sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info

    Joint Push Pull Classic (Old version) - v2.2a - 26 Apr 17

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Plugins
    368 Posts 150 Posters 2.0m Views 150 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • fredo6F Offline
      fredo6
      last edited by

      @diego-rodriguez said:

      @thomthom said:

      I think that he is requesting that you can doubleclick a surface to repeat the last Push-Pull operation. Like the native Push-Pull where you double-click and it extrudes the faces you clicked the same distance as the previous PP.

      yes πŸ˜„
      or can be "shift + click mouse"

      and other questios is:

      and to generate pushpull. now you have to do:
      selcted face + three click with mouse
      can be changed to :
      selected face + two click with mouse
      similar to native sketchup.

      JointPushPull would deserve a more natural interface mode, I agree. I'll see what I can do, because that may not so simple, and anyway I had the intention to re-engineer it more in the style of my more recent plugins.

      Fred

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • EdsonE Offline
        Edson
        last edited by

        is JPP 1.5 for SU8 only or will it work with 7.1?

        edson mahfuz, architect| porto alegre β€’ brasil
        http://www.mahfuz.arq.br

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • thomthomT Offline
          thomthom
          last edited by

          @edson said:

          is JPP 1.5 for SU8 only or will it work with 7.1?

          works for SU7 as well

          Thomas Thomassen β€” SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
          List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • jim smithJ Offline
            jim smith
            last edited by

            Thank you Fredo πŸ‘ great tool that gets a lot of use.

            "Out of clutter find simplicity,
            from discord find harmony,
            In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity"
            Albert Einstein

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • W Offline
              weiqi66
              last edited by

              Thank you Fredo πŸ‘ great tool that gets a lot of use.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • DavidBoulderD Offline
                DavidBoulder
                last edited by

                I've been playing with Joint Push pull on some relatively simple non orthogonal but simple objects (still just six sided objects). I was surprised to see when I changed my cube to something non orthogonal and then performed a JPP my newly made faces and edges were not parallel to their original elements.

                Reading into the documentation I think that is because Joint Push pull gets the vector for the new point from the average of the three points. This seems perfect on orthogonal objects, or maybe even symmetrically angled objects, but not when asymmetrical angles are introduced. I made an asymmetrically tapered cube and used the standard SketchUp push/pull to extrude the faces out by 24 inches. Based on an earlier test I confirmed that the new Joint Push Pull line is on a vector from the original point through the center of a triangle of the three points generated by the push pull. The distance between the original point and the new point is 2' 8-5/16" (I assume the length is optimized to minimize the change in the position or normal of the three planes). I then used a different method to generate the desired new shape. I drew lines for each pair of faces showing where they would intersect if they had been extended. These lines all meet at a point which represents the ideal location for the new point. It allows the other planes to stay exactly where they should be. 24" away from the original faces (and still parallel). Incidentally the distance between the original and new point with this method is 2' 8'11/16".

                Would it be possible to have an alternate method for JPP that worked in this way. I suppose it may be slower, first have to determine the implied intersection lines for each pair of adjacent faces, and then where they intersect, but I think the results would be very clean. In theory (as long as your push pull distance was not too large to create problems) you could JPP a selection of surfaces in by 24 inches, and then back out by 24 inches with almost perfect alignment (minus rounding errors) to your original geometry. Maybe this won't work in all cases, but for the times it will work it could provide better results. I think it is better for boxy shapes vs. highly faceted surfaces (if making them smaller vs. larger).

                I have attached a close up image of a intersection showing standard SketchUp push/pull and then the new point generated by a JPP operation or and a new point generated by my implied intersection method.


                SketchUp file that screenshot was from. This shows my workflow a bit more.

                --

                David Goldwasser
                OpenStudio Developer
                National Renewable Energy Laboratory

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • P Offline
                  pmolsen
                  last edited by

                  Any chance of a new option to thicken a wall on both sides and delete the original wall in one step please?

                  Would allow for example tracing the centreline of a complex wall from Google Earth, (eg. the walls of a house) then thickening it in one step.

                  At present it is difficult to achieve. You have to thicken it in one direction by half, then thicken it the other way by the same amount. Problem is when you do the second step it leaves the original faces there, or at least the outlines, even if you specify delete original faces, meaning you wind up with a line down the centreline of the wall top and bottom which you then have to delete. For a long complex wall that can be painful.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • P Offline
                    pmolsen
                    last edited by

                    Another request please. An option to say borders on external faces EXCEPT THE BOTTOM FACE. When thickening a wall for example, a face on the bottom is often not wanted since it will be sitting flat on the Google Earth surface.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • thomthomT Offline
                      thomthom
                      last edited by

                      @pmolsen said:

                      Another request please. An option to say borders on external faces EXCEPT THE BOTTOM FACE. When thickening a wall for example, a face on the bottom is often not wanted since it will be sitting flat on the Google Earth surface.

