IdeaStation: Request a Feature or Enhancement

How do I get my idea in Fusion 360?



find in browser

New Idea
55 Kudos

Please add an option in "select same diameter" to UNCHECK or deselect certain holes!  We're running parts with hundreds of holes, but we need to exclude certain holes.  Short of changing CAD diameters to 'break' the select-same-diameter functionality, it's very time consuming.

14 Kudos

We need the ability to design custom form tools with user defined profiles, such as endmills or step drills/reamers. The system should be able to display the tools form as well as the material removed when simulating. An option for lathe tools would be beneficial as well, such as user designed profile/boring bar with defined angles allowing the tool to be used on both sides of centerline when profiling. Competitor CAM systems have this ability and the lack of these features in Fusion have kept me from converting 100% for my CAM needs thus far

10 Kudos

I think it would quite handy and time saving to have Select Same Diameter as an option in the Bore cycle (2D Bore). Like the option in standard drill cycles. Make Life easier.

1 Kudo

We now have a Reorder to minimize tool changes checkbox, but we really also need an Order by tool checkbox option in PostProcess.


Reasons?  I have multiple operations that I want to happen by senquential tool regardless.  There is no good way to make this happen currently.

10 Kudos

I work as an application engineer with an autodesk reseller . And during my pre sales demo I show the ability to see the section analysis in the browser for our fusion models in A360 . And some of my customers have repeatedly asked me the ability to simulate the toolpath already done in Fusion 360 in A360 and also have told that it will give a better idea to their higher hierarchies and their customers


simulate in A360.jpg


If you really like my kudo . Please hit Kudos

9 Kudos

Engraving text

Status: Gathering Support
by Participant fuso152 2 weeks ago |

It would be great if there were a CAM option in 2D tracing or 2D engraving whereby the tool could follow the center of the font, rather than running around its perimeter. The result would be akin to stick fonts. This option is available in SolidCam for SolidWorks.

7 Kudos

Dovetail cut

Status: Gathering Support
by Explorer enovin 2 weeks ago |

It should be allowed to apply negative taper angle to cut multiple depth contour (pocket) with dovetail mill. As it is setup now (negative angle is not allowed) there is no good simple strategy to cut dovetail slot. Having this option - negative taper for dovetail mill will greatly simplfy programing of the toolpath.

15 Kudos



     Would like to submit an idea for a better User Interface for Cam templates. First I want to say that Cam Templates are great !!!... However with that being said "How to Store, Manage and Retrieve them"  needs some improvement. Below is a picture of how this

possible could be done. Hopefully the "picture and text" will give you a good idea of how it could work.


The "Circled Numbers" show the steps that the user would take to "Import"  Template(s)  they want to use.


The  "Circled Letters"  are brief description/notes to what needs to happen. 


Also it would be great if we could also do minor editing.  At least, Renaming Templates, Deleting Templates from the interface.





 Cam Template.jpg




Status: Future Consideration

I would love to "accept" this idea as it is something we are deeply passionate about.  We actually want Templates to become "first class citizens".  As you use the product and build templates you should be using templates more often then the core tool paths as they capture your machining preferences and intelligence.


Sadly, For now, I need to mark this as "future Consideration" in full transparency that this isn't something we will get to this QTR or Next.


With that said, we are serious about this.  So, keep the votes and Ideas coming.






25 Kudos

Just a small suggestion that would make life a bit easier for some workflows.  I have been cutting a number of large parts out of flat 2mm stock lately and the arrow for indicating which side of a sketch you are cutting during a 2D outline operation is getting very annoying.  The geometry I'm cutting are all sketch outlines and the stock is about a 900mm square.  When selecting the operation geometry it is hard to tell which side of the line the arrow is indicating when zoomed out to see the whole stock (first picture).  So when selecting each outline you have to zoom in (second picture) on each part to make sure you are cutting the correct side of the line.  I suggest using a different arrow style to make this more readable at different zoom levels (third picture).  I apologize for my MS paint graphic skills but I think it describes the style of arrow that would solve this issue.




Zoomed Out - hard to readzoomed out.PNG




























zoomed in.PNG

 Zoomed In - easier to read




























 Suggested Arrow - easy to read at all zoom levels






Status: Accepted

Yes, this is definitely something we need to fix, and good news is, we don't think it's that hard. Basically what's happening is that the arrow starts at the radius of the cutting tool, but for 2d cutting such as waterjet, laser, and plasma, the tool is basically a hairline, and we have taken that into account. We'll have this fixed soon so that the arrows are not on top of the toolpath if they weren't meant to be.  Here's a screenshot of the improvement that is in progress: 


Screen Shot 2017-03-21 at 11.33.56 AM.png

12 Kudos
Unfortunately, DXF is not nearly as popular for many software/machines/machine software as SVG.

Please begin an immediate campaign to add SVG anywhere Fusion 360 offers DXF. Intermediate software processes can expend time. Moreover, the conversions can frequently render inaccurate scaling which usually negates the entire purpose of designing the model at all.

Thank you for your consideration.
9 Kudos



I made a simple CAM project with a laser tool. If I want to take a look at the toolpath from the top view then the toolhead (even if semi transparent) make thes toolpath very diffcult to see.


As solution for this I want to hav an option to show/hide toolhead.

In the following screencast you can see that the dark toolhead overlays the toolpath and makes it badly visible.


As you also can see the yellow toolpath is very difficult to see, therefore I already made another idea on ideastation, please vote for it!:

Custom settings for all visual elements
105 Kudos

I propose that right-clicking on a Setup and clicking "Machining Time" should show not ONLY the total machining time for all operations within the setup (as it does now) but ALSO a list with EACH operation and its respective machining time!


1) When editing operations to reduce cycle time, OFTEN there is the most to gain in the longest operation. 

2) If you want to understand why a Setup Machining time is so long, this feature will QUICKLY show you which operations are taking the majority.

3) If you have a S&F typo (e.g. accidentally drilling at 0.2 IPM instead of 20 IPM) it's a quick way to sanity check WHY you drill operation is taking 47 minutes instead of ~1 minute).

4) We often receive CAM files from customers who want help optimizing their CAM strategies - this would help me understand, similar to #1 and #2 above, what's taking the longest

5) I believe (at the risk of being presumptuous) that this feature should be easy to implement!





