You don't need to 'edit' a group to change its entities. So once you have an array of the newly 'grouped_faces' [made as you group them] just process it thus: thick=1.0 ### or whatever dim desired grouped_faces.each{|group| group.entities.to_a.each{|e| next unless e.is_a?(Sketchup;;Face) e.pushpull(-thick) ### -ve pushes against face.normal } }

This http://www.3drad.com/Google-SketchUp-To-DirectX-XNA-Exporter-Plug-in.htm?

I believe that maybe the best for fill something between 2 arcs (or any curves) or more in the 3D space is Curviloft by Fredo6 (first tool: loft junction ) Call the tool, click arc1, arc 2, arc n , Enter that's all (curve 1, curve 2, curve n) And you will have a bunch of post parameters: Increase or decrease number of facets etc... Have fun curvilofting! (click image for zoom [image: i2ph_Curvi.jpg]

For solidgroups/components, the entity info will also report the volume. For a selected set of edges (or just one), it will report the length. [image: wKUO_volume.png]

I think the best way to choose plugins is to let practical work make the decision for you. (for any app' with plugin facilities). Just get cracking on with some models using the standard tools, and identify.. A) Things you need to do, but the standard tools can't manage it. B) Complex actions that you need to repeat a lot, and really want a quicker way to do it. C) Recommendations from other forum users who are trying to solve the same problem as you. ...then do a targeted search for a plugin to fit exactly what you need. I find this much better than just loading lots of plugins "just to try them"; no matter how clever they are, they will just become HDD clutter if they are not truly useful to your models - and that clutter can be a real pain, as plugin file management (one big folder!) is a totally "manual" experience, and you will be glad that you have only a "slim" collection if you ever need to diagnose slow-boots or bugsplats! There also comes a point when you can have so many plugin, that going back to the standard tools becomes faster than looking for some tutorial videos, to remind yourself how a rarely-used plugin actually works! So my big tip is this - consider carefully which plugins you DO NOT need, and eliminate them from your HDD mercilessly so that SU boots fast, and you are not swamped by extra toobars/menu items etc. that are no longer meaningful. That will leave you enough (tidy!) room in your plugin folder for an occasional "experiment" with a new crazy plugin when you need inspiration to break out of "designer's block".

Hello, I think that SketchyPhysics is really much designed to do that. Have a look at my model (http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=d307649663ad9dd982b31e1c15ea174c&prevstart=0), to see how it works.

@unknownuser said: Super cool but that select only points! That was the request.

@wo3dan said: @woodarc said: Can I align standard views to North, South etc even if the axis's don't align to them? If so how Besides TIG's method to align the view to a face, you can also align view to axis (green up). If you click on any axis in empty space and select 'Align View' in the context menu, the view will have green pointing up on your screen, blue pointing towards you and red to the right. The current drawing origin is the center of your screen's modeling space. This means that by simply adjusting the drawing axes, you have better controle over different views like top, front, left, right, etc. to see facades in 'heads on' view. Example: if you have a building rotated, not along red/green, then rotate the drawing axes about blue to get red/green along two perpendicular facades. TOP icon may be of no use. But right click an axis and select 'Align View' to get the right Top view, (green pointing up on screen). Thanks for your response. I tried what you said (I think!) This technique seems to give a top or plan view only which is great as I hadn't tackled the plan or top view until now. I have been trying to align vertical faces to show elevations and plans perpendicular or orthographic in Layout. I am working on a building that is square but with a diagonal ridge, the whole building is set at 327 degrees NW. Internal walls are set at two angles to the perimeter some perpendicular and some at 45 degrees. Many thanks for the guidance.

What about install DraftSight for OSX? It is an AutoCAD LT clone and it has an OSX version. You could at least open the DWG and see what the text is.

No there is not a direct option to do this. There is an .fbx importer floating around, or try collada. I found the best method is Deep Exploration through the .rh extension. Export out of Max as .rh and then use DE to convert to .skp. Expensive option, but works very well.

