Author Topic: Fusion 360 - MECHANICAL design Tips Tweaks and discussion. (Not Eagle) (Read 25797 times)

beanflying · « **on:** May 30, 2020, 07:57:46 am »

A place to hangout and discuss ask questions on how to do X in Fusion 360 from a Mechanical or CAD/CAM perspective.

Not a place to muddy it with bitching about Eagle Beta or Autodesk anti propaganda. Do that elsewhere!

A few useful Youtubers on Fusion 360

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo29kn3d9ziFUZGZ50VKvWA Lars works for Autodesk but these now older videos are still worth a watch in particular the Basics ones.

https://www.youtube.com/user/TheKHaug Kevin Kennedy is a NON Autodesk and has come to Fusion from other software. Recommended for newbies in particular.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU7QDqWAeIdCK5aNFXPgX2g Fusion 360 School. Lots of great snappy tutorials and a heap to be learned.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLEVULiWognkczOpDSGSlFg/videos Also a Fusion employee but these are his and he now runs some of the Autodesk live streams.

https://www.youtube.com/user/AutodeskFusion360 The Evil empires own Channel and they have been running more consistently over the last few months in particular.

Some of the 3D printing Channels I follow do some good content from time to time on specifics.

Also worth a look

https://www.youtube.com/nyccnc New Your CNC. Primarily a CNC workshop but some good Fusion 360 CAD and in particular CAM videos.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxgunnLdsV72eAezHW6u0KA/videos Fusion with a mainly 3D printing content and some Laser use.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeKpbMimEGgLM_0tnghfoVw/videos Mix of CNC, Fusion and some 3D printing.

Install it watch a few Beginners youtube tutorials and have a bash it costs $0 to play

https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360/startups
https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360-for-hobbyists

ONLINE PARTS OR CAD FILE REPOSITORIES

https://autodesk-fusion.partcommunity.com/3d-cad-models/sso?cwid=4197 Autodesks own.

https://www.traceparts.com/en Contains a bunch of Electronic and Mechanical catalogues including RS.

beanflying · « **Reply #1 on:** May 30, 2020, 08:11:57 am »

I went looking for a more graphical method of producing a Laser Cutter wiring diagram for non Electronics nerds to follow. Tried Fritzing briefly

Fusion 360 - MECHANICAL design Tips Tweaks and discussion. (Not Eagle)

looked at a few others and couldn't find what I wanted so I have been experimenting with a 3D approach. The other obvious approach would be Inkscape etc and do it as a 2D graphical option but this way the model can be made available online and be manipulated for viewing or working with it without installing Fusion.

The Stepper and attached wiring was where I started. Brought in the Nema 17 from McMaster-Carr then rather than adding a connector started a simple sketch. Extrude a few mm of fake wire, extrude a six core sheath and few mm of fake wire then use the loft command to link them together. The plan is this Stepper and 'Stub' will form the component to be used in a larger model.

To do a cable run then all you need to do is create a simple 3D single line path and follow it to where you need to go. Colour coding sheath or no sheath or dropping back to four wire is easy and can be done in the larger model.

The Model is over here if anyone wants to play https://a360.co/3c0vm2w

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #2 on:** May 30, 2020, 11:29:30 am »

Hi,
I am new to Fusion 360. I got interested to support my 3D printing activities.

I have learned a lot by watching Clough42 on YouTube. Here is an example:

He use the features of Fusion 360 to solve some real world problems.

I have created so 3D models for KiCAD:

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #3 on:** May 30, 2020, 01:07:32 pm »

It was been a bit of a haul for me as any real CAD usages was Ancient Autocad 2 I was taught at Uni on a HP Mini System with terminals (look it up it makes me the other side of 50

)

Todays expansion of the Stepper idea was to Scratch up the Driver part of it. Not an Engineering model by any means but a practical simplified version for the purpose I have planned. The Screen printing from the original went under the flat bed scanner and was placed on the Face as a 'Decal' (cosmetic and no thickness) in Fusion. I haven't completed the stub connector part yet.

Model is over here if anyone want to play further https://a360.co/2AozrQQ

Not that it matters to me but I will insert the Steppers into my current Laser build 'just because' they will exist

100W Laser shown here with the rear panel removed four grey boxes for the upgrade. Lots of detail lacking in the model such as V-Slots and fittings but this enables me to check fit of parts and provide a cut list for the sections and panels.

tpowell1830 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 30, 2020, 05:32:35 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on May 30, 2020, 01:07:32 pm

It was been a bit of a haul for me as any real CAD usages was Ancient Autocad 2 I was taught at Uni on a HP Mini System with terminals (look it up it makes me the other side of 50 )

....................................SKIP..............................

Not that it matters to me but I will insert the Steppers into my current Laser build 'just because' they will exist 100W Laser shown here with the rear panel removed four grey boxes for the upgrade. Lots of detail lacking in the model such as V-Slots and fittings but this enables me to check fit of parts and provide a cut list for the sections and panels.

As for AutoCAD, I was a user at version 2 also... also it dates me.

I like the spirit of accurate models of bought parts. So often, you can get a "3d representation" from the original mfg, but these are usually devoid of nuance. Yours is very accurate, this takes patience. The font is usually the most difficult to represent. But, what I do when I create these models, I store as a "library" part that I can quickly slap into an assembly later. However, with staples such as power supplies, these change so much nowadays and you may never find the same model/mfg again the next time.

With that said, "Is it worth the extra effort?". It depends on time constraints.

Nice work.

mnementh · « **Reply #5 on:** May 30, 2020, 06:14:29 pm »

Just needed to say... I'm sick of Fusion

me every time I try to do text on ANYTHING.

That said... at least it's not Eagle. *shudder*

I DO like how easy it is to think in "extrusions" with Fusion; they make it easy to design a "silhouette" of the core body of an object correctly situated on the correct planes and just pull it out to the desired height/length.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #6 on:** May 30, 2020, 11:25:28 pm »

Agreed Text currently SUCKS on Fusion BUT during a recent live stream I hit up Brad about it and they are working on a fairly major long overdue upgrade of the Text functionality. https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-360-feedback-hub/feedback-on-upcoming-text/td-p/9537505

The biggest issue with Text as it is currently is the bounding box not being fully defined meaning the text can be bumped stretched or just plain go wrong if that isn't done properly

In the workflow I leave the text until nearly last then generally but not always define it so it doesn't go kaboom.

Last things in the workflow are generally Fillets and Champhers as changing the model proper after these often breaks them. If I want to change the model I roll the timeline back before these helps minimise the breakages. This took me a long time to learn and lots of

beanflying · « **Reply #7 on:** May 31, 2020, 01:08:52 am »

Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on May 30, 2020, 11:29:30 am

Hi,
I am new to Fusion 360. I got interested to support my 3D printing activities.

I have learned a lot by watching Clough42 on YouTube. Here is an example:

snippity...

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

Added a link into post number 1. I have run across his channel before and there is some really good content

mnementh · « **Reply #8 on:** May 31, 2020, 01:26:23 am »

Oh Hells yes... proportional text box, text on arc and kerning are ALL things desperately needed. As well as a "simple" mode where you just start a text box, enter your text, then click on a surface to apply it; THEN, once you see what it's going to do, adjust font, size, +/- depth, +/- pitch and +/- slant of italics.

Yeah, I also discovered that getting the main shape done and saving the fillets, then text for last was a major lifesaver; as well as making sure to save a new revision before doing fillets or text. That way if you revise something then go down a different design path, you don't have to worry about going back far enough to accidentally undo fixing a borked plane or something and finding it AFTER you've already done fillets & text.

I've noticed that I get a lot more pushback from Fusion when trying to do multiple fillets at once, even on a single face; often it just goes NO!!! NO!!! NO!!! and I have to do most of them one covalent angle/line at a time. But a LOT LESS often does it break planes in the process, making 1-sided walls that have to be patched later (if possible at all) before it can be turned into a single body.

I've also noticed that whatever mechanism it uses to "auto-patch" a mass into one body after extrusion actions is a lot better; you can get a lot more complex in your angles without it randomly deleting or breaking individual polys and giving you voids to patch later. You know, until the exact instant you come to COUNT on it.

mnem

mnementh · « **Reply #9 on:** May 31, 2020, 08:12:28 pm »

Okay... Here's a basic design question for those with the know-how: I want to make a sandwich-type control panel box out of 2 300 x 400mm sheets of acrylic with 13mm radius rounded corners; I bought a stack of them cheap for this purpose. Normally, I'd just sketch out a couple concentric rectangles describing those dimensions and the inner dimensions, then extrude that to the desired height, then do my fillets to match the corners.

Here's where it gets sticky: I want the top panel to angle downwards such that the front wall is ~45mm high and the back is ~85mm high. This object will then have the corners filleted, incorporate built-in hinges for the bottom panel, then finally be sectioned into 4 workable sized pieces for printing.

What's the best way to start...? A trapezoidal sketch with the correct profile to match the size of the panels, extruded horizontally into a solid? Then how do I make uniformly thick walls after extruding the center cavity out of the solid?

I've played with the "rotate on" function, but I don't want the front/back walls to have a radius; I need them flat as there may be an I/O plate involved.

mnem

mnementh · « **Reply #10 on:** May 31, 2020, 11:10:18 pm »

Oklay... after 10 iterations I still haven't figured out to make the walls uniform. I'm gonna go eat some cake and rot my brain in front of the TV for a while.

mnem

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #11 on:** May 31, 2020, 11:47:55 pm »

Hi,
Can you share your F3D file?

I am not sure exactly what you want to achieve. I have the front and back surfaces vertical.

Here is my version:

and the sections through this model

If you download the attached file, you can use these controls to step through how I created this. It is not to scale.

console.zip (59.47 kB - downloaded 130 times.)

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #12 on:** June 01, 2020, 12:15:01 am »

mnementh,

If I draw two sheets 300 x 400mm with 13mm radius corners. I have placed one horizontal and one at 15 degrees.

Are you looking for a box that will hold the panels in this position with a uniform wall thickness?

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #13 on:** June 01, 2020, 12:32:56 am »

mnementh,

Try this.

I used the loft and shell modifications and then punched out the bottom with an extrude.

I have attached the F3D file.

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

console 3.zip (142.26 kB - downloaded 128 times.)

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #14 on:** June 01, 2020, 12:37:07 am »

mnementh,

One more view:

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #15 on:** June 01, 2020, 01:55:57 am »

Quote from: mnementh on May 31, 2020, 08:12:28 pm

Okay... Here's a basic design question for those with the know-how: I want to make a sandwich-type control panel box out of 2 300 x 400mm sheets of acrylic with 13mm radius rounded corners; I bought a stack of them cheap for this purpose. Normally, I'd just sketch out a couple concentric rectangles describing those dimensions and the inner dimensions, then extrude that to the desired height, then do my fillets to match the corners.

Here's where it gets sticky: I want the top panel to angle downwards such that the front wall is ~45mm high and the back is ~85mm high. This object will then have the corners filleted, incorporate built-in hinges for the bottom panel, then finally be sectioned into 4 workable sized pieces for printing.

What's the best way to start...? A trapezoidal sketch with the correct profile to match the size of the panels, extruded horizontally into a solid? Then how do I make uniformly thick walls after extruding the center cavity out of the solid?

I've played with the "rotate on" function, but I don't want the front/back walls to have a radius; I need them flat as there may be an I/O plate involved.

mnem

Sometimes problems are best approached sideways

Draw your side parallelogram but don't try and draw it accurately or think about it to much let Fusions parallel, symmetry and mid point functions to do the brain work. It can be done bottom up but it is really messy and would need offset planes and lofts

** Note I set the HEIGHTS of the Nodes at 45 and 85 and not the length of the line connecting the upper and lower lines **

Sketch 1 is not fully defined but can be by several methods. Placing the construction line tied to the mid points of your upper and lower allows the upper 'fixed length' line to move and retain the heights already defined so it would be easy to make front and rear slope in equally if that suits. The more simple version would be to simply make the front or rear face vertical using the single constraint depending if you want the slight slope at the front or rear.

Then Three extrudes, Left Face, Front and Back Faces & Right Side. Add fillets etc as needed.

mnementh · « **Reply #16 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:24:53 am »

Damn you and your tricksy little constraints straight to hell, bean!!!

Ahhhh... okay. So I WAS on the right track; I created the above objects by sketching a parallelogram, but then I extruded it as a single body. What I need to do is create the front/back walls as well in the sketch, that way the shapes of all the walls are defined.

I’ll spend some time tomorrow looking into those functions; I must admit the way you were able to manipulate the entire construct is quite enticing... thank you!

Okies... next question... I usually leave fillets till the last... as much as I want to just get jamming on something semi-finished looking, I think I need to figure out sectioning and bottom hinge first.

I figure dividing into quarters with overlapping fingers should be the simple solution, and if I do it right I can incorporate the hinge into the seam at the back of the box. I intend to sink button magnets in the bottom wall opposite the hinge to make things dead easy.

