Never mind?

After encountering this problem, the plugin wouldn't install guide points in other files either.

Quit SU, reopened, seems to work fine, even on the file I just posted...

It does seem that SU is less stable since installing Selection Toys and TT Lib1 this morning, but could be the moon -- this is not a report yet.

Sorry! -carl-

Hi Thom-

Just downloaded your Guide Tools and TT Lib2; they seemed to be working fine, then I tried adding CPoints to the circles in the attached file. There's one circle that the tool refuses to work on (top, far right).

The odd thing is that your tool had no trouble adding a CP to the other end of the same hole (see bottom side), and I made the row of holes by drawing one circle on face, move+ x2, then pushed them through...

I tried both selecting the face and then using Guide Tools, and just selecting the circle and using Guide Tools, both with CPoint at Circle Center and CPoint at Arc Center.

Thought you'd want to see it.

SU8 (pro-expired)
MacOS 10.5.8

Thanks, -carl-

9mm backer block sketch.skp

@remus said:

this is mre a long term wish if anyone's ever feeling really kind My limited knowledge of ruby tells me it should be possible, but i reiterate the limited part.

So, what would be really cool is to have a ruby that could cut standard sized countersunk holes for you. Much like the holes wizard in solidworks if anyones used that before.

ideally, it would kinda go like this:
1)start ruby
2)click where you want the hole
3)select hole size and wether or not to countersink it

thanks

I know this is an old post, but a search for "countersink" brings up nothing newer, so I'll second this!

I guess it may be a variation on "holes" scripts, but the specific functionality of this script's understanding standard hardware sizes, the correct bevel angles (they're not 45) and countersink depths, etc. would be tremendous for those of us sending models to metal fabricators!

I'd modify the requested functionality -- since holes don't copy easily, I think that starting the script, selecting the fastener, then click, click, click... to "drill" countersunk holes.

To ice the cake the script would understand correct pilot hole diameters as well as clear-hole diameters -- so you'd set the screw size (ie #10 or M6), then toggle for Clear/Pilot, check box for countersink, and off you'd go!

And while I'm wishing, it could place the appropriate screw component (or not).

If wishes were horses...

-Carl-

@tig said:

Menu > View > Toolbars > the_Tool's_Name
On a MAC it might be called something like 'Tool-Palettes' ?

Doh!

View>Tool Palettes

And there's your 2D tools palette as well.

Thanks, -carl-

Hi-

I've installed the 1.6.3 plugin, but when I first re-opened SU the little Hole on Solid toolbox was "in my way" so I closed it -- now I can't figure out how to get it back. I can choose the plugin from the Plugin menu and it works to make single holes, but I've no menu access to the Multi-Hole variant of the tool, and no obvious way to re-open the toolbox...

Any ideas?

Thanks, -carl-

(SU8 amateur, MacOS 10.5.8)

Hi TIG-

TT 3.0's "filletarc" is exactly the tool I need, but it has a 'feature' that doesn't make sense to me: It appears that at least for circles in the <1" diameter range the minimum fillet radius is limited to 1/2 the circle's radius.

In other words the smallest fillet I can add to a 1" circle is 1/4".

On the other hand I can use TT's "tangentialarcs" tool to make a 1/16" fillet -- but I have to take the added step of constructing a 1/16" inch long line segment on my fillet line and select that in order to force "tangentialarcs" to construct a fillet of the correct radius -- except that this actually creates an approximately correct radius, whereas Filletarc's radius is exactly what I input.

Anyway, I guess my point is that I don't understand why Filletarc shouldn't be able to make fillets whose radii are smaller that 1/2 the filleted circle's radius.

Regardless, it's a really useful tool for dealing with the true geometry of circles!

Thanks, -Carl-

Hi Dave-

Thank you for your considered response. No, your watermark solution is not quite what I had in mind! -- But it's a whole lot like how I'd have approached it back in the drafting table days: lay out grids/guides for the plan & 1 or 2 elevations, slap a piece of trace over the top and start drawing! Except if I understand correctly there's no using the lines in the watermark for inferences, right? So not exactly a step forward...

From your 4th paragraph I'm thinking maybe I need to learn about layers -- which I know something about from 2D CAD and Photoshop but am barely aware of in SketchUp. Might I create a lattice of guide lines (x, y, z grids) or other geometry in a separate layer?

I'm in the weird place where I don't use the program enough to get fully on top of how to use it, and the more I use it the less I know...

Anyway, thank you for re-addressing my question. I think I'll look into layers and see where it gets me!

Hi Rich & Dave-

I've checked your responses and re-read my original question, and I wasn't clear/precise regarding why I want what I'm asking for.

I'm familiar with inferencing, though toggling between x-ray and solid views in order to snap to something I can't "see" can be cumbersome, and tricky.

I looked at a YouTube on one of the workplane plugins this morning and while it was clear that it was an extremely powerful tool, it looked like another order of magnitude of learning curve, and I could not tell whether it would in fact do what I'm looking for.

What I'm after isn't so much a drawing tool as a composition tool. If you look at a Frank Lloyd Wright building (most obviously the Usonian block houses) it's clear that they're built to a three-dimensional grid, with the X, Y, and Z grid dimensions being proportional to but not identical to each other. Most of the notable 20th century architects did this to one extent or another (Mies, LeCorbusier, Venturi, Graves -- though he liked squares a lot, etc.). I don't want to design within a lattice, but it would be useful to be able to set up a series of geometries and to be able to see where the increments fall on (in) the model as I work on it.

I don't think that a large snap-to setting is the answer either, as the series of increments I might want to work to would probably be irregular (especially the vertical increments).

Does that clarify or muddy my question?

Hi- I expect that what I'm looking for exists, and I could find my answer if I knew what it is called!

I understand using Guide lines, but is there such a thing as a "guide plane"? I'm lazy and it's a PITA to chase a set of horizontal guide lines around a model in order to (for example) align window tops/bottoms, trim details, etc. throughout a structure. Plus the image gets very cluttered with all the dotted lines flying through the spaces. I'm envisioning a plane that would appear somehow (dotted line?) only where it intersects the model, and would work on those surfaces as a guide line does -- so a horizontal guide plane might resemble a waterline.

As I envision such a tool, one could set up a proportioned 3-D grid for one's design. Ideally elements keyed to these planes could move with them if one wanted to re-proportion?

Gai- Thanks! In action this doesn't look like it should work, but it's exactly what I needed! I expect I missed this in the tutorials last summer... Locking the movement direction really helps to avoid 'unexpected' results! Thanks again, -Carl-

Hi - I'm a woodworker, pretty new to SU. I think I'm having an "if I knew what it was called I could look it up" problem; it has to have been asked and answered a zilllion times but...

If I design, for example, a table -- all the joinery, dimensions, etc. -- and then my client wants it to be shorter/wider/taller/whatever, how do I insert/remove a slice from the middle? If I use the Scaling tool, everything stretches or compresses, so if for example I make it longer, the legs go oblong, the end overhangs increase, even the end aprons get thicker in proportion...

I think I want to create two section planes and then move them together or apart, but maybe that's how wome other program does it.

Thanks, -Carl-