• Login
sketchucation logo sketchucation
  • Login
πŸ€‘ SketchPlus 1.3 | 44 Tools for $15 until June 20th Buy Now

Mini-challenge

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved SketchUp Discussions
sketchup
328 Posts 26 Posters 29.1k Views 26 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.
  • G Offline
    gilles
    last edited by 2 May 2012, 17:32

    Good try but... πŸ’š


    jeffpush.png

    " c'est curieux chez les marins ce besoin de faire des phrases "

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • T Offline
      TIG Moderator
      last edited by 2 May 2012, 17:39

      Pilou's version appears to work...
      But when I reproduce it there's inaccuracy again πŸ˜•
      Logic [initially] says that offsetting [pushpulling] a face that is coplanar with the known diagonal by width/2 and then adding the new sloping lines through the points ought to make them along the rail's raking edges ???
      BUT the offset is perpendicular to the diagonal NOT the rails sides !
      Hence the errors... very much like all other approximation methods πŸ˜•

      TIG

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P Offline
        pbacot
        last edited by 2 May 2012, 17:46

        TIG,

        To me the problem is that d/2 should be measured perpendicular to the final edge, not the diagonal.

        Peter

        MacOSX MojaveSketchUp Pro v19 Twilight v2 Thea v3 PowerCADD

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • T Offline
          TIG Moderator
          last edited by 2 May 2012, 17:55

          @pbacot said:

          TIG,

          To me the problem is that d/2 should be measured perpendicular to the final edge, not the diagonal.

          Peter
          Exactly right - I was adding that to my last post as you posted...
          The difference between offsetting the diagonal and the sides is the error. πŸ˜’

          TIG

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • A Offline
            andybot
            last edited by 2 May 2012, 19:56

            @pbacot said:

            Gilles,

            I Have no idea how you figured that out 😲 One snaps to a line that is not there until the execution. That's wild!

            Peter

            Indeed - components interacting with each other during manipulation has always been baffling to me. Some things work and some don't (for example try to move a line in a mirrored component so that it's on the mirror plane - it won't snap to the other side, it'll just keep going past the mirror plane)

            http://charlottesvillearchitecturalrendering.com/

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • T Offline
              TIG Moderator
              last edited by 2 May 2012, 20:05

              I have yet another 'drawn' solution...
              I can't fault it... but then again... you might... πŸ˜’


              RakingRailDrawnSolution999.PNG


              RakingRailDrawnSolution999.skp

              TIG

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • B Offline
                bmike
                last edited by 2 May 2012, 20:20

                @tig said:

                I have yet another drawn solution... I can't fault it but then again... πŸ˜’

                that appears to work... instead of copying the line up by the thickness of the brace, i +rotated about the center of the original line 180d. then traced over everything to get my shape.

                except, when i use the tape, with 0.000000 accuracy, i get 5.995197, instead of what should be 6" in my example.

                copying the bottom line up 6" (2x the measurement i used for 1/2w) should yield better results, but then i'd guess that the top or bottom would be off. or the rotate tool is inherently inaccurate.

                mike beganyi design + consulting llc

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • G Offline
                  gilles
                  last edited by 2 May 2012, 20:26

                  @unknownuser said:

                  I Have no idea how you figured that out One snaps to a line that is not there until the execution. That's wild!

                  The line was not here but exist so you can interact with, I use this technic frequently.

                  " c'est curieux chez les marins ce besoin de faire des phrases "

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • R Offline
                    Rich O Brien Moderator
                    last edited by 2 May 2012, 20:42

                    A slight variation on TIG's

                    302 Found

                    favicon

                    (www.screenr.com)

                    Download the free D'oh Book for SketchUp πŸ“–

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • T Offline
                      TIG Moderator
                      last edited by 2 May 2012, 21:24

                      @bmike said:

                      @tig said:

                      I have yet another drawn solution... I can't fault it but then again... πŸ˜’

                      that appears to work... instead of copying the line up by the thickness of the brace, i +rotated about the center of the original line 180d. then traced over everything to get my shape.

                      except, when i use the tape, with 0.000000 accuracy, i get 5.995197, instead of what should be 6" in my example.

                      copying the bottom line up 6" (2x the measurement i used for 1/2w) should yield better results, but then i'd guess that the top or bottom would be off. or the rotate tool is inherently inaccurate.
                      Move+Ctrl to copy the bottom long-side lines up to 'T' [as there are two lines, split by the width/2 perpendicular line...] moved up to the top of the right-hand post [T]...