I’ve seen some really neat videos on things like hinges and latches using the animation workspace, but really not ready for that yet. If you know some good beginner vids on that type of construction in the design workspace, please point me there.

Cheers,

mnem
$:=\$

mnementh · « **Reply #17 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:33:50 am »

Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on June 01, 2020, 12:37:07 am

mnementh,

One more view:

(Attachment Link)

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

Wow, Jay... that’s a lot of exposition. Thank you!

Tomorrow when I can concentrate on it, I’ll review your workflow; between that and what bean has explained, I think I can actually make some progress.

mnem
Y’all are gonna have me doing constraints and all that badunka-dunk yet...

beanflying · « **Reply #18 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:41:56 am »

I ran into a similar issue with the 740B control box I made some time ago as the sides slope in on the original and in all sorts of wacky angles and I did my

then

So as it is a cold and wintry day out there I moved this upcoming project up the list as the guts of it was done and sitting in Fusion

Will be 3D printed sidewalls with Brass Inserts to retain the top and bottom Laser cut panels. Still need to finalise how much real estate I need for the low voltage switches and an Ammeter but as shown here 180x300 but I will slim it down to maybe 280 and print face down as 1 piece on the CR-10. Tweaking the dimensions of the box is trivial and shouldn't break anything else as it is all fully dimensioned.

Ranayna · « **Reply #19 on:** June 01, 2020, 08:56:29 am »

So, i'm a total noob regarding 3D CAD.

Would you recommend Fusion 360 for someone learning the basics?

As several others in this thread, i have a 3D Printer that needs feeding :p

beanflying · « **Reply #20 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:34:49 am »

Quote from: Ranayna on June 01, 2020, 08:56:29 am

So, i'm a total noob regarding 3D CAD.

Would you recommend Fusion 360 for someone learning the basics?

As several others in this thread, i have a 3D Printer that needs feeding :p

Some of the alternates put up have some severe limitations on abilities and some insist you publish ALL your designs as open source on the 'free tier'. So when looking at a package bear that in mind.

Trying to be even minded about it Fusion and it's two current 'free tiers' offers most of us an amazing package for $0 BUT at the whim of the Evil Empire that might change but the community backlash would be truly epic. Such is the nature of Cloud based software.

Install it watch a few Beginners youtube tutorials and have a bash it costs $0 to play

https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360/startups
https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360-for-hobbyists

tautech · « **Reply #21 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:42:56 am »

Quote from: beanflying on June 01, 2020, 09:34:49 am

Quote from: Ranayna on June 01, 2020, 08:56:29 am
So, i'm a total noob regarding 3D CAD.

Would you recommend Fusion 360 for someone learning the basics?

As several others in this thread, i have a 3D Printer that needs feeding :p

Some of the alternates put up have some severe limitations on abilities and some insist you publish ALL your designs as open source on the 'free tier'. So when looking at a package bear that in mind.

Trying to be even minded about it Fusion and it's two current 'free tiers' offers most of us an amazing package for $0 BUT at the whim of the Evil Empire that might change but the community backlash would be truly epic. Such is the nature of Cloud based software.

Install it watch a few Beginners youtube tutorials and have a bash it costs $0 to play

https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360/startups
https://www.autodesk.com.au/campaigns/fusion-360-for-hobbyists

Links ^^ need to be in the OP.

beanflying · « **Reply #22 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:43:35 am »

Nag Nag Nag

EDIT: Done now I have finished eating

mnementh · « **Reply #23 on:** June 01, 2020, 12:28:36 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 01, 2020, 03:41:56 am

I ran into a similar issue with the 740B control box I made some time ago as the sides slope in on the original and in all sorts of wacky angles and I did my then
So as it is a cold and wintry day out there I moved this upcoming project up the list as the guts of it was done and sitting in Fusion Will be 3D printed sidewalls with Brass Inserts to retain the top and bottom Laser cut panels. Still need to finalise how much real estate I need for the low voltage switches and an Ammeter but as shown here 180x300 but I will slim it down to maybe 280 and print face down as 1 piece on the CR-10. Tweaking the dimensions of the box is trivial and shouldn't break anything else as it is all fully dimensioned.

bean, I swear to FUCK I am gonna flap my fat dwagon wings alla way down-under and break my foot off in your arse...

You've infected my DREAMS with this F360 shit, haven't you?

I woke up at the butt-crack of dawn this AM with visions of my project box dancing in my head, all redesigned with inset panels top & bottom JUST LIKE YOURS.

mnem

mnementh · « **Reply #24 on:** June 01, 2020, 12:47:40 pm »

Somehow, I've missed THIS tutorial on Sketch Constraints all this time...

Either I didn't find it before, or maybe I did and I'm just ready for it now... but this morning, I found this one very clear and straight to the point.

DEFINITELY one for the 1st post.

mnem

mnementh · « **Reply #25 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:07:11 pm »

urrgh. Frustion360 is

me again; this time trying to draw the rectangle to define the inset for the panel. It'll create the workplane where it should, but instead of drawing ON THE WORKPLANE, it randomly picks some height BELOW the workplane & draws the rectangle THERE.

[EDIT] Okay... I outwitted the program that is SUPPOSED to be helping me make an object. By reorienting so that my POV is from WITHIN the body of the object, I was able to FORCE FuckWithMyHead360 to start ON the workplane. is the point of defining a workplane, when it is just going to start drawing wherever the fuck it feels like anyways...?

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #26 on:** June 01, 2020, 04:05:13 pm »

2am here so I am off to bed after a MDK GTA5 session

So just coz I will provide you with a link to mine so you can try and follow along answers to questions when I wake up sometime later

https://a360.co/3djfrxI

beanflying · « **Reply #27 on:** June 02, 2020, 02:41:10 am »

This isn't my original design but I took in a slightly wonky (not accurate) DXF in 2D and corrected the layout and then punched it to the third dimension

If the designer is happy for me to post the file I will later on or even a batch lot of STL's for 3D printing with scraps.

I suspect the original was done in Coreldraw or Illustrator

beanflying · « **Reply #28 on:** June 02, 2020, 02:46:42 am »

Quote from: mnementh on June 01, 2020, 03:07:11 pm

urrgh. Frustion360 is me again; this time trying to draw the rectangle to define the inset for the panel. It'll create the workplane where it should, but instead of drawing ON THE WORKPLANE, it randomly picks some height BELOW the workplane & draws the rectangle THERE.

[EDIT] Okay... I outwitted the program that is SUPPOSED to be helping me make an object. By reorienting so that my POV is from WITHIN the body of the object, I was able to FORCE FuckWithMyHead360 to start ON the workplane. is the point of defining a workplane, when it is just going to start drawing wherever the fuck it feels like anyways...?

mnem

If you follow the workflow on mine the main body is extruded first and then there is two consecutive sketches created using the upper and lower faces of the main body . There is no need for offset anythings or any reference to the origin just referenced to the faces. So right click the face and pick create sketch.

Stop making life harder for yourself

mnementh · « **Reply #29 on:** June 02, 2020, 03:55:28 am »

Quote from: beanflying on June 02, 2020, 02:46:42 am

Quote from: mnementh on June 01, 2020, 03:07:11 pm
urrgh. Frustion360 is me again; this time trying to draw the rectangle to define the inset for the panel. It'll create the workplane where it should, but instead of drawing ON THE WORKPLANE, it randomly picks some height BELOW the workplane & draws the rectangle THERE.

[EDIT] Okay... I outwitted the program that is SUPPOSED to be helping me make an object. By reorienting so that my POV is from WITHIN the body of the object, I was able to FORCE FuckWithMyHead360 to start ON the workplane. is the point of defining a workplane, when it is just going to start drawing wherever the fuck it feels like anyways...?

mnem

If you follow the workflow on mine the main body is extruded first and then there is two consecutive sketches created using the upper and lower faces of the main body . There is no need for offset anythings or any reference to the origin just referenced to the faces. So right click the face and pick create sketch.

Stop making life harder for yourself (Attachment Link)

Yeah, I couldn’t figure out how to get it to show the timeline; maybe they have that disabled as the new licensing takes away “collaborative” features on the hobbyist/free version.

That is exactly how I created the main body; I got through that relatively painlessly.

The problem was it being a dick with the “create sketch” function on existing surfaces. I’d click the face I wanted to draw on, click “create sketch”, and it would create the workplane right where it should. But then when I started to plop down points to make a line or rectangle it kept selecting everywhere BUT the damned workplane and just put the damn thing wherever the fuck it felt like, usually some random depth below the workplane.

Between that and the way it randomly fades the quadrille away to the point you can barely see it; like I said... my balls are just achin’.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #30 on:** June 02, 2020, 04:05:14 am »

I notice you seem to have the origin showing so I wonder if that was getting selected rather than the face? If another sketch is showing the create new sketch can also trigger of it rather than the face.

beanflying · « **Reply #31 on:** June 02, 2020, 04:51:18 am »

After only 6 1/2 days from order to delivery from China my Laser controller has arrived

via a trip to the scanner for a mugshot some minor tweakage and then thanks to the power of auto updating yesterdays model now comes with more detail from the controller model.

mnementh · « **Reply #32 on:** June 02, 2020, 03:07:01 pm »

Joo better bring those teardown pics over to the 3DP thread, joo hoser!

mnem
And lay offa muh chips, ehhh...?

mnementh · « **Reply #33 on:** June 02, 2020, 03:09:36 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 02, 2020, 04:05:14 am

I notice you seem to have the origin showing so I wonder if that was getting selected rather than the face? If another sketch is showing the create new sketch can also trigger of it rather than the face.

Yeah, okay... except that is the EXPRESS PURPOSE of defining a workplane in ANY CAD program I've ever used otherwise. You do this to tell the program EXACTLY where you want to work. I think this core stupidity is also part of what is Oh, so fucked-up with the Text functions; something fundamental in the software's architecture that PREVENTS these core functions from working the way most CAD programs work.

I dunno... is that the price of the otherwise easy-to-use yet powerful nature of the application...? Or is it really too much to ask that they adhere to SOME common-sense rules used by the rest of the industry...?

mnem
Nice pants.

mnementh · « **Reply #34 on:** June 02, 2020, 05:20:12 pm »

I just figured it out... BY ACCIDENT. There's a "3D Sketch" toggle in the Sketch palette. Of COURSE, this is toggled ON by default, AND none of the online tutorials I've seen mention the evil this one little setting commits upon an unsuspecting noob user.

Now if I could only figure why, when I started a sketch on the front panel, did it set the effing origin 18mm above the base plane...?

I mean... I know WHY; it's because that face is angled. But

made someone... ANYONE... think that either of these behaviors was a good idea...?

mnem
grr. arrg.

mnementh · « **Reply #35 on:** June 02, 2020, 07:17:04 pm »

arrrgghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

After finally figuring out where the tools are in the new UI to do a simple split body with 2D sketch (even the hits on the AD site show the old UI

) Now it's giving me the most useless error: "1 errors: split 2". Click on "More Info" it returns: "compute fail".

WHY...? WHY...? WHAT DID I DO WRONG YOU FUCKING LITTLE BASTARD INNA BOX...?!?

mnem

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #36 on:** June 02, 2020, 08:06:21 pm »

Hi,

Here are a few pictures and screen shots from today's project. It is replacement plate (785PL) for a mkc3-h01 tripod.

Models

I printed the part in gray PLA. The screw was made from brass.

Photographs

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #37 on:** June 02, 2020, 09:16:08 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on June 02, 2020, 05:20:12 pm

I just figured it out... BY ACCIDENT. There's a "3D Sketch" toggle in the Sketch palette. Of COURSE, this is toggled ON by default, AND none of the online tutorials I've seen mention the evil this one little setting commits upon an unsuspecting noob user.

Now if I could only figure why, when I started a sketch on the front panel, did it set the effing origin 18mm above the base plane...?

I mean... I know WHY; it's because that face is angled. But made someone... ANYONE... think that either of these behaviors was a good idea...?

mnem
grr. arrg.

The 3D sketch functionality in it's current form is new (l1-2 months I think) and I haven't seen any video on it or have I looked that hard either or played with it.

Re the Origin on or off or used or not. I use it initially to set a general point in space and direction to the model then it goes off. From that point forward ALL other planes, sketches and surfaces are referenced off the model. One of the most powerful sides of Fusion is having one change upstream change the entire model because of this referencing. If you keep referring back to the origin you are referencing the beginning to my way of thinking not the timeline concept that Fusion works on.

This ramble is pre coffee and 7am so I am now returning to slumber for another hour or so $:=\$

mnementh · « **Reply #38 on:** June 03, 2020, 12:25:59 am »

It's been sectioned, all holes are "drilled" where they should be, and shockingly, no children were killed in the making thereof. The joints are all relieved by .2mm to allow for 3DP tolerances per the advice of one of the yoobtoob vids I watched; turns out it was the "thicken sketch" operation as part of the sectioning process which he recommended that was causing the unexplained error.

