Analysis of my mistake? Rail cannot be tangent to profiles

[Corvin.Huber]

Here is my miniature project:

https://a360.co/40VQwd0

When trying to loft from the transom (profile 1) and keel-line (profile 2) along the two top-view rails, I receive the error message: 
modelling error: rails cannot be tangent to profiles.
I fail to see where the rails ARE tangent.
Is there some way to analyse where Fusion 360 gets stuck?
Thank you!

[title modified]

[TheCADWhisperer]

@Corvin.Huber 

Can you File>Export your *.f3d file to your local drive and then Attach it here to a Reply?

[TrippyLighting]

You are probably using the wrong loft sequence:

[Corvin.Huber]

Thank you Peter/Trippy. I have tried every thinkable sequence (or so I thought). Would you min sharing what sequence you used?
Thank you very much!

[TrippyLighting]

I did. I had a model with a timeline attached to my post 😉

[Corvin.Huber]

Danke sehr! Thank you very much!
I saw you did it "panel by panel" and then stitched it. That may be the better version. Nor sure why, but it worked. Thank you for helping me out.

Also besser Panel für Panel und dann verbinden ...

[Corvin.Huber]

I had attached a link.
But here the file is.
Trippy sent me a "solution".
It would appear that he lofted the side and the bottom separately and then stitched them.
But I cannot reproduce it.
Thank you for any helpful input.

[TrippyLighting]

Here's a quick video explaining the process :

https://youtu.be/qbhdTEE58iE

[Corvin.Huber]

Thank you!

[TrippyLighting · Accepted solution]

You're welcome.

Hopefully you were able to enjoy the higher resolution versions of the video. It takes a while for those to process on YouTube.

[Corvin.Huber]

Here is another question (können wir das auch auf Deutsch machen?):

I have a dreadfully complex model of an engine (40MB) that was converted from an SLDPRT file.  
https://a360.co/3lZTGME

I want to use this as a placeholder in an aircraft design and only need the "outside" surface. Is there a (reasonably) simple way to create a (much smaller and lighter) surface model of a complex mechanical model?

Thank you!

[TrippyLighting]

We could do this in German but it is a pain on a US keyboard with US spell checking.

I deleted 6 f the 7 cylinders.

Then I moved all the bodies of the remaining cylinder into a component.

Then I patterned that component.

that component instancing reduces the file size to 1/4rth, so around 10MB

I forgot to assemble everything using a rigid group. 

[Corvin.Huber]

That helps considerably. Thank you! 
You basically got rid of the complexity of 6 cylinders and patterned the remaining one.
If that is your solution, it means there is no way to create a single "shell" or surface from a complex component, eliminating everything that goes on "inside". 
Is that the correct?

Thank you for your speedy help!
Question for human interest: why do you do this? As a break from more serious work?

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Corvin.Huber wrote:

Question for human interest: why do you do this? As a break from more serious work?

---

I like to teach and educate. IMHO that is the best way to learn yourself!
This time of the year business in my industry is slow 😉

Edit: looks like I accidentally deleted half of my answer.

There is no "shell" function like this in Fusion 360. I believe in Autodesk Inventor it is called Shrinkwrap. 

[Corvin.Huber]

Aha. What IS your industry? CAD design as a service?

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Corvin.Huber wrote:

Aha. What IS your industry? CAD design as a service?

---

I develop concepts, budgets and proposals for high end manufacturing automation systems.

Computer Graphics, 3D modeling (not just CAD) and related topics have been a private passion of mince since university so for over 30 years.

[Corvin.Huber]

Understood.

I manage a tech start-up in the sphere of drone/eVTOL navigation. Originally I am an Aerospace engineer. I am dreaming of re-creating an updated version of a historic aircraft. Therefore I am teaching myself the basics of CAD to be able to visualize my design. 
Just in case yo are interested (no need to look of this is not your thing): http://www.hubair.de/hubair-baeumer-sausewind.html
and: http://www.hubair.de/hubair-baeumer-sausewind.html

[Corvin.Huber]

Also: for some reason I am unable to assembly the engine into a rigid group. Although I am creating a rigid group of all components, they fall apart when I rotate/move them. Would you mind helping me with that once more?
Thank you.
Do not be too helpful, or I'll keep coming back.
😓

[TrippyLighting]

The whole purpose of a rigid group is to NOT be able to move components independently.

If you are using the move tool and stuff still moves after you created a rigid group, that likely means you are moving solid bodies within their components. Most of the time that isn't what you want to do!

[TrippyLighting]

---

@Corvin.Huber wrote:

I am dreaming of re-creating an updated version of a historic aircraft. Therefore I am teaching myself the basics of CAD to be able to visualize my design. 

---

When you say "re-create", does that mean a visualization model, or a physical scale model, perhaps 3D printed, or a life-sized real replica ?

I've seen people do  all of those things with Fusion 360!