Dimensions and Volumes query....
-
If a group or a component-instance is selected AND it is a 'solid' [i.e. it just contains geometry and it is 'manifold' - no 'nested' objects/no unfaced-lines/no holes/no flaps/no internal partitions etc - every edge must have exactly 2 faces...], then 'Entity Info' will show its volume in current Model Units.
There are some scripts that will add guide-points at the 8 corners of an object's bounding-box.
You can then dimension to those for 'over all' dimensions.
Try this http://sketchucation.com/resources/pluginstore?pln=AnchorPoints -
Thanks. I mention the group volume issue because I tried it on a simple cube and then cylinder. I used the rectangle tool to make a square then extruded it into a cube. I couldn't get the volume unless I made it a group first. Smae with a cylinder---I used the circle tool then extruded it into a cylinder, but I could get the volume only if I made it a group first.
-
Yes, you must make a component or group to get a volume. Otherwise, as far as SketchUp is concerned you've just got a bunch of edges and faces.
If you want to know the dimensions of the bounding box without actually showing the dimensions in the drawing, you can use a plugin called Get Dimensions. It just pops up a dialog box with the dimensions in it when you run it with a group or component selected. I have a keyboard shortcut setup to run it. This is effective if the bounding box is aligned to tightly fit the geometry.
-
And as Tig points out if your cylinder, even as a group or component, has a hole in it it won't show a volume.
-
@dave r said:
Yes, you must make a component or group to get a volume. Otherwise, as far as SketchUp is concerned you've just got a bunch of edges and faces.
If you want to know the dimensions of the bounding box without actually showing the dimensions in the drawing, you can use a plugin called Get Dimensions. It just pops up a dialog box with the dimensions in it when you run it with a group or component selected. I have a keyboard shortcut setup to run it. This is effective if the bounding box is aligned to tightly fit the geometry.
Awesome! Thank you all very much!
-
Firstly, I got the Anchor Points plugin and it works sweetly. Thanks.
But, something still isn't right. I made my object a group and yet it still won't give me a volume in the Entity Info box.
-
@tig said:
If a group or a component-instance is selected AND it is a 'solid' [i.e. it just contains geometry and it is 'manifold' - no 'nested' objects/no unfaced-lines/no holes/no flaps/no internal partitions etc - every edge must have exactly 2 faces...], then 'Entity Info' will show its volume in current Model Units.
Did you get this bit?
-
@box said:
@tig said:
If a group or a component-instance is selected AND it is a 'solid' [i.e. it just contains geometry and it is 'manifold' - no 'nested' objects/no unfaced-lines/no holes/no flaps/no internal partitions etc - every edge must have exactly 2 faces...], then 'Entity Info' will show its volume in current Model Units.
Did you get this bit?
Yes, I got that. I'll have to check through the model to see what could be amiss. It would be nice if there were a quicker way to identify what's wrong.
-
@warped9 said:
Yes, I got that. I'll have to check through the model to see what could be amiss. It would be nice if there were a quicker way to identify what's wrong.
There is. Thom Thom's Solid Inspector.
-
Good modelling habits reduce the need for solid inspector and such tools.
-
@box said:
Good modelling habits reduce the need for solid inspector and such tools.
Excellent point.
Like anything else having to do with computers, GIGO applies.
-
@box said:
Good modelling habits reduce the need for solid inspector and such tools.
Sure. All I can say is learning can be a long and messy affair.
-
It is indeed long and messy, but things like solid inspector often only help finding the problems, you still have to repair them. Learning to model clean from the start will serve you far better in the long run.
-
@box said:
It is indeed long and messy, but things like solid inspector often only help finding the problems, you still have to repair them. Learning to model clean from the start will serve you far better in the long run.
Yes, I get that. But it is a part of learning what you missed even though you thought you'd done it right. Once you understand then you can make the effort to avoid such mistakes as you progress.
Now here is a somewhat related question. I've always assumed that the less geometry you had the better off you were. Basically if I combine two separate objects into one and intersect them then am I better off to eliminate the hidden parts that are no longer visible from the outside? Of course that leaves you with an irregularly shaped interior space and with less geometry that you wouldn't see anyway. Or is it best to just leave the hidden geometry intact and maybe not even intersect the two objects?
-
Quite right, but take that thought a little further.
You work for ages on a rather complex shape being a just a bit messy with the idea in the back of your head that you'll just get it all finished as is because you can check it all at the end and fix the problems.
You spend longer fixing the problems than you did making the piece to start with.
I'm just pointing out that an important part of the learning process is to understand how to work cleanly so that your problems are small and easily fixable. Many times people will post a mass of complex interconnected geometry and say solid solver won't fix it, what should I do? The answer is usually, start again.
The tools are there to use, use them as an aid not as a necessity. Too many people get caught up using plugins and never learn the full basics. Far too often people ask what plugin they need to do something that is a fundamental of Sketchup.
Sorry, I do ramble on, here end'th the lesson.
-
@box said:
Quite right, but take that thought a little further.
You work for ages on a rather complex shape being a just a bit messy with the idea in the back of your head that you'll just get it all finished as is because you can check it all at the end and fix the problems.
You spend longer fixing the problems than you did making the piece to start with.
I'm just pointing out that an important part of the learning process is to understand how to work cleanly so that your problems are small and easily fixable. Many times people will post a mass of complex interconnected geometry and say solid solver won't fix it, what should I do? The answer is usually, start again.
The tools are there to use, use them as an aid not as a necessity. Too many people get caught up using plugins and never learn the full basics. Far too often people ask what plugin they need to do something that is a fundamental of Sketchup.
Sorry, I do ramble on, here end'th the lesson.
No, I greatly appreciate the feedback and advice. I generally dislike having to fix something if I could have gotten it right or avoided it in the first place. I see the value of a plugin when it can do something more easily or that SketchUp won't do natively. Part of the learning process is learning how to do something in a more effective manner than previously when you achieved your goal but through a very laborious process.
-
If you intersect and leave the geometry inside you'll never form a solid.
Yes, generally speaking, less geometry is usually better but if it becomes more complex by intersecting then it gets worse.It's often a good Idea to think how things work in a real world environment and fit them together that way. Using groups and components you can build your things as real as you like in separate pieces that don't stick together. Then you have solids. If you then want to 3D print several solids as one piece, you can explode and intersect them and remove the inner faces therefore creating one solid.
And there is a plugin for removing internal faces.
-
^^ Thank you.
@box said:
And there is a plugin for removing internal faces.
This sounds like it could be quite a time saver. I'll look that up.
Of course it's impossible to start off doing everything is the most effective way. At this point I've had limited use and proper understanding of groups and components. But going forward I will try to work with those more in the hopes that it will make things easier overall.
-
TT's SoildInspector will highlight problems with things that are preventing your group/component from being a 'solid'.
Obvious holes, missing faces etc can be fixed manually.
A simple way to remove 'internal partitions' is to edit the object and make a temporary section-cut so you can access them for selection: click a face of an internal partition and press <delete> to remove it.
Repeat, finally select and delete the temporary section-cut, and re-test for 'solidity' - 'Entity Info' will say 'Solid' in its top-bar if it is...
There are tools to 'heal' non-solids - my SolidSolver is one of them.
However, these will fail if you have extremely convoluted multiple issues, as fixing one sometimes creates or changes another...
Advertisement