It's great when that proverbial light comes on and tasks seem so much more straightforward... even at 70. This will help clean up a few of my woodworking project design simulations. Thanks for being concise.
I'm glad you liked the video. I don't like to watch videos where they spend more time talking about nothing rather than showing what you came there watch in the video. Glad it turned the light on for you.
Hey Kevin, thank you for another video that's turned on a lightbulb for me. As built joints, joints and even capture/revert position explained simply and clearly in less than 20 minutes. Thank you again ... 🙂
Thank you! been struggling with other overly complicated instructional videos. Once again you are a brilliant teacher, simple straight forward. Imperial system is half language, metric is 100% mathematical, I prefer imperial also.
Adding what you said at 16:50 to Fusions description would actually make it way more helpful. I guess they tried to convey that with the according image but it's not as clear. Skip to 16:50 if you're impatiend. Watched the whole video anyway, great presentation!
You need to set your units to "thou", since that's the units you imperial hold-outs actually converse in. You know your unit is the wrong one when you have to divide it into thousands to get the actual base unit you are working in. Using inches for mechanical work is like using miles for house framing. Other than the cringe use of inches, that was an awesome tutorial :)
@@MechanicalAdvantage FYI, I'm an American living in America. Inches is great in the scale range from furniture to building construction. Below that it makes no sense. Having to have two duplicate sets of sockets, wrenches and hex keys for two systems of units is equally retarded and a waste of tool drawer space. The rest of the world figured this out in the 70s and switched away from rando units based on a kings body parts.
@@MechanicalAdvantage Bro, I live in Ohio, working as an engineer in a company where the vast majority of mechanical designs are done in metric. Not everyone clings to Freedom Units (TM)
@@cluebin8398 Sorry, thought you said you moved. Not sure where I came up with that. I just don't see either as a big hang up. In the US, imperial is far more widely used. If we changed, I wouldn't be upset about it, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. Just the amount of money required to change signs in the US would be billions and billions of dollars.
Very good video, and very informative and simple to follow. My problem is I have the free version and when I go to pick as-built joint, I don't have one in my assembly tab???? Is it possible that as-built joint is not in the free version online?
It’s in all versions. You aren’t in history mode. Right click on the design name at the top of the browser and choose capture design history. As-built joint will then appear.
When starting the 2nd half of video when you used the as-built to lock in the flange, could you have used the ground command for that component in the browser as an option? Helpful video, now I know the difference between the two joint commands.
Ground works, but ground is only persistent in the file for the clamp. If you insert the clamp into a different assembly, the ground doesn’t make that trip and you run into issues.
Got it, so much to know, glad you know! A related question can you use the joint command to join two subassembly. By subassembly I mean a component with say 5 components under it in the browser. The joint command in that case only seems to join a single component in each subassembly instead of the entire subassembly even though the each subassembly is a rigid group.
So it finally occurred to me watching this. An as built joint or a joint is just how you get there. You end up with the same product in the end. So simple to understand now.
*watches until switches from metric to imperial* ... Gasp! Downvote, unsubscribe, report abusive content. Jk of course .. probably the clearest explanation of F360 joints I've seen. Great video.
Good. I know a lot of people struggle with the difference between joints and as-built joints. So I was looking for a simple and practical example to demonstrate.
Great video thanks, gland you're posting again I learn a lot from your videos. Just a couple of questions. Why did you choose to use a ridged joint from your component to the origin point instead of grounding the component, what's the difference? Also I'm playing with a design that uses a reciprocating rack to drive a gear around. I can make the rack move linearly and the gear rotate ok but what 'jointing' do I use to make the motion of the rack drive the gear around?
