Fusion Electronics Library Notes and Crib Sheet

After spending many hours going round in circles trying to create new custom library parts in Fusion Electronics (FE) I gave in and posted a plea for help on the FE forum. I received some helpful replies but not sufficiently uplifting to put me at ease with the process.

As ever my nerdy side stepped up and armed with this new knowledge I set about learning the process step by step in a way that I could understand it and more importantly repeat it successfully.

The result of this is a 30 page document that can be downloaded from the link below. This contains the library process, a help crib sheet for using FE and the copies of the original support replies I received from the FE forum.

It may not be perfect and it is a work in progress so feel free to give me feedback on errors and content changes. Remember it is based on Fusion Electronics as of today at version 2602.0.71

I hope it helps someone, somewhere, sleep better. The length of the waffle will almost certain guarantee the latter.

Links to similar or related post are listed below : –

I had a ChatGPT experience

I am currently working on a timing synchroniser for the local church clock. Being of that generation I had come up with a CMOS based phase detector with monostable timers etc. This logic looks at the relative timing of the clock strike activation and a DCF timecode reference clock. I prototyped the circuitry, proved it and made a PCB for it in Fusion. It works very well and the resulting output slows or speeds up the clock by adding or removing lead shot to the weight tray on the clock pendulum.

I got my ear bent for being so old school and not using an Arduino or similar but I was reluctant to stray from known and proven simple logic with RC time constants. In the end I caved in and out of curiosity thought it might be a good project to get my feet wet with ChatGPT.

It took a little while to find my way round the ChatGPT site and to get to the software support section. Once there I entered in simple language what I was trying to achieve. ‘It’ replied with its understanding of my needs and I agreed this was correct. I then asked for some code for an Arduino UNO.

Out popped 44 lines of Arduino code …. which worked. Oh my goodness, what a revelation. Think I need to have a cup of tea and biscuit to recover. Like Fusion and 3D printing, this is going to completely change my workflow and project practices.

Links to similar or related post are listed below : –

Fusion Sheet Metal model export as PDF

The Sheet Metal module in Fusion allows you to create a 3D model of a folded sheet metal part and then ‘flatten’ the model to provide a net shape with fold lines. It is quite easy to use and impressive in the results you can achieve. The model can be adjusted for different metal types and their properties. The resulting flat net can then be exported as a DXF to send off to a laser or water cutting sub contractor.

The Fusion Sheet Metal module only allows the flat net data to be exported as a DXF file. This is not surprising as this is the most common data file request from sub contractors. That having been said I recently had a request for a PDF file which at first glance is not an export option in the Sheet Metal module. One solution was to use a web based DXF to PDF converter but this could be potentially unreliable in the conversion result.

A less obvious solution is once you have created the unfolded (flat) net, open the Drawing module in Fusion and use the From Design option.

This will load the unfolded net into a Fusion Drawing with the ability to be exported in PDF format. This is quite a useful export route to take as you can dimension and annotate the drawing in more detail than would be possible in the standard DXF format export from the Sheet Metal module.

The use of this Drawing module export route is going to be fairly rare but it is a useful option to know about and have up your sleeve.

Links to similar or related post are listed below : –

Drawing a parabola in Fusion

This is an interesting one and I admit to not fully understanding the result.

The conic curve function in Fusion allows you to set the two end points of a conic curve and then ‘pull back’ the curve to its apex and enter the rho value. When the rho value is entered as 0.5 this will create a parabola. (If you enter rho as >0.5 it will create a hyperbola and if <0.5 it will be an elipse).

With a rho value of 0.5 the focus point is the same distance from the curve vertex as the curve vertex point is to the directrix. The directrix is a mirror line behind the curve that at the parabola vertex is the same distance from the back of the curve as the focus is to the front, hence the 0.5 rho factor. (Best to see the sketches below …..).

If you draw a perpendicular line from the directrix to the curve and then from the curve to the focus, then in a true parabola the length of these two lines should be equal. (This is why parabolic shaped dishes are used for radio communication links. In simple terms, any parallel radio waves incident on the dish will have the same reflected propagation distance to travel to arrive at the focus point where the detector device will be located. There is a cumulative addition of the incident waves at the focus. This is the power gain factor achieved by the dish in amplifing the signal.

All good so far ?

The problem I encountered was I could create a random conic parabolic curve using the Fusion function (two end points and vertex using a rho of 0.5) but the paths from the directrix to the curve and the curve to the focus did not match.

