Posts made by Charlie__V

Sorta glad to hear others have concerns about this.
One bit of info I can add to this is:
If you are not keenly aware of “in model dimensions”, I could easily see someone setting an incorrect dimension and not even knowing it is wrong because the dimension tool really referenced the edge of the viewport and not the model geometry.
Since it doesn’t throw erroneous dimension.....IOW dimension to edge of viewport seems to maintain set scale of model viewport. (Wish I knew of safe .gif recorder so I could upload demonstration)

Charlie

@jgb said:

I tried something like that. I am choosing a well defined 3 line corner to initiate the placement. The problem is the first axis placement is usually not a problem. It is the second axis placement that simply will not do what I want. If I set the blue (for example) then I can't grab the red or the green to place one. It keeps flipping around aligning with the global axis.

What if you temporarily set at least one leg of your global axis along what would be your inside group/component second axis placement?
When complete.......of course reset global axis.
I know......not ideal......but? Maybe more predictable.

@jonorman said:

Good morning Fredo6
So i start SU, save the model as i.e Animator test. I make a cube, turn it in to a group, then start Animator. After completing the animation, and when i want to go edit it, it is all gone. Like I did not save it or something. I`v added a Gif video to show the process

I noticed in the .gif when you save the animation and before exit the name of the (clip?) is Film 1...see first screen grab

After you re-start Animator the “name” is Film (new).....she second screen grab.

I haven’t used animator for a month or more, and not by no means an expert......but is your “Film 1” perhaps available in the drop down?

Charlie

You have enabled back edges.....

---

@dave r said:

I can think of one reason to be able to snap a dimension to the edge of a viewport: if the part runs out of the viewport and you want to dimension to that point. But I don't imagine that's all that frequently used.

Touché

@dave r said:

Indeed this is a new feature with LO2018 and the Persistent IDs do make it possible. It works very well and is one more thing that makes my work in LayOut even easier.

Very cool......and now I suppose I wont be so bothered when i get a warning something needs fixing in SU and a persistent I’d has been fixed.

Charlie

@dave r said:

I haven't noticed the Dimension tool trying to snap to the edges of the viewport, though.

Thanks Dave, I should have also mentioned that I do not have any stroke applied, or have snap enabled for grid.
I do find it curious that the dimension tool would even snap to the edges of the viewport though....that is to say I cant think of a reason to need that to happen.

Other:
I did notice something curious that I need to revisit....I had a large scale detail I was working on and copied the viewport to “split” it so I could show each end of the detail. (W/break lines)
After annotation/dimensioning etc. I decided to pull a model dimension across the two separate viewports (across the break lines)and anticipating having to edit the text to the actual dimension. ( in this case 9’-7” O.C.)
Oddly enough the dimension was correct .......my guess is the persistent i.d.’s allowed this???

@dave r said:

I don't tend to lock viewports but I will lock the viewport layer(s) when I'm working but that's to prevent me moving viewports when I don't want to move them.

I’ll have to give this a try, assuming that the viewports will auto update.

Best regards,
Charlie

So as a habit I typically resize all viewports very closely to the edge of the model/part I wish to display.

Lately, and perhaps this has always been this way, I have noticed when dimensioning near the edge of the viewport the “snap” selection seems to prefer the viewport edge/corner over the “target” in model/part.......especially when near corners of the viewport.

I realize I can enlarge the viewport and lock it.
But my purpose of sizing viewport tight is so I don’t have to lock them...and locked viewports do not auto update.

Now from memory, I do think that if snap is disabled and you decide to dimension anything the snap function “self enables” (I could be wrong about this)

So......I wonder if it is a problem others are experiencing.......and if so.....there was a way to disable the “snap” capability for the viewport edges ONLY when dimension tool is selected. (Similar to how snap enables when dimension tool is selected.

Hopefully this is clearly stated.

Charlie

@joe wood said:

Folks I need to get this resolved, why aren't these dwg to scale in CM?

Joe,
Your files straight out of Sketchup are to scale, but as TIG pointed out, when you export out of Sketchup at 2D you cannot export in Metric units. (SU native Imperial units remain intact)

@joe wood said:

Is this the answer from PB?
'If I open in PowerCADD and just open it as feet and inches. It's OK if, after I make the file I THEN change the units to cm.

If I set the units as cm at import, the scale is off 2.54. then enlarging the drawing will give the correct scaling in cm.'

Joe,
Yes, that sounds like exactly the right answer, but.....for PowerCadd....we simply cannot be certain it will behave the same in the CAD software your client is using.

However, what we can determine from the image you provided is:

As TIG stated the SU native Imperial units will remain intact if .dwg is exported as 2D from SU and the text I added in the image above was an attempt to illustrate just that.
Note: your SU dimensions shown typically are no longer "active" when imported to other CAD software and are simply lines with the text sometimes preserved.

