Playing around with Fusion 360

[StevSmar]

I don’t put bolts into the parts I model, just the holes.

My next experiment with “large” Fusion assemblies will be to export them as a STL or STEP and then see if that makes it easier to use them without bogging my computer down.

Above is about as complicated as I can go before my computer craps out…

 

[Janger]

I don’t put bolts into the parts I model, just the holes.

My next experiment with “large” Fusion assemblies will be to export them as a STL or STEP and then see if that makes it easier to use them without bogging my computer down.

View attachment 38704
Above is about as complicated as I can go before my computer craps out…

How much RAM is in your machine? Is that the problem?

 

[Upnorth]

I turned that off too. Plus automatically orientating for sketches.

With my SpaceMouse, I just change to the orientation I want, I don’t need help From a program deciding what I need to look at.

I'm planning on doing a lot more modeling soon I'm considering getting a space mouse. They are pretty expensive so I want to be sure it's worth it before I spend the money.

The default I turned off was sketch related. When I selected the face to put a sketch on it would reorient the model. It would often be to something that was not convenient to me. I'm not good with certain orientations when modeling. I have a hard time wrapping my brain around where to dimension from. When I select the orientation myself it works better.

 

[Susquatch]

I'm planning on doing a lot more modeling soon I'm considering getting a space mouse. They are pretty expensive so I want to be sure it's worth it before I spend the money.

Based on all the hype, I got one. I figure it will work with whatever CAD program I settle on.

The Space Mouse is a learning curve all to itself. I have no problem with all the motions except roll. Twisting the chickens neck is quite intuitive but requires finger dexterity my old hands seem to be lacking.

However, it comes with a little "game" to help build skills that I load automatically and try to play every time I start my PC. I am getting better with rolling with time.

I am looking forward to the day when I can do it easily. It is quite obviously better than using a regular mouse.

As a bonus, the space mouse can be configured to work with office programs making panning and zooming really easy.

I'm not there yet, but I'm already glad I got it.

 

[Tecnico]

@Upnorth if you’re going to be doing any amount of 3D CAD then a space mouse is a good addition.

@Susquatch , you’ve probably played with it but for those just getting started with the space mouse there’s a menu that lets you change the sensitivity to your inputs. It’s sort of like the settings for movement and scroll speed for an ordinary mouse.

When it’s set too high I find it whips the model around too fast & overshoots.

D

 

[Upnorth]

I don’t put bolts into the parts I model, just the holes.

My next experiment with “large” Fusion assemblies will be to export them as a STL or STEP and then see if that makes it easier to use them without bogging my computer down.

View attachment 38704
Above is about as complicated as I can go before my computer craps out…

What is this?

 

[PeterT]

Sometimes you absolutely need to insert a fastener into an assembly, even if its a token one. You may need to evaluate clearance or insertion or removal or other fitment issues.
But ya if you have a flange plate of 26 holes, it may be for cosmetics. Here again, the program may have beneficial tools. A 'radial copy' of a fastener (including washer, nut...whatever) uses lower computational resources as a single tree line item than drag & drop as a separate part.

I'm not quite sure what STL STEP think would do to resources, size or speed/processing wise of modelling. Can you elaborate? I thought those were more end result formats for machining or printing or whatever.

 

[StevSmar]

What is this?

It’s the fuselage frame for a Hawker Hurricane. Super fun translating drawings into a 3D object:

(Above is a pulley for the control column that a friend asked me to model so he could get one CNC machined. I used the gear profile from Machineries Handbook, making a guess that this was the profile the original pulley used. The original Hawker Aircraft drawing is behind the model bottom right)
(I should point out that when I did this, there were some bugs in Fusions formula, hence the cumbersome way I’ve structured them to make Fusion happy)

 

[StevSmar]

I'm not quite sure what STL STEP think would do to resources, size or speed/processing wise of modelling.

On the model in my post #61, the main issue I’d come across is that the models became “unstable” once their complexity got to this level (That is, they would start to repeatably crash so I couldn’t progress with inserting components much further). My hope is that by converting the model to STL or STEP that the unstableness will be delayed.

I haven’t experimented much with it since I was giving myself carpal tunnel due to using computers most of the day and then modelling in-front of the TV at night (I.E. when my wife was watching something that I wasn’t interested in…). Once I’m retired I’ll likely take it up again.

 

[StevSmar]

How much RAM is in your machine? Is that the problem?

16Gb. I’d run Windows 10 resource monitor at the same time to keep an eye on how much RAM was being used and it always hovered around 8Gb. So I didn’t bother increasing the size of my flock (my Mum would always say how her computer was getting slow and she needed more ram’s…LOL)

My laptop is getting a bit old now, maybe 5-7 years, so if I take up complicated modelling in Fusion again I’ll likely be replacing it.

 

[Susquatch]

On the model in my post #61, the main issue I’d come across is that the models became “unstable” once their complexity got to this level (That is, they would start to repeatably crash so I couldn’t progress with inserting components much further).

Just a suggestion from a guy who is a Fusion Dummy..

