Using Fusion 360 to document actual RockSim10 parts for Level-3 design documentation package

[Dan Griffing]

Is there anyone out there with experience using Fusion 360 to document actual fiberglass parts from Rocksim10 for realistic 3D documentation for their level 3 project?

I've just downloaded Fusion 360 to see if I can use it to create a parts list and a set of 3D construction and assembly drawings for my Wildman Extreme Tripoli level 3 project.

It would be nice to create and share common parts.

 

[dr wogz]

Fusion 360 is a pro CAD package. do you have any CAD experience? You may also want to ask in the '3D printing forum' as there is a lot of CAD talk there..


Are you expecting to take the RS file / parts files and import them into Fusin 360?

 

[Dan Griffing]

Fusion 360 is a pro CAD package. do you have any CAD experience? You may also want to ask in the '3D printing forum' as there is a lot of CAD talk there..


Are you expecting to take the RS file / parts files and import them into Fusin 360?

Only indirectly. Before retiring as an engineer six years ago I spent two decades working alongside mechanical engineers whose job it was to be pros with packages like SolidWorks. I’ve now upgraded my workstation with the full capability to use Fusion 360 and figure that there’s no better time than now to learn it.

FWIW during my retirement I also mastered KiCAD sufficiently to do a fully successful electronics design that resulted in a 3” x 4” 4-layer board with over 200 mostly 0603 sized components on both sides.

Since I’m now currently intending to use Fusion 360 only to make nice, accurate, 3D representations of rocket parts that I have in front me, and have dimensions for in RockSim, (and better than my totally illegible hand drawings) — it should be much easier than my electronics engineering project.

And no, I’m not looking to import anything from RockSim projects, only to have a 1:1 correspondence that I impose myself. I was merely asking if any other rocketeers had ventured down a similar path.

 

[dr wogz]

I'm a PTC Creo (Pro Engineer) CAD guy. ask away for anything may stumble upon!

I do many "rocketry" things in CAD.. the 3D forum should show that!

 

[Dan Griffing]

I'm a PTC Creo (Pro Engineer) CAD guy. ask away for anything may stumble upon!

I do many "rocketry" things in CAD.. the 3D forum should show that!

Although my degree is in chemical engineering, most of my experience has been as a systems and process control engineer, and firmware design specialist and working as a part of technical, multi-disciplinary teams. I’ve worked across several scientific and engineering fields including physics semiconductor equipment development, electrical and mechanical engineering.

So while I’m still confident that I can learn Fusion 360, at 70, I have a built-in expiration date for my useful rocketry work, so I want to make use of what others have done instead of going it alone.

 

[AeroAggie]

There are some great beginner tutorials for Fusion in their library. I'd start there to learn the mechanics of the software, where buttons and menus are, etc. Once you have a grasp of the basics, I can show you some things to help get you going. Rockets are generally dead simple to model.

 

[Arpak]

There's tons of tutorials out there, personally I watched these 2 and have been able to use fusion 360 with ease. Granted, having a 3d printer helps learn.

 

[Dan Griffing]

Only indirectly. Before retiring as an engineer six years ago I spent two decades working alongside mechanical engineers whose job it was to be pros with packages like SolidWorks. I’ve now upgraded my workstation with the full capability to use Fusion 360 and figure that there’s no better time than now to learn it.

FWIW during my retirement I also mastered KiCAD sufficiently to do a fully successful electronics design that resulted in a 3” x 4” 4-layer board with over 200 mostly 0603 sized components on both sides.

Since I’m now currently intending to use Fusion 360 only to make nice, accurate, 3D representations of rocket parts that I have in front me, and have dimensions for in RockSim, (and better than my totally illegible hand drawings) — it should be much easier than my electronics engineering project.

And no, I’m not looking to import anything from RockSim projects, only to have a 1:1 correspondence that I impose myself. I was merely asking if any other rocketeers had ventured down a similar path.

After working all day on Fusion 360 to familiarize myself with it, here are the first results in the form of a Wildman Extreme beveled fin that closely matches the dimensions given in RockSim. I've merely approximated the fin edge bevel from memory instead of actually measuring it.

The biggest problem I encountered was joining all of the line-segments to get a complete profile. Also, some of the dimensions in the RockSim fin design were inconsistent.

 

[Arpak]

The biggest problem I encountered was joining all of the line-segments to get a complete profile.

The coincidence tool is your friend here, click on the end of one line segment and then click on the other and it'll close the profile for you.

 

[jderimig]

Dan I use Inventor for my modeling, basically same functions as 360. It's easier just to create your own part library. Nose cones can be trickier as you need to use spline curve tables to create the rotated geometry. Shoot me a pm or question here if you need any help.

 

[dr wogz]

Another thought I just had (as I start my CAD day)

All the CAD programs have their own, proprietary files types. yes, they can (mostly) now open each others, but there are certain nuances with the files types.

 

[Dan Griffing]

The coincidence tool is your friend here, click on the end of one line segment and then click on the other and it'll close the profile for you.