                      Just don't select the bottom face.

                      Thomas Thomassen β€” SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
                      List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • mitcorbM Offline
                        mitcorb
                        last edited by

                        Regarding your issue with Joint PushPull not staying orthogonal, Use either VectorPushPull or NormalPushPull as other options. You can predefine the path the PushPull will follow with a line segment or by example with a nearby line already in the model.

                        That is, if I understood your problem.

                        I take the slow, deliberate approach in my aimless wandering.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P Offline
                          pmolsen
                          last edited by

                          @thomthom said:

                          Just don't select the bottom face.

                          I do not know what you mean. I do not select the bottom face. I select the single vertical faces and push-pull them one direction. Faces get created all round and top and bottom. Without deselecting the selected faces I then push-pull them in the opposite direction. There is no way of not creating the bottom faces.

                          But the problem is the outlines of the original faces remain on the top and bottom, along with numerous other lines generated by the push-pull. How do I prevent them?

                          One thing I tried was pulling the faces in one direction with "Delete original faces" on and "No Borders". I then used the Cleanup plugin to delete all the orphaned edge lines from the original faces. I then reselected all the faces and tried to pull them in the opposite direction using Thickening and Borders on Outer Faces Only. It does not work.

                          When you pull the wall in one direction using thickening, the original faces stay selected. If you then pull them in the other direction without deselecting them, they all move in the correct direction.

                          If you do the first push-pull with no borders and delete original faces they do not stay selected. After you do the cleanup, you reselect them and try to pull them in the other direction but it does not work properly. Some of them pull the correct direction. Others pull the opposite way (the same direction as the first push-pull operation) meaning those parts of the wall end up offset from where they should be.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Y Offline
                            yokaxi
                            last edited by

                            thanks

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • H Offline
                              hero719
                              last edited by

                              β˜€ πŸ‘ thk u sure!! i'm beginner.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • N Offline
                                Napper
                                last edited by

                                I've been trying to extrude a wasching bowl by 12mm. The JPP crashes on me every time I do this no matter whether I try it on my XP machine at work or my Mac at home. Is this a bug, or too many faces?

                                Kind regards,

                                Napper

                                This washing bowl crashes JPP

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • TIGT Offline
                                  TIG Moderator
                                  last edited by

                                  Napper

                                  It's an awkward shape to JPP...
                                  I can't get a good result either πŸ˜•
                                  Here's an alternative method...
                                  As it's a solid you can use Jim Foltz's 'shell' @12mm, then temporarily hide the top of the original outer-shell, PushPull the top of the new solid inner-shell up ~50mm so it will pierce the outer-shell's top, intersect both groups' geometry together, and then erase the unwanted parts in them, explode the two groups together and re-group as one, smooth it... πŸ˜„WHB_Test2[TIGd].PNGWHB_Test2[TIGd].skp

                                  TIG

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • N Offline
                                    Napper
                                    last edited by

                                    Hi TIG,

                                    this worked quite well, actually! I had to redo it, as I had given you the inner shell and needed an outer shell but that was good practice, actually... :smile: And along the way I got a new plugin, I had not been aware of as of yet. So, what I wanted to say is: THANK YOU!!! :smile:
                                    

                                    Napper

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • J Offline
                                      JasonDoggart
                                      last edited by

                                      Hi - thanks for all your hard work! This is such a useful, well designed tool!

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • fredo6F Offline
                                        fredo6
                                        last edited by

                                        NEW RELEASE
                                        version 1.6 - 22 Apr 11: bug fix - better respect of offset distance in case where the surface is composed of faces with sharp angles.

                                        See main post for download.

                                        Fredo

                                        [Edit: I fixed the link to the download thread. TIG...]

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • S Offline
                                          SketchUpNoobie
                                          last edited by

                                          @unknownuser said:

                                          NEW RELEASEbug fix - better respect of offset distance in case where the surface is composed of faces with sharp angles.

                                          This will be great! Thanks! πŸ˜„ Have a cookie. πŸ˜‰ And...er...a beer. πŸ˜• Great combination. 🀒

                                          --

                                          SketchUpNoobie: the complete noob in all things SketchUp.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jeff hammondJ Offline
                                            jeff hammond
                                            last edited by

                                            @unknownuser said:

                                            bug fix - better respect of offset distance in case where the surface is composed of faces with sharp angles.

                                            nice!
                                            works very well on my test case (which previously failed with v1.5).
                                            thanks for the update!

                                            dotdotdot

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 8
                                            • 9
                                            • 10
                                            • 11
                                            • 12
                                            • 18
                                            • 19
                                            • 10 / 19
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Buy SketchPlus
                                            Buy SUbD
                                            Buy WrapR
                                            Buy eBook
                                            Buy Modelur
                                            Buy Vertex Tools
                                            Buy SketchCuisine
                                            Buy FormFonts

                                            Advertisement