Fusion 360 - Organize your files using Derive

In this video I'll demonstrate how to use the Derive command and the benefits of doing so to organize your designs and keep design and manufacturing happy.

[@qwidium]

i didnt knew about derive feature. Many thanks.

[@MrRctintin]

That’s really handy to know. If I have a component drawn in CAD that I want to show someone how it will look, I can model in chamfers etc so the render is realistic, but have a derived file with no chamfers to use in CAM. I like that!! Great video Kevin

[@remiepron]

Hi Rob, you may use a manufacturing model instead. it is located into the manufacturing environment. You will then benefit from all the parametric model simplification features while staying inside the same original fusion file.

[@bwilliams1815]

awesome. Great function.

[@CraigLYoung]

Thanks for sharing 👍

[@swamihuman9395]

- 'Derive' certainly has its use cases. - In the case of "removing" chamfers though, a 'Manufacture Model' w/ 'Simplify' in the Manufacture workspace would be more appropriate, I believe. - Perhaps you'd consider making a video on that solution, and compare to the 'Derive' solution. Just a thought, if you want ideas for other vids. - Whatever the case, thx for another good video :) Carry on...

[@k6vasulam]

04:15 Why can't you use the 2D chamfer? I use it almost every day for that exact reason, for i'm too lazy to manually adjust the lead ins and outs. Just put Chamfer Width to 0 and Tip Offset to your liking. I keep my clearance at 0.02mm and it seamlessly binds the chamfer with the wall. Only thing is that when the chamfer is already modeled in, you can only select the top contour and not the bottom, for as with the regular "Contour" option you could choose between the two. Maybe for other angles it doesn't work, but for 45° it works (for me) flawlessly. Also great overview of the Derive command, will probably use it in the near future!

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

That is definitely an option. There is always more than one way, but without putting effort into explaining different ways to use 2D chamfer, I just went with the default method won't work for this example. Thanks for watching.

[@poetac15]

Came here to post this. I only found out recently that you could select the inner contour of a modeled chamfer and the 2d chamfer tool paths works well.

[@BlackSmokeDMax]

We do use the derive command, but mainly for other reasons. This seems like another great use, as the design side of the files do get messed with a bit, things get hidden/unhidden which could affect later assemblies. Do you ever use the "manufacturing model" feature built into the mfg section of Fusion? We had tried it quite a while back and were getting some weird results, so we went away from that but were just recently thinking of trying it again, for pretty much the exact thing you laid out in this video. Now if we do, and it still seems flaky, we could easily use this workflow, and possibly just setup an entire folder for only *PartNum_MFG* named files. Any thoughts on differences between the mfg model and using a derive?

[@M_a_t_t75]

I've had nothing but problems with manufacturing model especially if there are multiple parts that need to be machines like this example. I've had much better results using derive like this and keeping the original file intact. Each of our folders has an original numbered part, an associated drawing file, and a derived CAM file. Changes to the original carry over to both the drawing and derived cam. Works pretty well!

[@BlackSmokeDMax]

@@M_a_t_t75 glad to hear I'm not alone in seeing weirdness with the mfg model. I mean I'm not glad, lol, I guess I am glad it is not just me!

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

@blacksmokeDMax @matt For a while, I was under the impression that MFG models were going to be phased out. However, that isn't the case. I don't have a lot of experience with MFG models one way or the other. I would encourage you guys to post when you have issues to forums.autodesk.com under the Fusion MFG forum.

[@blainemaxwell]

Can you please share what controller you use for your CAD work? Mouse / track ball etc. Thanks for the great videos.

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

Mostly in the videos I just use shift + middle nous button for orbiting and middle mouse button for panning. The mouse I use is just a Logitech M720 marathon www.logitech.com/en-us/products/mice/m720-triathlon.910-004790.html I do have a SpaceMouse wireless but rarely use it in the videos. 3dconnexion.com/us/product/spacemouse-wireless/

[@eyes2videos]

Thy! But how can I use the original component or body in a library to re-use it. E.g. a specific ray?

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

You can insert any fusion Design as a component in a new design. When you derive a part into a new file, that also gives you a file you can insert into other files.

[@codeohazel]

Very helpful! Kevin is there a way to post process gcode from 2 different fusion files, using the WCS offset, without copying parts from one file and pasting them all into the same file??

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

Not currently. This is something that I think we can expect in the future.

[@codeohazel]

@@MechanicalAdvantage today I dove in to figuring out how to do this, moral of the story you can copy and paste gcode files together, or just copy and paste designs into the same fusion file and setup from there... lame. Looking forward to that future feature or possible plugin!

[@quinncampbell9079]

The better way to do DFM would be to utilize the manufacture model space within manufacture rather then the derive. Derive for this would be good if you wanted to give your CAM guy access to just that 1 component rather then the entire assembly.

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

That depends. Again, one of main reasons I showed this workflow was to simplify the number of manufacutring setups in one model. If I had 10 components that each needed at least 3 setups, I would have over 30 or more setups in the same file. Using derive, I can spin each of those files into a single document with only the setups needed for that part. The other goal was to not dirty the designers files. Again, this may or may not be a problem. If you have a company that is also doing lifecycle management, they may consider a part "released" when the final CAD work is done. At that point, adding sketches for CAM toolpaths may not be allowed. Deriving these into their own files allows the original design files to not be altered, yet still used for things like CNC programming.

[@karlk.]

You need to go more in depth on how you made these setups

[@MechanicalAdvantage]

Creating setups in general? If that is the case I have some playlists created for creating setups on the channel.

[@karlk.]

Creating setups from a multibody part... Noone has that on yt

[@karlk.]

Im good now tho...a coworker explained it