Status: Future Consideration

Marking this as "future consideration".  It is something that we should do.  Possibly in the first half of the year.  More likely in the second half.


To break it down, you are looking for a way to easily visualize the area of your NC program that has the most machining time so you know where to focus your efforts in optimizing a program.


Is this a correct summary?



8 Kudos

Being able to organise CAM Templates in custom folders would make having 10-20 or more templates easier to manage.


I have around 20 + templates and now it is becoming harder to organise, these custom folders could be created whenever you need one. A folder per type of machine, part, tool or operation.


Something like this:


template folders.jpg

17 Kudos

Currently, the 2D Chamfer tool won't work correctly in scenarios with modelled chamfers, if at all. That's not a problem for deburring sharp edges, but it would be nice if it could support modelled chamfers too. This would eliminate the need to specify a chamfer width, and would mean that you could use the benefits of the tool clearance smarts.



Status: Archived

Thanks for your idea! We definitely feel you and agree with this idea. The challenge is how our software is set up and is very difficult to make the work well. It's not a small project and we'd like to tackle it but we have some higher priority projects we'd like to knock out this year. We'll keep you posted on our progress. 

6 Kudos



      You have an incredible "edge" software package in Fusion 360.  I (like many others), am a non-paying subscriber who is open to a paid subscription if I design and create something which can turn profit.


    However, I find that while you have volumes of other paid suites which are designed for professionals, that this one should focused (not necessarily just on us), BUT that we should be highly on your minds, as we are the ones with the potential for pay conversions and really have no package which suits us.


   Therefore, I urge consideration for tutorials which focus on our "Hobbyist" level CAM machines, Tooling, File formats (SVG), etc as we who are not yet at a point of creating any products or services, need to know how to use your product.



    For Example:

1.) I know six people (not including myself) locally who have either an X-Carve or Shapeoko 3.  All of these use routers which function as the spindle.  NONE of us know how to set the tools, tool holders, or even understand what a shoulder is on a straight end mill, which does not really even seem to be represented. 


2.) None of us is able to export DXF files from the sketches to recreate "accurately scaled" SVG files directly from this software as the source, a format which our local maker space uses for the laser cutter. 


3.) Tormach and other machines are cost and size prohibitive to many of us individuals.  Therefore, we fail to understand why that level of machine is considered above those of us who are:

                                    a.) Just starting out, and only have a slight understanding to begin with

                                    b.) Personally invested enough to purchase the machines to learn if given a solid medium

                                    c.) Without the benefit of shop co-workers, trade schools, etc to begin to operate.



Please pause, take a candid look at your audience (over 25 percent are users just like me), and help us to become successful, so that we can (in turn) push Fusion 360 into a nearly unconquerable share for its sub-market.


3 Kudos

Please either add "V Bits" or use more clear verbage regarding this tool in the Tool Management library, so that we may clearly add our V Carve bits with minimal confusion.

2 Kudos

Very simple suggestion that would save a lot of time.


Add a CAM ACTIONS menu item that would repeat the last Post Process.  Provide a shortcut (accelerator) key


*** Do NOT show the Post Process screen

*** Do NOT show the file screen

*** Auto replace the previous post file


Display a transient message  "Post File replaced"



1 Kudo

PLEASE!!! please fix the internal threading portion of the lathe cam, the fact that it practically dose not exist is unbelievably frustrating.

31 Kudos

Hey Guys,


I work as an application engineer . Till now I have been working with 3 axis with Fusion 360 for benchmark which has been really successful. And now our company has started to focus for Fusion 360 ultimate . And during the training I noticed that the Ultimate software doesn't have simulation with the entire machine like HSMworks , SolidCAM as referred to the image below.


Yes the entire machine has to simulate . Especially this will be useful to visualize 4th and 5th axis strategies in the software . Cause the simulation seen in Ultimate especially the 4th axis wrapping strategie's simulation are quite misguiding . Couldn't figure out whether the indexer is rotating or the tool is revolving around the component. Kindly try to bring this in Fusion 360 Ultimate as early as possible . Looking forward for a great update for this feature.




Status: Future Consideration

Marking this as Future consideration to be transparent about how soon we will address this.  


We do need to do this, however, it isn't simply pulling in what we have in HSMWorks.


 As a note, the attached Screenshot is SolidCAM not HSMWorks.

3 Kudos

Variable feedrate

Status: Gathering Support
by Contributor jcsantilli 3 weeks ago |

I would like to suggest a "variable feetrate" on the tool tab with a minimum and a maximum value.

For example in the part that I attached, the tool start cutting a big chunck of material, but when start cutting the dome the passes are very light and would be nice to be able to speed up the process.



1 Kudo
How about introducing Injection & Compression mould simulation features from Moldflow over to Fusion 360 - Induction Heating - Controlled Valve Gate Opening - Best Gate Location & MOULD DESIGN!! (Although not technically a simulation feature - haha)

I think this kind of update to the simulation workspace is very much the logical step forward and would further elevate Fusion 360 in what it can do.

Just a quick shout out to the Fusion 360 team, I think you're all doing a great job. Fusion 360 really is getting better and better.

21 Kudos

Hi Fusion. Gotta say F360 is brillant, best thing since sliced bread


I use it with a DIY 3 axis cnc table that works both as router and as a plasma table. Designed using Fusion


When I used Fusion for plasma cutting I have a problem with cutting sharp angles. The issue is that the plasma jet (and I assume water jet) has a lag of about 15 degrees. so when you take a sharp 90 degree turn it take a while for the jet to catch up. This leads to a under cut, negative rake. So when viewed side on the cut is not 90 degree to the Z plane but at an angle of about 75 degrees


The solution appears to be instead of going round the corner you over shoot, then come back at 45 degrees and then start the next edge. See the red line in the image below. 


2017-01-29 19_10_35-Autodesk Fusion 360.png


By overshooting the corner and then have a new lead in allows the jet time to catch up


The corners look sharp when looking at the Z plane. But when looking at the X or Y plane a distinct angle is visible


Happy to wait since I generally only cut 3mm steel and its not to noticeable


Keep up the great work




Status: Accepted

Godo news, the team has agreed to add this.  

14 Kudos

I understand that variations on this idea are peppered throughout the forum, but it seems like an easy win for your CAM engineers. 