All that remains now is to countersink all the segment assembly screw holes holes and do fillets and I should be able to start fab; might even get something printing tonight. *knocks on wood*

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #39 on:** June 03, 2020, 04:12:11 am »

And now you know more the next one will be easier

Todays Project is the mockup for yesterdays two minute teardown of my new Ruida 6445G Laser Controller https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/test-equipment-anonymous-(tea)-group-therapy-thread/msg3086264/#msg3086264

Time to start arranging the lumps and running mock wires to connect them.

Mmmm Consists of 105 bodies

beanflying · « **Reply #40 on:** June 03, 2020, 05:20:34 am »

So I have broken Fusion or more likely it is broken

When I go to include the various Components into a larger layout design it breaks the Decals

I have put a request onto the Autodesk forum but apart from removing and then reapplying the decals in the layout anyone here have a solution?

3pm I think I am calling it Scotch O'Clock......

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #41 on:** June 03, 2020, 06:39:04 pm »

Hi,
Today's project was to make some replacement clips that hold 3/8 impact sockets on a rail. Some of the original clips were broken.

Model

A small piece of the track was modelled first and the clips were modelled after that. Only the clips will be printed.

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #42 on:** June 04, 2020, 02:59:29 am »

Quote from: beanflying on June 03, 2020, 05:20:34 am

So I have broken Fusion or more likely it is broken When I go to include the various Components into a larger layout design it breaks the Decals

I have put a request onto the Autodesk forum but apart from removing and then reapplying the decals in the layout anyone here have a solution?

3pm I think I am calling it Scotch O'Clock......

So it turns out Fusion does have a Bug with Decals and inserting derived models - So Reported and in their system

HOWEVER - according to Phil @ Fusion I should be inserting 'Linked Models' not using the 'Insert Derive' in this case. Why was I not aware of this because it is not an item on the insert menu

It is done by using their file system and right clicking and selecting 'insert into current design'. This works great if you want to insert the entire model in that link but it lacks the flexibility of the 'insert derive' where you can insert a bit from another model.

So a solution sort of and onward

mnementh · « **Reply #43 on:** June 04, 2020, 05:13:39 pm »

Yeah... now you're FEELING the part of my lament about "having to outwit the software that's SUPPOSED to be helping you"...

mnem
Moose are not good at water-skiing.

beanflying · « **Reply #44 on:** June 05, 2020, 05:00:32 am »

Sometime later. Time to run some virtual 24V wiring to power it up

pipe2null · « **Reply #45 on:** June 06, 2020, 01:52:36 am »

So I finally broke down and installed Fusion after spending multiple days writing a new threads library for openscad from scratch. It works well and renders much, much faster than other libraries, but it was a PIA directly calculating every point and facet in the thing to maintain standard thread profile and whatnot in order to get the perf gain... But I digress. I'm familiar with thingiverse for getting various stls and scad files. I usually spin my own designs from scratch anyway, but not when I'm just getting started with a new-to-me software platform.

Any recommended sites for open source/free Fusion designs files? Especially if the site is primarily for 3DP audience. Thanks

beanflying · « **Reply #46 on:** June 06, 2020, 02:21:29 am »

There are some I have shared in the https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/3d-printer-yet/ thread but given the size of some Fusion files I have tended more toward just uploading STL's there. Some things I do are really niche so I don't share them and some of what I do is for $ and nothing to do with Electronics so they don't always get shown.

As to a larger Fusion sharing site there isn't one I am aware of and as the software is aimed at commercial use it is more likely you will only find files linked to here or there rather than a library.

Here is an early project box of mine if you want something to play with. Takes generic 7x9cm evilbay project boards and 3mm knurlnut inserts https://a360.co/2MANwxq Bound to be some things in it I would do much differently now but it prints great without supports. Take it apart and make it better

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #47 on:** June 06, 2020, 03:22:01 am »

beanflying,

Thank you for sharing your Fusion 360 file for the box.

I put the box together:

It looks like there is no gap between the lid and the body of the box?

I see you printed this, how does the lid fit?

I generated the STL file for the box and sliced it. The software estimates 3.5 hours to print the box, no lid. How long did the print take?

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #48 on:** June 06, 2020, 03:26:03 am »

As the saying goes 'I like a tight Seal'

It worked fine as is with my CR-10S at the time and I have done a couple of the Ender which also worked. If you are worried about it use the press/pull (Q shortcut) and push the mating face in by 0.1-0.2mm to give it some clearance. Print time sounds about right too.

This mornings tweakage and Render - should have included a Shark next to the text

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #49 on:** June 06, 2020, 04:59:59 am »

Hi,

This is my version of the 7x9 project box:

The modelling is different. This is the order of operations:

Modelled the PCB first.
Encased the board in a solid block
Applied fillets to the external corners
Used the shell command to hollow the block
Split the hollow block
Add the lip around the lid
Add mounting spacers

Still to do

Add the lid attach.

IF you change the board dimensions or move the mounting holes on the board, the enclosure will 'track'.

File attached.

Jay_Diddy_B

7x9 jdb v2.zip (233.83 kB - downloaded 104 times.)

mnementh · « **Reply #50 on:** June 06, 2020, 10:31:28 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 06, 2020, 03:26:03 am

This mornings tweakage and Render - should have included a Shark next to the text

What... no unicorn farts? I'm mildly offended.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #51 on:** June 07, 2020, 04:51:09 am »

Wonder how Unicorn Farts Explode with 35kV shove up their bits

Not idiot proof but an attempt at improving the odds of the idiots not becoming a Darwin Award winner. Using the old Aussie Standard colours for Mains and I REFUSE to use Black as Hot

you complete dicks in charge in the USA

mnementh · « **Reply #52 on:** June 07, 2020, 12:58:41 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 07, 2020, 04:51:09 am

Wonder how Unicorn Farts Explode with 35kV shove up their bits

Not idiot proof but an attempt at improving the odds of the idiots not becoming a Darwin Award winner. Using the old Aussie Standard colours for Mains and I REFUSE to use Black as Hot you complete dicks in charge in the USA

Really only one way to find out...

Yes, it's true; Americans think with their dicks, which means they vote with their dicks. Either being a dick or twiddling their wieners pretty much every minute of the day.

mnem
There IS a reason I'm trying to escape from DumbFuckistan, you know.

beanflying · « **Reply #53 on:** June 07, 2020, 01:04:08 pm »

You tell you other half you are going to probe Unicorns with HV and see what the response is

11pm must mean it is knock off time for my Brain. Port & Chocolate I think

End of the day Renders and still did some outside when the Sun was Shining.

mnementh · « **Reply #54 on:** June 07, 2020, 01:43:52 pm »

She sez, and I quote, "As long as it's attached to your nutsack, probe away..."

I don't know whether to take that as a threat or a challenge...

mnem
Now, of course... I can't stop thinking about it.

pipe2null · « **Reply #55 on:** June 08, 2020, 12:44:01 am »

Not sure which thread is better for this Q, this topic or the 3D Printer Yet? one. Figured "Mechanical Design" might be a closer match. ANYway...

So I'm working on a few different projects related to 3D printable pneumatic parts and/or piped air kinda stuff. My immediate project I'm trying to get done is an anemometer (air flow and pressure meter) that uses a couple reasonably precise I2C pressure sensors (BMP388's). I have an initial prototype that kinda works, but I still have much experimenting to do with different pitot/venturi/etc configurations, and hopefully improve sensor drift a bit.

But the issue I keep coming back to is how to run wires through the wall of a pressurized 3D printed container/pipe? For a finished design, using gasketted nuts and bolts as intermediate conductors would probably work, but not ideal when I'm trying out a bunch of different configurations and need to swap the sensors to newly printed parts. Using glue to fill in around wires run through actual holes in the container doesn't really work since the sensor modules I'm currently using have little cable adapters that I don't want to mess up.

Thoughts?

beanflying · « **Reply #56 on:** June 08, 2020, 12:53:19 am »

Without a bit more of a picture of what you are doing I would have thought surface roughness and 3D printing would be an issue? What sort of pressure are you running at?

Back when I had a real job we used fairly much off the shelf Stainless Cable glands with submersible pumps at a few Bar of water pressure with open motors in the shells under them. Against a pressurized container they should cope with a bit more providing you don't blow the threads out.

pipe2null · « **Reply #57 on:** June 08, 2020, 01:34:45 am »

The cable glands should provide a good short term solution. Long term too unless I figure a different way of doing it that is printable. Thanks!

Yea, surface roughness, getting air-tight connections with non ideal tolerances and octagon-ish "circular" curves makes things a bit challenging trying to do pneumatic bits and pieces with 3DP. To start with, I'm using pressures not much above ambient, but I'll see what I can get up to. When (if?) I come up with designs worth releasing, I fully intend on doing failure testing... Who needs fireworks when you have designs to test? Perhaps those little printed plastic pinatas are filled with unicorns?

Heh. Kidding! (Mostly...)

beanflying · « **Reply #58 on:** June 08, 2020, 05:26:39 am »

Stop Means Stop. A few times around the WEB I have had muppets wanting to rewire Emergency Stops and keep x,y or z alive

Punch the button and nada lest you release your smoke and yet they want to argue

Laser version because it was the most recent case of such muppetry

Learn to love the insert manufacturers part https://autodesk-fusion.partcommunity.com/3d-cad-models/sso as well as McMaster Carr to save a heap of time.

beanflying · « **Reply #59 on:** June 08, 2020, 06:29:42 am »

Sometimes Pseudo Models are all that is needed to get an idea across don't sweat the little things always. Looks far to shiny to be a cheap and cheerful Chinese product anyway

Done with the help of a manufacturers hose barb assembly twice. 10 minute model

mnementh · « **Reply #60 on:** June 08, 2020, 04:10:25 pm »

Quote from: pipe2null on June 08, 2020, 12:44:01 am

Not sure which thread is better for this Q, this topic or the 3D Printer Yet? one. Figured "Mechanical Design" might be a closer match. ANYway...

So I'm working on a few different projects related to 3D printable pneumatic parts and/or piped air kinda stuff. My immediate project I'm trying to get done is an anemometer (air flow and pressure meter) that uses a couple reasonably precise I2C pressure sensors (BMP388's). I have an initial prototype that kinda works, but I still have much experimenting to do with different pitot/venturi/etc configurations, and hopefully improve sensor drift a bit.

But the issue I keep coming back to is how to run wires through the wall of a pressurized 3D printed container/pipe? For a finished design, using gasketted nuts and bolts as intermediate conductors would probably work, but not ideal when I'm trying out a bunch of different configurations and need to swap the sensors to newly printed parts. Using glue to fill in around wires run through actual holes in the container doesn't really work since the sensor modules I'm currently using have little cable adapters that I don't want to mess up.

Thoughts?

If you can lay your hands on an old CPAP/BiPAP machine, particularly the ResMed series (I've picked up a few at the thrift) to tinker with, they have a pretty well developed differential pressure venturi & MAF sensor assembly in them which tinkery might lend some valuable insight into the work you're doing.

Just a thought...

mnem

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #61 on:** June 08, 2020, 05:59:54 pm »

Quote from: pipe2null on June 08, 2020, 01:34:45 am

The cable glands should provide a good short term solution. Long term too unless I figure a different way of doing it that is printable. Thanks!

How about using a small PCB with the connections soldered and an O ring (or silicone):

Jay_Diddy_B

beanflying · « **Reply #62 on:** June 09, 2020, 06:32:45 am »

I needed a generic Microswitch and couldn't find a model to 'borrow' so I rolled my own. Available to steal here if it is of use https://a360.co/2A61YuZ or you just want to play.

pipe2null · « **Reply #63 on:** June 09, 2020, 07:26:31 am »

@beanflying: I'll probably play with your switch later. I'm currently debating taking the plunge into CNC and laser cutting. To be clear, the cheap-but-better-than-a-toy end of the spectrum. I haven't done either before, so my dilemma is figuring out the cheapest solution that isn't a waste of money... I don't think I'm ready for a complete-from-scratch DIY reprap type setup, so I've been looking at chinese kits (with ball screw) and such. Your microswitch and muppet comments reminded me that I need to look into endstops. Heh.

How long did it take you to make the microswitch model?

Quote from: mnementh on June 08, 2020, 04:10:25 pm

If you can lay your hands on an old CPAP/BiPAP machine, particularly the ResMed series (I've picked up a few at the thrift) to tinker with, they have a pretty well developed differential pressure venturi & MAF sensor assembly in them which tinkery might lend some valuable insight into the work you're doing.

Heh, funny you should mention that. I actually have a CPAP machine in the room, but it's on loan and the way it's manufactured is not friendly to uninvited tinkering. I'll check the local thrift joints when they finally open up. I was thinking of just doing an airflow meter, but your mention of MAF made me scratch my head a bit.... Hmmm...

Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on June 08, 2020, 05:59:54 pm

How about using a small PCB with the connections soldered and an O ring (or silicone):

Yea, that could probably work for lower pressures. I'll probably try that out as soon as I figure out what I'm doing for non-o-ring gaskets. Which brings me back to my current ridiculous excuse -- ERR -- I mean my current "need" for cheap-ish laser cutting in my lab. I have multiple sets of cutting tools, but no, of course I want sharks with laser beams mounted on their heads. Or unicorns with lasers? I'm not sure if that's a more appropriate reference for this thread.

beanflying · « **Reply #64 on:** June 09, 2020, 08:04:10 am »

Probably 30 minutes I guess for the switch model. It wasn't important to be to uber accurate with things like measuring arm angles etc but it is accurate on the rest if it needs to be made into another assembly for example including the mounting holes and width. So model appropriately I guess is what I am saying, in some cases I would simply leave a space for the switch in the design rather than model it and insert it.

With Laser cutting or CNC for that matter think seriously about what is the biggest likely wiget I will want to make 'sometimes' or if it is a one off or very rare you need a big widget then look at the differential between out sourcing the work to extra size and cost of owning the bigger toys and the space requirement.

Initially I went for an upmarket 300x200 40W Laser and should have gone to at least a 600x400 60-80W in hindsight but I am now building a 1200x900 100W

In reality this is larger than needed for all likely jobs but it is the last Laser I will need or build (famous last words

).

The larger CNC I own and still need to get rewired and operational (separate dirty workspace reasons partly) is a 1000x600 working area with a 2.2kW spindle, which while not huge if I need anything larger done I would be happy at this stage to farm out as the next step up is really to a full 8x4' bed and the space required is massive. I could generate work and $ locally if I owned a larger one but it is not where I am currently at.

EDIT - Virtually wired in place

mnementh · « **Reply #65 on:** June 09, 2020, 01:31:49 pm »

Dammit bean, would you stop waggling your Fusion-Fu in our faces like that? We feel inadequate enough next to your collection of lasers and wood-mangling tools...

mnem
"widget... widget-widget..."

beanflying · « **Reply #66 on:** June 09, 2020, 01:36:16 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on June 09, 2020, 01:31:49 pm

Dammit bean, would you stop waggling your Fusion-Fu in our faces like that? We feel inadequate enough next to your collection of lasers and wood-mangling tools...

mnem
"widget... widget-widget..."

Download the model, follow what I did when or try and find out what I should have done better. The challenge is there for you

pipe2null · « **Reply #67 on:** June 09, 2020, 08:27:52 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 09, 2020, 08:04:10 am

With Laser cutting or CNC for that matter think seriously about what is the biggest likely wiget I will want to make 'sometimes' or if it is a one off or very rare you need a big widget then look at the differential between out sourcing the work to extra size and cost of owning the bigger toys and the space requirement.

Initially I went for an upmarket 300x200 40W Laser and should have gone to at least a 600x400 60-80W in hindsight but I am now building a 1200x900 100W In reality this is larger than needed for all likely jobs but it is the last Laser I will need or build (famous last words ).

The larger CNC I own and still need to get rewired and operational (separate dirty workspace reasons partly) is a 1000x600 working area with a 2.2kW spindle, which while not huge if I need anything larger done I would be happy at this stage to farm out as the next step up is really to a full 8x4' bed and the space required is massive. I could generate work and $ locally if I owned a larger one but it is not where I am currently at.
(Attachment Link)

Hmm. Well, I have the challenge of finding an "apartment friendly" solution that avoids being lynched by my neighbors, plus all the normal challenges getting into CNC and laser for the first time. I have plenty of available windows, so fume extraction should not be a problem, and I'll probably have to use a tarp/drop cloth to catch dust and debris, and supersize my mini fire extinguisher. Is CO2 commonly used to keep work pieces from catching fire? Working area size-wise for spindle use, the baby 3018 kits are too small but the 6040 kits are a bit too expensive for me ATM. For laser, it would be nice to have a larger format but cheap frame big enough to cut reasonably sized colored acrylic panels for a dry box and 3DP enclosure. I'm still scratching my head on this one: you can get away with a large cheap belt driven frame for laser, but using the same kinetics and controller for both the spindle and laser saves a lot of cash...

For spindle: What wattage/RPM should I get for PCB work and/or non-metal enclosures, or generally speaking milling/cutting/drilling materials up to but NOT including metal? I'm arbitrarily using surface mount and through hole PCBs as my minimum capability bar. As far as noise pollution is concerned (apartment...), how much of a difference is a water cooled spindle compared to air cooled?
For laser: I really, really, really, REALLY want a higher powered CO2 or equivalent laser, but that just isn't going to happen any time soon unless there is an extremely good fire sale, so I'm looking at cheap-ish chinese laser modules. Any idea what the minimum output wattage laser module would be that isn't a complete waste of money, for cutting colored acrylic on the upper end of use (and rubber or silicone gaskets)?

I'm sure I'll have questions more related to Fusion after new toys -- ERR -- I mean tools get ordered and delivered.

Quote from: mnementh on June 09, 2020, 01:31:49 pm

Dammit bean, would you stop waggling your Fusion-Fu in our faces like that? We feel inadequate enough next to your collection of lasers and wood-mangling tools...

mnem
"widget... widget-widget..."

It will NOT admit feelings of inadequacy! But I can't hide the Olympic sized pool of drool collecting on my desk... Hmm... Apparently drool volume can be measured in watts of laser output. Who knew?

mnementh · « **Reply #68 on:** June 09, 2020, 09:50:04 pm »

I'm sure bean knows where there's a online converter for that; seems it would be a standard currency in some circles.

Maybe your next design should be a drool cup with ear-loops...?

mnem
Hell, at this point even my feelings of inadequacy have feelings of inadequacy...

beanflying · « **Reply #69 on:** June 10, 2020, 01:00:18 am »

I make no apologies for puddles of drool but I also acknowledge there is always someone out there with a better, faster or bigger toy/tool too in an ideal world I would have an 8x4 table with a Big spindle and Plasma fitted

With your apartment limitation and your current wants there is a couple of options. One is you build a 'proper' CNC router with linear guide rails and ballscrews because open build rollers and belts will SUCK for accuracy in particular if you want to do SMD sized PCB's. 400-750W of VFD spindle will be plenty (avoid using woodworking router adaptions). IF you are prepared to not do any large or photo engraving then you 'could' fit a proper real 10W diode to the gantry for cutting and slower speed engraving this with a few passes will do 3mm Acrylic and leave you with one machine. Given the complexities of CO2 Lasers/Mirrors and lenses it is really not compatible with the mess of CNC in one box.

If you choose the better option of the two a separate Laser given the space constraints then 40W is sensible you can cut slowly 6mm Acrylic/Ply in single passes and run high speed engraving. My current Toy - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/40w-300x200mm-laser-cutter-engraver-vollerun/ but with a bigger capacity than mine is sensible. X axis Linear Bearing and Y with roller wheels and belt drive on all is fine as there is very low inertia compared to CNC Routing and the Y movements are slow compared to the X. One option is DIY from Rob who I got the plans for my bigger one then bashed to larger ones again well worth the few $ for the Fusion Plans and build guides https://www.furtherfabrication.com/resources?category=Y400 this size and table top style makes sense and his videos are worth a watch regardless https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZ72zDm2feverqV7qAbNH7Q

Yippee Team Fusion has found the rendering bug on my layout and got me a solution product support and 'Free' software

Feel free to browse the model and critique, I do reserve the right to ignore that critique

https://a360.co/2XZg1u0

mnementh · « **Reply #70 on:** June 10, 2020, 02:38:09 am »

Yup... starting to look like a right proper -INATOR there bean... we're all looking forward to the human subject testing.

Tho I AM a bit disappointed... only ONE BRB...?

mnem
*toddling off to ded while I still can*

beanflying · « **Reply #71 on:** June 10, 2020, 07:24:09 am »

Only one BRB may be shown but I think the size of my upcoming build will maybe get one fitted at each end.

Another 'rough' model for the project today. Take the picture use it as a Canvas and use the apparent known over all dimensions for scale. Result sort of kind of looks like the real thing and good enough for 'stralia and then added into the job

mnementh · « **Reply #72 on:** June 10, 2020, 02:55:42 pm »

Yeah; that's exactly what I was thinking on the BRB thing; one of my regular clients back in the day required a BRB at eye-level (even if it had to be mounted on a pole) on every left corner of any machine or series of machines & jigs bigger than a refrigerator. Point being you ALWAYS knew where to look for it no matter where you were or what side you were facing.

What's the duty cycle on that compressor in this application...? Is it one recommended by the people who made your LASER or its driver...?

Asking because that particular one just OOZES "Cheap China-Direct POS" even from a picture on the computer screen... LOL

Decent job on the model, tho!

Good building!

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #73 on:** June 10, 2020, 03:09:01 pm »

The nozzle requirements are really low at only a few PSI and a few LPM so the vibe pumps do fine and are more or less standard with most Lasers. For mine I might just run it via a regulator/trap off my small tanked compressor but

it won't make a lot of difference as the extractor is the noisy bit.

Need to get my head around how to draw this bit next and have it make sense to the average punter https://www.aliexpress.com/i/32962475128.html I already have the final mirror and nozzle assembly done I can drag in for the other part of it.

$:=\$ time

pipe2null · « **Reply #74 on:** June 10, 2020, 07:48:33 pm »

I'd like to lodge a complaint against the Bea-nNut Gallery... I previously had myself convinced that I'd just go with the cheapest laser diode module that had enough power not to be a complete waste of money. Now after binge watching Rob's DIY CO2 videos and buying and reviewing his build plans, not nearly as complicated as I had previously envisioned...

And it seems quite a bit cheaper than I had thought too, at least if you avoid commercial electronics and go the reprap/Marlin/blah route for control and stepper drivers... He listed cost of aluminum extrusion at around $500 for the large format (1200mm x 600mm working area) and around $300 for his smaller desktop design (600mm x 400mm working area), so scaling the thing up or down doesn't change the overall price a whole helluva lot since Rob's BOM includes about the same $ for electronics as the laser+laser PS...

Hmm...

Quote from: mnementh on June 09, 2020, 09:50:04 pm

Maybe your next design should be a drool cup with ear-loops...?

That sounds ergonomically challenging, a bit too curvy for my current CAD skill level, but I'll keep it in mind. Or I could just re-purpose an old fashioned tin-can-and-string telephone.

beanflying · « **Reply #75 on:** June 10, 2020, 11:25:12 pm »

As we go a little sideways on the thread (never happens of course

) look at https://lightburnsoftware.com/ for software it is what I am going to with my new one rather than the issues with RDWorks and go for a Smoothieware board. I have a clone one (open source regardless) that hooked up fine with Lightburn and at some stage it will go into my smaller Laser so I can stick with one bit of software.
http://smoothieware.org/laser-cutter-guide

beanflying · « **Reply #76 on:** June 11, 2020, 02:38:13 am »

Another External CAD repository that exports Fusion format

I have added this link into post #1 too before @tautech gets in my ear again

Signup was painless and you had to opt-in for marketing rubbish so

https://www.traceparts.com/en It has taken longer to type this post.

I was looking through the natively available options in Fusion for a footswitch and couldn't find whgat I wanted so Google to the rescue https://www.traceparts.com/en/product/rs-components-footswitch?Product=10-16112011-141340 Auto opened in a new model in Fusion which isn't a major thing but in this case I would have just shoved it into the other model as a part and saved the separate file.

Still saved 20 minutes of head scratching

mnementh · « **Reply #77 on:** June 11, 2020, 02:41:52 am »

Yebbut... you aren't going to BUY that are you...?

mnem
*knocks self unconscious with a ZIF mallet*

beanflying · « **Reply #78 on:** June 11, 2020, 02:46:37 am »

Given my Kidney's and Right arm are already mortgaged it is unlikely short of buying the winning lottery tick this weekend

beanflying · « **Reply #79 on:** June 12, 2020, 01:55:30 am »

This morning over Coffee I went looking for a model for a USB Drive to insert. NIL found

So what I did find was some very boring one piece cable end models https://autodesk-fusion.partcommunity.com/3d-cad-models/sso/usb-cables-te-connectivity?info=teconnectivity%2Fcable_assemblies%2Fcopper_cable_assemblies_new%2Fmultimedia_cables%2Fusb_cables.prj&cwid=6550 and split their boring grey selves into bits for some adaption and material changes.

Then copied the tweaked USB A bits into a new Component and roughed in a body styled after Brand V without the retraction bit for a KISS Drive. All three are here if they are useful https://a360.co/3hdA00S

EDIT: RJ45 model is here https://a360.co/2XUD0HP I treated it fairly differently to get the 'look' I wanted. Rather than split it up I just changed a bunch of surface finishes to Blue and Clear but it remains one body.

The Raised Text is actually done in the larger model with one face coloured for visuals so you won't find it in the model linked above.

mnementh · « **Reply #80 on:** June 13, 2020, 01:46:58 am »

The part of me that survived working HellDesk at a borg cubicle ship (one of those buildings that's nothing but floor after floor of these) cringes when I see things like those poor decapitated cables...

