3D Truss Models

medeek

I'm not really happy about SketchUp's move to discontinue its Make version. I've already posted my thoughts on the SU forum about it in another thread but to reiterate my points I will post it here as well:

@unknownuser said:

I’ve invested a lot of my time (the last two years of every free moment I’ve had) and effort into developing a couple of plugins for SketchUp. Granted my intended audience is the PRO user by in large but I think SketchUp is really shooting itself in the foot and also negatively impacting its many plugin developers like myself by pushing a web based platform that does not allow for the installation of extensions and is completely missing the Ruby engine.

As far as doing anything productive I have never used a web based app except for the simplest operations. Even email, I still check with Mozilla Thunderbird or Outlook, I can’t stand web mail. Web based apps and the web in general is great for online maps, simple games, news sites, Wikipedia and disseminating information. Name one other major CAD platform that has a significant amount of its users using some sort of web based CAD utility, they don’t exist, and probably for a good reason.

I really think SketchUp and Trimble should reconsider this move. If you push people like myself away, that help make SketchUp more useful, you will lose it all. Yes, your established user base will stay, but its your new incoming user base that will fall off. Without a solid full feature free version the new kids coming up through high school and college will find something else. No one is going to seriously use the web based version, it’s too slow and limited. Other software will spring up to fill the void, and you will slowly loose whatever market share you might already have.

medeek

and...

@unknownuser said:

I think I can read between the lines. Trimble is wanting to squeeze more of the casual-pro users into upgrading to a Pro license by eliminating the gravy train known as Make. The vast majority of the customer base is probably Make users with a small percentage of Pro (paying) customers. To make SketchUp viable they need a larger volume of paying customers, I get it, I have the same problem with my own plugin income, the volume is too low.

The problem is that in order to charge a Pro price you really need to offer a full fledged “Pro” product. This is where I feel that SketchUp has let itself and its user base down. Only recently has layout become a more serious tool. Without the ability to seamlessly produce production drawings (the real world product of designers and engineers) SketchUp is merely a conceptual tool that no one takes too seriously.

The reason the Pro user base is too small is because it is not full featured enough. The solution is to beef up Pro even more so it can really compete in the marketplace against the big boys. A better product will draw more customers, build it and they will come, as they say. Trying to squeeze your customer base is never a great idea, its only a road to a slow demise.

faust07

Thank you for your incredible efforts to develop plug-ins for building construction solutions. Even the renderings are getting better and better. I'm thinking about whether the techniques are also suitable for the requirements of building constructions in Germany... Keep up the good work!

pbacot

Good points. Thanks for your work on these applications!

medeek

@faust07 said:

Thank you for your incredible efforts to develop plug-ins for building construction solutions. Even the renderings are getting better and better. I'm thinking about whether the techniques are also suitable for the requirements of building constructions in Germany... Keep up the good work!

I'm not familiar with the building industry or codes in Germany but I would interested in learning more. I've also been working on translating the plugin into various languages this last couple of weeks and German is high on my list to get incorporated into the new language files. Please feel free to message me or send email if you have any specific questions, requests or resources on building in Germany.

glro

@medeek said:

@faust07 said:

Thank you for your incredible efforts to develop plug-ins for building construction solutions. Even the renderings are getting better and better. I'm thinking about whether the techniques are also suitable for the requirements of building constructions in Germany... Keep up the good work!

I'm not familiar with the building industry or codes in Germany but I would interested in learning more. I've also been working on translating the plugin into various languages this last couple of weeks and German is high on my list to get incorporated into the new language files. Please feel free to message me or send email if you have any specific questions, requests or resources on building in Germany.

My experience is that translating a software is not only about words. Wooden houses are built in each country using technics that are not exactly the same. So translating words from one language to another is not sufficient.
Maybe the first step would be to check if technics are similar or not in the country you plan and if yes, then look for a a bi lingual technician

just an idea and with respect... personnaly, it would take me many lives to do the work you have done in just 2 years ...

glro

@medeek said:

and...