The two endpoints were just thousandths apart and aside from the extrude function not being able to select a closed perimeter, I couldn’t tell that there were unconnected line segments, or where they were. I spent at least an hour trying to find out why I couldn’t extrude, and the video about it wasn’t much help. Just part of the learning curve.

 

[Dan Griffing]

Dan I use Inventor for my modeling, basically same functions as 360. It's easier just to create your own part library. Nose cones can be trickier as you need to use spline curve tables to create the rotated geometry. Shoot me a pm or question here if you need any help.

Thanks. Will do.

 

[Dan Griffing]

There's tons of tutorials out there, personally I watched these 2 and have been able to use fusion 360 with ease. Granted, having a 3d printer helps learn.

Thanks. I’ll watch it later today

 

[dr wogz]

yeah, I'll note that the [basic] concepts expected are also a little 'fuzzy' to some.

All geometry is to be closed. all CAD programs feature ways to ensure the geometry is closed. Or: it's expected that you start with a basic closed shape, and refine it's dimensions with added dimensions. (Draw roughly what you want, then add dims & watch is adjust itself.)

Take advantage of work planes, work points & work axis to better define the next set of features. "the easier way to draw something might not be the best. Easy may prove to be a pain should you want to refine a feature later on"

 

[Arpak]

I couldn’t tell that there were unconnected line segments

Unconnected points will be white while connected points will be black.

 

[Dan Griffing]

yeah, I'll note that the [basic] concepts expected are also a little 'fuzzy' to some.

All geometry is to be closed. all CAD programs feature ways to ensure the geometry is closed. Or: it's expected that you start with a basic closed shape, and refine it's dimensions with added dimensions. (Draw roughly what you want, then add dims & watch is adjust itself.)

Take advantage of work planes, work points & work axis to better define the next set of features. "the easier way to draw something might not be the best. Easy may prove to be a pain should you want to refine a feature later on"

After getting a mere taste of what’s possible with Fusion 360, the risk I’m now facing is going off on a Fusion 360 tangent and doing far more than is needed to meet the requirements for moving forward on my Tripoli Level-3 project and documentation.

I can see how Fusion 360 or a similar CAD tool might be essential for post-Level-3 rocket design enhancements but only a beginner-level use of it is needed to make drawings of standard rocket parts for Level-3 documentation that are infinitely better than any of my hard sketches could be.

The Tripoli project proposal also requires a neat, legible, electrical circuit sketch for the recovery system. Does anyone who is following this thread have a recommendation for a computer drawing tool to use to meet this requirement? I have actual pictures of two other E-bays that meet these requirements but that’s not the schematic sketch that’s required.

 

[KilroySmith]

The Tripoli project proposal also requires a neat, legible, electrical circuit sketch for the recovery system. Does anyone who is following this thread have a recommendation for a computer drawing tool to use to meet this requirement? I have actual pictures of two other E-bays that meet these requirements but that’s not the schematic sketch that’s required.

Wouldn't KiCad (which you said you had learned) be appropriate, if not massive overkill? I mean, for the most part you're gonna be drawing lines and boxes (wires and (altimeters, batteries, switches, etc)), so even something with primitive drawing primitives like PowerPoint should be sufficient. I doubt anyone expects you to reproduce the schematic for the Altimeter you're gonna use...

 

[Dan Griffing]

Wouldn't KiCad (which you said you had learned) be appropriate, if not massive overkill? I mean, for the most part you're gonna be drawing lines and boxes (wires and (altimeters, batteries, switches, etc)), so even something with primitive drawing primitives like PowerPoint should be sufficient. I doubt anyone expects you to reproduce the schematic for the Altimeter you're gonna use...

Although I had 5 years of experience using it, since upgrading my workstation to 64-bit Windows-10 I haven’t resurrected KiCAD.

KiCAD was my preferred tool for electronic circuit design, surface mount component selection and multilayer board layout. But I don’t think it had a simplified function for the kind of interconnection wiring diagrams that are required by the Tripoli Level-3 project proposal.

Its been two decades since I was “Power Point Proficient”, and I may have it as a part of the Windows Office suite that I have on my workstation. I’ll give it a whirl. There may also some lines and boxes graphic features on Microsoft Word that I can try too.

Thanks for the advice.

 

[dr wogz]

Dan, AutoCAD would be your top choice here. or Adobe Illustrator.. but they may be overkill (and over $$$!) for the task (not to mention a new learning curve!)

As Kilroy mentions, you only need make lines & boxes. Anything that does straight line is your friend.. Even M$ Excel would work for this.

 

[Dan Griffing]

Dan, AutoCAD would be your top choice here. or Adobe Illustrator.. but they may be overkill (and over $$$!) for the task (not to mention a new learning curve!)

As Kilroy mentions, you only need make lines & boxes. Anything that does straight line is your friend.. Even M$ Excel would work for this.

Decades ago I was making such diagrams for my employer at the time, the Silicon Valley company KLA-Tencor, even using (gag) Microsoft Paint! If you were in an underfunded engineering group without the pizazz and pull of management, you had to make do with what you had.

 

[Arpak]

Does anyone who is following this thread have a recommendation for a computer drawing tool to use to meet this requirement?