So, although you "see" the dimension 319.98 it is not actually representative of the imported .dwg dimension. And the math provided very closely proves this out.

So, in short, I would attempt to explain to your client that a conversion on his end from imperial to metric will be necessary.

The top dimension your client shows in the image 12597.7cm x 2.54 = 31998.158(mm) divide by 100 = 319.981 or round to 319.98cm

@joe wood said:

OK, let's hope that last one is correct! I used 1" = 1'.

My next Scene is covers more area then the last, with a page size of roughly 850 x 530 cm. I Temp drew in those dimensions here
[attachment=1:396j2cay]<!-- ia1 -->1 Next One.png<!-- ia1 -->[/attachment:396j2cay]

how do I go about figuring the page size and scale for this one? Remember I just want an accurate dwg file to measure and not an accurate scale printed drawing.

Joe,
I was trying to steer you into setting up a scaled set of documents for a number of reasons, but mainly as a way to for you to convey the information from your original drawings/model as you intended.

Having a dimensioned .pdf file for the client and you to refer to for example helps you from having to answer for any(client)mistakes unintended or otherwise while manipulating the .dwg you have provided.

That said, It appears you want to still try to export to 1:1 and there is a limitation as to sheet size in LO 508cm x 508cm I believe (200"x200" Imperial...LO Version 2018...maybe same in LO V2015?)[attachment=0:396j2cay]<!-- ia0 -->JoeWood_Page_508cmx508cm_LO_V15.layout<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:396j2cay]

That limitation will not allow for 1:1 scale, so as I suggested earlier it would be best to pick a Metric scale and a sheet size you can live with....even though you are not interested in printing the pages.

Best regards,
Charlie

---

JoeWood_Page_508cmx508cm_LO_V15.layout

@joe wood said:

Thanks again Charlie, I'll try it again,

you know, I'm not trying to get a specific scale on paper, all I need is for my French client to be able to get accurate dimensions off of the dwg file.

so is this dwg I posted ealier, accurate now?

In the cad software I am using it is, but you may want others to further verify.

@joe wood said:

The next Scene I'm trying is much larger and the 1" = 1' scale doesn't work at all.

how do I figure out which scale to use? None seem to fit the viewport.

Joe,
Assuming this is all still in the context of the Metric (French client) I would set the LO page size to Metric, all the LO SU viewport scaling to Metric, and of course LO dimensions in Metric.

(you should not have to worry about the Sketchup model being metric, unless you will show dimensioning "in" the SU model in the LO viewport)

You will have to increase the paper size to accommodate lager parts of your model.(and larger viewports based on scale(s) selected)

In the attached file I have set the file units/page/dimensions/viewport scaling to metric.
(please see note in box bottom right corner of page)JoeWood_C3Paper_Metric_Cm_Scale_1_10_LO_V15.layout

Here is another page size "C2" with viewport scales of 1mm = 10mm(1:10) & 1mm = 20mm(1:20)
JoeWood_C2Paper_Metric_Cm_Scale_1_10_20_LO_V15.layout

Charlie
Note;
Most of my work is US/Architectural/Imperial and mostly ¼" scale and almost always page size of Arch D 24"x36"

Maybe our friends in and around France can recommend "typical" sheet size and scaling for a project like your so you can potentially save yourself from having to resize/scale all of you pages.(if not "standard" in france)

@joe wood said:

I'm not completely getting all of this but seems like I'm close

but why are these dimensions off?

Joe,
Maybe I am not following still?

In the attached model I have set the LO file to imperial and set all viewports to 1"=1'-0" (1:12)(regardless of SU model units)
So, your original SU model in LO appears fist.

I extracted one rafter and dimensioned it in SU after setting model units in SU to Metric.

I then saved this same model and changed the SU model units to Imperial.

Inserted both of these models below your original model in LO

You can now see a representation of both Metric and Imperial (both dimensioned in SU) within the attached LO file. 1 rafters_Imp_Metric_LOFile_Units_Imp_V15.layout

Note: always make sure "preserve scale on resize" box is ticked in the SU model palate.

Hope this all makes sense.

Charlie

@joe wood said:

OK found the dimensions in the tray, but when I changed it to cm, all the dimensions are wrong? The SUp model was set to the same cm scale.

[attachment=5:3e349nvu]<!-- ia5 -->9 Untitled.png<!-- ia5 -->[/attachment:3e349nvu]

here's the skp file!