@pbacot said: @metaclay said: @gaieus said: @metaclay said: Can i just snap to any point regardless they're position in 3d space ? Yes, you can, so if you have problems, please post specific examples. Here's simple setup, i create 2 rectangles, one is lying on ground plane (xy plane) while another is above the ground ( i moved it vertically along z axis). I tried to move any vertex of rectangle#1 to snap to any point of rectangle#2. How to do it ? Right now, it can't snap to other rectangle coz they're on different plane. Thanx You are right it can't. That's because SU is trying to help by preventing you from warping your rectangle (see below). I guess the question is what are you trying to end up with in the model? You can obtain "inferences" from points on edges (e.g. endpoints) of the upper rectangle, if you are trying to align the lower point directly below it. You have to do that in a couple of steps (I can give if you need) but the easiest thing is to project edges down from the upper rectangle to the lower rectangle plane, so you can snap to the endpoints. Generally the "snap" to point in this two-plane scenario would only make sense in reference to the camera position--if it worked, if I am understanding correctly. However if your objective is to warp the lower rectangle to a point outside its plane, you have to press command (alt on a PC) to "autofold" the face of the rectangle while moving the vertex. Thanx Pbacot, That makes sense why i can't snap directly to it, yeah it will 'bend' the face. Btw I've just solved it using 'inferences' method like u said. Additional note or request : it would be great if SU got option to turn this on/off , in same 'wild' case, maybe i need to build some free form design, this is also helpfull if i can have option to turn snap on/off , just for flexibility reason (so accomodate more users need). Right now the 'snap-persistent' mode make SU more 'mechanical/technical' but maybe that what the SU is designed for. peace... Thanx a lot.

I can't see why you would want to do this - most people struggle in the other direction trying to make their objects 'solid'... BUT assuming it has some hidden use we can't think of... a small hole will make it 'non-solid'... if you want all 6 faces of 'the box' to remain the same, but for it to be 'non-solid', you must add something else into its group/component like another group - e.g. group one of its faces - or add a single diagonal non-faced internal line that is then hidden - use Xray mode [or put it on an off-layer]. A manifold 'solid' contains no entities other than faces and their edges, and every edge must have two faces - no more, no fewer - it's a simple rule [note that for these purposes 'guides' are ignored]. So the converse is true - to make something 'non-solid' you must ensure that the simple rule is broken!

I found the answer... Run Regedit Find HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes.skb and delete this entry, this don´t interfere with the .skp thumbs, so if you rename the .skb to .skp the thumbnail will appear normally.

Thanks for the replies. I realize I've got to be systematic - set up some tests in SU and in Layout and work through all the advice in this thread, labeling everything as I go. I do wish it was more straightforward. I don't have to do anything to get a crisp print out of AutoCAD - it's not something I have to think about. I wish SketchUp was the same - hit print and get an acceptable result.

Cathy, it looks like Pilou and I are tag-teaming again. Normally folks do import components directly in a model and you can do that from either the Google toolbar or by searching in the Components browser. You can then save the component to a local library, including Components Sampler if desired. That said, I downloaded a tree component and saved it in the Components Sampler library as you described. The tree component does appear in the library as expected. Is it possible the component didn't really end up in the Components Sampler folder? Was that library already open in SketchUp? Those thumbnails don't dynamically update so the tree wouldn't show up there until SketchhUp had a reason to reload the thumbnails. Reopeing SketchUp would be one way to do that. Selecting a different library and coming back to Components Sampler should do it as well.

If you use a tool like thomthom's 'Solid-Inspector' it will show the issues.[image: LEUF_Capture.PNG] Other tools like my 'SolidSolver' can try to fix issues... BUT these tools can often fail because the errors are often too convoluted... a manual fix is then needed... Your form has several such difficulties... A manifold 'solid' is best be thought of as an object that contains only faces and their edges, AND those edges ALL have two faces - no more, no fewer. So that excludes all faceless edges, single-sided faces that will end up somewhere as a 'flap' with an edge with only one face, punched 'holes' in faces that will inevitably have an edge with only one face, internal 'partition' faces within twin-skinned 'walls' that will have some edges with three or more faces etc... Your form has several problems like those listed above... You can see them using Xray mode, and Section-Planes to cut the object etc during using 'Solid-Inspector'. Then you can select+delete to get rid of unneeded edges/faces etc. There are also a couple of tiny very narrow internal flap-faces, because not all of your faces are exactly 'axial' - use a Style that shows edges 'by axis color' to see these better, zoom in and erase them... If you make it a group and select it then 'Entity Info' says 'Group' BUT IF it's manifold it says 'Solid Group'... Here it is fixed [image: znhU_Capture1.PNG]

Thanks a lot. Just what I needed.

I'd worry about the terrain after the house is built but when you're ready, you can use the Sandbox tools to create that. Any chance you've got a survey of the lot with topographic info?