Fusion needs the capacity to add non-cutting arbor features below the teeth of a slitting saw. The editable parameters of the slot mill do not go far enough to describe what amounts to pretty common tooling. 





Status: Future Consideration

Thanks for the idea! We are marking this future consideration since we are currently focusing our efforts on higher priority projects. We'll keep you posted on our progress. 

15 Kudos

A backside chamfer tool is needed. It can be faked by using a Dovetail tool

A double sided one is more useful and cannot be faked.

See this link for an example.

6 Kudos

- Even stepdown box to select for Face Milling when using multiple depths.

- 'Spiral' cutting strategy when Face Milling in Climb or Conventional direction, so that the tool doesn't lift and rapid from one side of the job to the other between cuts to maintain cutting direction with multiple passes.

3 Kudos

When using the Hole feature in Model, after selecting a face or plane to put the hole in, as soon as I rotate the view using the mouse wheel, or even just pan the screen using Ctrl + mouse wheel, I cant select a reference to accurately place a hole in from an edge. This is incredibly frustrating. Also, why cant I select another hole to reference from??


Why is it that when you select a plane or face to sketch on, that the view shifts/rotates to some other completely different face? Im already looking at the face I want to sketch on, that's how I was able to select it, yet the view flies off to somewhere else???


In CAM, when creating a new setup or sometimes editing an original setup, why does flip axis always move the box point? I think the box point should remain where it has been selected by the user.



7 Kudos



if you are in model workspace you can use user defined parameters e.g. for sketch dimensions, dimensions of objects etc..

This is very comfortable. But unfortunately parameters are not available in the CAM workspace.

Even if I create parameters in the model workspace I cannot access them in the CAM workspace e.g. inside toolpath settings.

Lets say I have 8 toolpath. 4 with Lead-In radius 4mm and 4 with Lead-In radius 6mm.

If I later want to change the 4mm to 10mm I have to to it 4 times - for each of the 1st 4 toolpath one time - this is really time consuming.

Better would be to use the parameters. Then I can just change the parameter and all toolpath that use this parameter will update.


BTW: I know the 'multi-edit' feature where I can edit multiple toolpath at once, but this sheet is very big und uncomfortable to use.

I would prefer parameters for CAM as well.



4 Kudos

Unless I am missing something, I can't do an internal chamfer with a boring bar (unsupported tool). Any way we could add support for this?

5 Kudos

Hello Autodesk Experts!


Paul Claus suggested that I submit another idea based on one of my Fusion 360 CAD inquiries.


I would be just super if while simulating in the CAD environment there was the option to have the simulation wait after each tool path (like an M01).


This gives the programmer a bit to look over the results of the tool path that just simulated before moving on to the next. It makes simulation a bit more manageable.





2 Kudos
Trapezoidal threads are created with the wrong angle (currently 60° but should be 30°) which makes them unusable in real life. Before the latest update it was possible to change this in the threaddata folder and also create custom threads that aren't available (even multistart threads could be made with a copy and rotation) but since the latest update this folder has disappeared along with the custom threads I had made. It would be great if this could be restored to allow customising or even better allow custom threads to be input directly in fusion rather than having to edit the xml files.
2 Kudos

Hi Guys,

I could use some help with this - i am using a cnc gang lathe CMS GT27 with 8025 Fagor control

So i have been having this issue for a long time and have asked about it in the past and the response is it is in the post processor. I have tried to make changes and all looked ok for a little bit but when i started trying to cut a radius is where the issue happens the worst. so for the most part i have given up and i come to the realization that it is not the post processor and here is why


1) when setting up the lathe tool holder in edit tool  i select Counter Clock Wise direction but the tool just flips over then i select the orientation to the way it is installed on the Lathe that would be from the X- to 0 not the normal X+ to 0 and then the path generation is unable to create a path. it gets path error and it trying to generate the tool path from the X+ to 0 direction 


2) when i leave the tool oriented from the X+ to 0 but CCW selected, then it creates the code but it uses  G03 and all positive X values.


3) i change the G03 to a G02 and also change the X values to be negative but the radius is still not correct.


So you might ask please upload a the drawing but that is not needed, just make a .5 cylinder 4" inch long and a .25 radius on the end and you will have the drawing also use any post processor that comes with fusion - i use Haas Lathe same issue


use any tool you want. but fusion 360 will not be able to  produce the code to use the tool from the negative X direction. only works good as long as the tool is from the X positive direction.


It would be nice if the Fusion group would address this issue instead of claiming it is a post processor issue. It is not - it is related to a core limitation in the software it self !!!!!


Then you guys say -> fix this in the post processor.


So to fix this in the post processor is the wrong place and could also be dangerous. if you make the mods and get used to using it that way and then add a tool from the other direction and  crash. (yes you should verify the tool path every time but if ignored could cause some issues.) so then have different post processors for each tool variation. pain in the ..


So the root of the issue is located in the Lathe Tool Edit page under the setup tab and it lets you select witch way the tool is pointing but if you select the lower arrow (X- ) it will still put the tool above the center line of the material. It should drop the tool below the center line to be correct and then generate the tool path in the Negative X. otherwise that selection in that menu is useless  and should be removed. also to add a picture of a peace of material in the middle of the arrows for orientation would be good.


as far as The clockwise or counter clock wise checkbox, It should be changed to read tool facing upright or upside down - the spindle direction should be derived from the direction the tool is pointing at the material and if it is upright or upside down to do it correctly, and then place the tool in the drawing in the correct orientation.


i wish the fusion group would address the issue instead of passing it off as a post processor issue - it is  a fusion issue and needs to be fixed, so far it looks like you know it but do not address or

maybe have never used it to machine anything and don't see the importance.. I guess if your market is just hobbyist then who cares  whether it is correct or not but if you are trying to compete with real professional software then it should be fixed. 


Its funny, i have seen a lot of the help vids put out by people from autodesk and showing how to use the software, how to use the CAM processor And it has been very helpful, But i don't think they have ever cut a single chip with the code it generates. it would be nice to see if the developers that made the Videos could Actuality use to make a part from the generated code.


So please fix the issue in Fusion, it is not in the post because that is not the correct way to fix a programming error.   



I need a crow bar to pry with but i could use a screw driver to do it, Is that the right way ?    No!


