Thanks for this. I have a client who likes tiled elliptical segment roofs. This might just solve my detailed tiling problem.

@gaieus said:

Great shot
(and indeed a better "project" than letting him sit in front of the TV all day)

So true. Unfortunately my grandson seems to be an aspiring demolition contractor

Looks like an expensively machined nail with a turned tip or is it really a ball point pen?

Like the horizon shapes in the reflection on the ball, How was that achieved?

A few of my own findings...

Fairly obvious but dimensions don't autoscale after exploding the view not a problem, just set the scale manually.

You can "clip" a plan with the rectangular viewport before exploding, but you can't apply a clipping mask and then explode.

I have quite a few layers in my drawings and exploding makes editing or manually trimming seem quite complex.

What are the pro's & con's of exploding a SU viewport in Layout? I've had an initial play and can't see any file size saving but dimensions & LO graphics connect a lot more positively. I have a multi storey building which is at an advanced stage of development that I'm tempted to "explode", but what happens when I need to replace a plan, will my notes & dimensions stay in the right place? Is there a good time to break the link?

JGA, Autodesk pooped on my parade a long time ago and I've vowed never to support them again. T'was ArchiCAD. Much to like until you need custom components then it was just a complete pain. BIM is IMHO just smoke & mirrors unless you have big budgets and an onsite tech support wizard. We need tools like SU for the real world of day-to-day design like the O.P.

@JGA There are so many global variations on windows it's hard to find the "one" let alone the variants to suit a project. This is what I like about S.U., it allows you to build a personal, maintainable library of parts which can be quickly tweaked for the job in hand. Each model can be detailed to your personal/local/job requirements, unlike the v. expensive BIM package that I'm quietly letting go because it couldn't show a simple door architrave correctly.

You are right though, the window wouldn't weather too well in Scotland.

Thanks TIG but I'm struggling with Ruby. I've done basic, machine code (long time ago), Lisp & GDL (ArchiCAD).

I did look at your volume script but I'm not sure how to add your snippet of code above.

I would have thought it was a case of simple priorities.

Outer shell & union adopt first object layer
Trim & subtract retain original layers
Split & intersect would retain original layer(where retained) & create a new group on layer 0 for the white bit in the menu icon

Naming should also follow a similar pattern.

Easy?

I'm looking for a solution that will provide me through the report generator with the perimeter, area and volume of a solid shape to analyse rooms. I know how to get this manually, but it would be great if this info was automatically updated with the shape so it could be quickly extracted and analysed in Excel.

I think I can get the right results for volume straight out, and the floor, wall & ceiling areas can be extracted by assigning different materials to the various faces but I can't see any way to get the perimeter for a face in the report.

Anyone got a solution?

Feels like it should be a fundamental part of the S.U. report.

Solid tools are a great step forward, but I am frustrated by the outcome. Why does the process result in groups being renamed & moved to layer 0. It may be a great safety net for tracking changes, but I seem to spend more time moving stuff back onto the right layer and changing the name back again than I would dealing with any other problems which might arise through the process.

What do you think, should S.U. retain the original layer & name of the target when carrying out solid operations?

I bet "precision" isn't a feature that is ranked near the top?

It would be cool to see SU on one of these devices but I don't think my fingers are pointy enough to be accurate.

@ericksaraiva said:

My cad software is ArchiCAD but SketchUP rules.

+1

I think the "big" BIM software does some clever things, but sometimes if you want to do something different that isn't supplied in the box the whole design & development process can grind to a halt. SU wins because its spontaneous in the design process, components can evolve with the design and the more I dig the more I can see ways of filling many of the BIM gaps by using "Generate report..." with M$ Excel and Layout.

The biggest frustration of the process is Layout, when @last developed SU they created a slick & refined product. Layout in comparison is still playing in toy town & feels like it was coded using BASIC!

I know probably sounds a little wierd, but while we w a i t ... for layout to handle an average complex model, any chance in Pro under File > Export 2D graphic we could add the skp file format. Layout appears to handle a basic 2D file a lot quicker than a full 3D model when adding dimensions etc and the only workaround I can see at this time is to export to dwg, import back into SU and save as a new skp file.

Yes I know about the slice function, but it doesn't give a projected image e.g. anything other than intersections with the cut plane are missing.

@tig said:

Here's v2.5 http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=172583#p172583
'<No_Face>' option added, so you get just lines without faces.
'Lock Cut' option added so you can't accidentally move the group.
A class test replaces typename, optimizing speed.

That was quick! Thanks TIG. Still looking forward to the time when S.U. lets you remove that 0.2mm offset

@tig said:

I suppose I could adjust my code to has a <None> option under face material so all faces are auto-deleted for you

Your app works just fine as is TIG, no criticism intended! As Gaieus has recognised it would be logical for the S.U. section process to make that little change from < to <= in the display calculation and bring many benefits with no negatives to the drawing process.

@tig said:

If all you want is all of the line-work associated with a SectionCut it's built in.
Select just the Section Plane and right-click context-menu 'Make Group from Section'.
A group is made containing the line exactly over the originals.
Switch off the SectionCut to see the lines and edit/use them etc
This is where the core S.U. program needs fixing TIG. If the section is active the resulting slice lines/edges are hidden and deactivating the cut the lines merge with the rest of the model. There are many work arounds but it just seems to me that the current arrangement of not displaying the slice because it is coincident with the section plane desn't make sense in CAD world?

@gaieus said:

TIG has a "SectionCutFace" plugin that utilizes this group from slice + already fills the faces + moves this group a little bit mack so that you can see it.

Already one of my must have plugins from way back, but sometimes I just want the lines and having the slice appear without adjustment would naturally simplify the drawing process and TIG could then remove his 0.2mm offset.

Just a little request, doesn't even need a new button. Why when you make a section cut does the action only return model info which is BELOW the section plane and not BELOW & EQUAL to the section plane?

Changing this would remove the need to tweak a "Create group from slice" down by a tiny fraction to make it visible for "solidifying" cuts and adding dimensions.

This has bugged me for years!