Jump to content

Fusion help required


Erfolg
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am working through an Autodesk exercise, I have followed the instructions and do not know why some aspects are specified.

 

The item is very basic, a parallel key as used in engineering.

 

You are requested to use box to create the item. This requires the two face dimensions to be entered, in conjunction with a length dimension. Having done this you appear to have a key. The instruction then go onto to use the draft command, WHY. What is draft doing that the box command has not done?

 

Hoping you can help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this case it does not seem necessary?

 

The next stage is to assemble all the bits into a singularity of separate components to make a universal type coupling, not that it is something I immediately want, hopefully it is something that may be useful in the future,

 

Thanks Ron, there is a lot of potential, that I am totally unaware. Perhaps in the future the knowledge (if I remember). will be used by myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Erfolg said:

In this case it does not seem necessary?

Well it really does depend on what you are try to model. Let’s say that you needed to form a model that was a simple key (as in engineering key with sloping sides). You could draw the cross section with the sloping sides and then extrude it to the length required, alternatively you could use the ‘box’ option to create the overall shape (width, depth, length) then simply draft the sides to form the sloping sides, much like my example above. Not much to chose between the two approaches. However, let’s say that you’ve designed a much more complex model, for example a hollow box with diagonal cross members and you want to provide more strength to the walls by tapering them (thicker at the base). Creating that shape becomes easy as you select the top surface of the walls then select all of their side faces then draft them all in one go to the required taper.

 

But like so many good software programs there is always more than one way to do things, as I find out each time I use Fusion 360!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you, so many options. I cannot at this stage make any rational judgement of may be best, or can be used.

 

I guess the worked example/exercise approach, is that you are introduced to options and methodologies.

 

The fundamental problem for most people learning by themselves, that it is frustrating that you have no idea that multiple sketches are often needed. It seemed that initially that some things seemed to be random, if something worked or did not and so on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from the basic sketching tools (lines, rectangles, circles etc) the functions I have found most useful are Trim, Extrude, Loft, Shell, Pattern, Offset Planes and learning how to  use paths to help form models (e.g. curving exhaust stacks). Another useful thing is the timeline which allows you to go back through your design to change things, or delete things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadnt looked at the repository for a while, thanks Kevin for the nudge. And low and behold somebody has drawn the venturi!

 

It's still under debate, but if you draw it and print it yourself then you do not have to declare it and there are no penalties in scale competition. But don't quote me as there is much debate still...

 

It then does beg the question, how do we know the competitor drew it and didnt just download it.....

 

Cheers

Danny

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Danny Fenton said:

I hadnt looked at the repository for a while, thanks Kevin for the nudge. And low and behold somebody has drawn the venturi!

 

It's still under debate, but if you draw it and print it yourself then you do not have to declare it and there are no penalties in scale competition. But don't quote me as there is much debate still...

 

It then does beg the question, how do we know the competitor drew it and didnt just download it.....

 

Cheers

Danny

 

 

And there is also the "I made that" factor.

I do not have the skills to draw them, so am grateful for those who can and make them public.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Danny Fenton said:

Revolve is very handy to create cylindrical objects about an axis

 

705.JPG.867e2734ed40e152eb079db2d445123b.JPG

 

705a.JPG.e37c1ea2f76ad66741f77d2c8df02bad.JPG

 

I find the biggest problem is when you return after a week and have to re-learn ?

Cheers

Danny

With 3D CAD, I've found what works best for me is to record everything I do as I go along. This way I have gradually built up my own manual of the best ways of doing each kind of task. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Starting as a modeller, with no experience, or exposure to current engineering type techniques etc., it is difficult.

 

My own experience as a young man, was the talk of CAM. It was just a concept. The NC machine tools were 6 track tape controlled, as for CAD, this was an idea, where the first CAD packages were often very numeric driven, where the visual image accessed via a graphical output from the filed data. 3D models again existed as concepts, where wire frame, solid entity, rendered finishes were ideas using Boolean operations, where matrices mathematics could be used to manipulate the objects, where it was possible to apply a web over the objects to predict heat, stress etc relationships. All were ideas that were not related or integrated, and did not exist in any practical sense.