Please let me know if any other ideas to fix this issue

Thanks for any input


2 Kudos

After working with the CAM in Fusion 360 a bit I found one thing which really bothers me a lot. It is the fact that when-ever you make a change to an operation or the setup the operation(s) are marked invalid and need to be recalculated.


I think there are some common situations where I do not understand why operations need to be recalculated. For example:


  • Change the program name/comment at the setup
  • Change the spindle RPM or the feed rate for an operation
  • Change the cooling settings for an operation
  • (Maybe) change the Saftiy Hight of an operation
  • If you use surfaces as blocking surfaces you often change the visibility of them, e.g. hide them. Every time you do that, all your operations are marked invalid.

So, it would be cool if you could improve the logic to decide whether or not an operation really is invalid.


14 Kudos

When using the 2D > Engrave tool in the CAM workspace, generated paths are very far from optimal.  Some paths result in 90%+ unnecessary movement.  This is most obvious when engraving text.


I make some simple signs with names on them.  Below is a small screenshot of part of the tool path (I don't want to include names, so I can create another screenshot with generic text if needed). Just for some perspective on the cost, the word "Always" is about 5 inches long and the body is roughly 30 inches.  Each time it does an unnecessary movement, it's not just a little movement, it's traveling in some cases 20 inches just to come back to where it was!


Let me summarize the movements below (sorry if i missed any):

  1. In the word Always, it enters on the y
  2. Goes off and does another letter y on the other side of the body 
  3. Returns to Always and engraves the comma
  4. Moves up to the letter l (L) and engraves it
  5. Goes off and does a letter L on the the other side of the body, followed by another letter near that one
  6. Moves down PAST Always, to another word, engraves one letter
  7. Moves up PAST Always to another word engraves one letter
  8. Moves up to Always, engraves the letter A
  9. Moves down to another word engraves one letter
  10. Moves back to Always and engraves A followed by W (enters W from the middle...)
  11. Engraves the letter S


Please optimize these movements, or provide us with a method to optimize them manually.

Thank you so much! 




P.S.  I love Fusion, this is just my one gripe!

Status: Archived
4 Kudos

Foam cut

Status: Gathering Support
by Explorer rideonbeat a month ago |

It would be great if we can use fusion 360 to generate g-code for wire foam cutting, or if we can control the path inputs and outputs maintaining the plasma/laser/water cutter on.

7 Kudos

Press brake CAM

Status: Gathering Support
by Enthusiast bryan5 February |

With sheet metal just around the corner and the CAM features to cut and nest on water jet, plasma, and lasers being added as well; I wanted to know if there is a future plan to add bending CAM to Fusion for press brakes.


In my opinion this is the logical next step for the sheet metal work flow.


Thank you

6 Kudos


I recently purchased a uniquely-shaped boring bar for my slant-bed lathe to do some concave facing work, and Fusion doesn't have a pre-packaged toolholder in the turning tool library to accommodate this. (The end of the bar has a 27.5' clearance angle from vertical, just to give an idea.) A fellow Fusion user suggested to me that I just add 10' degrees to the tool orientation angle either in the tool setup itself in the library or in the Profile operation itself. The problem I ran into with this is that Fusion seems to be doing some radius comp and the parts are coming out oversized on the OD, and undersized on their IDs. Simulation and the posted code both reflect this. If I leave the tool "as-is" with the incorrect 17.5' end angle, then the simulation and posted code are fine. (Aside from it not correctly simulating whether the insert will clear or not.



Fusion Team - do you guys have any plans in the future to introduce custom lathe toolholders, or maybe expanding the pre-packaged options to include a wider range of oddball geometries?



See attached for the drawing of the bar [and VBMT 21.51 insert] I'm using, as well as how the toolpaths look on a simpler dummy part with and without the tool orientation adjustment. For reference, the OD of that section of the part is 0.507".

5 Kudos

Would like to see a Preview button next to the OK and Cancel buttons on every toolpath Edit dialogue box.


I'm fairly new at F360 and 90% of the time, my toolpath doesn't generate properly. Most of the time, it doesn't generate at all! LOL So I have to go back into the Edit window a handful of times.


This would also give the user a chance to tweak toolpath subtleties before moving on.

3 Kudos

I would like to have the option to be able to pick any point on my model to set my x,y,z coordinates and to be able to rotate around an axis to position my x,y,x as I wish. This method makes it faster imo to set work coordinates in any area of my part instead of clicking on planes or selecting predetermined coordinate planes. 

3 Kudos

Hello everybody,
Regarding the CAM module, I would have a really essential suggestion.
This is about the cutting data of a tool.
As an example I call a toroidal carbide torch for roughing pockets.
The radial and lateral infeed of the tool I have to specify each time in the individual milling operations, which is unfortunately very annoying.
Each manufacturer has its own cutting values.
It makes sense to enter the maximum radial and axial infeed in the tool definition / tool library.
And once you have defined 20-30 different tools, it will be annoying to pick out the respective deliveries.

My tip would be if the selection of the tool in the menu the fields are grayed out or locked as default and would be unlocked by hand for any adjustments.


LG Volker

Here is an example from Autodesk Powermill.

41 Kudos

This is an example of a completely useless tooltip - adding the words "specifies the" to the field name doesn't make it helpful.  In this case it would be useful to know what the helical ramp diameter is used for and how it affects the cut - how does it relate to the size of the bit?  Is there anything else you can tell me about this setting to help me figure out what its useful values might be?  I'm not really asking about this particular setting, I'm saying that these are the questions that should be asked about every tooltip to make sure it's helpful.



Status: Accepted

Yes, we are looking into these now and getting them updated. 

31 Kudos

APPLY Button for CAM operations

Status: Archived
by Enthusiast macca5 on ‎10-07-2016 01:14 AM

An APPLY button when configuring CAM operations would make altering settings much more efficient.


For example, if your are altering tool step over or number of finishing cuts it would be better to click APPLY to see the results and not OK and then have to reopen the operation to re-edit.



Status: Archived

I need to archive this one.  While there is a "User story" here with a workflow that needs to be improved as noted by the votes.


However, this particular solution to the problem does not align with the fusion workflows.


We will continue to provide an instant preview in cases where that is possible.  We will also continue to improve the previews of the end result for more complex toolpath calculations.



