I need some help accurately scaling a model like in AutoCAD
-
I think I may not have been clear enough in my previous post. I would like to scale the object based from the top of the arc to the corner of the object and not the bottom of the object (which extends vertically beyond the corners), but I still want this extreme geometry to be scaled. The image below indicates where i'd like to scale the object by, but I want the entire selection to be scaled by these reference points.
[xxl-img:t62j2bbi]http://i969.photobucket.com/albums/ae179/zxinfinity/scalebyref2.jpg[/xxl-img:t62j2bbi]
If i were to scale the arc independently, the scale factor becomes ~1.26, which would be impossible to scale to manually for the curved surface. I understand very well how the Sketchup scale tool works. In Autocad you can specify a base point from which the center of scaling will occur as well as a reference point for which you can specify a distance between them to achieve a uniform scale. In Sketchup, the only base points allowed are at the corners, or faces, or center of the bounding box.
Would it be possible to implement a plugin that allows you to specify a base and reference point and whether it's a 1d, 2d, or 3d scale? The bounding box scale works in MOST cases but just isn't flexible enough.
-
Have you considered FredoScale tools ?
Can you post that SKP?
The Scaling box's bounds should be the object's bounds - I can't see how any part of that shape is outside the scaling 'box'
-
I have tried Fredo's scale tool, but it too uses the "bounding box" to specify base points for scaling. If you open up the file I've attached, you'll notice that I've dimensioned the vertical "bulge" of the arc. Note that the corner of the surface is not at the lowest vertical elevation.
So when I go to scale the entire object, pulling the bottom blue only grip does not refer to the "corner", it is referring to the lowest vertical elevation. Essentially, the 2nd bounding box image that I posted earlier is where I would LIKE for the bottom edge of the bounding box to be, except that I want to scale the WHOLE group unidirectionally using this smaller bounding box. In other words, the vertical "bulge" height becomes the reference height by which I want to scale.
For example, I would like to vertically scale the object referring to the 24' vertical height to a new height of 27'6". I understand that if I get out the calculator and divide the desired height by the current height, and then manually enter the scale ratio down to the nearest thousandth or even ten-thousandth, I'd get a somewhat accurate dimension.
This can get cumbersome and time consuming pretty quickly though in a larger model, particularly when I want the object to be scaled from a specific point (being limited to bounding box scaling means that I would potentially need to reposition each object which would be scaled using different scale factors).
Please let me know if I've made this any clearer or more confusing.
-
-
TIG,
Thank you for your timely responses. Your method indeed does work, and it achieves the "snapping" precision I was looking for, but is this generally the accepted method for unidirectionally scaling with reference?
It seems like there's a lot of extra steps to get to what I was looking for. The preferred method might almost be to use a calculator, unless the height isn't known or isn't a precise number (e.g. ~27' 6 13/32"). Drawing the extra lines and construction lines and having to re-scale in two directions to achieve a unidirectional scale with reference seems very cumbersome. I personally have no experience writing Ruby scripts and have not dedicated the time to learn it, but I figured with the collection of scripts that you in particular have written, this one would be relatively simple, yet extremely powerful.
Looking forward to hearing what you and others might think.
-
Ok, what happens when you need to scale using the tape measure method, but the actual reference dimension is something very imprecise, i.e. ~26' 0 23/64"?
-
Why not use a sensible dimension and pick the known points for that.
If you are modeling something that's 27'6" long then the odd 1/64" is not very critical...However, you'll only get the '
~' in front in Sketchup if you measure a distance - say~27' 6 13/32"- if you know it should be exactly27'7"then type that in as the value [with the 'units'] - both when using the Tapemeasure rescaling trick OR stretching on an axis with the Scale tool...
Why worry about the '~' ? -
So How did you export the model? I've never run into this. While I don't use acad anymore, I do export and send the acad file to several different consultants. We haven't run into a scale issue except for one time, where I exported the model from layout, and the SU reference was not set orthogonal.
-
I currently have the same question! Would love it if there was a plug-in to mimic AutoCad's "reference point scaling" method.
-
Perhaps this helps?
https://extensions.sketchup.com/sv/content/s4u-scale -
@bep said:
@unknownuser said:
@patrickbateman said:
Is it possible to do this for a selection and not the entire model?
yeah.. group the selection then preform the scaling while inside the group.
DUH
BepDUH No.2
Advertisement