Tool Library Organization Proposal

[ARTHUR-HM]

I mocked up what I personally think would help organize the mess that is the tool library when you're working on parts with multiple setups. 

The majority of my parts use multiple setups, and some setups get bounced between different machines. So tool #s are usually numbered as a per setup basis so any guy in the shop can grab it and load the tools needed numerically. 

The problem now is when looking at the tool library with multiple setups, all the tools are just mixed together, making it a mess to sort through. in the image below, I've renamed each operation to help show how messy and unorganized the library view is.

My proposal is to add another drop down under the document file you're working on in the libraries panel on the left. So in this example, "Tool Library Setup Examples". See Image below...

Now when you click on the design file you're working on in the library panel, each setup will have it's tools grouped together. MUCH easier to figure out what goes where. If you're using the same tool in different setups, that shouldn't be a problem, just list it under both setups. Taking it one step further, if we could then click on the setup name in the left column, it would then only show tools for that setup, as seen below...

I was going to submit it to Request a Feature, but figured I'd get some feedback first. What do you think? Make sense?

[LibertyMachine]

The organization of the current file library is such a mess when dealing with more than one op, lets be frank. It doesn't take several ops and dozens of tools for it to become a cluster fudge. Two ops and less than a dozen tools and it's a fiasco.

I think anything that moves towards better order and control is a win in my book.

That being said, I know the team is currently working on Toll Library 2.0 (or is it 3.0?) and they've hinted at better organization abilities. Perhaps @jeff.pek or @al.whatmough would be willing to give us a very brief word or two in regards to tool management?

-EDIT- And i do it the same way. With the exception of my probe, no tool ever remains in the same pocket for more than one job. Always renumbering stuff

[Steinwerks]

There is an idea sort of following this line of thought in the Ideastation: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/hsm-ideas/structured-part-tool-library/idi-p/6849490

[ARTHUR-HM]

Whoops, I think @al.whatmough moved the wrong post. I see he made this into an idea post for me, but took the wrong reply and posted my response to the idea page, not the full idea. 

[al.whatmough]

It was supposed to pull over the initial post plus the conversation.  I am not sure what happened there, I am sorry.

[georgehudetz]

@ARTHUR-HM thanks for posting this - your timing is excellent.  As has been mentioned, we are in the process of improving the tool library & related topics.  We've had some short discussions here among the dev team, and we all agree your idea is excellent, and that we will incorporate it, in some fashion, in our new designs.

Since I'm new here, I'd like to give a quick introduction.  I'm on the Fusion User Experience team, and a 20 year veteran of Autodesk (Both Inventor and Fusion).  However, I'm quite new to CAM, which, as a UX designer, has both advantages and disadvantages.  Suffice to say that I may ask some very basic questions from time to time to make sure I understand your needs correctly.  In any event, I'm really looking forward to working with this community and the (excellent!) CAM team and to make CAM better.

To that end, I have to ask - how do you feel about having to go to the Tool Library dialog to learn about the contents of a given document?  As  a UX guy, I find myself thinking "Shouldn't the Tool Library just display what is in the libraries?"  Of course practical considerations often over-ride such concerns, but I it would be possible - for example - to show a list of tools in the browser for each Setup, in a folder under the Setup, arranged as you have shown.  Any thoughts on that approach as compared to doing this in the Tool Library dialog?  Other ideas?

Thanks again,

George

[LibertyMachine]

Welcome @georgehudetz!

The issue currently, is that the Tool Library shows everything that is available in the active document(s) with no means of displaying only the tools used in the current Setup. This causes problems when you are renumbering tools, editing tools, even just selecting tools. Since all of our tool selections and edits take place through the Tool Library dialog, it would make sense (to me) that any interface would be present in that screen. This doesn't need to be a specific drop-down or sub menu, but there really needs to be something there. 

Re-reading your statement:  As  a UX guy, I find myself thinking "Shouldn't the Tool Library just display what is in the libraries?"  Yeah, it should display what in the library, but what about active Setups, or the last 4 Setups for the current job, where do they get displayed?

Are you thinking along the lines of another tab in the library or perhaps another interface for organizing operations? I would think the implementation of additional interfaces would be more time consuming that a menu on the left as @ARTHUR-HM suggests.

Do you have any mock-ups you could share that we could chew on?

[ARTHUR-HM]

@georgehudetz Thank you for chiming in. I'm happy to hear that the idea was liked and that we could expect the library to move in that direction a bit. A tool folder for each setup in the browser wouldn't be a bad idea. There would be use cases where that wouldn't be ideal. Some of my parts required a ton of setups, and a ton of tooling. In addition, those parts have lots of bodies and sketches I'm using to reference. It's already a chore for those types of parts to go through and open, close, open, close, on all the tiny drop down arrows. This also then forces a ton of scrolling up and down in the browser. So adding in a tool folder would just add to all the extra up and down and opening and closing. 

Something like that wouldn't be a bad idea for when using smaller parts with less setups and tooling. So implementing that wouldn't be a bad idea. I can always ignore those folders when I have such a large list in the browser and use them when things are less chaotic. 

You make a valid point about the tool library being only a library of tooling, and that logically that makes more sense. But use case, the tool library comes in handy having the libraries and setup tools mixed together. I often find myself copy and pasting tools right from my libraries into the design library. It is also nice to see both for referencing purposes and other use cases. So eliminating the setup tools in there wouldn't be ideal, at least for my workflow. I just need better organization.

One thing I will note about having a tool folder in the browser under each setup, is if this were implemented with a quick way to override a tool diameter, that would make my shop very happy. They hate opening up the tool library and finding the tool to edit a diameter if it needs changing. It's a cumbersome workflow for something that is done in a job shop constantly. I absolutely love Fusion, the issues I have are only small workflow things that would speed up my shop a ton. So anyway I can help achieve those goals, I'm all in. So I'm glad to see how much effort you and your team put into listening to your users. Thank you

[georgehudetz]

Thanks for the comments folks!  @LibertyMachine yes we eventually will have mockups to share!  I'll be spending some quality time with the dev team over the next two weeks, and we will be reaching out to the community on a broader scale some time after that.

@ARTHUR-HM thanks for the detailed feedback.  Your points make sense, and we will keep them in mind as we work our way through this.  I did have some kind of quick access from the browser in mind, so its' good to see you would find that valuable.  But I can also see how it could get ungainly in the browser for complex setups, and how you need access to the document contents from within the Tool Library dialog.

Thanks again, and stay tuned!

George

[ARTHUR-HM]

@georgehudetz

Hey it looks like some of what was discussed here was added! Not sure if it was a while back and I just missed it this whole time, but I see it's there. Thank you!