Joe,
I get 301.93cm for the over all rafter length in both Sketchup Model and Layout file.
please see attached. [attachment=1:3e349nvu]<!-- ia1 -->France 2b_LO_V15.layout<!-- ia1 -->[/attachment:3e349nvu]

PS....in my above simple example the SU model units are in fractional inches and LO model viewport scale @ 1" = 1'-0" [1:12]........I used LO dimensions to illustrate you could leave your native model set to imperial, yet still document & dimension an imperial model to metric (cm/other) in LO. (Rt. click LO viewport..open w/Sketchup to view SU model)
[attachment=0:3e349nvu]<!-- ia0 -->Scale_Test_SUImperial_to_LOMetric_V15.layout<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:3e349nvu]

Charlie

---

France 2b_LO_V15.layout

---

Scale_Test_SUImperial_to_LOMetric_V15.layout

@joe wood said:

OK matched the two scale up

[attachment=2:2rsqbge2]<!-- ia2 -->1 Untitled.png<!-- ia2 -->[/attachment:2rsqbge2]

but how to change the dimension units??

Joe,
It might be easier for all of us to help if you posted a simple file like in the image attached.(simple rectangle with imperial and metric dims)

Once the exporting to scale of a single entity is sorted out, you should be able to follow the same procedure with the project you are working on now.

Merely a suggestion.

As to setting/changing the dimension units, I'm not sure you need to change the units for the file, just the settings in the "Tray". Just make sure you have the dimension tool selected to do so.

Charlie

---

![Dimension "setting" in LO](/uploads/imported_attachments/w4Fo_LO_Dimension_setting.PNG "Dimension "setting" in LO")

@pbacot said:

The last one definitely comes in to scale when I open the dwg. Except the top rafter is off slightly--and I remember it being exact on an earlier translation. I get 301.93. So it looks like you found the scaling process that works!

I saw in Joe’s image above the SKP viewport in LO is set to 1” = 1’-0”(1:12)
Though on export the scale for Model space was set to 1/16” = 1’ (1:192)

Perhaps this accounts for the remaining discrepancy?

Charlie

I think the exploded view “beyond” is what is a bit confusing? (Perceived 2 “styles”)

C

I have a similar need when importing from a program called Softplan.
Rick Wilson was the original author of group by layer.....SD Mitch added some lines of code to that plug (now called layers to groups) in so it would first group by layer.....then consolidate the "like named" layers....then put all geometry on layer zero.

IDK the SOP for sharing plug in w/o authors permission (though Rick Wilson allows for it's modification/distribution as long as copyright remains)

Anyhow....see attached file.......took about 1.5 seconds for Layers to groups to sort it all out.

C

---

SolidBuilderImport_RickW_LayerstoGroups_Mod_by_SDMitch.skp

I'm told this is a very old table.....and possibly +125 years old....or more.

I can/will add to the provenance....but for now decided to just model the table to open some discussion about it.

For instance:
Both "leaves" of the table appear to be a single "slab' of wood (old growth lumber)

Wood stock used for the perimeter and hinges varies ± 1/8"....lending credibility to age of table.

Anyway.....I have just modeled the broad strokes....and am interested in how I might model the carved bits of the legs. (perhaps not necessary to model/just use image instead...pls. see attached leg pic)

Charlie

---

---

---

SKP_V8

There may be hope if I understand what the new json files are.....Per SU 2018 release notes:

SKETCHUP:

Preferences Location
The majority of preferences are now stored in two json files. There are still some OS controlled preferences that remain in the registry (Win) or plist (Mac). The json files are saved in the following locations:

On Win:
PrivatePreferences.json is saved to C:\Users\AppData\Local\SketchUp\SketchUp 2018\SketchUp SharedPreferences.json is saved to C:\Users\AppData\Roaming\SketchUp\SketchUp 2018\SketchUp

On Mac:
Both PrivatePreferences.json and SharedPreferences.json are saved to /Users//Library/Application Support/SketchUp 2018/SketchUp

LAYOUT:

Preferences
Your existing user preferences will now migrate when upgrading.

I have no idea if toolbar configuration would be considered a “preference”........but i do hope it is.

@david. said:

My 3DConnexion SpaceNavigator doesn't work with 2018. Seems like this happened with 2017, too. I currently can't connect to 3DConnexion.com to check for updated drivers.

David,
I updated my 3DXware to latest and it did not make my SpaceNaivagtor kick on in SU 2018. (& yes this happened w/SU 2017 as well....a later update from 3DX ware did support 2017)

So: I copied over the Folder: 3DxSketchUp & 3DxSketchUp.rb from my 2017 SU Plugins folder.

File path for 2017: C:\ProgramData\SketchUp\SketchUp 2017\SketchUp\Plugins

**SU 2018 did not have a Plugin folder in the following location so you will have to create one.

File path for 2018: C:\ProgramData\SketchUp\SketchUp 2018\SketchUp\Plugins

C