How to Add Joints and Contact Sets to a Geneva Drive in Fusion 360

[@ProductDesignOnline]

Comment your questions and thoughts below!
P.S. If you liked this video, I'd love for you to Subscribe ► bit.ly/sub-right-now
-
*TIMESTAMPS*
0:00 - Add Joints and Contact Sets in Fusion 360
0:23 - Getting the sample file
1:52 - Understanding the sample file
2:44 - Applying as-built joints
4:07 - Applying joints
5:41 - Enabling contact sets
6:10 - Testing the motion

[@jasonhe6947]

Thank you so much. I just started learning Fusion 360, I finally found a great video explaining how to do this

[@sirorlandodecorsica6210]

You are wonderful. Thank you!

[@yienmaster04]

I immediately used my knowledge from this video to try to accurately animate a wankel (rotary) engine with a revolute on the center shaft and contact sets between the rotor and shaft as well as rotor and housing... It worked! But only for a second before Fusion basically melted down (even on a very powerful PC). I take it contact sets are very computationally expensive on anything but the most simple geometry?
BTW, great video as always. I hope that post over on reddit the other day gets you some much deserved extra attention!
EDIT: Turns out the model I started with was pretty complex. I modelled the basic shapes without 100's of parts and seals, and the contact sets work smooth as butter now.

[@ProductDesignOnline]

EJH04, I'm glad that you found the knowledge to be so useful so fast! :)
I was just going to say that it was likely the model and not the contact sets, but I see you realized that and edited your comment.
As always, thanks for watching and commenting! I'll keep cranking out videos and hopefully the steady growth will continue!

[@vibaudupa9062]

i was able to draw and make the gears but faced problem on getting the geneva motion. Had missed the contact sets part. This video was just what I needed. Thank you so much.

[@Alan-hc4jx]

Great video, am in the process of creating joints and movements, so finding it very useful, just a comment, the small unit with the red clip, the reason for the clip is because the drum is designed to rotate around the centre pin (to reduce friction wear when moving in the slots) with a washer between it and the clip, on a real unit the clip is sitting in a groove, with the small hook shapes used to slightly open it to place and remove, when I get time will try to replicate this on the drive.

[@BillyBob-si2db]

Excellent high impact concise information... Thank you.

[@ProductDesignOnline]

As always, thanks for watching! :)

[@baldurkuhn1]

Very helpful video, as usual. Only you can save me, Kevin. I designed a simple folding table with folding legs, but it's not working. The table was working fine, but then I add the legs, and the joints, and in order for the legs to work, I had to ground some element that now prevents the table from folding. Is this doable? Many thanks!

[@ProductDesignOnline]

It's definitely doable. You should only need to ground one component. Generally, you don't want to ground something that's supposed to move... So with your design the table top may be best.

[@baldurkuhn1]

@@ProductDesignOnline Although that does work for the legs like I said, the top also is supposed to fold down, and grounding that makes it a problem. I made some other rigid joints I hadn't before, and grounded the piece that goes on the wall. Now it's working. Thanks for taking the time! Cheers.

[@sethother8012]

I ttried to add contact sets to the ball joint at the top f he tripod that you didn't get to in you othe video, it ended up with a warning and was stuck and couldn't move. Is this due too the ball not being positined in the right spot? How can I knw tthe ball is positioned right or otherwise make the contact set wok at the op f the tripod?

[@TheBene145]

Hello, can you create from the finished geneva drive from the program also an exact piece list?
or how can one find out the names of the individual components? since in fusion sometimes only numbers stand like 0208-00P: 1

[@ProductDesignOnline]

Hi, RmXx. You can create a Parts List (in the Drawing workspace) based on the components. Parts lists itemize all components in the drawing and include the item number, the quantity, the part number, the description, and the material.
You can learn more here - help.autodesk.com/view/fusion360/ENU/?guid=GUID-50A3BA0E-8BA4-4F3C-A06C-01E8D7E0B7FF
Cheers, Kevin :)

[@erikm9768]

I love this tutorial. However, contact sets for me on even two simple gears is just excruciating slow. Everyone seem to recommend motion link, but i actually want to test the function of the gears, not add some simple animation. I dont understand why this isnt more common, for me its a highly important feature to see your design mechanically moving as intended. I hope Fusion 360 improve this aspect of the software a lot in the future, on bullet physics things like this has been running real-time since two decades ago. Did i misunderstand something?

[@ProductDesignOnline]

Hi Erik. That's correct - motion links with the proper joints will provide you to animate the motion to test things. Contact sets are really more of a "workaround" for when the joints/motion are complex. For this beginner video it was really just used as a quick "this is how it works" type thing. With that said, I do agree that Fusion 360 could use some enhancements in the realm of motion links and testing of real movement.

[@sethother8012]

Autodesk needs to do a much better job at making the motion study user friendly. Why can't we at least have some kind of litttle reference window, so we can see the angle of revolution while we select our graph points? (PS revolute' is not a word.) They don't even label the axes on the time graph. And why not allow us to drag the points where we want in real time like most software lets you?
And if I choose two points and one is step 0 and 0 degrees and the other is at step 100 360 degrees, and i loop it, then why isn't that simply moving in a continual rotation at a constant speed? . Where is autodesk getting their math? It's just not logical. This software wears me out in areas that should be straightforward simple logic.