8 Kudos

Hi everyone,


I'm a bit stuck in the thread milling capabilities within Fusion. I've already asked in the CAM section for help, but there doesn't seem to be a solution ready. (


When thread milling, fusion is always looking at the diameter of the modeled hole, and an offset is possible. This however isn't working well when sometimes holes are sized differently. An m10 hole can be 8.5 mm (standard drill size) or 8.376 mm (the minor diameter) or simply 10 mm.


What i would really like some more control over how a hole should be thread milled.

Regardless of the hole size, or even a point should be enough to thread mill.


We need a few things:

  • D (Major diameter) 
  • d (minor diameter)
  • Depth
  • Pitch
  • Angle (for tapered threads)
  • Climb/conventional milling
  • Type of radius compensation
  • Type of feedrate (toolcenter or outside of tool)
  • How many teeth a tool has
  • Spring passes (with or without finishing offset)
  • possibility to use different kinds of thread mills (multiple threads, drill-thread mill, indexed mill etc.)





The use of the cutter in this video would be great, 4 seconds for a completed M10 hole!

And also you can download their programming tool from here


Or these:



4 Kudos

One of the most frustrating things about working with Fusion 360 CAM is when I try to create or edit an operation & I get the error "No toolpath created". This means that SOMETHING is wrong in the operation setup.

A simple (and obvious) example is when I try to cut a slot with a tool that is too large to fit the slot. OK, I can figure that one out, but it would be far more helpful if the error said "selected tool too large", or something like that.

Far more often though, I get this useless error message, and have no clue as to where to begin to look. I have wasted hours & hours struggling to get a usable toolpath, with absolutely no help or guidance from Fusion. 

So, my idea/request is for Autodesk to provide error messages that actually provide useful information about what is wrong with the current setup. I understand that this may not be as simple to do as it sounds, but surely the software can produce more information for the user than a message that means "Nope, that didn't work. Guess again."

Alternatively, it would help if there was more complete, comprehensive documentation available on this subject. Currently the online docs provide a generic sentence or two about each available parameter. This is rarely (if ever) helpful when trying to sleuth out a "No toolpath created" error. 

I have watched every video that I can find even remotely pertaining to this subject & while each one may contain a tip or two, this is far from a comprehensive way of dealing with this issue.

The good news is that Fusion 360 already has a built-in mechanism for providing useful, in-contex information about a particular error (ie, the window that now says "No toolpath created").  Imagine how powerful this mechanism would be if it provided a message that pointed to the actual source of the error.....

9 Kudos

When you choose "select same diameter", please show how many total instances (e.g. number of holes) are selected.

5 Kudos

Asking for "Select Same Diameter" option with Thread operation like the drilling operation.

4 Kudos

I have been looking for this feature in every CAM software I've ever used - Volumetric feedrate. Rather than telling the software how many IPM or IPT, tell it what my maximum MRR for a given tool (or operation) is, and let it find an acceptable feedrate on its own (with some limits, of course). For example, If I am running a 3d adaptive path at 100ipm and 1" DOC, but then go to a .125" fine step down, I want to be able to run much faster for the small step downs. If the software were to look at a DOC / WOC / RPM as the DOC is decreasing, it could maintain the MRR of the largest DOC. Additionally, some geometry tends to generate an extremely narrow WOC for a given DOC even though the allowable step over may be much larger. On complex geometry, this could save SIGNIFICANT amounts of time.

23 Kudos

Save CAM Simulation as a Body

Status: Future Consideration
by Explorer jmcgee3GRY3 on ‎10-17-2016 07:10 AM

Being able to save CAM simulations as a body would:


  • Allow users to quickly check dimensions of remaining stock and therefore tool path clearance, without modeling the fixture
    • This would be particularly useful for low production volume parts.
    • For example, the clearance of a workstop that protrudes .250 inches from the face of a vise jaw could be checked against the remaining stock after a 2D contour with tabs strategy has been used.
  • Create a quick way to model stock for multiple setup parts
    • Fixturing for the remaining operation(s) could be designed more efficiently.
  • Allow more accurate representations of the final part without extra modeling
    • Features such as fillets and chamfers would be generated based on tooling limitations, and would therefore be more accurate. This could lead to more accurate part drawings in assemblies and renderings.
Status: Future Consideration

Thanks for your idea! This is something we definitely want to provide, and is part of a bigger plan where we have derived assets for not just CAM but Simulation, 2D Drawings, etc. Ultimately we imagine a scenario where you have 1 model that contain derived parts for the different states in the manufacturing process. This is a big project and is still a ways out, so I'm changing this to future consideration. 

3 Kudos

New to F360, mostly find it an amazingly pleasant surprise compared to what I previously used (I-DEAS), but really miss a key functionality.


I-DEAS used a single-click of the middle mouse button to variously mean "OK", "done", "done with selection", etc. which saved a lot of the mousing around otherwise required to complete selections, exit a form, etc.

7 Kudos

Not sure how everyone else handles the CAM side of prototyping but almost every new design I machine has its own dedicated "environment" file for CAM with my machine\table\vise models and my designs linked in. It sure would be nice to have the update references button available in the CAM work-space so I don't have to always switch to the model work-space just to click a button and then switch back.




3 Kudos

It would be great if post processor settings could be saved with the individual file. 


For example:

One of my routers doesn't understand helical moves - so I need to disable them on my post options. If I move to a different computer to get my work done, the setting is turned back on. It would be nice if the settings traveled with the file.



This is also useful in case of post edits. I have an issue now where files work great previously, but an update to the post changed behaviors on my machine and the new behavior isn't desirable.



5 Kudos

I would like to suggest the CAM software remember where a previously posted file is located.  I regularly jump back and forth between CAM files and the Output Folder only remembers the location it was pointed to the last time a file was posted.  I post my CAM files in customer named folders and sub folders with part numbers.


I post a file for customer "123" and then work on a CNC program for customer "456".  While working on "456" I need to go back to "123" and post again.  Now the Output Folder is now pointing to "456" location.  Sure would be nice for the software to remember where "123" is since I have already posted to the "123" location.  This would save time so I would not have to browse back to the location I want the file posted to.

10 Kudos

In the CAM section, tool library there is a way of editing a tool spanning several operations in your setups.

One thing i ran across was i broke a 3.5mm endmill on a setup that hade 20+ operations.
And needed to replace each everyone of em with a 3mm endmill. That is one hour of my life i never get back.
A right click "Replace tool" option in the tool manager menu for the specific document would do just that. And then you could mass edit all similar operations in one go instead with the compare and edit option.