This was the culprit in "one of those real

calls" enough times it made me wish we could outlaw anything sharper than a eraser in the building...

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #81 on:** June 14, 2020, 03:02:12 am »

Doing a Manual DRC and Oops

Using an Actual DIN rail to pacify @mnementh for using snipped cords

mnementh · « **Reply #82 on:** June 14, 2020, 03:54:47 am »

Hey, I’ve seen THAT in in the wild too...

“What happened tooda fiber uplink from the 13th floor?”

“I dunno, what happened...?”

It keeps flip-flopping whenever they’re on a video conference.”

“Oh fuuuu...”

“Oh eff WHAT...?”

“Joey did a rack & stack in the MDF last week...”

“Good lord... who let HIM in THERE...?”

“You said ‘I don’t care whose turn it is; I want those switches turned up before the weekend’. It was his turn.”

“Ohhhh, fuuuuuuu....”

mnem
You can’t make this shit up.

beanflying · « **Reply #83 on:** June 15, 2020, 04:36:49 am »

'Fixed' also redid the Pneumatic Plumbing layout. Added another lump to the design I wasn't going to. The Industrial blower because they are clunky looking and would dominate the layout. The Cure is change it to Clear Acrylic as a material and add it in. There to show what it is but see through so it more or less hides.

beanflying · « **Reply #84 on:** June 16, 2020, 03:41:35 am »

Learn to love the Loft Command.

Shiny Bling. 3/8 Thermistor thingy so the Render is just because.

Single Sketch as shown. Three Extrudes, one for the hole in the brass plug, one for the body and another for the two connections. Loft one Body to one connection as a new body then another for the other side then use the combine bodies command to put them together.

The Brass bits and Hose ends are all inserted from manufactures and just put into place using the point to point move so the alignment is easy.

beanflying · « **Reply #85 on:** June 17, 2020, 03:19:42 am »

Just for completeness sake Epic model is now complete. https://a360.co/2XZg1u0

Some of the details

17 Discrete Externally created custom models linked into the design (some of them then used multiple times) plus about 6 small Models created in the larger model.
Maybe 20-30 externally sourced models/components from various libraries are used within the various models.
Something over 150 Sketches
Having a quick look at some of the sections and there is well over 1000 bodies in the overall model.

Ryzen 3700X 32GB and a 5700XT Cruises fairly much. The GPU numbers peak around 40% if you really spin the model around, memory usage is fairly light peaking at about 8Gb. That all changes when you try an in-canvas (local) render all cores pegged and very light GPU load

The online viewer also has some good features you can right click on bits and hide them or also add markups and export views.

mnementh · « **Reply #86 on:** June 17, 2020, 02:03:52 pm »

Quote from: beanflying on June 16, 2020, 03:41:35 am

Learn to love the Loft Command.

Shiny Bling. 3/8 Thermistor thingy so the Render is just because.

Single Sketch as shown. Three Extrudes, one for the hole in the brass plug, one for the body and another for the two connections. Loft one Body to one connection as a new body then another for the other side then use the combine bodies command to put them together.

The Brass bits and Hose ends are all inserted from manufactures and just put into place using the point to point move so the alignment is easy.

Interesting... So loft in this case is being used as a "mirror" function? That does sound like a powerful function. *makes mental note to search out some tutorials*

The brass tee and the plug you used as a base for the TC are all from someone's catalog; McMaster-Carr or Grainger, etc... you only had to make the silvery bit? That is intended to represent a stainless tube, crimped around a couple wires, like most industrial thermocouples/thermistors come packaged?

I wouldn't have thought of that; I'd still be

trying to make the brass plug.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #87 on:** June 17, 2020, 02:21:23 pm »

You could use the Mirror command with one loft but you would need a plane to mirror around or you could copy and rotate the part around an axis but then you need to create that axis. So Two Lofts then post joined into one is easiest in this case. More ways than one to skin that Cat

The Tee and Plug were McMaster Carr bits using the Move command but the align point to point in this case. Get the orientation correct first then pick a circle on one and a circle on the other and tweak the height if you need to. It took me some fiddle the first few times but do it in that order makes it easiest.

EDIT: There you go todays learning module

Place the Tee under the plug after fixing the orientation of it. Use the already created sketch and make the 4mm Probe and pins with lofts. 20mm Probe and 5mm pins with a 5mm offset is about right for the look. Download link https://a360.co/2N3vJiM

I will check in after some $:=\$

mnementh · « **Reply #88 on:** June 17, 2020, 05:28:05 pm »

Oh, now you're just making my brain hurt.

I think I'll come back to that when I'm a bit more awake myself; just came in from shooting hoops with the boi.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #89 on:** June 18, 2020, 01:24:17 am »

Got to look after the Kids and your mental health first

The move is two parts in this case as I deliberately laid the tee on its side (Because I am

)
Step one is just a rotate as per pic one.
Step two is put the tee and align it with the plug/ This is what took some sorting out for me initially. I tried just using the 3D move arrows to align bits and they never did. You just need to pick in this case two circles and it doesn't matter they are different sizes Fusion will force a common center point. For looks I then moved the Tee down 1mm so a partial thread shows.

This small skill is really worth learning and in particular the point to point move.

Then onto the sketchy extrudy lofty bits.....

beanflying · « **Reply #90 on:** June 19, 2020, 02:05:47 am »

In a similar vein this concept model https://a360.co/2N9BaNb for Cross Bed Airflow on a Laser.

The Elbows were made using a Loft between two Plates. This could have been done with a Circle on one sketch and a Path on another with the Path function but the Loft is easier. ** For those who haven't tried the Loft function it will not Loft a hollow object it needs to be a solid surface.

So When your Loft is done use the Shell command to hollow it out. But this leaves an issue of the far Face still being in the model. Select it and do an extrude cut to remove it from the world and then you are done.

Take this base model use the rectangular pattern on it do some rotations and aligned moves and presto you have a model to get a concept across to others.

mnementh · « **Reply #91 on:** September 16, 2020, 05:22:21 pm »

You know, every time I get an eMail from AutoDesk/Fusion360, it's to tell me about more features they're taking away. As they still refuse to offer a reasonably-priced nonprofit/personal use subscription, I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

mnem
Stick a fork in me, I'm done.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #92 on:** September 16, 2020, 09:18:50 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on September 16, 2020, 05:22:21 pm

You know, every time I get an eMail from AutoDesk/Fusion360, it's to tell me about more features they're taking away. As they still refuse to offer a reasonably-priced nonprofit/personal use subscription, I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

mnem
Stick a fork in me, I'm done.

I got this email, too, and figured that too many people were taking advantage of the free service for it to be worth Autodesk's while.

The only part of it that is aggravating is that it won't do STEP export any more.

The "10 active and editable documents" thing seems to me to be that you simply indicate (somehow) that a document is "inactive," meaning that it can't be worked on or edited. But it's still in your cloud account. If you need to work on it, make something else inactive and re-activate it. For the home user who just wants to design things for 3D printing it's not much of a concern.

sokoloff · « **Reply #93 on:** September 16, 2020, 10:07:39 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 16, 2020, 09:18:50 pm

The "10 active and editable documents" thing seems to me to be that you simply indicate (somehow) that a document is "inactive," meaning that it can't be worked on or edited. But it's still in your cloud account. If you need to work on it, make something else inactive and re-activate it. For the home user who just wants to design things for 3D printing it's not much of a concern.

I wasn't so sure. I saw another bit of content on their site somewhere earlier today where they indicated that you need to "archive" a project to let yourself make a new 10th one.

When I took a project in my account and started to archive it, you get a dialog with this scary-sounding warning:

Since it was just a sample project, I then archived it, went to the website and restored it, and it does appear that you can still work on it once restored.

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #94 on:** September 16, 2020, 10:18:19 pm »

Hi,
The STEP export feature is a big deal for me. I was using Fusion 360 to make 3D models for KICAD.

KICAD can use STEP or WRL.

Any suggestions on another way to generate 3D models for KICAD?

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

langwadt · « **Reply #95 on:** September 16, 2020, 10:24:26 pm »

Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on September 16, 2020, 10:18:19 pm

Hi,
The STEP export feature is a big deal for me. I was using Fusion 360 to make 3D models for KICAD.

KICAD can use STEP or WRL.

yep I also use it for kicad models, and you have to use step if you want to export the whole thing as step

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #96 on:** September 16, 2020, 11:14:23 pm »

It is now on Hackaday:

https://hackaday.com/2020/09/16/autodesk-announces-major-changes-to-fusion-360-personal-use-license-terms/

Jay_Diddy_B

Bassman59 · « **Reply #97 on:** September 17, 2020, 12:04:39 am »

Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on September 16, 2020, 10:18:19 pm

Hi,
The STEP export feature is a big deal for me. I was using Fusion 360 to make 3D models for KICAD.

KICAD can use STEP or WRL.

Any suggestions on another way to generate 3D models for KICAD?

I also use F360 to create STEP models for Kicad. A thing I did last week was to create a 3D model of the rotary encoder with RGB LED shaft that SparkFun sells. It's a close fit to the Bourns part (same PCB footprint) but the body size is different enough to not be a true replacement. Bourns has a model, Sparkfun does not. And I was able to create a decent-enough model of the part and I put it into my Kicad library. I didn't bother re-generating the STEP model of the PCB with the new model; instead I just modified the board model that I had already imported into F360 and replaced the Bourns model with mine. That worked as expected.

The guy who does the excellent Kicad Step-Up thing (which, for those who don't know, is a tool that takes a STEP model and allows you to precisely place it within the PCB footprint) does that with FreeCAD. But FreeCAD is shite compared to F360. I guess you get what you pay for, dunno.

asmi · « **Reply #98 on:** September 17, 2020, 07:34:44 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 17, 2020, 12:04:39 am

Any suggestions on another way to generate 3D models for KICAD?

It's not just KiCAD. I used it for making step files for Orcad and Altium as well. This is a super big deal to me. I guess I've got to look for alternatives, as this functionality is not worth $300/year to me.
UPDATE - I googled around a bit and found this: https://www.alibre.com/atom3d/ Looks like a promising option, no-BS permanent license model, and upgrade path. Will need to take a closer look at it.

langwadt · « **Reply #99 on:** September 17, 2020, 09:26:16 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on September 16, 2020, 05:22:21 pm

As they still refuse to offer a reasonably-priced nonprofit/personal use subscription, I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

mnem
Stick a fork in me, I'm done.

yeh, with their claims of "staying true to our guiding principles of democratizing design for everyone." it just doesn't feel right that someone
using every day professionally and some using for fun as a hobby on weekends should pay the same

to a company using it professionally to make money $800 for three years might as well be nothing, for a hobbyist not so much

sokoloff · « **Reply #100 on:** September 17, 2020, 10:28:41 pm »

Quote from: langwadt on September 17, 2020, 09:26:16 pm

Quote from: mnementh on September 16, 2020, 05:22:21 pm
As they still refuse to offer a reasonably-priced nonprofit/personal use subscription, I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.
yeh, with their claims of "staying true to our guiding principles of democratizing design for everyone." it just doesn't feel right that someone
using every day professionally and some using for fun as a hobby on weekends should pay the same

to a company using it professionally to make money $800 for three years might as well be nothing, for a hobbyist not so much

I'm not happy about the loss of STEP export either, but I take the perspective that I, as a weekend hobbyist, am going to continue to use Fusion360 for modeling for 3D printing and I'm not going to pay the same as someone using it everyday professionally.

They're going to pay $300-450/yr and I'm going to pay nothing.

PlainName · « **Reply #101 on:** September 18, 2020, 03:44:31 am »

Quote

I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

It's taken you this long to figure that?

It's Autodesk. They're not in the business of giving people free stuff - their core is to sell expensive stuff. The only reason they let you have this for nowt is because that's the only way to get new bums on seats. It's a well-trodden path, particularly with complex products where there is a learning curve - get them hooked with low- or zero-cost versions and then force them to upgrade once they are locked in. Microsoft achieved this by turning a blind eye to pirated Word, so despite stuff like Ami being superior they got the eyeballs. When a business buts new stuff, what their users already know has the foot in the door, and the rest is history.

Here, they want your muscle memory to favour their tools, and all your documents locked into their format. The longer you stick with them the harder it will be to break away...

The surprise here is not that Autodesk are turning the screws but that apparently no-one saw it coming.

krzysssztof · « **Reply #102 on:** September 18, 2020, 05:46:19 am »

To all who is/was using Fusion 360 for creating KiCAD footprints : you should definitely try FreeCAD.

It has much less features than Fusion 360, it is also harder to master and has some issues.

But from the other side - it has got some plugins dedicated to exchange data between KiCAD and FreeCAD. You can send your models back and forth in just a second. It also has a one button click funtionality to importPCB model from KiCAD so you can easily fit it to your housing modeled in FreeCAD.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #103 on:** September 18, 2020, 07:02:13 pm »

Quote from: krzysssztof on September 18, 2020, 05:46:19 am

To all who is/was using Fusion 360 for creating KiCAD footprints : you should definitely try FreeCAD.

