The .SKP file you linked to [121.skp] is corrupted [invalid] and sadly it can't be opened - let alone 'fixed'. Although it does have a v18 'header', something inside its code is broken. Do you have the backup version .SKB file ? If so rename it as a .SKP and try that...

yeah the measuring tool worked just fine, I had to lengthen the posts and raise the roof up, re do the knee braces, but now I have something to show the customer, and something to work up a price with [image: e6l7_1Reduced1.jpg]

The additional geometry is really things like coplanar faces--removing the uneeded edge dividing them, and stray edges--depending on the settings you have made for Cleanup3. It's good to use the tool as you model before you create too many extra edges etc, and avoid modeling that does so. SketchUp doesn't make the extra edges, though plugins might (such as SandBox). I would turn off the CleanUp purge functions and do the purges in the Model Info window. See if that helps. I find CleanUp3 to be so slow as to be unusable in larger models in v2019, regardless of the cleanup job or selection. It is often faster to cleanup the model on my own. It seemed to work fine in 2016. I've never tried 2017. Haven't heard of multiple instances of the application opening.

no special extension needed, use the standard built-in tool FOLLOW ME, it'll do what you describe

Look at Clothworks (the trick is to make two half passes! One from the top, one from the bottom with the rotated object ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hmx0K2Sk1VQ

When you use Curviloft to make a surface it automatically makes it a group. So your "solid" isn't because it is made up of several faces and edges of raw geometry and two groups created by Curviloft within the other group. By exploding those two groups you get all raw geometry within one group which is a Solid. You should also reverse the blue faces so you only see white from the outside. Blue faces are back faces.

@bep said: "So, at this point the spring has tension and the red part has made contact with the pin, and further movement of the handle will begin to slide the blade out of its contact. Right?" [highlight=#ff4040:2cbrobxo]Yes![/highlight:2cbrobxo] "But, just to keep my reputation as a royal pain-in-the-butt alive, I do have a question -- To keep the spring from just raising the blade with the arm, there would have to be tension, or pressure, that holds the blade in place until the arm raises the blade far enuf that it can break free and snap up, right?" [highlight=#ff4040:2cbrobxo]Yes!, the pressure should ensure for enough friction wen the spring gets loaded to prevent the blade from sliding out of the contact fingers Whit this design the "red part" slides the blade out off the contact fingers. Then at some point the blade snaps away from the contact fingers[/highlight:2cbrobxo] But, while every blade switch that I have found uses a contact that is formed into a sort of spring shape to ensure good contact with the blade this beast seems to have relatively thick "arms" that stick straight up, and I don't see how they can provide the spring action to ensure good contact, let alone provide enuf pressure against the blade to prevent it from just moving up with arm. [highlight=#ff4040:2cbrobxo]They somehow can get enough contact pressure wih this design, without enough contact pressure the contact resistance would be to high, and the switch could burn/melt at that place.[/highlight:2cbrobxo] "Also can't figure out why they would go to the trouble of cutting the contact down the middle like that. Does that have something to do with it?" [highlight=#ff4040:2cbrobxo]Yes, this is done to ensure a big enough good contact area, to keep the contact resistance as low as possible Wider fingers would be more difficult to get them plane to the switch blade[/highlight:2cbrobxo] About your drawing. A part of the blade and the top of the fingers should be slightly rounded, to let the blade slide in easier. Some things to read up on the switch topic: https://phasetophase.nl/kalenders/kalender_2009.html (translate with google) https://ecprops.com/products/knife_switches/knife_switches.html http://0330de8.netsolhost.com/test/html/products/knife-switch.php Together we have 4 active brain cells Hopefully the move to your new home goes very well. Hey Bep, Really appreciate all the time and effort you have put into setting me straight on this. But for now everything has taken a back seat to other higher-priority things in my life. Again, many thanks. Steve

Some other pictures from that project. I didn't use much SketchUp and I never took many pictures, but at least it all got built. [image: 2l0T_original4.jpg] [image: UJlL_original5.jpg] [image: giXr_RasmussenTrellis2maxppB.png] [image: zBbE_original3.jpg]

Here is an example of a garden wall and trench. Both with shadows "On Ground" and without. [image: iSCI_ScreenShot2019-08-05at12.32.35PM.png] [image: Y0w8_ScreenShot2019-08-05at12.32.46PM.png]

I assigned a shortcut for " view/rendering/edge/by axis " as ALT + X so i can turn on or off the colors of the object's axis, so in this way, i know where to dimension any object. < X,Y >

Textures.com has some decent free stuff. https://www.textures.com/browse/plain-tiles/35905?seamless=1

I rarely, if ever, use those functions. If I need to upload something to the warehouse I clean it up first, which is done in a separate model file. Same thing if I download anything from the warehouse, clean it up first in a separate file before I use it in my model.

What size paper does your printer handle? Are you sure the model will fit within the printer's margins? Are you getting the model window to the correct aspect ratio? Upgrading to Pro could be a good option. As I described, the process for being able to print things like this to scale is much easier. If you have to do this more than once in a great while and you value your time, the cost of the Pro license isn't really a big deal. You could figure out how much time you've got invested in trying to get this one thing printed and add in the time for someone else to try to help you.

@mike amos said: ...it was switched off, and THEN suddenly spark up with this. might be a 'special' (non configurable) behaviour of the Make version for doing at least some promotion for the Pro version which btw subsidized the Make version.

Sometimes, just by articulating the question you find the solution yourself: I created a small texture 50x50 pixels with a solid colour and now it displays correctly. But do I have to do this every time I want a solid colour to display correctly in parallel? [image: wQqC_1.jpg]

Yep - It was the one about knock-on effects. You are correct that is just opinions but what caught my was comments in the early posts about how there seems to be some drop off on this forum in the number of respondents (especially in some that have very active in the past). I thought I had noticed it before as well so it caught my attention. Even though I did see some things I agreed with (yes, they are opinions) and I found the thread was interesting.

Ok, my bad! thanks! (and thanks for the reply!)

Else you have the truely free amazing PConPlanner!

Sorry for the delayed reply - internet out! That's solved it! I had tried to re-install, but it obviously hadn't run through properly as I don't recall it asking for the SU versions. I'm now up and running. Many thanks for the advice!

@anton_s said: Can do that with ClothWorks too! [attachment=0:2wt755v5]<!-- ia0 -->Soft Box.png<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:2wt755v5] Steps: Draw a box and group it. Assign a cloth property: (Context Menu) ClothWorks -> Make Cloth Apply adaptive grid with desired spacing: (Context Menu) ClothWorks -> 1 Cloth -> Apply Adaptive Grid Set stretch to 0.09 and bend to 0.25 via ClothWorks UI. Set gravity to -1. Draw a rectangle beneath the box and set it shape to collider. Simulate. Use drag tool to deform at desired places. Stop when the box settles over the rectangle. Make use of the toggle drape feature to apply material. Thank you very much for your help! This extension is awesome