I should have addressed this better in the video. When you ground a component, it is only grounded in that design file. So if you insert that design into a different design, nothing is fixed in space. Maybe I’ll do a little video on this. Imagine if you assembled a hydraulic cylinder and grounded the first component. When you inserted that cylinder Into a new design, it wouldn’t work they way it was meant to because the first component would be free to move in the new design. I’m not 100% sure on your second question, but the answer may be a motion link. That would work if you had sliding component and a rotating component. You could add a ration that says for exert x distance of motion, rotate x number of times.
I think I misunderstood the different position part. Parts lists are available for sure. I thought you were asking about something like a hydraulic cylinder being shown in a drawing in an open and closed position.
Usually this is called positional representations or overlays. You might be able to make something to resemble this, but to my knowledge, Fusion doesn't have this specific capability built in yet. If you have a video that shows differently, I would love to see it. help.autodesk.com/view/INVNTOR/2022/ENU/?guid=GUID-34C28C35-45CA-4476-9336-30146F7C9471 And then look at the bottom example here that shows an Overlay View help.autodesk.com/view/INVNTOR/2022/ENU/?guid=GUID-C53DAB48-BA5F-4377-842D-BB8F3E5962A0
For someone who uses pounds of bananas as a measurement, your very clever 😉😁 That’s going to take a couple of times watching to understand it all, but really fantastic content Kevin, please keep doing these for us 👍
ortho is great when I need to see if things are aligned perfectly. I don't need objects in the foreground bigger than in the background -- that's what render mode is for... :)
TY very useful video. I prefer the first method as it seems to allow the plugger to move more independently without needing a sketch to create a point. (BTW only Americans use imperial, the rest of the world use metric) lol (even your space agency use metric). lol. (try it, it's an easier system to use) lol
Hi Billy. Thanks for the comment and I’m glad you found it useful. Question for you. Let’s pretend the rest of the world with the exception of your country decided to switch the Imperial system. Would you make the switch or would you stick with what you know? After 46 years, it’s hard to make the switch away from a system you have been using your whole life. The good news is the system of measure doesn’t impact the concepts shown in the videos I guess.
@@MechanicalAdvantage The world was using that system however as progress was made and more logical systems were developed other peoples' adapted, I was born 55 years ago in a country that used imperial but learned to use the metric system as the world did. Progress is not hard, just takes an open mind. ...
@@MechanicalAdvantage I answered it and gave an actual account to emphasize the answer. "country that used imperial but I learned to use the metric system as the world did"
When two components aren’t in the right place, a joint is used to define the position between those two components. When a component is in the correct position an as-built joint defines the relationship between the two components (rigid, or type of movement)
With as-built joints, you can define motion but you can’t with rigid groups. With as-built joints, only two components can be included. Rigid groups can contain many components in one group.
WoW - 'Gravity', as built in to the design, compels the anchor mechanism (adjustable rubber stop) to slide inward towards the handle as it is opened and closed. Holy moly that is impressive. th-cam.com/video/yi72BQ9M3qI/w-d-xo.html . A very clear and well explained technical tip!
I love it. Yes you can. I am from Canada, so most of our construction measurements are inches and feet. Thanks great video explaining. Much appreciated. It helped me.
I'm glad you picked up on the humor. You would be surprised by the number of emails and comments I get from people pissed off because I dared to show a tutorial using imperial measurements.
HAHAHAH TO MAKE A PLANAR JOINT YOU HAVE TO CREATE A SKETCH! HAHAHHA IMMAGINE DOING SOMETHING PROFESSIONAL LIKE THIS HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH! F360 joins are just stupid!
I'll have to look at why I did that in this case. You don't need a sketch to add a planar joint. Sounds like you are a fan of the SW guys. Don't you find it interesting that when the guys that built SW left and started Onshape and did the same joint type workflow instead of mates. Hmmmmm..........
@@MechanicalAdvantage The only answer I have for this is proprietary software. I teach Fusion, Catia and Sw as well, the point is that only SW\Catia has an engineering way of treating joints. That's it. If you want to do something nearly professional of course. Fusion is for kids sw is for boys, catia is for men.