@unknownuser said:

I think I can read between the lines. Trimble is wanting to squeeze more of the casual-pro users into upgrading to a Pro license by eliminating the gravy train known as Make. The vast majority of the customer base is probably Make users with a small percentage of Pro (paying) customers. To make SketchUp viable they need a larger volume of paying customers, I get it, I have the same problem with my own plugin income, the volume is too low.

The problem is that in order to charge a Pro price you really need to offer a full fledged “Pro” product. This is where I feel that SketchUp has let itself and its user base down. Only recently has layout become a more serious tool. Without the ability to seamlessly produce production drawings (the real world product of designers and engineers) SketchUp is merely a conceptual tool that no one takes too seriously.

The reason the Pro user base is too small is because it is not full featured enough. The solution is to beef up Pro even more so it can really compete in the marketplace against the big boys. A better product will draw more customers, build it and they will come, as they say. Trying to squeeze your customer base is never a great idea, its only a road to a slow demise.

my understanding is that a customer is somebody who pays for something; people using Make are not customers, thay are users, because they don't pay

you cannot expect a company to give for free and for ever its product, so i am not surprised by Trimble's decision not to update the Make version

I even find it a fair decision to keep the 2017 Make version online in the next years, so that people can adjust

Sketchup.free cannot be used by professionals, but it is a good way to learn about 3D, and hopefully, it will be able to manage extensions some day in the future

it is just my point of view...

medeek

@giro

I agree that offering Make for free indefinitely is not a viable business decision either. Rather than drop Make entirely they should offer it in a $50 - $150 price range for the casual user. At that price most users would be willing to bite and even the most modest income of your average middle class (non-professional) user should be able to justify and afford it. By eliminating the mid-range flagship product they are essentially eliminating a whole swath of the user base and more importantly the new up and coming user base.

Whomever is making this business decision at the top needs to reconsider and come up with a better solution.

I have been a big advocate for SketchUp and not just because I've created some plugins for it. I still firmly believe it is the most intuitive and easy to use 3D design software out there. I've used Solidworks, Catia, ProE, AutoCAD (3D work), Revit and Chief Architect. All of these other softwares have their strong points and hence are used in their respective industries but they all feel clunky and dated when compared with SketchUp.

I'm not religious about SketchUp, if something drastically better comes along then I will make the switch but I haven't found anything better yet.

I just would really hate to see Trimble take SketchUp down the wrong path.

medeek

@glro said:

My experience is that translating a software is not only about words. Wooden houses are built in each country using technics that are not exactly the same. So translating words from one language to another is not sufficient.
Maybe the first step would be to check if technics are similar or not in the country you plan and if yes, then look for a a bi lingual technician

I agree, my translation word for word is merely a start. Ultimately, I will need a native speaker in each language that is familiar with the lingo of the construction industry in their native tongue. To properly translate the plugin will involve others and I am currently seeking out those individuals.

In fact, in that vein, I am offering a free license to any user who would be willing to help with the translation into their native tongue. I am still compiling a list of words and phrases but it should only number about 100 to 150 at best.

pilou

I can make the French part for the fun like an objective tour de force!
But don't ask that for the BlackFriday!
Several specialized dictionaries are required!

medeek

For the gutter tab my french translations are:


trans = {
		'Global Settings';'Paramètres Globaux',
		'Gutters;';'Gouttières;',
		'Gutter Style;';'Style de Gouttière;',
		'Gutter Material;';'Gutter Materiale;',
		'Gutter Extension;';'Matériau de Gouttière;',
		'Vertical Offset;';'Décalage Vertical;',
		'Downspouts;';'Descente de Gouttière;',
		'Downspout Length;';'Longueur Descente;',
		'Downspout Type;';'Type de Descente;',
		'Downspout Depth;';'Profondeur de Descente;',
		'Downspout Width;';'Largeur de Descente;',
		'Downspout Dia.;';'Diamètre de Descente;',
		'Gutter Dimensions;';'Dimensions de la Gouttière;',
		'General';'Général',
		'Layers';'Strate',
		'Materials';'Matériaux',
		'Sheathing';'Revêtement',
		'Gutters';'Gouttières',
		'License';'Licence'
		};