Until quite by chance … I had drawn a parabola conic (0.5 rho) where the diameter of the curve (curve peak to curve peak) was twice the vertex peak to the directrix line. Using this ratio always gave me equal path lengths between focus and curve and the curve to directrix.

Conclusion – the conic curve function in Fusion is not necessarily producing the result you might expect of a true parabola shape. I think it is almost certainly to do with the equation of a parabolic curve which the Fusion function is maybe not fully addressing.

Update : Looking back to my amateur radio microwave activity I remember the true focus of a dish was derived from the formula f=D2/16d where D is the dish diameter and d is the depth of the dish. From this you can calculate the focal ratio f/D. For efficient illumination of a centre fed dish the f/D ratio had to lie between 0.3 and 0.45.

By chance my choice of 120mm diameter and 30mm dish depth provides a 30mm focal length and the Fusion conic curve graphing is correct and gives an f/D 0.25. I think for any other f/D ratio the Fusion conic curve will not be an exact match to a true parabola curve (that is the focus to curve and curve to directrix path lengths will not be equal). I think this is because Fusion assumes the focus point is on the same axis as the end points of the conic curve. On this basis any conic curve created in Fusion with an expected rho value of 0.5 (a parabola) must have the directrix positioned at a distance equal to half the distance between the two end points. The conic curve is then ‘pulled back’ to the directrix line and the rho value of 0.5 entered. This could be automated using parametric functions. If the focus is not on the same axis as the curve end points some head scratching will be necessary and any resulting conic curve will not be a true parabola.

A construction related comment.

Never trust the accuracy of a floating Point placed based on just a selected grid position in Fusion. You must dimension lock the Point back to the sketch reference otherwise any resulting sketch using the Point will not be constrained. The parabola sketch is an example. I placed the two end Points for the curve, the curve centre and the directrix centre as my initial sketch postions. Then using the conic curve function clicked on the two curve ends and pulled the vertex back to the directrix point and entered the rho value of 0.5. The curve line immediately came up in black to indicate it was fully constrained. If any of the Points had not been dimension locked, the curve will appear blue – unconstrained.

To conclude this waffle and complete a solid version of the parabola, use the offset command to draw a parallel line behind the parabola curve and then ‘seal’ the end of the two curves with a short line and also add a short centre dividing line. You can now select half of the solid in extrude mode and rotate around the centre line axis to give a complete solid parabola. Here is a step by step process.

Here is the resulting solid parabola. This might be an interesting 3D print …..

Links to similar or related post are listed below : –

Creating Customised Threads in Fusion 360

As ever this started off with a need and from the need came some learning.  In my experience such needs are always welcome for the resulting learning benefit but inevitably lead to a few hours of frustration.

We have a small Jacuzzi spa at our home in France.   It has two cartridge filters that are screw mounted into the sump of the spa.   The threads on the cartridges are plastic and are loosely defined as 2” SAE spec. (I think SAE is a fine pitch thread (?) and as the filter threads are around 5mm thread to thread pitch, they don’t seem to me to be fine pitch).

When filling the spa from empty, Jacuzzi recommended that the filters are removed and the filler hosepipe nozzle is wedged into the outer vacated of the two filter holes. The nozzle has to be jammed in place by packing a cloth or sponge around it.   Filling via the filter mounting ensures the spa fills from the bottom up with minimal potential for an airlock in the pipework.

The problem with this is that the filler hose tends to have a mind of its own and when your back is turned it will liberate itself from the filter hole and whiplash round like a demented cobra and give you an unexpected bath.

After one such soaking I resolved to stop this happening.   What was needed was an adapter plug to fit into the “2” SAE” socket that would accept a standard hose push fit connector.  This would hopefully keep the rampant serpent retained during the filling process.

I opted to use a standard commercial male hose connector for the interface to the filler hosepipe. These have a DIN Pipe thread specification (G26.441 x 1.814 mm).   This left me with the need to model the 2” SAE from scratch which on inspection appeared to take the form of a pseudo Acme profile but with an asymmetric thread to valley ratio.

Having failed to find anything helpful on the Internet I set about creating a custom thread in Fusion 360. New experience ….

Here is the resulting adapter. 

The attached ZIP file below has the full write up, the STL file and the source Fusion file.

Links to similar or related post are listed below : –

Verified by ExactMetrics