It has much less features than Fusion 360, it is also harder to master and has some issues.

But from the other side - it has got some plugins dedicated to exchange data between KiCAD and FreeCAD. You can send your models back and forth in just a second. It also has a one button click funtionality to importPCB model from KiCAD so you can easily fit it to your housing modeled in FreeCAD.

I have tried FreeCAD -- for the Kicad Step-Up -- and other than for that one specific use, FreeCAD is awful.

PlainName · « **Reply #104 on:** September 18, 2020, 07:25:17 pm »

Quote

FreeCAD is awful

But is actually free, and will remain so

As it happens, I used it for real last night to create a 3D model to print. My normal CAD tool is TurboCAD, so FreeCAD isn't as bad in comparison than if I were coming from Fusion. But then you pays your money and takes your choice - if you like Fusion 360 enough, surely you would buy a license.

mnementh · « **Reply #105 on:** September 19, 2020, 01:59:13 pm »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 18, 2020, 03:44:31 am

Quote
I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

It's taken you this long to figure that?

It's Autodesk. They're not in the business of giving people free stuff - their core is to sell expensive stuff. The only reason they let you have this for nowt is because that's the only way to get new bums on seats. It's a well-trodden path, particularly with complex products where there is a learning curve - get them hooked with low- or zero-cost versions and then force them to upgrade once they are locked in. Microsoft achieved this by turning a blind eye to pirated Word, so despite stuff like Ami being superior they got the eyeballs. When a business buts new stuff, what their users already know has the foot in the door, and the rest is history.

Here, they want your muscle memory to favour their tools, and all your documents locked into their format. The longer you stick with them the harder it will be to break away...

The surprise here is not that Autodesk are turning the screws but that apparently no-one saw it coming.

We all saw it coming. We're not stupid; we're engineers FFS.

But there's a difference between "turning the screws" and making your introductory product useless for its primary purpose, thereby driving those who might be willing to give you money for it turn away in disgust. AutoDouche aren't just stepping over that line, they're moving the line to the edge of a cliff and jumping over it.

Given what it has to offer now I certainly wouldn't give them more than $50 for it, and "Not only no, but hell NO!" to their moronic subscription-only business model.

I'll continue using the free version to make plastic toys and spacers/cribbing blocks/bushings to print on my 3DP; that's exactly what it's good for. Any further drafting work will be done in some other environment, and I will take the skills I learned on F360 elsewhere, giving AD $0 for that education. That's exactly what their business model is worth.

mnem
Fuck 'em. And the whores they rode in on.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #106 on:** September 19, 2020, 06:44:15 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on September 19, 2020, 01:59:13 pm

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 18, 2020, 03:44:31 am
Quote
I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

It's taken you this long to figure that?

It's Autodesk. They're not in the business of giving people free stuff - their core is to sell expensive stuff. The only reason they let you have this for nowt is because that's the only way to get new bums on seats. It's a well-trodden path, particularly with complex products where there is a learning curve - get them hooked with low- or zero-cost versions and then force them to upgrade once they are locked in. Microsoft achieved this by turning a blind eye to pirated Word, so despite stuff like Ami being superior they got the eyeballs. When a business buts new stuff, what their users already know has the foot in the door, and the rest is history.

Here, they want your muscle memory to favour their tools, and all your documents locked into their format. The longer you stick with them the harder it will be to break away...

The surprise here is not that Autodesk are turning the screws but that apparently no-one saw it coming.

We all saw it coming. We're not stupid; we're engineers FFS.

Well, see, that's the crazy thing. All over this forum I see engineers (or maybe they're hobbyists pretending to be engineers) who are always looking for ways to "hack" a product to get a "free" upgrade (see the endless Rigol and Siglent threads) or looking for cheap clones of products. "Oh, the Saelae logic analyzer is too expensive, fuck them, I'll use the clone." So if you're an engineer, you should understand how product pricing works and why the Saelae is more expensive.

I wonder how many of these engineers expect customers to pay their asking price for their products.

I wonder how many of these engineers decry Chinese cloners when it comes to their products.

Quote

But there's a difference between "turning the screws" and making your introductory product useless for its primary purpose, thereby driving those who might be willing to give you money for it turn away in disgust. AutoDouche aren't just stepping over that line, they're moving the line to the edge of a cliff and jumping over it.

Given what it has to offer now I certainly wouldn't give them more than $50 for it, and "Not only no, but hell NO!" to their moronic subscription-only business model.

To be honest, I'm surprised that their free version has persisted as long as it has. How does a company pay its engineers if a very usable version of its product is free?

Sure, it's just "software," and "software wants to be free," but unless you work for free and don't want anyone to pay you for your designs, then surely you see that software development is not just handwaving and magic. It's real work.

Quote

I'll continue using the free version to make plastic toys and spacers/cribbing blocks/bushings to print on my 3DP; that's exactly what it's good for. Any further drafting work will be done in some other environment, and I will take the skills I learned on F360 elsewhere, giving AD $0 for that education. That's exactly what their business model is worth.

Please report back and say which environment you've chosen, and whether it's as efficient as F360 or as easy to learn and use, and we'll all switch to it en masse and show those fuckers at Autodesk that we think they suck!

I mean -- yeah, I use Kicad and it's an excellent piece of work regardless of its cost. I hope that their Kicad Services thing enables the developers to make a living doing it. I started using it several years ago (during the run-up to the 4.0 release) because I needed to design some boards and my Ultiboard license was showing its age. Altium then as now was way more expensive than I could justify. The only real option was EAGLE. And I looked at EAGLE, and considered springing the $1000 or whatever for the unlimited license, but hot damn that program was a mess. The libraries system stinks, the user interface was designed by dingbats and the only reason it ever got any traction was because they had a very limited free version that all of the Open Source Hardware weenies jumped on. (I should note that I looked at gEDA back then and that package sucks in every way.) To be fair, the recent price drop in OrCAD makes that look attractive, but see, Kicad is eminently usable.

Can FreeCAD become to 3D design what Kicad is to PCB design? Sure, yeah, if the developers had vision. And income. Right now, FreeCAD is a toy, it has been a toy for several years now, and I don't see evidence that it will be anything but a toy.

All of this is to say that I'll probably end up springing the $300/yr for the "startup" or "personal" or whateverfuck version of F360. Why? Because it works.

langwadt · « **Reply #107 on:** September 19, 2020, 09:16:44 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 19, 2020, 06:44:15 pm

Quote from: mnementh on September 19, 2020, 01:59:13 pm
Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 18, 2020, 03:44:31 am
Quote
I'm beginning to wonder how long before all that's left is the advertising.

It's taken you this long to figure that?

It's Autodesk. They're not in the business of giving people free stuff - their core is to sell expensive stuff. The only reason they let you have this for nowt is because that's the only way to get new bums on seats. It's a well-trodden path, particularly with complex products where there is a learning curve - get them hooked with low- or zero-cost versions and then force them to upgrade once they are locked in. Microsoft achieved this by turning a blind eye to pirated Word, so despite stuff like Ami being superior they got the eyeballs. When a business buts new stuff, what their users already know has the foot in the door, and the rest is history.

Here, they want your muscle memory to favour their tools, and all your documents locked into their format. The longer you stick with them the harder it will be to break away...

The surprise here is not that Autodesk are turning the screws but that apparently no-one saw it coming.

We all saw it coming. We're not stupid; we're engineers FFS.

Well, see, that's the crazy thing. All over this forum I see engineers (or maybe they're hobbyists pretending to be engineers) who are always looking for ways to "hack" a product to get a "free" upgrade (see the endless Rigol and Siglent threads) or looking for cheap clones of products. "Oh, the Saelae logic analyzer is too expensive, fuck them, I'll use the clone." So if you're an engineer, you should understand how product pricing works and why the Saelae is more expensive.

I wonder how many of these engineers expect customers to pay their asking price for their products.

I wonder how many of these engineers decry Chinese cloners when it comes to their products.

Quote
But there's a difference between "turning the screws" and making your introductory product useless for its primary purpose, thereby driving those who might be willing to give you money for it turn away in disgust. AutoDouche aren't just stepping over that line, they're moving the line to the edge of a cliff and jumping over it.

Given what it has to offer now I certainly wouldn't give them more than $50 for it, and "Not only no, but hell NO!" to their moronic subscription-only business model.

To be honest, I'm surprised that their free version has persisted as long as it has. How does a company pay its engineers if a very usable version of its product is free?

Sure, it's just "software," and "software wants to be free," but unless you work for free and don't want anyone to pay you for your designs, then surely you see that software development is not just handwaving and magic. It's real work.

but it was only free to those that worked for free and didn't get any pay for their designs, maybe the issue was that too many where abusing the system
which is sad because a $300-500 a year to a company using it professionally is basically nothing

mnementh · « **Reply #108 on:** September 20, 2020, 03:07:13 am »

All of these arguments were addressed in my "not offering a reasonably-priced personal-use/non-profit use version" comment.

What's broken in their business model is not that they expect to get paid for it, but rather that they deliberately design it to use lots of resources on their end, then use that as an excuse to try and sell it the way some corner pusher sells crack: Free at first to get you hooked, then out come the meathooks every few months for another chunk of money.

Not interested in propagating that business model. For my level of design, their thin-client approach serves ONLY them; it does me no favors. If they offered a sanely-priced version that just does what I need, I'd buy it... ONCE. Not gonna buy it over and over again.

Like I said; I'll use them as long as the free version continues to do what I need. I'll gladly take advantage of the education that software offers. When it ceases to do what I need, then AD will have outlived its usefulness to me and they will be kicked to the curb, just like Adobe and Norton before them.

mnem
*playing the non-zero-sum game*

mstevens · « **Reply #109 on:** September 20, 2020, 01:35:58 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 19, 2020, 06:44:15 pm

Can FreeCAD become to 3D design what Kicad is to PCB design? Sure, yeah, if the developers had vision. And income. Right now, FreeCAD is a toy, it has been a toy for several years now, and I don't see evidence that it will be anything but a toy.

At one point people like yourself were saying the same thing about Linux. Just because it is free, and lacks being developed by a company, does not mean it is a toy.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #110 on:** September 20, 2020, 08:15:23 pm »

Quote from: mstevens on September 20, 2020, 01:35:58 pm

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 19, 2020, 06:44:15 pm

Can FreeCAD become to 3D design what Kicad is to PCB design? Sure, yeah, if the developers had vision. And income. Right now, FreeCAD is a toy, it has been a toy for several years now, and I don't see evidence that it will be anything but a toy.

At one point people like yourself were saying the same thing about Linux. Just because it is free, and lacks being developed by a company, does not mean it is a toy.

Are we at Linux on the desktop yet?

Exactly.

But more to the point, it is obvious that there is a difference between OS development and a niche application like 3D modeling.

You might also notice that I mentioned being a Kicad user, and honestly, that's a better comparison than Linux. I think Kicad succeeds where gEDA and FreeCAD fail because the development process is clear and open, there's a vision for the product, there are a handful of serious lead programmers, and there is financial support from at least one large organization.

langwadt · « **Reply #111 on:** September 20, 2020, 08:49:14 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on September 20, 2020, 03:07:13 am

All of these arguments were addressed in my "not offering a reasonably-priced personal-use/non-profit use version" comment.

What's broken in their business model is not that they expect to get paid for it, but rather that they deliberately design it to use lots of resources on their end, then use that as an excuse to try and sell it the way some corner pusher sells crack: Free at first to get you hooked, then out come the meathooks every few months for another chunk of money.

Not interested in propagating that business model. For my level of design, their thin-client approach serves ONLY them; it does me no favors. If they offered a sanely-priced version that just does what I need, I'd buy it... ONCE. Not gonna buy it over and over again.

Like I said; I'll use them as long as the free version continues to do what I need. I'll gladly take advantage of the education that software offers. When it ceases to do what I need, then AD will have outlived its usefulness to me and they will be kicked to the curb, just like Adobe and Norton before them.

mnem
*playing the non-zero-sum game*

The subscription model gives them a steady income to keep the product current, at the extreme the alternative is that everyone buys it once and they close the company

this guys explains it well: https://www.reddit.com/r/CNC/comments/iuem5t/lots_of_fusion_users_here_so_heres_a_heads_up_to/g5na7ee/

PlainName · « **Reply #112 on:** September 20, 2020, 10:11:16 pm »

Edit: went off on one. A somewhat more coherent response:

Quote

The subscription model gives them a steady income to keep the product current, at the extreme the alternative is that everyone buys it once and they close the company

That's rubbish. First, many many MANY companies seem to manage with a single charge per item. Particularly companies that have to actually supply stuff too (so have proper overheads rather than just a software duplication pseudo-charge).

Second, what God-given right do these companies have to be given a living? Why aren't I given a guaranteed income for doing a hell of a lot of work that no-one wants to pay for? If they want income they should supply what people want to pay for.