		reg_notice = '* Remarque; Les paramètres des gouttières sont enregistrés dans le registre Windows ou dans une sous-section d\'un fichier .plist sur un Mac.';

pilou

Little corrections

'Gutter Material:':'Gutter Materiale:',
'Gutter Extension:':'Matériau de Gouttière:',
must be
'Gutter Material:':'Matériau de Gouttière:',
'Gutter Extension:': 'Extension de Gouttière:',

  'Downspout Length:':'Longueur Descente:',

must be
'Downspout Length:':'Longueur de Descente:', (if you have free space on the line)

  'Layers':'Strate',
  must be

'Layers':'Couches', (context of building), 'Calques' context of drawing, computers etc...)

And depending
if gutter(s) are visible = gouttière(s)
gutter(s) not visible = chéneau(x)

medeek

@pilou said:

Little corrections

'Gutter Material:':'Gutter Materiale:',
'Gutter Extension:':'Matériau de Gouttière:',
must be
'Gutter Material:':'Matériau de Gouttière:',
'Gutter Extension:': 'Extension de Gouttière:',
  'Downspout Length:':'Longueur Descente:',
must be
'Downspout Length:':'Longueur de Descente:', (if you have free space on the line)
  'Layers':'Strate',
  must be
'Layers':'Couches', (context of building), 'Calques' context of drawing, computers etc...)

And depending
if gutter(s) are visible = gouttière(s)
gutter(s) not visible = chéneau(x)

Thank-you I will make the corrections. A couple of obvious errors on my part, I guess I wasn't paying attention.

Now that the template is setup, adding a language is really simple, its the actual translation that I will probably struggle with since as you've noted choosing the correct word based on the context is difficult unless you are proficient with the language.

medeek

Speaking of complex roofs:

medeek

Back to complex roofs. I've been giving some thought to complex truss roofs and how to handle L-shaped roofs and their derivatives. Basically there is three ways to frame them out, which one is the most standard or preferred?

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/0d42dfb9-8059-40a9-afb9-e0f5a8c346df/Hip-Study-2

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/0d2f77aa-207c-457d-8315-9012eabb958e/Hip-Study-2B

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/cab9b658-f458-4453-b276-e8a9bb34bfb2/Hip-Study-2C

Option C with a drop in purlin frame:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/88cc9419-366b-4296-9341-e5b127c6a87e/Hip-Study-2C2

medeek

Valley sets can get a little interesting when you start dealing with intersecting hip roofs. If the width of the projection were to increase the valley set would become a combination of standard valley trusses and flat top or hip valley trusses.

View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/9bf5fd1a-e2db-4346-9596-d044bf4a1cd7/Complex-Roof-6

With the projection width extended:

View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/8b18063b-18cb-4107-84f0-3834c1fe8b3e/Complex-Roof-7

medeek

Version 2.0.9 - 11.25.2017

Structural outlookers (vert. & horz.) enabled under advanced roof options for Parallel Chord truss type.
Metal plate connectors now enabled for all parallel chord trusses.

This truss type should now be up-to-date with all of the advanced options available:

roof returns, gutters, ceiling drywall, ridge cap etc...

medeek

I was discussing the plugin with a family friend and he suggested I offer a student version of the plugin (ie. fully functional but time limited to one year and purchase requires a student ID).

I already offer a trial version (freemium model) that is limited in its functionality.

Is there any need for this?

pbacot

Some sort of educational version might be good, or licensing to school or class that has an expiration so it is harder to pirate... It may be some teachers would like to use it to familiarize students with construction methods, besides the modelling aspect.

juju

Is there some way you can incorporate a method for exporting/importing settings (user defined layers for example) in your various extensions? I'm migrating to a new machine and this seems like a useful feature, even though it may be one that will probably not be used a lot.