2 Kudos

Since the Fusion360 installation model is webdeploy and is fluid in its installation location, this proposal is to either standardize or ease modification and locations of installed items.


For example of the problem, suppose I want to edit the GreyRoom.xml like mentioned here.  How do I go about finding it?


#1.  Posts should be installed in C:\ProgramData\Fusion360\Posts instead of C:\Users\Name\AppData\Local\Autodesk\webdeploy\production\890691bd91ea0296c1b94572fdc7dda4ba2e48f0\Applications\CAM360\Data\Posts today and something else tomorrow.


#2.  Custom Posts could be installed in C:\ProgramData\Fusion360\CustomPosts with an easy way to access both from CAM.


#3.  The help dropdown could include a link to the current install directory for different items.


Note:  Above applies to windows, not sure how this would work on other platforms.



1 Kudo

any chance fusion can stop defaulting back to the speeds and feed once a cutter size has been tweaked as i set a manual feed and speed to suit my job from the defaults speeds and feeds given ,it keeps the depths and off sets so why cant it keep to the speed i have given manually,once i tweak a cutter size because of cutter wear i have to spend time that is money to manually go tho all my program to adjust every setting




to save our company time and most important MONEY  

10 Kudos

Better Thread Mill Tool Geometry

Status: Gathering Support
by Advocate russtuff on ‎12-05-2016 09:43 PM

1. If I'm setting up the tool correctly, the first line is called "Diameter" but I think it should be more specifically labeled as "Cut Diameter". Yes I see it says "Cutting Edge" right above it.


2. The tool's Neck Diameter appears to be automatically scaled based on some calculation using the "Diameter" value. This has caused some confusion for me when setting up a tool, and when I simulate the cut I tend to get interference (red) which makes me nervous. I've worked around it though. You'll see in the image below that the cutting geometry is tiny, and disproportionate to the Neck Diameter of the tool I'm holding in my hand.


My tool is the TM8 at:

I would like to have the ability to specify the Neck Diameter and the Cut Diameter separately. And while we're at it....


3. I would like to be able to specify the "Crest" too (see above link).



23 Kudos

A quick CAM idea that would be very useful.


How about being able to visually manipulate/tweak the CAM toolpaths with your mouse (after the CAM paths have been generated with the editor)? In the same way that you can Push/Pull and extrusion with your mouse, using the Push/Pull arrows, it would be great to fine-tune the toolpaths in CAM by right-clicking your mouse to make the adjustment. The changes can be made visually or a simpler dialog box (similar to what is appearing in CAM edit already, but simpler), would allow for numerical changes. Just right-click on the toolpath and a simpler dialog box would appear to change standard settings


I think this would be great for:
- tweaking individual lead-in and lead-out paths/arcs/lengths - which would allow for more 'creative' fixturing, or if you are simply trying to avoid hitting a fastener.
- Adjusting feeds in certain toolpath zones
- applying bezier handles to toolpaths for more accurate tweaking - especially useful for defining where the tool enters and exits the path
- allow for tighter nesting of parts


Just a suggestion - not sure if this was discussed before. The idea came up when struggling to 3D Contour organic surfaces that intersected with geometric ones, and wishing I could just move a couple of the paths with my mouse. This would be designed to help tweak the toolpath after it's been generated. 


CAM Adjustment.JPG






Status: Future Consideration

This is an excellent idea and one that we may revisit at some time.


However, at present, this is not something we will be able to dedicate resources too in the near to medium term.



9 Kudos

Fusion 360 for Business Hybrid Cloud

Status: Gathering Support
by Advocate bensbenz on ‎12-09-2016 03:49 PM

In light of a recent post by @prabakarm found here


which further explains that just "storing files locally" is really not ideal considering how the entire system works, and considering there are power users of the Fusion that simply having recent data on one machine may not be enough should there be an outage I would like to propose a Hybrid Cloud solution.


Basically Fusion 360 with no cloud would suck. Its not as easy as simply having local copies of files, its just not designed that way and for many good reasons. Basically what I think would be great is if we had a Business level subscription. Included with that would an appliance, be it hardware and software, or simply a virtual appliance that would live on site, local at your place of business. Said appliance would be the middle man between you, the internet and the Autodesk cloud. As long as you were onsite at your place of business, an internet outage or cloud outage would have no effect on access to your data. Fusion would behave exactly the same as if there was no outage, because its simply talking to the appliance. When the internet or cloud came back online, all the data is synced.


This solution would have numerous benefits:

Its a local copy of your data without sacrifices in functionality
The concept is proven by many other cloud services
Client performance should be enhanced for things like autosave (we are only going as far as the local network)

Perhaps you could also leverage said appliance for offloading local sim and rendering


I know for my own business having this implemented would instantly elevate Fusion 360 in my mind as being enterprise class software and just about eliminate my concerns with my data in the cloud.

8 Kudos

post processor subscription

Status: Gathering Support
by Advocate mfeathers on ‎12-16-2016 01:14 PM

It would be nice to be able to subscribe (notification of updates) to post processors of choice on


While I'm running a modified version of one of the Autodesk posts, the base version I used is well over a year old.

4 Kudos

I think it would be a good idea to be able to import a CAD model for a tool holder. I find it easier to model the holder than have to enter a list of dimensions.

15 Kudos

CAM Workflow Improvements

Status: Future Consideration
by Mentor on ‎10-24-2016 04:40 AM

As an active participant of the CAM forum, I would say that hand's down, the most common problem we see is that of "My post failed, it said something about tool orientation"

This always comes down to one thing: People dive right into programming their part, but they never bothered to do a Setup. So when their tool is trying to mill along the Z axis, they think the solution is to turn on Tool Orientation. This is clearly wrong and the tooltip tells you what it's for, but apparently that is ignored or misunderstood.


I propose something along the lines of these options:

1) Grey out all the toolpath icons until a Setup is performed.

2) If that's not desired by the community, perhaps clicking an operation could prompt a pop-up window informing you that you haven't established your WCS yet and would you like to? This box MUST have a button to click for more information, perhaps linking to a very short video or text explaining what the WCS is for and why you need to set it up before programming


I mean, we all love the easy padding of kudos and "Your answer was accepted as solution" but I'd rather just see the community not even hit that problem in the first place

What are your thoughts @Steinwerks @HughesTooling @al.whatmough ?