Manufacturers of physical goods employ designers to design new products. Unless you're selling tractors (apparently) you're not renting the stuff when you sell it. If you can't afford to continue development of your product because everyone that might ever buy one has already bought it, you suck as a businessman and should be doing something else. Running the UK government springs to mind, but there are other scenarios.

langwadt · « **Reply #113 on:** September 20, 2020, 11:36:56 pm »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 20, 2020, 10:11:16 pm

Edit: went off on one. A somewhat more coherent response:

Quote
The subscription model gives them a steady income to keep the product current, at the extreme the alternative is that everyone buys it once and they close the company

That's rubbish. First, many many MANY companies seem to manage with a single charge per item. Particularly companies that have to actually supply stuff too (so have proper overheads rather than just a software duplication pseudo-charge).

Second, what God-given right do these companies have to be given a living? Why aren't I given a guaranteed income for doing a hell of a lot of work that no-one wants to pay for? If they want income they should supply what people want to pay for.

Manufacturers of physical goods employ designers to design new products. Unless you're selling tractors (apparently) you're not renting the stuff when you sell it. If you can't afford to continue development of your product because everyone that might ever buy one has already bought it, you suck as a businessman and should be doing something else. Running the UK government springs to mind, but there are other scenarios.

I'm particularly happy about subscriptions either but I understand why the companies do it, unlike a physical product unless there is a big change in computer hardware or OS, software doesn't "wear out"

just consider the subscription as a payment plan,

PlainName · « **Reply #114 on:** September 21, 2020, 12:36:05 am »

Quote

just consider the subscription as a payment plan,

It's not, since you can never pay it off. That's like infinite interest.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #115 on:** September 21, 2020, 03:19:24 am »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 20, 2020, 10:11:16 pm

Edit: went off on one. A somewhat more coherent response:

Quote
The subscription model gives them a steady income to keep the product current, at the extreme the alternative is that everyone buys it once and they close the company

That's rubbish. First, many many MANY companies seem to manage with a single charge per item. Particularly companies that have to actually supply stuff too (so have proper overheads rather than just a software duplication pseudo-charge).

So you buy an oscilloscope. You give the vendor say $2,500. You have an oscilloscope, hopefully it does what you want. But what if you realize at some point that you need wider bandwidth, or more channels, or deeper memory? Well, there you go, you have to buy a new oscilloscope. Well, ok, unless you bought one which has an option to add two new channels (which means you paid for an expansion capability you might never use) or add that bandwidth (by swapping out the front end boards with new ones, and you paid for that possibility up front too). In any case, if you want more later, you pay more later too.

re: overheads. So, software engineers don't get paid salaries and benefits? Their offices don't have heating, air conditioning, utilities, all of that? Or are you a hobbyist who thinks like Stallman that "all software should be free?"

Quote

Second, what God-given right do these companies have to be given a living?

They have none. But if they offer a product for sale, then what god-given right do you have to say that they charge too much or that you want it for free? Call up Autodesk and demand that they give you full-up F360 for free forever, and they'll politely tell you to go away.

Quote

Why aren't I given a guaranteed income for doing a hell of a lot of work that no-one wants to pay for?

People don't want to pay for someone else's work because they think they're special or they're entitled. You think you're entitled to their work for free because nobody wants to pay you for your work.

Quote

If they want income they should supply what people want to pay for.

They do. They supply a quality product at an extraordinarily low price. $300 a year for F360 is unbelievably inexpensive, compared to say a SolidWorks license.

Quote

Manufacturers of physical goods employ designers to design new products.

And software vendors employ designers and engineers to design new products, too. Again, you're laboring under the delusion that software engineering isn't actually work and that the engineers doing it do not deserve compensation for their labor. You seem like a manager. (Or a hobbyist.)

Quote

Unless you're selling tractors (apparently) you're not renting the stuff when you sell it. If you can't afford to continue development of your product because everyone that might ever buy one has already bought it, you suck as a businessman and should be doing something else. Running the UK government springs to mind, but there are other scenarios.

So how is it different from a hardware vendor making a new product with the income generated from sales of the previous product? If you're making a widget that nobody buys, you have no income, and you won't be able to make Widget Version 2. Same thing with software. The vendors take income from sales of previous products and plow it into development of the follow-on. If there is no income, there is no follow-on.

I think you're a hobbyist and you want everything for free because you're special. Ask whomever made the computer you used to post your rants if they'll just give it to you for free, because you're special. Please report back.

PlainName · « **Reply #116 on:** September 21, 2020, 03:37:01 am »

Quote

So, software engineers don't get paid salaries and benefits? Their offices don't have heating, air conditioning, utilities, all of that?

Don't put words onto my keyboard. I said that the cost of getting to the next funding round (i.e. the next product or whatever) is part of the selling price of the previous product. Or do you think car manufacturers lay off their engineers once a car is shipping?

Quote

Or are you a hobbyist who thinks like Stallman that "all software should be free?"

What post of mine are you commenting to? If you actually read 'em instead of foaming off you'd notice that I've been suggeting people pay for this stuff. At no point have I said it should be provided free, and in fact pointed out good reasons to be wary of stuff that is!

Quote

what god-given right do you have to say that they charge too much

My wallet says I have the right to say that are charging too much for me. Or I don't like their terms. So I don't use it and haven't bought it. What's your problem with that?

Quote

or that you want it for free?

Gordon Bennett! Please don't make up stuff and then falsely attribute it to me.

Tell you what: comment on what I've actually said, rather than what you wished I'd said, and I'll come back to discuss your points.

Bassman59 · « **Reply #117 on:** September 21, 2020, 04:59:22 am »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 21, 2020, 03:37:01 am

Quote
So, software engineers don't get paid salaries and benefits? Their offices don't have heating, air conditioning, utilities, all of that?

Don't put words onto my keyboard. I said that the cost of getting to the next funding round (i.e. the next product or whatever) is part of the selling price of the previous product. Or do you think car manufacturers lay off their engineers once a car is shipping?

So consider why they are doing this. They could either demand $5,000 for the software, which would not be unreasonable, but it would put it out of the reach of hobbyists like yourself.

Or they could charge a lot less, like say $300 a year, and then as they say, "make it up in volume." Likely the choice to offer it for $300 a year means they think they'll actually make more money on the deal.

But what is obvious is that they were making $0 income on the free product. And in fact they were losing money on it, because it is very easy to get the personal-use license and then use the product professionally. They cut that off. As is their right. You don't like that because you're a cheapskate.

Quote

Quote
Or are you a hobbyist who thinks like Stallman that "all software should be free?"

What post of mine are you commenting to? If you actually read 'em instead of foaming off you'd notice that I've been suggeting people pay for this stuff. At no point have I said it should be provided free, and in fact pointed out good reasons to be wary of stuff that is!

You're obviously pissed off that they would dare stop giving you their product for free.

Quote

Quote
what god-given right do you have to say that they charge too much

My wallet says I have the right to say that are charging too much for me. Or I don't like their terms. So I don't use it and haven't bought it. What's your problem with that?

So then, why are you complaining about the pricing on this forum? Find a free alternative and get back to your hobby. But report back how well you're getting on.

Quote

Quote
or that you want it for free?

Gordon Bennett! Please don't make up stuff and then falsely attribute it to me.

You complain that a product that used to be free no longer is. So clearly you want it to be free for you.

Quote

Tell you what: comment on what I've actually said, rather than what you wished I'd said, and I'll come back to discuss your points.

You said:

Quote

Manufacturers of physical goods employ designers to design new products. Unless you're selling tractors (apparently) you're not renting the stuff when you sell it. If you can't afford to continue development of your product because everyone that might ever buy one has already bought it, you suck as a businessman and should be doing something else. Running the UK government springs to mind, but there are other scenarios.

And I mentioned that there's no difference between software vendors and hardware manufacturers in this -- both employ engineers to design the new products. Both use income from previous sales to fund development of new products.

You are correct that there's no physical product distribution to deal with regarding software sales. So this gives the software vendor great leeway in deciding how to price their product. They can do what hardware vendors cannot -- make different versions of a product available at different price ranges and let a customer upgrade immediately to one with more features. You can't do that with a tractor, eh?

But there is still cost involved in the development, maintenance and support of a software product. Microsoft and Apple are always updating their operating systems (and Apple is always updating hardware), so there is great cost involved in just making sure an existing product runs on the latest operating systems. All too many software vendors give up on that. "You want support for the new OS? Buy our program again at full price." Or maybe they just never bother updating, abandoning it (like Xilinx ISE, but hey that's free) and then the customer needs to maintain old hardware and old OSes, which just puts more cost in terms of time and effort on the customer. Someone's always paying.

I know there are people on this forum who maintain old machines to run old software. Some of that is not by choice -- they have specialist hardware tied to old computers and new operating systems simply won't run the old software. A lot of it is by choice -- they don't want to re-buy the same software again. Or whatever.

So good luck on your future endeavors.

langwadt · « **Reply #118 on:** September 21, 2020, 07:49:59 am »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 21, 2020, 12:36:05 am

Quote
just consider the subscription as a payment plan,

It's not, since you can never pay it off. That's like infinite interest.

sure and in about 10 years you'll have paid almost as much as a license for solidworks

PlainName · « **Reply #119 on:** September 21, 2020, 01:16:10 pm »

Quote

You complain that a product that used to be free no longer is. So clearly you want it to be free for you.

Actually, I expressed surprise that you lot didn't see it coming. Nowhere did I say I wanted this thing, never mind for free. I dare you to point out my post where I said or implied that.

Now kindly fuck off with your made-up insinuations and false attributions.

sokoloff · « **Reply #120 on:** September 21, 2020, 04:08:25 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 21, 2020, 03:19:24 am

Or are you a hobbyist who thinks like Stallman that "all software should be free?"

Stallman does not object to companies or individuals charging for software. (He's not demanding "free as in beer".)
What he objects to is the lack of freedom as in "freedom of speech".

There is nothing in GPL to preclude charging for software or engineering. There is a lot in GPL to prevent the curtailing of freedom to modify and copy. (The latter has some implications on the practical ability to charge money initially, but those are in my experience [I did some work with/for rms/FSF briefly in college] very much secondary.)

mnementh · « **Reply #121 on:** September 22, 2020, 04:12:56 pm »

Quote from: Bassman59 on September 21, 2020, 03:19:24 am

...So you buy an oscilloscope. You give the vendor say $2,500. You have an oscilloscope, hopefully it does what you want. But what if you realize at some point that you need wider bandwidth, or more channels, or deeper memory? Well, there you go, you have to buy a new oscilloscope. Well, ok, unless you bought one which has an option to add two new channels (which means you paid for an expansion capability you might never use) or add that bandwidth (by swapping out the front end boards with new ones, and you paid for that possibility up front too). In any case, if you want more later, you pay more later too.

I'm going to quote you out of context here; not to pick a fight but to point out that this is a REALLY bad choice for an example, as modern scopes (and SAs, AWGs, RF Gens... the list goes on and on) come with too much essential functionality that is enabled/disabled purely in firmware.

Then comes the inevitable argument over whether it's right, wrong, fair, immoral, offends the Tooth Fairy, etc if you hack said FW to enable stuff you didn't pay for.

mnem
Please carry on carrying on!

Jay_Diddy_B · « **Reply #122 on:** September 26, 2020, 02:34:20 am »

Hi,

There has been a change of plan by Autodesk, the STEP file export is being retained.

Details:
https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/blog/changes-to-fusion-360-for-personal-use/

Hackaday: https://hackaday.com/2020/09/25/autodesk-blinks-keeps-step-file-export-in-free-version-of-fusion-360/

Good news for now, for those who use Fusion for making 3D models for KICAD and other EDA software.

Regards,
Jay_Diddy_B

langwadt · « **Reply #123 on:** September 26, 2020, 01:23:43 pm »

I think Autodesk could have saved themselves a lot of flak if they had done this from the beginning https://youtu.be/r7U5Pky6EIo

mnementh · « **Reply #124 on:** September 26, 2020, 03:20:46 pm »

They could save themselves a lot more flak just by providing a sanely-priced consumer-level product instead of doing the "get 'em hooked then take away feature after feature" marketeering piracy thing.

I get the feeling that 90% of the company is clones of Stef Murky.

mnem

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20180510

langwadt · « **Reply #125 on:** September 26, 2020, 05:47:20 pm »

Quote from: mnementh on September 26, 2020, 03:20:46 pm

They could save themselves a lot more flak just by providing a sanely-priced consumer-level product instead of doing the "get 'em hooked then take away feature after feature" marketeering piracy thing.

"sanely-priced consumer-level product" I'd say free with limitations that don't affect hobbyists much covers that.

if freeloading professionals are a abusing the free version instead of paying what is essentially nothing compared to running a business,
I can see why autodesk has to do something

PlainName · « **Reply #126 on:** September 26, 2020, 08:33:01 pm »

Quote

"sanely-priced consumer-level product" I'd say free with limitations that don't affect hobbyists much covers that.