 

Today the 3D models and adaptive processes, are real, still a bit clunky.

 

So even much what we may have been taught is today of no use. So what we need to know today?

 

Pretty much as Ron has written.

  • You do need a clear idea, dimensionally and graphically what it is you want to create. Ad-hocking does not work for me.
  • Multiple sketches are needed, with Fusion.
  • You need to learn a few basic operations, such extrude, holes and so on.
  • The suggested list of each sketch content/operation helps when amending.
  • That historic listing on the bottom is most useful, although I use history in the operating listing.

It has taken me an age of both reading, worked exercise and watching videos to have gained even a basic shaky usage. In a world where often you need to undertake a related set of operations to do what you think should happen.

 

As to is it ethical to use predefined files, where is the problem? People use wheels, engines, canopies, GRP mouldings, radios, clevises and so on. Any problem is with those living in the era that was my youth, where nothing much was available, even radios were often home built.

 

Kids have the advantage that they often have a teacher to guide them, where even bizarre interfaces are there are norm, in a world where intuitive interfaces are the direction of travel.

 

 

 

Edited by Erfolg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This subject highlights the great loss that Dave Burton has been to us modellers as well as his family.

 

|I am certain that David would have produced a number of articles for the mag, which covered the generalities of 3d modelling, possibly specifically Fusion. Cura could also provided David with the opportunity to discuss slicing as a concept and the specifics of Cura and similar software.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue of "is it ethical" to admit the source of either design, cad drawing and then the final production (3D printing, cnc machining, laser cutting etc) is only relevant for a competition.  For a scale model just for general flying it's all irrelevant.

 

The "tidying up of the rules" is needed because people have different idea of what is the important part. 

Is having the idea and spending the time designing/drawing in cad the difficult bit, or using someone else's design files to print on your own or a commercial company 3D printer etc etc.  The only clear way to do this is design it yourself, do the drawing yourself and buy a 3D printer or 3 axis mill or whatever and make the part yourself.  Then it is not needed to declare it.

 

BUT it is all based upon trusting that the competitior is honest with the declaration.  Having seen some blatant cheating in Switzerland at the 2018 Scale World Championships, I fear that any rules decided upon will be not enough to deter the cheats.  However I don't think it will be too much of a problem domestically.

 

John M

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh! John, I am sure you were mistaken with regard the World Champs, it just would not happen, would it?

 

In this era, as you allude, there are so much that can be produced by machine, Laser components, with interlocking components. The result is a much reduced level of manual skills in the construction process. It can be a similar story with respect to finishing, from professional finishing tools, spray booths with guns.

 

As for scale models that are museum quality. Often in detail there are problems. Real metal aircraft, are seldom perfectly smooth, due to pulling/tanking due to riverting, more so with the exotic welded machines. As for panel gapping, hmm even a 0.001" at 1/72 scale, would be 0.072" at full size, seems a bit big to me. Yet many scale models seem to replicate gapping that you could almost fall into. Real full size WW1 and many WW2 stuff were pretty rough by peace time standards and positively primitive if compared to museum stuff.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erfolg

If your first sentence was tongue in cheek, then I will have a chuckle. 

If you were serious in thinking that cheating would not happen at a WC, then I am afraid you are completely wrong. 

I was there as one of the two UK team managers for the scale F4C and F4H teams.  We encountered a model not built by the entrant/pilot and two instances of blatant use of GPS positioning for the start and end of each manoeuvre which is also against the rules.  Another adding/removing wire skids (to protect his wing tips in an untidy landing) when you are only allowed to remove the pilot and flying prop for a scale one between static and flying judging.  I could go on.........................

John M

Edited by John Minchell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The help on this thread, Videos and the book from AutoCAD has helped tremendously.

 

The more that I have practiced the better I get, Hmm, where have I heard that before.

 

I am still some way from competent, although I may get there. I am aware that my primary interest is building models. The 3d printer has opened  some opportunities and created ideas. 

 

The most recent learning lesson, is in my case, I cannot design adlib, as I go along. I need to do a decent sketch, plus dimensions, to make good progress, in the modelling process.

 

Yes multiple sketches, trimming, offsetting, all make live much easier as suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...