@IAmTheVector Sure it is. It has nothing to do with being proprietary. I really don’t how people get to be such a fanboi of products. It’s just software; it isn’t a religion. Maybe traditional constraints are now obsolete.
I don’t know. I think people will tell you I’m pretty damn funny. I get tired of the emails as comments about not using metric. So that was a preemptive strike.
It's great when that proverbial light comes on and tasks seem so much more straightforward... even at 70. This will help clean up a few of my woodworking project design simulations. Thanks for being concise.
I'm glad you liked the video. I don't like to watch videos where they spend more time talking about nothing rather than showing what you came there watch in the video.
Glad it turned the light on for you.
Hey Kevin, thank you for another video that's turned on a lightbulb for me.
As built joints, joints and even capture/revert position explained simply and clearly in less than 20 minutes. Thank you again ... 🙂
Clear and concise. No unnecessary filler. Thanks
Thanks, this was really helpful. I've watched a bunch of tutorials this month and no one explained the difference.
Thank you! been struggling with other overly complicated instructional videos. Once again you are a brilliant teacher, simple straight forward. Imperial system is half language, metric is 100% mathematical, I prefer imperial also.
Awesome!! learned more in 17min then the last month!! ..and yes agreed...MORE VIDEOS please 😊!! subscribed Thankyou
Very Cool! I learned some new techniques for assembling joints. Thanks for posting this video.
Perfect. Answers every question I had about Fusion 360 joints.
Really appreciate the concise nature, and pace of your videos. Thanks!
This is the best tutorial. Very helpful to me. Thank you so much.
Excellent job Kevin I only wish you did more videos!
This is the best explanation and example I have ever seen. great job.
Outstanding video Kevin! This answers several questions. Thanks for sharing!
Adding what you said at 16:50 to Fusions description would actually make it way more helpful. I guess they tried to convey that with the according image but it's not as clear.
Skip to 16:50 if you're impatiend. Watched the whole video anyway, great presentation!
Very well done on this video! Helped me out tremendously
You need to set your units to "thou", since that's the units you imperial hold-outs actually converse in. You know your unit is the wrong one when you have to divide it into thousands to get the actual base unit you are working in. Using inches for mechanical work is like using miles for house framing. Other than the cringe use of inches, that was an awesome tutorial :)
When your country rules the free world, we'll use whatever units you want. Until then, inches ;-)
Glad you found it helpful.
@@MechanicalAdvantage FYI, I'm an American living in America. Inches is great in the scale range from furniture to building construction. Below that it makes no sense. Having to have two duplicate sets of sockets, wrenches and hex keys for two systems of units is equally retarded and a waste of tool drawer space. The rest of the world figured this out in the 70s and switched away from rando units based on a kings body parts.
@ What country did you move to?
@@MechanicalAdvantage Bro, I live in Ohio, working as an engineer in a company where the vast majority of mechanical designs are done in metric. Not everyone clings to Freedom Units (TM)
@@cluebin8398 Sorry, thought you said you moved. Not sure where I came up with that.
I just don't see either as a big hang up. In the US, imperial is far more widely used. If we changed, I wouldn't be upset about it, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. Just the amount of money required to change signs in the US would be billions and billions of dollars.
Why can't Autodesk manage this level of clarity? I am going to share this at every opportunity.
Very good video, and very informative and simple to follow. My problem is I have the free version and when I go to pick as-built joint, I don't have one in my assembly tab????
Is it possible that as-built joint is not in the free version online?
It’s in all versions. You aren’t in history mode. Right click on the design name at the top of the browser and choose capture design history. As-built joint will then appear.
You have a very pleasant and effective teaching style. Very nice. You helped me. Sub'd up and liked.
Great video as always, thanks! A keeper for future reference.
Great video Kevin....as always! Definitely my favorite fusion how-to creator. :)
Very helpful explanation, thanks a lot!
When starting the 2nd half of video when you used the as-built to lock in the flange, could you have used the ground command for that component in the browser as an option? Helpful video, now I know the difference between the two joint commands.
Ground works, but ground is only persistent in the file for the clamp. If you insert the clamp into a different assembly, the ground doesn’t make that trip and you run into issues.
Got it, so much to know, glad you know! A related question can you use the joint command to join two subassembly. By subassembly I mean a component with say 5 components under it in the browser. The joint command in that case only seems to join a single component in each subassembly instead of the entire subassembly even though the each subassembly is a rigid group.
So it finally occurred to me watching this. An as built joint or a joint is just how you get there. You end up with the same product in the end. So simple to understand now.
*watches until switches from metric to imperial* ... Gasp! Downvote, unsubscribe, report abusive content. Jk of course .. probably the clearest explanation of F360 joints I've seen. Great video.
thanks for this! I'm trying to apply this to a push and pull, where one component pushes another.
Clear teaching, thank you
Thanks, hopefully it helped to clear up the difference between as-built joints and joints.
thanks, short and clear
thanks a ton! exactly what I was looking for!
Good. I know a lot of people struggle with the difference between joints and as-built joints. So I was looking for a simple and practical example to demonstrate.
Great video thanks, gland you're posting again I learn a lot from your videos. Just a couple of questions. Why did you choose to use a ridged joint from your component to the origin point instead of grounding the component, what's the difference? Also I'm playing with a design that uses a reciprocating rack to drive a gear around. I can make the rack move linearly and the gear rotate ok but what 'jointing' do I use to make the motion of the rack drive the gear around?
I should have addressed this better in the video. When you ground a component, it is only grounded in that design file. So if you insert that design into a different design, nothing is fixed in space. Maybe I’ll do a little video on this. Imagine if you assembled a hydraulic cylinder and grounded the first component. When you inserted that cylinder Into a new design, it wouldn’t work they way it was meant to because the first component would be free to move in the new design.
I’m not 100% sure on your second question, but the answer may be a motion link. That would work if you had sliding component and a rotating component. You could add a ration that says for exert x distance of motion, rotate x number of times.
@@MechanicalAdvantage Thanks for your reply, that makes sense and I'll give the motion link a go (once I find out what it is and how to use it 🙂).
Thanks Kevin your suggestion to use a motion link worked a treat.
Thanks for sharing.
Fantastic!
nice video, i would like to know if in this way you can make a 2D drawing with part list and so on showing the different position of the assembly
That functionality is not currently available in Fusion 360.
@@MechanicalAdvantage are you sure? I saw some video with part list and so on
I think I misunderstood the different position part. Parts lists are available for sure. I thought you were asking about something like a hydraulic cylinder being shown in a drawing in an open and closed position.
@@MechanicalAdvantage I meant that infact. Have you ever tried to do the 2d drawing, set the view, modify position and create another view?
Usually this is called positional representations or overlays. You might be able to make something to resemble this, but to my knowledge, Fusion doesn't have this specific capability built in yet.
If you have a video that shows differently, I would love to see it.
help.autodesk.com/view/INVNTOR/2022/ENU/?guid=GUID-34C28C35-45CA-4476-9336-30146F7C9471
And then look at the bottom example here that shows an Overlay View
help.autodesk.com/view/INVNTOR/2022/ENU/?guid=GUID-C53DAB48-BA5F-4377-842D-BB8F3E5962A0
Great video thank you!
Thanks for sharing 👍
For someone who uses pounds of bananas as a measurement, your very clever 😉😁
That’s going to take a couple of times watching to understand it all, but really fantastic content Kevin, please keep doing these for us 👍
you switch to inches but use the unrealistic orthographic perspective mode...brilliant !
