NEW Fusion 360 Tangent Relationship - How Does It Work and When Should We Use It

In this video we are going to explore the newly added Tangent Relationship. This was part of the January 2022 update to Fusion 360 and at a first glance it is a very welcomed addition! In playing around with the tool I have noticed a few areas where it seems to struggle so I wanted to cover some cases where it works great and some where it is currently struggling a little.
The main area I found problems is when you apply more than one Tangent Relationship to a set of components. It does not appear to be able to solve multiples simultaneously.
You can start with this dataset to follow along: a360.co/3s7FPTJ

[@HOSTRASOKYRA]

Thank you very much. It is helpful for me.

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

Glad to hear that

[@TYTAX_HOME_GYMS]

Great video material. Regards from Poland.

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

Thank you very much!

[@Fusion360School]

I just love your presentation style. Well planned, no fluff. I wonder whether this would work on a bolt carrier group mechanism, where the pin moves through a helical path. Or should we just stick to using contacts sets in that case?

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

Thank You. For the bolt carrier, I haven't had luck. The bolts/pins tend to flop and flip orientation so it would need to have a planar joint applied so it keeps its orientation. Here is an example with one "bolt" set up. a360.co/3KZQaK6 Try to apply it to the others and see what happens. I like your videos as well! Bummer about the defaults in Extrude! I agree that should be in the core product. I have commented on a few of your videos, not sure if it comes through. Surrogate deboss i enjoyed. I commented that you could also use Replace face with an inward offset surface as a possible follow up.

[@Fusion360School]

@@LearnEverythingAboutDesign Thanks, I will check out the file. I did see your comments in the surrogate emboss video, but did not have time to clearly read through it. Sorry about that, I have fallen behind on replying to comments recently. Will need some time to test your suggestion. Also, it's been a while since I have made that video. Will need to refresh my memory.

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

No problem and I understand. I just wanted to be sure the info made it across in case you do an update video on the workflow.

[@mayankmalukani3613]

At time 8.56 , when you select the faces for the Tangent Relationship, can you please try reversing the order of face selection, orange component face first and share if it works?

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

Unfortunately no it doesn't. I had tried several ways of selecting the cam or the follower first with no luck. I tried selection sets as well. It just seems to mechanically lock up when there is more than one tangent relationship in a setup like this.

[@billf1748]

Great video. Very helpful. For the cam/valve example, I'm wondering what would happen if the follower component was split into two components and then each was "rejoined" with an as built rigid joint. This might solve the problem of two tangent relationships trying to work off one component.

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

Thanks Bill, sadly I tried that for this video and it didn't work. It was almost like it was having trouble solving the joints in order. I hope in the future it will work better because that cam/follower would be an ideal choice here!

[@douglasmckinley-sr1507]

Simple case - have a relatively flat cone (11 degree angles) on a slider. Then a sphere on a slider at a 90 degree angle to the axis of the cone. There are two conditions where the sphere can be tangent to the cone - on the outside of the cone face or the inside of the code face. Fusion seems to make the decision for you and you do not have the option to chose which side meets your design goal. A kludge fix seems to change the revolve from positive 360 to negative 360. Hopefully Autodesk will give the option of selecting what side you want the tangency on. in future revisions.

[@LearnEverythingAboutDesign]

is it a solid or surface? If its a surface then you can try and flip the normal. If its a solid it assumes the normal is outward and should use that. but yeah seems like there should be a "flip" option!

[@douglasmckinley-sr1507]

@@LearnEverythingAboutDesign it’s a solid made from revolving fully constrained sketch geometry. Start at origin, horizontal line on x axis. Then angled line (11 degrees). Then horizontal line back to y axis. Then perpendicular back to origin. Then revolve around z axis. Was surprised it did not know inside from outside of a solid and treated it like a surface. Changing the revolve from positive 360 to negative 360 seems to correct it (guessing it flipped the normal of the face?). If you move the sphere too far it will flip to the other side so you need to set the limits. It’s a work in progress, but has potential.