Overhanging beams with point loads now check out. Once again ChatGPT to the rescue to help debug my syntax and even debug my actual algorithms. This AI stuff is getting crazy good, sometimes it makes mistakes but then it is able to reason and catch itself, it's uncanny.

Now I just need to debug for uniform distributed loads on overhanging beams. Then it is on to the actual engineering portion (AWC stuff for wood) and some final formatting of the PDF/HTML report.

I'm also not entirely satisfied with the clunkiness of the tools used to move and create the supports, some improvements on this end are needed. A load/support copy tool would be really nice, rather than having to create completely new loads and supports from scratch.

Version 0.8.1 - 09.07.2025

• Developed the matrix analysis engine for the beam calculator using the stiffness method.
• Added a load diagram to the beam report.
• Added shear and moment graph to the beam report.
• Added a deflection graph to the beam report.

The engineering report is still not complete however by rolling this beta release I can allow potential users of this plugin the ability to test it out and assist in the debugging. The plugin can be directly downloaded from this link:

http://design.medeek.com/calculator/sketchup/medeek_engineering_ext.rbz

Working on assembling the actual engineering part of the report now, adjustment factors, shear, moments, deflection and bearing checks.

The vertical jumps now look at lot better. So far it seems pretty solid:

Here are the different EB (Euler-Bernoulli) and TIMO (Timoshenko) deflections for the same simple supported beam with a basic UDL (no self weight, just the external load applied) :

My parameters are:

2×10, L=144 in, E=1.7e6 psi, I=98.931 in⁴, A=13.875 in², G=106250 psi, κ=5/6

As you can see the Timoshenko analysis yields slightly more deflection since we are accounting for deflection from both shear and bending. According to my calculations my results are within less than 0.05% of the theoretical value so I think the algorithm is working correctly

Now I need to check a few different multi-span configurations as well as overhangs to make sure everything is indeed robust.

When I calculate the Timoshenko beam I'm wondering if I should adjust the tabulated E value since it is being adjusted for the shear already by %3 for sawn lumber per Appendix F of the NDS (Sec. F.3). So the listed value is is actually 3% larger than the (shear-free) or true value of E.

I will be running a Thanksgiving promotion beginning Oct. 30th until Dec. 1st with 30% off of the regular mdkBIM bundle price (permanent license) using the coupon code GIVETHANKS25.

This will reduce the bundle price from $280.00 USD to $196.00 USD. This promo code does not apply to any of the extensions purchased separately. As part of this promotion a permanent license for the Electrical, HVAC and Engineering plugins will also be included upon request at no additional cost. The offer ends on Dec.1st and no rain checks will issued thereafter.

design.medeek.com

Version 0.8.3 - 11.12.2025

• Enabled a detailed and simple engineering report/analysis for sawn lumber beams.
• Added an option to switch between Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beam analysis.
• Report now includes live load and total load deflection graphs.
• Shear, Moment and Deflection graphs can be toggled to all load combinations within the report.

Tutorial 1 - Beam Calculator

I'm very excited about this release, it is the first time in history (that I know of) that one can do actual engineering all within SketchUp. The API is magical, you can turn SketchUp into just about any thing you can imagine.

First look at a sample load diagram that will be generated within the report:

I was going to include the numerical values but it clutters things up too much so I think it makes more sense to just include the appropriate tables below the diagram with all of that information.

Notice how P3 is essentially on top of D1. The point loads and distributed loads can be anywhere along the beam so things may become a little cluttered even with my best attempts at trying to make the diagram as clear as possible.

If you look at the output from Weyerhaeuser's Forte app, my diagram is similar in many respects but somewhat more detailed.

One thing I have not considered yet is what if the user wants to input negative (uplift) loads. I will need to give that some more thought and figure out if that is something I should add and then determine how to best represent an uplift load.

The other thing I realized is that unlike a truss, I'm actually only dealing with a one dimensional structural entity here. Do I really need the grid? It does help show the size of the beam (the length and depth are to scale) but otherwise there is really no need for it.

Thoughts overall?

Tutorial 76 - Double Stud Walls (18:03 min.)

Tutorial 77 - Mitek vs. Simpson (11:00 min.)

Version 1.1.0 - 12.11.2025

• Updated the file/component loading method for hangers and certain joist types to increase plugin performance.
• Fixed multiple bugs with CFS joists.

Version 4.1.8 - 12.13.2025

• Fixed a long standing bug where blocking was not created above and below doors, windows and garage doors.
• Fixed the blocking bug for rectangular, gable, shed and hip walls.
• Fixed a context menu bug (Edit Opening...) for gable, shed and hip walls.

Version 1.5.6 - 12.14.2025

• Added three and four gang dimmer and timer switches.

After the Beam calculator I need to put together the post/column calculator, then the footing calculator, then the shear wall calculator and then maybe the FTAO shearwall calculator.

I spent about an hour trying to figure out the best way to model some of these plumbing fittings for the upcoming plumbing extension. The most basic or commonly encountered of which is probably the 90 deg. elbow or quarter turn. I decided to use the default 24 segments in a circle so that the fitting doesn’t look too blocky but now I am worried about the polycount. Here is a precisely modeled elbow (1-1/2", ABS DWV, Part No. 300).

All dimensions are in agreement with the Charlotte dimensional catalog (pg. 28). My concern is that the file/component size is 112 Kb, is this too large? There will be many such fittings in a given plumbing model, then again maybe I am overthinking this.

I will probably have to model all these fittings by hand, especially if I want them to be low poly and clean. The problem I have found with bringing in models from other vendors is that they are often messy and not even dimensionally accurate to their own documentation. I end up spending more time trying to clean things up when it is sometimes easier to create a clean model from scratch.

Version 4.1.9 - 12.16.2025

• Enabled the "Add Studs" feature for the following wall types: rectangular, gable, shed and hip.

Tutorial 79 - Adding Studs (5:31 min.)

I’m thinking about adding in a tool so that one can assign labels within a load center as well as configure the circuit breakers. Thoughts on this?

Version 4.2.0 - 12.22.2025

• Updated the opening and closing algorithm for all (panel) garage doors.

Not a customer request, just an interesting kinematic challenge that I felt like addressing at some point. I found the previous garage door opening animation largely unsatisfactory for panel doors like these. Hopefully you can indulge me with a little gold plating... now back to the real stuff.

Version 3.7.6 - 01.07.2026

• Added an offset parameter for coffer trusses (non-raised heel only).

Version 4.2.1 - 01.09.2026

• Enabled the CUSTOM E casing for rectangular windows.
• Enabled the CUSTOM H casing for rectangular windows.
• Added a STYLE H casing option for rectangular windows.