Status: Future Consideration

Hey all, great conversation here. Marking this as Future Consideration as something we'll plan for. We need to get our ducks in a row before we can commit to this being accepted. More to come. 

24 Kudos

Form Tool Support for Tool Library

Status: Accepted
by Explorer msheridan523 on ‎08-23-2016 09:02 AM

The "Form Tool" option from HSMexpress to support custom tool profiles; like tread mills, or other odd shape mills. This would be a great benefit to make building a tool library. It can be confusing how to enter tools, especially for new users and those that are new to CAM in general.

Status: Accepted

Thread tools will be added in the November release.


Custom form tool remains in the backlog.


2 Kudos

When you are in the CAM workspace and switches between different operations. You see the tool, holder and toolpath.

I whould love to be able to directly click on a point on the toolpath to move the tool. And use the Mouse leftclick and drag left and right to move the tool around the path. Like you are able to when you are in the Simulate.

It not always you need the stock simulation, and this whould be like a simulate lite thats faster to access. 



7 Kudos

CAM usability improvement suggestions

Status: Gathering Support
by Explorer MaxB4D5Y on ‎12-19-2016 09:38 AM

This is an amazing piece of software and I appreciate all the work that has gone into it. Here are few suggestions that would make my work easier. 


A tool isometric view button would be really useful.


In the tool library, storing the maximum ramp angle of a tool would simplify things for most operations.


In 2D bore add an option to bore from Bottom to top (this can be done with a thread milling cycle but is not ideal)


In the face function add in a spiral facing option. (side note, why does the face function always use a square or rectangular bounding box even when round stock is selected in the setup?)


In the drill cycle the bore milling function does not pick up a diameter off the selected face or hole which is kind of weird. In the same function it asks for a Pitch as in thread milling it would be more useful to ask for a ramp angle.



1 Kudo


sometimes it is so much quicker to just place a job roughly 'square' with x and y coordinates and make the G68 sort it out. 


3 Kudos

I use both ArtCAM-Standard 2017 and Fusion 360 to create designs and tool paths for my CNC Router.


I would like to share tools (i.e. Cutters or bits) between the two Autodesk applications.  I use ArtCAM for more artistic types of designs and Fusion 360 for more CAD type parts.  Since the output I use for both is Gcode to run on my CNC, I dislike having to create duplicate tools in each program's tool library.  I have quite a few bits and have implemented my own tool numbers and labels for them.  I, like most, buy my bits from a number of different suppliers, and most of my bits are not included in the default tool library provided in each program.


Since Autodesk has access to the file format for both tool libraries, it should be straightforward to allow for exporting and importing the tool library into a common file format or at least synchronizing the tool library between the two applications.  Based on other forums I follow, there are quite a few customers that use both ArtCAM and Fusion 360.  Importing and exporting to a format such as excel or CSV would help, although a format that can handle complex bit geometry would be preferred (could still be done in CSV or Excel).  Both ArtCAM and Fusion 360 allow for custom bit geometry, as well as feed and speed data to be stored.


Of course integration among all applicable Autodesk applications should be the goal, ArtCAM and Fusion 360 are what I am currently using.

18 Kudos

Build Fusion for Ubuntu

Status: Archived
by Explorer dubstar-04 on ‎09-23-2016 01:34 PM

Fusion is the best CAD Cam software I have ever used and it would be amazing if it worked on Ubuntu which is the best OS. 

Status: Archived

We do not plan to build a Linux native client. However we are working on a browser access point for Fusion and that will work on any WebGL enabled browser (see for a very early stage preview) and we see that as the way forward for Linux users.



6 Kudos

Roughing strategies.

Status: Gathering Support
by Enthusiast andreas on ‎12-26-2016 04:17 AM

I'm missing roughing strategies more and more when im doing CAM work with fusion360. The ability to do deep slot plunge milling with a large insert tool that is not center cutting for example.

Would make it possible to remove a heap of material before going in and claening up with a more traditional tool path.

2 Kudos

Currently if I have a bunch of operations to run at a tilted axis I use the Tool Orientation setting and place all those operations in a folder to override the Fixture #. 


Which is fine. I use create derived operation to avoid setting up the tool orientation over and over again. But, I occasionally have to go adjust what angle the operations run at. Which when you have 20+ operations, require you go to into each and every operation and re-select references and becomes very time consuming for such a simple task.


Since I can already right click a folder and override my workoffset, why not let me set a "master tool orientation" for all operations in that folder?  Then we would not need to worry about all that extra work and it would speed up my life and I'd be super happy. I'll slip you a twenty if you can make this happen for me. 


We do a lot of 5-axis work and this is one of my least favorite things about doing 5-axis in fusion.

5 Kudos

It'd be great to have the option of keeping a toolpath from being worked in the simulation. Maybe a lightbulb or something to toggle it? Sometimes I have a few extra long toolpaths (plus extra long to scrub past) that has no bearing on what I'm checking out smack dab in the middle of an op, and alt + clicking every relevant toolpath gets pretty tedious. 


Bonus graphic because why not:


36 Kudos

Toolpath trimming

Status: Future Consideration
by Contributor andreas.kadelbach on ‎05-26-2016 02:57 AM

Generating a toolpath (especially in 3D) often results in some small, unwanted toolmoves.  In HSMWorks you have an option to trim the toolpath in order to remove this areas from the toolpath. This is much quicker than modifying the parameters several times, hoping the tool moves only where you want it to move. 

It would be great if this feature find its way into Fusion360. 




Status: Future Consideration

This is in our backlog to do.  I have placed it as future consideration until our developers start the work on this.

30 Kudos

hallo, fusion


since last week I am just clicking and clicking working on this architectural model.. together about 20 thousand clicks only just to select  contours one by one by 2d contour or 2d engrave


please can you URGENTLY add functionality for multiple contour selection? :)


many thanks





Status: Accepted

This is in-progress. We will keep you posted on this in future what's news and this thread. 

9 Kudos

I propose an option to right-click on a Setup, choose "Machining Time" and show a list of each operation within the setup and its machining time.    This detail is very useful when looking for ways to optimize CAM or simply FIX a mistake (e.g. you have a feedrate at 2 IPM instead of 20 in a drill op).  