I'd say it doesn't, because that way the paying customers are also paying for the freeloaders, so the full license costs even more than it would otherwise, putting off more potential purchasers.

But surely Adobe have done the maths. Maybe they know that whatever it's priced at, even stupidly cheap, the majority of 'hobbyists' using it now still wouldn't buy a license.

langwadt · « **Reply #127 on:** September 26, 2020, 11:14:11 pm »

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 26, 2020, 08:33:01 pm

Quote
"sanely-priced consumer-level product" I'd say free with limitations that don't affect hobbyists much covers that.

I'd say it doesn't, because that way the paying customers are also paying for the freeloaders, so the full license costs even more than it would otherwise, putting off more potential purchasers.

I don't consider hobbyist freeloaders, the freeloaders are those who should buy a license for their business instead of abusing the free version

Quote from: dunkemhigh on September 26, 2020, 08:33:01 pm

But surely Adobe have done the maths. Maybe they know that whatever it's priced at, even stupidly cheap, the majority of 'hobbyists' using it now still wouldn't buy a license.

exactly, the hobbyist won't buy it anyway and without sufficient limitations on a free/cheap version some pros will just get that version whether the license allows it or not

PlainName · « **Reply #128 on:** September 27, 2020, 12:02:45 am »

Quote

I don't consider hobbyist freeloaders

How are they not freeloaders?

Quote

a person who takes advantage of others' generosity without giving anything in return
- ODE

That's a pretty apt definition, I'd say.

beanflying · « **Reply #129 on:** February 04, 2021, 05:40:39 am »

Flagrant BUMP

Just entering my third 'free' year of Startup License as of Today. So if you have the creds for it worth getting this license to see if you like or dislike it before shelling out the $ in particular since some of the nobbling of the 'hobby' version happened. I was given the option to downgrade to Hobby as it expired and keep going too.

https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/startups

mnementh · « **Reply #130 on:** February 09, 2021, 04:05:59 am »

Yeah, maybe if I actually get to a point of having a single saleable item I'll look into it... would kindof like to be actually on some kind of profitable roadmap before I take that offer and squander it.

For now, I'll just continue using the sanity-free version and grousing aboot it...

mnem
*toddles off to ded*

beanflying · « **Reply #131 on:** February 13, 2021, 04:29:49 am »

Topic moved to the Mech Eng. section from the EDA section - sort of made sense

Todays Random Fusion 360 use. Quick Drill Template in paper. I have done them in the past as Laser cut ply or Acrylic for repeat use but this is a one off for a accessory panel in my Car. 10 minutes work drop some double sided tape on the back to help avoid any whoops moments

One Sketch, extrude the bits I wanted and use the Drawing part of Fusion to print a 1:1 Template.

mnementh · « **Reply #132 on:** February 14, 2021, 03:03:01 pm »

So this is what... indexing the 4 panel attachment screws and correctly locating the pilot holes for a holesaw...?

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #133 on:** February 14, 2021, 09:39:24 pm »

Fairly much. As the lip around the four main parts is fairly narrow being a few mm out with the holesaw points in particular would be a major cosmetic oops. I have done similar templates for IEC plugs and others I print direct onto my label printer for nibbling/drilling.

I really put it here as an idea of using 3D modelling software to produce a 2D result.

beanflying · « **Reply #134 on:** February 15, 2021, 05:05:36 am »

Quote from: mnementh on February 09, 2021, 04:05:59 am

Yeah, maybe if I actually get to a point of having a single saleable item I'll look into it... would kindof like to be actually on some kind of profitable roadmap before I take that offer and squander it.

For now, I'll just continue using the sanity-free version and grousing aboot it...

mnem
*toddles off to ded*

There you go you wannabe Canuck. And to others following along, sensible explanation of the 10 Doc limit for the Fusion Hobby License. Also check out some of his other content on Fusion 3d Printing and Laser use. I hadn't looked at it before but looks fairly simple to cope with unless you are a heavy using hobbyist.

mnementh · « **Reply #135 on:** February 16, 2021, 12:16:05 am »

Yeah, no... I've already had problems with projects mysteriously losing their complete history when I go back to them before this new indignity. I don't expect that to get any better once all my projects have been compressed & archived for long-term storage on their secondary servers.

I would so much rather store them locally, which I do export locally as much as possible anyways; now I will start doing it every time I make a new version of something so I can be sure I keep that history intact.

mnem
*outwitting the program that's supposed to be helping me again*

beanflying · « **Reply #136 on:** March 04, 2021, 07:44:19 am »

Every tool is a Hammer

Or in this case some 10mm EVA floor mats meet my Laser Cutter and some Fusion 360. One Beer consumed for this bit now on to the cutouts of the layers.

The Drawer is from the under my vehicles driver seat. BCD325P2 Scanner, BF-F8HP Baofeng and a roughy UHF and all the charge leads and adapter bits I am likely to need on the road.

beanflying · « **Reply #137 on:** March 05, 2021, 02:49:43 am »

Swiss Cheese done over a couple of Coffees. Off to the Laser when I get a bit of clear time. $3 worth of foam estimated and 3 hours time @ $x/hour

Room for the manuals on the base layer.

beanflying · « **Reply #138 on:** March 06, 2021, 06:42:15 am »

Test fit post Laser Cutting. Just need to glue the layers together and a small manual trim near the lock mechanism is needed and missed during the Cad work.

Fusion 360 exported via the Mapboard Plugin to make life MUCH easier

https://apps.autodesk.com/FUSION/en/Detail/Index?id=7055850008078104945&os=Win64&appLang=en

Then into Inkscape for a tweak as my Laser speaks SVG not DXF.

beanflying · « **Reply #139 on:** March 12, 2021, 05:50:20 am »

Today's semi useful Fusion tip learn to use and love the offset face function. Great for making clearances before manufacturing from Laser or 3DP. Not a strict Engineering job but a quick and dirty solution to fudge it into place.

Reason to do this is I twisted off the added BNC connector AGAIN

and this will stop it attracting cobwebs and as much dust in the shack or more likely its new home of my site bag. Good toy for a sanity check and this one runs within 10 Hz at 30Meg so not to shabby for the few $ and USB or 12V for power.

Rough physical model made first then offset the panels by 0.2mm from the PCB and adjust the tab clearances with the offset face function. Laser cutting tomorrow as it is Beer O'Clock.

beanflying · « **Reply #140 on:** March 13, 2021, 04:35:48 am »

And $2 worth of Acrylic and a few minutes Laser time later

Measured once cut once and it fits

beanflying · « **Reply #141 on:** March 23, 2021, 02:04:37 am »

Well worth a watch. Covers 3D sketching and routing of wires. I used some of this with my Laser layout model earlier this thread but Brad does a great job explaining it.

beanflying · « **Reply #142 on:** April 03, 2021, 10:47:08 am »

I will start a separate thread when I get to some construction but a little Jigging was todays Fusion for the first part of upgrading my 3018 Trash Router/Engraver in particular for PCB milling. I have been sitting on this Mobile phone repair clamp for way to long always with this in mind

Aliexpress Seller I used

Part of it's problem was always the flex in the supplied bed if you tried to clamp to it so I used to run heavy MDF then clamp to that which was a PITA. The base on this holder below is solid 6mm Aluminum so between it and the 5mm sacrificial MDF will lock the base up well.

One end of the four clamps has a 0.9mm deep rebate already cut into it and as they are 50mm wide plenty of area to provide even pressure on a PCB for routing. With adding a few extra holes and tapping them (eight) it will hold 10x20cm or 15x13cm boards fully supported and with some modified clamps on two edges a bit larger or more likely a different base but in reality larger boards are likely to be sent out and I would put up with the wait.

Shown is the sacrificial spoilboard that will get milled 'flatter' before use when attached to help get around some of the issue with PCB height variation. Also pre milling probing of the PCB surface via Flatcam. Spoilboards will get the Laser cutting treatment because I have one so nice and quick and accurate each time for hole locations.

Brushless motor and improved Z axis are the next and biggest bits to design.

beanflying · « **Reply #143 on:** June 10, 2021, 06:58:32 am »

So I have an upcoming job I want to electrically drive with a toothed belt. The plan is to use a Laser Cut Pulley out of Delrin but I might try one from Acrylic as I already have it in stock and the torque loads are fairly low.

So I went looking for how to model a GT2 (or 3) belt and there is a bit of a knowledge gap among the usual suspects listed in the opening post. I found this Youtube one below but his model breaks (likely due to a rounding/positional error) on higher teeth counts. Basically it generates teeth in space then tries and fails to stick them to a separately generated internal body.

I have had similar issues before with Fusion and circular patterns. The best solution is to first model the stock and then model the removal and pattern that feature. Feel free to play with both the one from the video above and mine here https://a360.co/357uhVM Mine does break the second Sketch occasionally but removing and reapplying two tangent constraints fixes it again

Solve the problem and win a prize

mnementh · « **Reply #144 on:** June 20, 2021, 01:42:18 pm »

Looks like a reluctor ring off an old VCR servo-drive motor.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #145 on:** June 25, 2021, 04:40:04 am »

The concept of 'Adequate Modelling'.

This model of a cheap 90 degree 10RPM drive is a model I ran up today. Omitted plenty of details like external gearcase screws and most of the rear motor detail as they simply are not useful or needed. Important bits are correct overall dimensions shaft details and mounting screw locations to fit into the larger project. Anything resembling a how to make the gearbox or motor would just be fluff and a time waster. KISS

tautech · « **Reply #146 on:** June 25, 2021, 04:55:20 am »

sort of standard shaft size is 5.4mm/0.212598" ?

beanflying · « **Reply #147 on:** June 25, 2021, 05:11:51 am »

Quote from: tautech on June 25, 2021, 04:55:20 am

sort of standard shaft size is 5.4mm/0.212598" ?

Diameter of 6mm and a Flat section 1.2 off that for a flat clamping surface. At least that was what I saw it as

AmnevaR · « **Reply #148 on:** June 25, 2021, 06:52:32 am »

I don't think NYC CNC youtube channel was mentioned (I have searched NYC CNC in this thread and found nothing )
https://www.youtube.com/nyccnc
They have great tips and tricks for CAD/CAM in Fusion 360

beanflying · « **Reply #149 on:** June 25, 2021, 08:03:09 am »

Quote from: AmnevaR on June 25, 2021, 06:52:32 am

I don't think NYC CNC youtube channel was mentioned (I have searched NYC CNC in this thread and found nothing )
https://www.youtube.com/nyccnc
They have great tips and tricks for CAD/CAM in Fusion 360

Some good CAM stuff for sure and a mix of CAD. Will add it to post #1

mnementh · « **Reply #150 on:** June 27, 2021, 05:27:05 pm »

Am I like the only one still having the file accessibility problem in the Free version? (Well, I assume it's somehow related to the fuckery involved with their recent "Editable/Read-Only" fuckerization of the database)

I've updated twice since the shit hit the fan over this; and yes, I know the "workaround" is to reset the file type from "Editable" to "Read-Only" and back again... but any project made since then is simply not available if I've ever closed F360 on it. Everything I've been able to Google is the same old shit from back when the problem first arose.

The fucking ring of doom just keeps circling forever and it never opens; I have to open the damned project on the web and import it. And shockingly, when I do that, the measurements are never exactly the same as what I created; they're always a few dozen or even a few hundred microns off. Seriously,

...?

It's like they're trying to piss us "free users" off.

mnem

beanflying · « **Reply #151 on:** July 05, 2021, 04:16:31 am »

A Little while later and a small stash of 5mm Acetal sheet to Laser Cut into Rack and Pinions and the gearmotors have arrived in 10, 50 and 100 RPM. Just a quick mockup to play with on the bench before I get to a final design and intended use.

Acrylic to Acetal should be fine for side bearing/guides and 'reasonable' wear and Acetal to Acetal for the main working surfaces and the R&P. Price driven compromise as the Acetal is way more expensive than Acrylic. Talking maybe 1-200 operations a week at low frequency for the final application.

Linear speeds circa 8.6, 43 and 86mm/sec depending on Gearmotor

beanflying · « **Reply #152 on:** August 19, 2021, 12:26:14 pm »

WAY WAY off the reservation of things E today. Fixture and welding table lash up for a good friend. Laser cut 12mm Aluminium (his number) tops at this stage but its a single click to pump them all to 16mm (my preference) then off to the Laser Cutter and a little post reaming and counterboring of the hold down points.

Reason for Aluminium is non stick to Slag or MIG spatter also non rust and lots of other good points unless you go Cast Iron.

Basic arrangement is make one panel then rectangular pattern for all the top plates, take that original copy it then spin in 90 degrees and move it to the vertical face and a second pattern. Basic frame is 75x50 and 75x25 heavy RHS.

The idea is sort of Fireball Tool meets 20,000km of separation in the Ozzie Bush.

Payment - Box of Beer and wood fired Pizzas at his place


EEVblog Main Site	EEVblog on Youtube	EEVblog on Twitter	EEVblog on Facebook	EEVblog on Odysee