle to find (thanks to Eagle DRC!) that the layout was now completely mangled. Several pads were ripped out of the PCB outline and had migrated elsewhere.  None of these modifications were, surprisingly,  reflected in Fusion. The board appeared to view fine in Fusion. 

So, to answer your questions: No projections.  First sync (of board outline to eagle) was OK. The view of the model in Fusion appears fine irrespective of the damage that is visible within Eagle. 

I would also welcome an answer to my original posted question on workflow . It seems that the entire design document is overwritten and the changes as a result of changes from Eagle and any orignal mechanical mods , unrelated to PCBA component, are lost. This is even if the document is saved to the cloud from Fusion as a new revision. Why does the scope of changes from eagle extend beyond the PCBA component?

Perhaps, the PCBA has to be included as an X-ref in the encompassing mechanical design.  But then how does one modify components within the PCBA, in relation to the encompassing design, and propagate back to Eagle? Something in the link system (or in my brain) seems to negate the purported benefits of this ECAD-MCAD integration. I am sure I am missing something fundamental to the workflow.

[innovatenate · Accepted solution]

Below is a screencast that highlights a pitfall that might explain the PCB explosion in Eagle after your pulled to Eagle from Fusion. It is a bit of a guess, but maybe it will help.

I think I can help with the other question too. Fusion's data management only records versions at the design level. The PCB while a component of the design is still embedded in the design. In order to update a new version of that design must be created. Only Eagle has push/pull capabilities

The most important thing to remember is this:

• When the EAGLE pushes an update to the PCB, a new version of the F3D that contains the PCB is created in the cloud.
• This means that, for the Fusion user to see the new PCB, they have to close (if it is currently open) and re-open their design.

In other words, the EAGLE push behaves exactly like a second Fusion user who has opened the Fusion design, edited it, and then saved it. Remember last save wins.  If you go through the version history in the data panel, I'm guessing you would find more versions that you recall saving in Fusion 360. You can use the open command to review these versions. You can also promote a previous version to make it the latest version of the design.

The key thing is you have to be careful about pushing from Eagle and simultaneously editing in Fusion 360, it can be a bit confusing if you're not aware of the version thing.

One thing you may consider doing is keeping the PCB board in its own separate design in Fusion 360. You can right click on this design in the data panel to insert this design into another design in Fusion 360. This is called an X-Reference. The upside to this approach is that you're less likely to be editing the Fusion design and overwriting versions that have been pushed from Eagle. 

The downside is that you have to Open the X-Referenced design with the PCB board in it to make edits to it. It cannot be edited in-place.

I hope I explained that clearly. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the very clear answers!

    I want to say I was careful in the creation of the initial PCBA sketch,  and that I kept the sketch disjoint from the solid model for the battery. That said, I might have made a mistake. In any case, as an interesting  aside, it seems that the damage and dislocation within Eagle was limited to the through hole pads (PTHs from eagle library).  

   With respect to the workflow,  I am still trying to grapple with how the fusion-sync implementation results in seamless ECAD-MCAD workflow. Just to reiterate your comments:

  If the PCBA is part of a larger mechanical design, then it seems that:

    a. Pushing from eagle to fusion will result in loss of interim progress/changes - that is unrelated to PCBA itself - within Fusion; should one accept the new document revision in Fusion.  This is because, the scope of the Eagle push-pull link extends beyond PCBA component and to the entire design that embeds the PCBA component.

    b. Xrefing the PCBA design into the mechanical design will fully mitigate a. However, this approach will not allow in-place push to Eagle since, understandably,  Xref is unidirectional. 

Therefore, given the uncertainty and consequent anxiety produced by a,  X-refing seems to be the only reasonable way to work with this fusion-sync feature. At that point, given the limitation in b, from a users perspective, what is the difference when compared to a traditional step file based  (or other solid model file format based) approach?

Thanks for your patience!