Fusion 360 Hardinge 5C Collet CAD Tutorial! FF43

Tutorial on modeling a custom 5C collet in Fusion 360 for a Hardinge Mill Arbor!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Recent Videos:
Form, Cut or Mill Threads: bit.ly/1nHBnrx
Fusion 360 1-2-3 Block: bit.ly/21qgq1y
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reach us / CNC Info:
Speeds & Feeds: provencut.com
Download Fusion 360: www.dpbolvw.ne...
Online Fusion 360 Training: bit.ly/LearnFus...
Hands-On CNC Classes: www.nyccnc.com...
SMW Products: saundersmachin...
CNC Resources: www.nyccnc.com
Music copyrighted by John Saunders 5 Reasons to Use a Fixture Plate on Your CNC Machine: bit.ly/3sNA4uH

[@IAintScaredOfNoGhost]

Love these little tips and tricks, John. Been a huge fan of yours for a few years, and tomorrow I get to use a CnC vertical mill for the first time in my life. (used a manual mill and cnc router for first time in past few months) you were definitely the inspiration! thanks for all you do to help us newcomers to the craft!

[@oldmatebutler]

Please keep these vids coming man, they're great!

[@GlassImpressions]

I love the FusionFridays! I think you should have fusion video every day. :)

[@bretsiemons2692]

Good info, thanks for your hard work putting these videos together.

[@jeromevuarand3768]

Aren't the top right inclined line you selected (and the arc connected to it) from the edge of the slot rather than where the uncut surface would reach? That would make the radius slightly smaller than in the original part.

[@kisssys5414]

That was just what I needed. Cheers Steve

[@kaden56]

I love your fusion 360 videos so much! Thank you for taking the time to do this, they help so many of us so much. Being the expert that you are maybe you could tell me, can fusion 360 produce 5 axis or 3+2 axis cam?

[@HughesEarthworks]

Another great video John! I have been looking for the capture design history thing. I could not figure that out. Thanks.

[@DonDegidio]

Nice video, John. Keep them coming. :-)

[@tylergraham4794]

Love the videos. I just downloaded Fusion 360 and have been trying to make all kinds of parts. I'm currently designing 1911 grip plates and have mostly gotten them completed but I cannot figure out how to add checkering to the grips. If you could create a video on how to do this in Fusion it would be greatly appreciated. Also if you could show how to add other texturing such as a star burst pattern that would be really appreciated as well.

[@ashish9501]

very useful video .... thank you ......

[@rlockwood2]

rather than rebuilding it, did you try using the direct modeling stuff to remove the slots prior to capturing design history?

[@atomkinder67]

I was wondering why he didn't just model it from scratch. Sketch profile and revolve, add a woodruff and some threads, done.

[@sharpx777]

your angle might be off as you used the slot projection (or maybe the diameter as the slot continues thru the cylindrical part), better to use the lower part where there is no slot

[@ericstratten6974]

Yes, need to do a Sketch Intersect in an area that is not slotted.

[@GregFowlerPlus]

I use SolidWorks, not Fusion, but couldn't he have simply "filled" the slots first to get the exact accurate profile of that fairly simple part? Then grabbing the 2D x-section should have been trivial...

[@sharpx777]

Greg Fowler the bottom part is not slotted and can be used instead, front radius doesn't really matter. you're right, cross-section should work just fine.

[@murrayedington]

Just select the slots and delete them in direct editing mode (as suggested below). Much quicker - just did it myself to check. But if you are going to insist on using "project", make sure the sketch plane doesn't lie in one of the slots or your cone angle will be too narrow (slightly) - or set the angle to the correct value with the dimension command, whatever that should be.

[@GregFowlerPlus]

Yeah, I basically said the same thing - just delete and patch the faces you don't want. But I am a SolidWorks guy, so dunno how Fusion really differs (parametric is parametric, though...)

[@tjnak]

Way Cool John. Now I just need to find somebody that can make me one, with a 1" and 1.25" arbor shaft.

[@tnflyfisher]

I am in the process of purchasing a Tormach 1100. In your older videos you used Sprutecam and another Cad package and now you use Fusion 360. Do I need to just start with Fusion 360 and forgo learning the CAD and CAM packages Tormach offers? Is there any need to purchase the software Tormach offers in that Fusion 360 seems to do it all? This would free up some cash for other additional hardware if not needed. I love your videos and hope you keep them up. I would like to get more information on your hold down table too.

[@NekitaNet]

Is that thread pitch UNJ and therefore within the standard of SAE AS8879?

[@michaeljuan98]

I wish solidworks had these features

[@inzen86]

Hi! It seemed to me that you used the edge of the slot for the projection. Wouldn't that make the diameter of the part a little smaller? Just being curious.