Personally I like to use draw.io for simple circuit diagrams; been using it all through my Computer Engineering courses. For example, this is the wiring diagram for our clubs 2 stage sustainer (couple changes were made since).

 

[Dan Griffing]

Personally I like to use draw.io for simple circuit diagrams; been using it all through my Computer Engineering courses. For example, this is the wiring diagram for our clubs 2 stage sustainer (couple changes were made since).

View attachment 471809

That looks really great. I’ll look into it.

 

[brennant]

I hand draw my circuits and then scan them. It may not be the easiest thing but it is simple and it works.

 

[mtnmanak]

draw.io is my choice as well for circuit diagrams, but really, for a Level 3 project, you probably don't need as much detail. I used Visio for my Level 3 circuit diagrams because it is quick and easy. They only took me a few minutes. They aren't nearly as detailed as what I could have done in draw.io, but all the TAPs are normally looking for here is that you thought through your wiring scheme, have a hard "off" on the battery circuit and that it generally makes sense. You can go crazy on all these diagrams and pictures if you want, but it seems like a waste of time to go too far down the rabbit hole. I would rather spend the majority of my time actually building.

 

[Dan Griffing]

draw.io is my choice as well for circuit diagrams, but really, for a Level 3 project, you probably don't need as much detail. I used Visio for my Level 3 circuit diagrams because it is quick and easy. They only took me a few minutes. They aren't nearly as detailed as what I could have done in draw.io, but all the TAPs are normally looking for here is that you thought through your wiring scheme, have a hard "off" on the battery circuit and that it generally makes sense. You can go crazy on all these diagrams and pictures if you want, but it seems like a waste of time to go too far down the rabbit hole. I would rather spend the majority of my time actually building.

Its also my understanding that the TAPs want the document to show that the primary and backup recovery electronics systems are fully redundant.

I’ve already implemented several such systems on previous rockets (which one of my TAPs has already inspected and verbally okayed) so my task is simply to document an “as-built” like diagram for my L3 project proposal.

 

[mtnmanak]

Its also my understanding that the TAPs want the document to show that the primary and backup recovery electronics systems are fully redundant.

I’ve already implemented several such systems on previous rockets (which one of my TAPs has already inspected and verbally okayed) so my task is simply to document an “as-built” like diagram for my L3 project proposal.

Absolutely - I file redundancy under the "generally makes sense" category since I don't build anything over 2.6" in diameter without redundant systems.

More to the point though, is how much detail / time you want to spend on documenting this. At the low end, you can just explain the redundancy in narrative. At the high end, you can build a to scale, 100% accurate schematic down to the smallest component on your circuit boards. While that would look awesome and your TAPs would think it is super cool, it goes well beyond the scope of documentation required.

At the end of the day, it is up to you and your TAP and what they are comfortable with. Communication with them is important to keep yourself on track - both from going down rabbit holes and to ensure you have enough detail in your documentation. In this case, it will probably save you some time to ask your TAPs what their expectations are. I know my TAPs well and have worked with them for a quite some time. I bounce ideas off them regularly and they let me know in very direct fashion if I am on target or missing the mark

 

[Dan Griffing]

Absolutely - I file redundancy under the "generally makes sense" category since I don't build anything over 2.6" in diameter without redundant systems.

More to the point though, is how much detail / time you want to spend on documenting this. At the low end, you can just explain the redundancy in narrative. At the high end, you can build a to scale, 100% accurate schematic down to the smallest component on your circuit boards. While that would look awesome and your TAPs would think it is super cool, it goes well beyond the scope of documentation required.

At the end of the day, it is up to you and your TAP and what they are comfortable with. Communication with them is important to keep yourself on track - both from going down rabbit holes and to ensure you have enough detail in your documentation. In this case, it will probably save you some time to ask your TAPs what their expectations are. I know my TAPs well and have worked with them for a quite some time. I bounce ideas off them regularly and they let me know in very direct fashion if I am on target or missing the mark

Looking through TRF Level-3 project documentation I've found no example of a project proposal document that's the first required step of the process.

So while I'm interested in a project proposal that my TAPs will sign off on so that I can commence my L3 construction, I also want one that I can look back and be proud of and possibly post on TRF with my finished Level-3 documentation as a good example for others to follow on how to do it.

Also, because of who are now going to by my TAPs, I need to do everything in an exemplary fashion.

 

[mtnmanak]

Looking through TRF Level-3 project documentation I've found no example of a project proposal document that's the first required step of the process.

So while I'm interested in a project proposal that my TAPs will sign off on so that I can commence my L3 construction, I also want one that I can look back and be proud of and possibly post on TRF with my finished Level-3 documentation as a good example for others to follow on how to do it.

Also, because of who are now going to by my TAPs, I need to do everything in an exemplary fashion.

Sounds good - draw.io may be the best bet then, great site

 

[Dan Griffing]

Personally I like to use draw.io for simple circuit diagrams; been using it all through my Computer Engineering courses. For example, this is the wiring diagram for our clubs 2 stage sustainer (couple changes were made since).

View attachment 471809

Here's my first crack at a DRAW.IO simple circuit diagram that I'm now planning on using: