I’ll take a little bit of credit for printing and testing and some CAD work, but 0 of the credit for the idea. You can thank @bitingmidge for that one:
Side Note: I really should have read that far back when I decided to start the CAD lol… Some of the things I had to re-learn on my own were already in there.
I will work on the description. It was getting a bit late, but I’ll slowly add some of the information discussed here, and I’ll try to come up with some visuals.
I set out to make it fully parametric, but messed up. After I imported the Makita ring .step, I forgot to enable the “Capture Design History”, so it wouldn’t let me go back and edit any of the sketches before that.
I’ve been wanting to practice recreating parts, so if I get around to it, and can get a parametric version of the mount itself, I would bet a full parametric version for all sizes in a reasonable range would not be that hard.
Surely the 3rd time making it would be easier, right?? lol
OOPS, sorry @bitingmidge, I didn’t read carefully your August 10th post, thanks anyway to both of you.
Man, I have so many hours into making a parametric mount. It just does not work in Fusion360. When you move something, it will randomly dimension to the other side, or just completely lose the projected line for no reason…and not give you a warning that is has lost projections.
I have tried all sorts of tricks to make things stick, but I can move a part back and forth fixing issues each time and end up with a dimension that will randomly flip to the wrong side. Keep in mind this is a single part. This is not even an assembly.
I am just about done with it, unfortunately. It makes developing super difficult because things move often when you are making something new.
To make your parametric mount even more complicated, I really like the 2.5" remix so I can use my big dust collector in my shop. If you get it working, maybe this can be a part of it.
https://www.printables.com/model/212623-lowrider-3-cnc-makita-700-series-mount-removable-d
That’s just it. It is two numbers Router body diameter or Hose diameter. I have made it super basic and it still breaks even if switch back and forth 48mm to 60, 60 to 48, then 48 back to 60. It breaks every time, and it tends to also lose more and more projections each time…and it doesn’t tell you when it looses a projection it just turns green or yellow with no way to relink it.
Really not worth the time. It is meant to copy, edit, and rename. Parametric is just abysmal in fusion.
This is some of what I have run into on the table model.
I also need this, but I haven’t done it yet, but to make i more complicated, I want it to integrate with my magnet connectors as well 
It is very nice. The extra suction / volume make it so I don’t need to wear a mask while cutting now
I think this great.
Really an awesome job guys!
I have a dewalt router. I hope you can get the parametric thing working. I would definitely print this.
I had better success with onshape Indeed
The inference engine is just better…
But fusion is great as an all in one platform for modeling and cam
Back to Solidworks then?
That makes some stuff more difficult, of course, since the benefit of parametric stuff is that it can be edited, and editing from CAD is the primary reason that I started working with Fusion360 in the first place.
I have also experienced my models having weird flips seemjngly at random (though I bet it is predictable if I knew how stuff was coded) and having no option other than “undo” to get things back to normal, since typically you can’t just undo a dimension.
I know that flipping dimension caused me headaches with the MP3DP bed support, to the point where it seemed faster to just re-draw it all. It also caused me plenty of trouble with Doug’s parametric table. It does not make me more amenable to dropping the cash on buying a Fusion360 license, at the very least. I can deal with weirdness in FreeCAD, because it’s free. I would be OK if there were a low-cost non-commercial license, maybe… but at the regular price? I can’t see that being palatable. If I were using it commercially, and getting this kind of errors? I’d be melting the tech support’s phone lines.
Something else I ran into was when I was creating a sketch that bodies would be based on, and I drew a line and entered a formula that was to give its dimension length, if the formula was not acceptable to F360 for some unknown reason (formatted in a way F360 didn’t like), if I missed that the formula turned red for a split second before I pressed enter, F360 would draw the line to where I was clicking, instead of the dimension, and since I was clicking in the right place, the line looked right, and the sketch interior area would turn to the blue color indicating a closed shape, and the model would allow the body extrusion. However, if I later changed parameters in some way, or perhaps in a certain way, the line described above would cease to exist, the sketch would become non-closed, and the body or bodies extruded from the sketch, would cease to display as though they did not exist.
I never tried solidworks, but they have a very nice offer for makers
Under 10$/month for the full product is very tempting…
That is good to hear. I am looking at pricing.
Honesty, maybe. There is a free makers version so people can still edit my files.
From what I can tell if something is 2mm away, you make an edit and that thing is now on the other side of another object it tends to just put it there. Solidworks seems to at least what side of the line was it on. And SolidWorks rarely every loses a projection. Fusion losses it almost every single time.
In the end I am much faster, it takes less steps and editing /parametric is far better with solidworks.
Yeah another complain is sometimes it will complain about something missing and give a ghost of where it was…other times it is just gone and you have no idea what is missing. So going back to a two year old project to edit, it is usually faster for me to redo it. Yet I can still go back into my solidworks from 2015 and have no issues.
I won’t won’t go crazy in this thread I might be time to revist a new CAD thread. I pay $500/yr for fusion, rendering is good not great, Cam is a bonus but I do not use it. Onshape is free if I go completely open source, as in completely even developing openly, and that is a big no thank you. Paid onshape is more than solidworks and what happens when you stop paying, can you still edit old files…and only online. Solidworks is $3k+, no rendering at that price you can do a yearly maintenance but I would not do that but you own it and can easily go back to old files forever. They do have a new package I am actually going to call and ask about it. FreeCAD was not intuitive for me. I spent time learning fusion but the time I waste is a huge bummer, and the BOM system is just about worthless as well.
Really? I thought they got rid of all the free versions except educational
I have sat down and told myself I was going to bite the bullet and learn FreeCAD at least 10 times, but after using Fusion, it’s just really hard to force myself to use something that is not as polished and so different. After 5 minutes or so I usually give up…
I think there’s no free version except the educational one
The “makers” liscence is quite cheap though, 9$/month
There are still some options for like $40/year as well.
If I go to solidworks I will try to make any mounts and cases in Onshape free version. I have a call with onshape today. I looked into it deeper and The only thing I see I don’t like is the mating, it is exactly like Fusion and while it is faster it is not better. Solidworks let you mate like you are building (surfaces), fusion/onshape make you make like a digital file. For specific example I like to use planer and cylinder mounts for things like add on mounts with ever hole. If anything changes the mates will break and give a warning, with fusion they always break and it doesn’t like mating every hole. Sort of a self check if you will.
Price wise from what I see solidworks is the price of two years of onshape. SolidWorks will not shut off until it will not work on the computer anymore. onshape will not let you edit after the license expeires.
And with solidworks you would be paying for something you already know how to fluently use. If I’m not mistaken weren’t the LR2 and Burly/Primo designed in solidworks? if so how were you able to do it then but no longer have a license? is that a per year payment or a one time for solidworks?