I'm not concerned about realistic
ortho is great when I need to see if things are aligned perfectly. I don't need objects in the foreground bigger than in the background -- that's what render mode is for... :)
Thanks
TY very useful video. I prefer the first method as it seems to allow the plugger to move more independently without needing a sketch to create a point. (BTW only Americans use imperial, the rest of the world use metric) lol (even your space agency use metric). lol. (try it, it's an easier system to use) lol
Hi Billy. Thanks for the comment and I’m glad you found it useful. Question for you. Let’s pretend the rest of the world with the exception of your country decided to switch the Imperial system. Would you make the switch or would you stick with what you know? After 46 years, it’s hard to make the switch away from a system you have been using your whole life. The good news is the system of measure doesn’t impact the concepts shown in the videos I guess.
@@MechanicalAdvantage The world was using that system however as progress was made and more logical systems were developed other peoples' adapted, I was born 55 years ago in a country that used imperial but learned to use the metric system as the world did. Progress is not hard, just takes an open mind. ...
That wasn’t the question :)
@@MechanicalAdvantage I answered it and gave an actual account to emphasize the answer. "country that used imperial but I learned to use the metric system as the world did"
as a canadian...we use both lol...divde by 2...divide by 10 ...both easy
helpful
so what actuaully is an as built joint
When two components aren’t in the right place, a joint is used to define the position between those two components. When a component is in the correct position an as-built joint defines the relationship between the two components (rigid, or type of movement)
It is more confusing difference between Rigid group and As build Joints. It is kind of logical but, it looks like one can cover both.
With as-built joints, you can define motion but you can’t with rigid groups. With as-built joints, only two components can be included. Rigid groups can contain many components in one group.
metric units are much more intuitive once you get used to them
i wish there was a video for something that im working on bc nothing is working lmao
WoW - 'Gravity', as built in to the design, compels the anchor mechanism (adjustable rubber stop) to slide inward towards the handle as it is opened and closed. Holy moly that is impressive.
th-cam.com/video/yi72BQ9M3qI/w-d-xo.html . A very clear and well explained technical tip!
Thank you. I hope you were able to put the info to good use.
self-respecting people are using international units
So funny inches. Lol ❤
Listen. When your country leads the free world we’ll use whatever unit you want 😋
I love it. Yes you can. I am from Canada, so most of our construction measurements are inches and feet. Thanks great video explaining. Much appreciated. It helped me.
How can a intelligent person prefer inches since mm is so much more logic? :)
See, your first mistake as assuming that I was intelligent : D
Im not a pcychopat i switch to inches:) LOL.
I'm glad you picked up on the humor. You would be surprised by the number of emails and comments I get from people pissed off because I dared to show a tutorial using imperial measurements.
HAHAHAH TO MAKE A PLANAR JOINT YOU HAVE TO CREATE A SKETCH! HAHAHHA IMMAGINE DOING SOMETHING PROFESSIONAL LIKE THIS HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH! F360 joins are just stupid!
No you don’t.
@@MechanicalAdvantage 14:50 Total nonsense! Something that you do in 1 click on Sw... this is so dumb. And F360 users are just a fanbase.
I'll have to look at why I did that in this case. You don't need a sketch to add a planar joint.
Sounds like you are a fan of the SW guys. Don't you find it interesting that when the guys that built SW left and started Onshape and did the same joint type workflow instead of mates. Hmmmmm..........
@@MechanicalAdvantage The only answer I have for this is proprietary software. I teach Fusion, Catia and Sw as well, the point is that only SW\Catia has an engineering way of treating joints. That's it. If you want to do something nearly professional of course. Fusion is for kids sw is for boys, catia is for men.
@IAmTheVector Sure it is. It has nothing to do with being proprietary. I really don’t how people get to be such a fanboi of products. It’s just software; it isn’t a religion.
Maybe traditional constraints are now obsolete.
you know you are not funny 👎
I don’t know. I think people will tell you I’m pretty damn funny. I get tired of the emails as comments about not using metric. So that was a preemptive strike.