What if you combined all the existing struts into one component and then start adding more struts. When it happens again, combine again and so forth.

 

[Upnorth]

It’s the fuselage frame for a Hawker Hurricane. Super fun translating drawings into a 3D object:
View attachment 38741
(Above is a pulley for the control column that a friend asked me to model so he could get one CNC machined. I used the gear profile from Machineries Handbook, making a guess that this was the profile the original pulley used. The original Hawker Aircraft drawing is behind the model bottom right)
(I should point out that when I did this, there were some bugs in Fusions formula, hence the cumbersome way I’ve structured them to make Fusion happy)

Interesting. I'm an aircraft mechanic and had no idea the fuselage on a Hurricane was a bolted structure. I always thought they were welded.

By coincidence I have a functioning hurricane/Mark I spitfire oil temperature gauge on my desk. It even has a 1944 repair tag on it. Still responds to changes in temperature but I'm certain the calibration would be off after 79 years of sitting around.

When I was using solidworks I modeled the Piper PA-18 fuselage. I found solidworks to be way easier than Fusion 360 for welded assemblies. Possible that fusion has made it easier with updates though.

 

[StevSmar]

had no idea the fuselage on a Hurricane was a bolted structure. I always thought they were welded.

I have one source that claims Hawkers used bolted joints in the Hurricane (and later Typhoon and Tempest) because that’s what they were setup to produce. That makes much more sense to me than the often stated claim that bolted joints made the Hurricane easier to repair. Many of the joints have tubular rivets which would effectively eliminate being able to unbolt one strut and bolt another in.

When it happens again, combine again and so forth.

I’ve tried most permutations (as far as I can remember). Several large components with the same underlying geometry (wireframe). There doesn’t seem to be much difference to stability.

I’m wondering if it’s a graphics card problem, sometimes fusion opens using the onboard graphics rather than the separate graphics card.

 

[Bandit]

Ha! I don't know anything about any of the programs!
I thought the frames of the planes would have been welded too, however pieces would be easier to replace if bolted in. Even a tubular rivet could make sense, drill them out. Even at that time, at an out of the way air field, not all of the junior mechanics would have known how to weld, to say maybe no electrics for stick or fuel for oxy welding.
Was over at the Nanton Air Museum lately, watched the Lancaster fire up, then they fired up a Bristol engine, that made some noise! Found out the Miscedio (dam spell check) used a lot of balsa wood in the air frame, I had thought it was spruce from what I had read. They are restoring one. Yes what you don't know!

 

[Upnorth]

Been getting back into learning how to do assemblies. I found it clunky before but I'm getting better at it. I had to refresh my memory on how to do it. I used to bring in parts and then align them with the first screen they were imported in. Terrible way to do it. Just bring them in then roughly align them. Then under modify use the align tool. It works pretty good. After that use a joint to set a position and set up any movement if required.

Going back to my CAD roots a bit by using one of Elmer's steam engine plans as a learning aid. This one is the Grasshopper.

 

[BaitMaster]

I used to use Fusion. I found certain actions especially lofting irregular shapes would cause it to crash.

Now, I’m on year 2 of Solidworks Maker with no regrets.

Everything I’ve tried to do with it is has done flawlessly.

For 120$ CAD a year it seems like a bargain to me.

It does all the different file types….. sheet metal…. Etc.

I don’t use it for a slicer for printing or a CAM for Gcode, but as a cad it’s pretty sweet, in my eyes.

 

[PeterT]

Now, I’m on year 2 of Solidworks Maker with no regrets.

You might actually be the first person I have come across with firsthand SW-Maker experience for any duration. I am happy to start a dedicated post, or you can if you wanted to kick things off. I think a lot of folks, including me, would like to know more of the details specific to SW-Maker app. Are you game? (I'm a SW 'spendy' version user, hence my vested curiosity).

 

[Upnorth]

A few more parts added in. I'm finding it easier to set up joints and motion but it sometimes requires some thought to make the motion work correctly. I am now starting to see why a space mouse would be useful. I now spend a lot of time moving the model around to select points during assembly.

 

[PeterT]

Not sure if F360 has this feature, but maybe its possible to set up tiled viewports to whatever are good vantage points. If it works like other programs, you can start clicking or drawing in one window & seamlessly carry on into the other. Often this can be a preferred way to work at different scales or perspective, especially physically bigger assemblies. Zooming & scrolling & space-mousing have their place for sure, but it grows old when you have to do a lot of driving around the model, especially repeatable operations.

 

[StevSmar]

I used to use Fusion.…Now, I’m on year 2 of Solidworks Maker with no regrets... For 120$ CAD a year it seems like a bargain to me...

That does sound interesting, I should look at SW Maker in more detail. Fusion seems restricted compared to some of the things AutoDesk Inventor can do- like deform parts.
CA$ 120 does seem like a bargain. When I was heavily modelling in Fusion I did contemplate the CA$300 to $400, it felt like a lot of money (but not on a per hour basis, and I was spending a lot of hours…)