Hi guys,

can you tell me whether you actually got the pics I attached to this post? I get a copy of the post, but no pics, and really its the pics that detail the process, without them this thread is likely not very useful.

Craig

---

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of joeaverage via groups.io <joe.average@...>
Sent: Thursday, 10 April 2025 8:40 am
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [pcbgcode] #Fusion#EAGLE Using Fusion Contour to make a PCB

?

Hi,

I'll start with a board of my own, a 2D PCB designed in Fusion, but is nearly identical to EAGLE. To use Fusion Contour toolpath function you need a 3D model, and thus the button that produces it. the second pic is that 3D model with all the layers visible. In order to machine the traces and the board we want visibility of the board core, and the top and bottom traces only....so turn of the visibility to those other layers.

Now open the Manufacture workspace of Fusion. We need to generate a stock model, and this is perhaps the most critical and confusing part of the process. The stock model should include the top and bottom traces and the board core. But note that the traces (top and bottom) are actually broken into three bodies, and this is different to EAGLE and is the reason that PCB-Gcode does not work. Thus the top traces are formed of the combination of Body1, Body2 and Body3. Exactly why Autodesk did this is still a mystery to me, but it is what it is. For our purposes we need Body1 ONLY of both top and bottom traces, and the core body.

For most standard 1 oz.sq.yd boards the copper layer is 35um thick or 0.035mm. The total stock model is therefore 1.5mm (board core) + 0.035mm (top traces) + 0.35mm (bottom traces)=1.57mm. Use the Setup panel and dialogues to set the origin position, the origin orientation, the Setup name etc as per normal with a Manufacture setup.?

If you've made it this far you have largely 'broken its back'.

Craig

---

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of irobbo2 via groups.io <irobbo2@...>
Sent: Wednesday, 9 April 2025 3:11 pm
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [pcbgcode] #Fusion#EAGLE Using Fusion Contour to make a PCB

?

Hi Craig

?

Likewise, I’m now using Fusion, ?exporting back to Eagle and running PCB-Gcode, I use Chilipeppr auto leveler though. I did look briefly at producing Gcode via Fusion, but I think my eyes glazed over at the complicated process and put that thought aside for a bit.

?

I would be interested in understanding the process you have put together to produce Gcode via Fusion. I doubt Autodesk will change Fusion to accommodate PCB-Gcode, and I vaguely remember that the possibility of any changes to PCB-Gcode to work with Fusion was complicated and unlikely.

?

Cheers

Ian

?

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of joeaverage via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, 9 April 2025 11:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [pcbgcode] #Fusion#EAGLE Using Fusion Contour to make a PCB

?

Hi,

Autodesk have declared that they are ceasing support for EAGLE next year. I have not used EAGLE per se for about three years, I use instead Fusion Electronics which is Autodesk's re-imagined version of EAGLE. There have been a number of changes, and one in particular that prevents PCB-Gcode from working with a Fusion board. For three years I've been exporting a Fusion board to EAGLE just I could use PCB-Gcode.?

?

There is a specific reason that PCB-Gcode does not work in Fusion, and I presume interested parties could re-write PCB-Gcode to suit the new 'Fusion' environment, but I have not bothered.

?

Autodesk have always claimed that using Fusion CAM functions, 2D Contour in particular, that you could generate Gcode without the use of a ULP. Until now I've never had any luck trying to do so.

The last few days however I've rolled up my sleeves and with the (grateful) assistance of Jorge and Seth at Autodesk I've made some good progress.

?

I'm now able to generate good Gcode, the match of PCB-Gcode. Generating it is an involved process, but now I have a template that automates many of the settings and that has vastly improved the rate at which I can produce code. The code generation process is still longer, say 15 to 20 minutes per two sided board, however I have found that the speed and efficiency of Fusion Contour is

such that the isolation tool path that results is approximately 50% better in run-time than the same PCB-Gcode output.?

?

Additionally I use Autoleveller to maintain exact cutting depth. There are a few quirks about Autoleveller that must be respected in order to get good Gcode. Those quirks are accommodated by several edits to the Fusion Mach4 post. In particular the format of the x,y,z coordinates must comply in order for Autoleveller to work.....but it does, in fact better than before. I used to have to run the drill code through a script to get Mach4 compliant code, now I don't. Fusion Contour/Fusion Mach4post/Autoleveller generates perfect Mach4 code, no hand edits, no running through a script....so yes when I say better than before I actually mean it.

?

I make somewhere between 200 and 500 boards a year, with perhaps 100 to maybe 200 being repeats of boards I've made before but the remainder are all one off designs. Having a productive PCB design tool and a reliable and fast PCB design to PCB tool is critical to my work.? For many years I have relied on PCB-Gcode and Autoleveller to secure the later. For the first time I think I can say I have found a solution that is at least a match for PCB-Gcode but may in fact prove better ......... Fusion Contour/Fusion Mach4 post/Autoleveller.

?

If anyone is interested we should start a thread covering this development.

?

Craig

?

Virus-free.