5 Kudos

I think it would be a good addition to be able to select multiple chains with the Drag Selection tool within the CAM module.

multi selection.jpgespecially when you are doing engraving on a surface.


this would aid in being able to speedup work flow and also reduce the chance of missing a chain if you have to select each one individually like at the moment.






1 Kudo

Hello Autodesk Experts!


Paul Claus suggested that I submit another idea based on one of my Fusion 360 CAD inquiries.


I would be just super if while simulating in the CAD environment there was the option to have the simulation wait after each tool path.


This gives the programmer a bit to look over the results of the tool path that just simulated before moving on to the next. It makes simulation a bit more manageable.





1 Kudo

We are facing the lack of an advance finish or 3D-equivi distance type finishing toolpath in milling. Sometimes we run a finish tool path for walls and we like to run it on flat or steep faces as well. If we make a toolpath with horizontal distance between passes (step over) and vertical distance between passes (step depth) at same time so it will give us a complete finish on entire part. 

9 Kudos

When cutting any wood with a CNC router (especially open grained wood like walnut or mahogany), I find there is a high risk of pullouts when the tool is cutting across the grain. Pullouts are pits in the surface created when bits of wood are pulled out by the tool rather than cut smoothly.


My work-around has been to slow the whole cut down, take several finishing passes, and use very expensive and sharp tools. But wood can vary a lot from piece to piece. So, I might think I've got my tool path locked down, and then a piece comes through with a looser grain system and I get pullouts again. These pullouts can ruin a piece if they are too deep to be sanded out, which can be depressing if it happens to a $300 piece of curly walnut.


Cutting example.jpg


I would like to be able to slow the feed rate when the cutter is moving ACROSS the grain. This  feature would be very closely related to Maximum Directional Change. I would implement it as another line in the Feed Optimization menu by having the user select a reference line or edge that runs parallel to the grain of  the work piece and then enter an angle of motion (or angle of tangent if on a curve) relative to this reference beyond which the Reduced Feedrate is used. 


This would be very useful to woodworkers, who always plan the grain direction early in the design process. Even plywood would benefit, because the top veneer can be particularly weak and prone to splintering off when cut across the grain.  This would also be of interest to anyone cutting any composite material that has oriented reinforcing. 



46 Kudos

Different setting apply for cutting in wood and hardwood than the available Material choices in the CAM "Select Tool". Adding wood as an option would be very helpfull to seperate wood tool settings from other materials.


Status: Accepted

As @Laurens-3DTechDraw rightly points out.  This is the dirrection the tool library is going in.



6 Kudos

Activate Component Improvement

Status: Gathering Support
by Participant thetechbros2015 on ‎12-16-2016 12:04 AM

Some times when making a Quick part up Or Programming the CAM for a part . I'm jumping between parts editing sketches, features and Operations. I forget to activate the component or operation in CAM and it ends up taking longer because  sketches don't show up for the parts they are suppose to be for. There  just isn't an easy way at a glance to see what part or cam is activated, I find my self hovering over all my parts in large assemblies trying to see were I screwed up and were I was actually editing  .

A Simple improvement could be like not to auto hide the dot that you select when you activate a part that way it will always be visible at a quick glance.


Best regards,


       Logan McCleary


7 Kudos

I currently teach Fusion 360 at a couple local MakerSpaces and I'm consistently impressed at just how positively the community responds to what they can do with it.  The students are always amazed at how simple it is to get their ideas from their head to being realized as a 3D model on screen.  And being able to edit it after the fact with parameters or history?  They just light up!


Now... the CAM side of things?  Not so much!


One of the top complaints I get from the students is it’s waaaay to complex to actually set up the CAM to use with their personal, hobbyist mills.  I would say a good 80% of them actually gave up trying to get it to work and end up looking elsewhere which is a shame considering how powerful your CAM is.  But it is too complex!!  Heck, even I've struggled with the overwhelming amount of admittedly powerful, but not-for-my-needs settings that are present.


You have to remember while a power-user Machinist will appreciate that, one of the appeals of Fusion 360 is all that power is approachable for the hobbyist, and the hobbyist has no idea what half of those things mean!  My take is set up simple, safe 'Beginners Wizard‘ that configures all of that for you.


For instance, say they have a simple 1/4 four-flute end-mill that came with the hobby mill they purchased off of Kickstarter. They know it's a 1/4" four-flute endmill and that their machine is based on GRBL, but that's the total extent of their CAM knowledge.  Fusion 360 could start by asking about the material.  It asks the type: Wood, Plastic or Metal?  They choose 'Wood'.  Next... Hard wood (give examples), Soft wood (again, give examples), MDF or Plywood. Since they have Pine, they would choose 'Soft'.


Next, ask them simple questions about their end-mill which they can probably answer just by looking at it.  What type is it? Flat, Round, Slot-cutting, etc?  They'd choose 'Flat' What's its diameter? 1/4".  How many flutes?  They look and count four.  How deep can it cut?  They see it will cut about a half-inch deep. How far below the chuck/collet does it extend?  About an inch or so.


You then prompt them to save that in their tool library which should *only* show the tools they have set up, not the ridiculous catalog you have now.  That can still be available, but you need a dedicated 'My tools' area to keep things simple. Also, let them add personal notes about each too. (e.g. 'Use this for Pine' so next time they know to go right there.)


After the above, your software would infer safe settings of everything else.  It doesn’t need to choose the fastest/most optimized/best settings and actually should err on the side of caution/consistency because again, these types of individuals aren’t looking to crank out performance.  They aren't thinking of the most efficient cut depths or speeds... they aren't thinking of how can they maximize tool life by adjusting tool paths or how to shorten job-time for manufacturing.  The *only* thing they are thinking is 'How can I make this doohickey I just designed get cut out of this block of pine I picked up at Home Depot?  I really want to see it work!!'


Don't believe me?  Ask them about 3D printers!  They don't mind staring at a print that takes well over eight-hours to complete their job because they love watching their ideas being created seemingly out of nothing.  It keeps things fun and entertaining, but most of all, engaging, especially when they’re just getting started.


Then later, when they really start to understand the intricacies of CAM and *want* to do that advanced stuff, they can start to peel back the covers by switching to ‘Advanced’ mode which would present your UI as it appears now.  Best of both worlds kind of thing.


But you'll never get there with an 80% attrition rate right at the very beginning.


Just some food for thought.