                      TIG

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • T Offline
                        TIG Moderator
                        last edited by 2 May 2012, 21:27

                        @unknownuser said:

                        A slight variation on TIG's
                        http://www.screenr.com/7VC8
                        Another working solution [I think!]... but it uses a script 😞

                        TIG

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • R Offline
                          Rich O Brien Moderator
                          last edited by 2 May 2012, 21:33

                          A script that should be a default tool πŸ‘

                          If only Google accepted sketchUcation's offer to buy Sketchp that time πŸ˜’

                          Download the free D'oh Book for SketchUp πŸ“–

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • T Offline
                            TIG Moderator
                            last edited by 2 May 2012, 21:38

                            @unknownuser said:

                            A script that should be a default tool πŸ‘
                            If only Google had accepted SketchUcation's offer to buy Sketchup that time πŸ˜’
                            I know... I know... but we are now all Trimblers-in-our-boots πŸ˜‰

                            TIG

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • P Offline
                              pbacot
                              last edited by 2 May 2012, 23:01

                              @tig said:

                              I have yet another 'drawn' solution...
                              I can't fault it... but then again... you might... πŸ˜’

                              Without doing a test, I don't see the logic that when you rotate the line back up, that point E hits the diagonal at any meaningful (or snappable) point. It can't be hitting the 'M' midpoint of the diagonal... therefore it isn't width/2 off the true axis of the board. In fact, isn't the angle created the same as measuring width/2 from M to the bottom edge?

                              MacOSX MojaveSketchUp Pro v19 Twilight v2 Thea v3 PowerCADD

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • T Offline
                                TIG Moderator
                                last edited by 2 May 2012, 23:11

                                That's was the point... you snap it to M but E can never 'touch' it - but it will align... landing on the centerline.
                                BUT... you have me 'banged to rights' - it doesn't work as it's not an exact fit, so there is still a tolerance issue πŸ˜’ πŸ˜’ πŸ˜’
                                Back to the drawing board... πŸ˜•

                                TIG

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • T Offline
                                  TIG Moderator
                                  last edited by 2 May 2012, 23:23

                                  Driven

                                  I think this a variation of the two-instance-rotation-with-mutual-snapping solution posted earlier today...

                                  Can you elaborate...

                                  So far, I think that is the only good way [along with Fredo's weird snap inferencing example] ???

                                  TIG

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • D Offline
                                    driven
                                    last edited by 2 May 2012, 23:23

                                    been watching with no spare time...

                                    my solution, two instances of square component, the second moved to top of target post and rotated 180ΒΊ, then in edit mode rotated again from pivot point and snaped to first instances [also rotating] none pivot corner.
                                    seems accurate added the lines to show the theory

                                    john


                                    v6

                                    learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself...

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • D Offline
                                      driven
                                      last edited by 2 May 2012, 23:38

                                      Tig,
                                      your most likely right, I haven't had a good look at all the 'solutions'
                                      I'm working 18hr days at the moment and just had a quick shot at it, needed a play before sleep...
                                      john

                                      learn from the mistakes of others, you may not live long enough to make them all yourself...

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • M Offline
                                        mac1
                                        last edited by 3 May 2012, 16:04

                                        mini__mac2.skpHere is improved on solution I posted early and all dimension have been verified to SU 32 bit float accuracy against the close form solution I presented above.
                                        Note I have been using some of the post dimension Jeff posted early of 96" post height, 65" spacing and 3.5 rail width.
                                        No plugin is used.
                                        I did use the technique I posted almost a year or so ago on the exact solution of sphere line intersection.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • A Offline
                                          andybot
                                          last edited by 3 May 2012, 16:13

                                          @mac1 said:

                                          [attachment=0:1pq9h5l0]<!-- ia0 -->mini__mac2.skp<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:1pq9h5l0]Here is improved on solution I posted early and all dimension have been verified to SU 32 bit float accuracy against the close form solution I presented above.
                                          Note I have been using some of the post dimension Jeff posted early of 96" post height, 65" spacing and 3.5 rail width.
                                          No plugin is used.
                                          I did use the technique I posted almost a year or so ago on the exact solution of sphere line intersection.

                                          Hey Mac1 - what "sphere" are you using? It's not clear in your model what your steps are.

                                          http://charlottesvillearchitecturalrendering.com/

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • 1
                                          • 2
                                          • 12
                                          • 13
                                          • 14
                                          • 15
                                          • 16
                                          • 17
                                          • 14 / 17
                                          14 / 17
                                          • First post
                                            268/328
                                            Last post
                                          Buy SketchPlus
                                          Buy SUbD
                                          Buy WrapR
                                          Buy eBook
                                          Buy Modelur
                                          Buy Vertex Tools
                                          Buy SketchCuisine
                                          Buy FormFonts

                                          Advertisement