[@srp01983]

Yes I wondered about that too. It would be a very small discrepancy, but maybe important for a collet.

[@occamssawzall3486]

Yes it does shrink the outer dimension by a smidge. And although the straight cylinder portion isn't critical, the dimensions on the taper are quite critical.

[@RoboCNCnl]

He buddy..... You havend been responding to a lot of comments lately.... This tells me..... Congrattssssssss !!!!!! (Or am I wrong...? )

[@ianjackson8643]

facebook.com/NYCCNC/photos/a.335220553290295.1073741828.335079259971091/931751000303911/?type=3&theater

[@waqar-ul-islambouns190]

How to build pendulum clock

[@MorganOliff]

Nice job john. Hey don't forget you lose a few thousandths on the radius when you project from the slot since it's on the center line and you lose that highest point.

[@MorganOliff]

Oh, just read the other 9 comments saying the same thing. :)

[@chrissekely]

Why not just use the direct modeling features in F360 to just modify the original to suit? That may be a bit less error prone (and the threading would be the same).

[@GregFowlerPlus]

As a 15-year SolidWorks veteran, I still must admit that Fusion looks pretty slick and appears to have some innovative features. But I've only seen it demo'd with very simple parts/assemblies with small number of bodies. My question is, how slick is it with large, very complex assemblies? I routinely deal with full machine layouts of over 120K components and complex mechanisms/mates trying to simulate the actual kinematics of the machine. I have a really legit CAD workstation, but am pretty close to pushing it to it's limits (might need to upgrade soon). So I wonder, how does Fusion compare to SolidWorks in this regard? I am dubious of it being able to handle such complexity, but would love to be found wrong on that assumption...

[@occamssawzall3486]

Large assembly is atrocious. Past 15-20 parts of moderate complexity it completely slogs. It has no "lite" part feature like SW has. Nor does it have a dedicated assembly mode. It's really good for single components and small assembly, it is lacking horribly on the assembly front though. And I'm not sure if there will much improvement on it. My personal opinion is that is simply not the direction they plan on taking the software and that it's really just for single component design and machining. SW and Pro-E still dominate in the large assembly arena. Fusion seems to be designed for simplicity. Powerful and flexible, but still simple. It's trying to do so much in a single software application that, although it can do many things, it doesn't do any as well as a more dedicate software application can do it.

[@GregFowlerPlus]

+Occams Sawzall I was afraid this would be the case. Currently my company has several thousand seats of Solidworks (after switching from UG a decade ago), but we're always evaluating other packages to supplement (or even replace) SW. So far we haven't been impressed with anything, but I have very high hopes for OnShape... it's just early days and they have a ways to go before they might succeed in becoming a major disruptive player in the market...

[@occamssawzall3486]

Honestly i think Fusion is better than OnShape right now and will continue to be so in the future. You mentioned you left UG over a decade ago. Siemens has made incredible progress with their NX system, it might be worth checking into. The prices of it have fallen considerably and look to be roughly on par, in some cases cheaper, than even SW is right now. for large assembly Pro-E has always been the go to, seems better than even SW at handling large assembly systems, but it was also specifically designed and improved to do it as well. I think its going to be many years, if not decades, before we see a single software system that can "do it all". The modularity of the NX system does look promising, along with their PLM systems they have in place. But, its only what I've been able to glean from reading white pages and accounts from other people, couldn't say ya or nay from a first hand experience.

[@MrClickbang357]

How many "C"s is that? Eight - get it? Yeah yeah I know: I will keep my day job! Okay - what about the hollow in the middle of the part? Is that there because you rotated the outline? Somehow this early in the morning (5:15)I missed that.

[@UnconventionalMillin]

why not just delete the holes and slots instead of modeling a new 5c?

[@waller393]

Why go threw all the trouble of importing it then modifying it when you could have done it faster in solidworks?

[@occamssawzall3486]

Because it's Fusion Friday... Not Solidworks Sunday? XD

[@cavemansmancave9025]

Si senor. That was really bad. I'm sorry. 😂 Thanks, John

[@gusbisbal9803]

John, honestly, the capture history is annoying to you because you don't see the benefit of freeform design and think parametric design is all there is. If you had used surface modellers or sub-D modellers then you would have a different perspective on CAD. Not everyone comes from solidworks back ground. In fact I would say MOST people who use this will not have come from that back ground.

[@Hirudin]

Couldn't you freeform model just the same with the history enabled?

[@gusbisbal9803]

No. Thats the point of not having it selected.

[@Hirudin]

Is there a list of modeling tools only available when history is turned off?

[@gusbisbal9803]

No it has to do with the nature of the workflow and is more about having less parametric limitations and allows you to design quicker. CAD is not all about tools. Its more about workflow and efficiency.

[@Hirudin]

So, basically, you don't like the idea of people having different opinions than you.