Sorry I didn't explain it so well

I know how to use scenes. what I need is to make the camera "part" of the component it resides in so it will remain relative to that component :S

so if I have a simple room with a window I create the interior view I like where the camera points to the window and then I tweak the position of the room it self in relation to the external surroundings?

My problem is that I spend a lot of time finding the internal views and then If i want to rotate the building later I loose all views!

Is it possible to setup a view that doesn't change if I move the component? I'm tying to setup some views in my scene and I would like to fix a camera to a certain interior view but still be able to rotate the model to adjust the external surrounding views, i hope it makes sense ?

thank you very much! I got it solved by exploding and re-grouping - I was really starting to go nuts so this great community saved me again

If I click "reset scale" on one of the groups where the texture looks zoomed, the groups jumps back to being tiny size. I don't know where that leaves me because there's so many many groups with this issue

• update

If I explode the component for one of my apartments and explode all groups then I can apply the texture as normal? How do I keep the grouping and get the same result?

I'm having some problems, I have been modeling an complex model in a small scale and I have resized it to 1:1 scale and when i apply my textures they look strange on some of the faces. See the attached screendump.

some of the faces show the texture and very large so i think there's some residue from the small scale model?

I have tried to remover ALL materials with Material Tools (2.2.0) and it fixed half of the faces.. strange now my looks as in the image.

I hope you can help me. I need a way to remove all references to the small scale world since I have to move this into 3DS Max soon and it would cause havoc if this problem continues

Totally off topic,
I wrote a reply earlier to you earlier today but I Just figured out that it hasn't been posted, it has happened a few times before, I'm sure it's something I did but hmm strange!

Thank you very much for your help Bjørn!

I'm not able to use the glue trick for this project but it's a good idea!
I'm sure you're right - it's a matter of practice and then I'll get the hang of it! and then maybe one day there's a plugin developed!

Thank you and mange tak!

bjornkn,

wow! thank you for taking the time to make such a detailed explanation!!

In my example I trim the top and bottom due to some other design issues but I get the point, but because I can't add any volume on the outside (all external measurements needs to stay 100% the same, then there's shapes that needs to be extended instead of trimmed, isn't that true? I have attached a picture. These small unforseen adjustments seems to be quite confusing :S

Do you use the flattery script to move all faces to the horizontal position, or do you do it manually?

Thanks again!

Dave:
I have attached a file that shows the adjustments necessary, the next step in my test file would be to unfold the 'adjusted' model with Flattery or similar script.
I don't know how is possible via ruby, but if that's possible via a plugin it would be great The model is adjusted for 2mm material.

ledisnomad: thank you for the input I'll check the plugins you mention!!
"Then I would edit it in Autocad and make adjustments for thickness" I don't understand how that's possible, I found it a bit hard to adjust the model within sketchup but if i only had the 2d shapes in AC I would be totally lost :S you must be very good

The models are not only exterior models, they need to look perfect both in and out. My goal is to have a working method that would be 99% precise then I could start making models in other materials even metal because I wouldn't have to tweak it with a knife anymore

Thanks again to all of you!

model_raw_adjusted.skp

@bjornkn said:

Well, my example wasn't the SU model, but a model of the finished cardboard version, with exaggerated thickness

yes i know, but it would appear similar in SU with extrudes walls right

@dave r said:

So what you need is a way to adjust the dimensions of some of the pieces to compensate for the thickness of the paper but not all the pieces need that adjustment.

Yes that's right I would like to be able to model a building with non extruded walls (it leaves the model open for much faster changes) and then I would like to keep all outer dimensions the same as the 3D model for when I turn it into a physical model. This requires a lot of thinking and manually trimming some edges and so on as bjornkn explained it in his example (his walls are extruded but the same rules apply since I just work with invisible thickness)

I hope it makes sense

Exactly, and the 'paper' is 2-4mm in thickness depending on the scale of the model and that's what's causing the problems

@dave r said:

Out of curiosity, can the cutter cut a V-groove in paper? If so, do you even need to draw the V-groove? If the lines represent the centerline of the groove, maybe you don't need more to drive the cutter.

The V grove isn't what I'm using for the models, it was an idea by bjornkn, but I don't have such a knife and I prefer to cut the parts as he describe in the corner trim example

bjornkn:

Thank you very much for the explanation I'll go with rule 2 since shearing could be an issue and it looks like it could make things simpler.

Dave:
Thank you for the comment, i don't know that plugin but I'll have a look and if you find something then do let me know! I don't know how to tweak an existing ruby script so i hope there's something out there that could help me!

@bjornkn said:

And you don't fancy cutting edges with a passepartout knife, like this one : http://www.modulor.de/shop/oxid.php/sid/cef5e8b50b1dcdcd6f7d628b4e63bd8b/cl/details/cnid/LAN/anid/LANE ?
Cutting 300 hard 4mm+ cardboard with a knife isn't exactly fun...
I've built some laser cut model airplanes, and they were engraved with the laser too. That would make it easier to find the paired edges? This could also be burnt outside the parts, on the cutoffs?
Basically this is just a question of building a good layout system, that makes it easy to assemble afterwards. You could maybe burn some notches or holes to make it easier to keep track of the trimmed/non-trimmed parts?

I never heard about a passepartout knife before, it might be handy later on, but for now I need the simplest route to getting this model done
You're right the engraving could be very useful - I just need a very clever plugin to help make this layout system.

It still confuses me a bit which parts to trim and not, if I have the corner of a cube, do I trim 1 side and 1 end of the top part... hmm I think it's doomed to go wrong if I should figure this out manually. My structure compares to a large swiss cheese so there's so many parts that needs to be processed by my brain.

@bjornkn said:

Depends a lot on what type of models you make. For buildings with mostly 90 degree corners it should be pretty easy.
For each of the joints you simply subtract the thickness of the material on one of the parts.
Or mitre the joints at 45 degrees - if the laser can do it - or do it by hand afterwards.
Or cut all by hand from foamboard with the technique suggested by honoluludesktop?
For more complicated models it depends on what type of models they are.

Good point bjornkn,

I forgot to tell you about the models,

The models vary of course but in this situation it's a 100% orthogonal design so that makes it a bit easier.
But the design is complex and contains roughly 300+ faces. How can I keep track of the subtracting? Simply getting from 3d to flat 2d is already messy :S
I can't mitre the joints on the machine we have access to. And I can't use the foam board since our teacher doesn't like it

What I usually do is to try and keep parts of the model grouped for the laser-cutting e.g the entire first floor and so on, but this is the only way i keep the parts separated when I start gluing them together it's like solving a puzzle, maybe that can be improved too?

@honoluludesktop said:

When I built paper models, I used strathmore (sp?) sheets (not sure of the name) that had a thin hard layer on both surfaces, then notched, and fit the sheets together. More work, but nice edges on the model.[attachment=0:kc83qqji]<!-- ia0 -->Temp00.png<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:kc83qqji]

Good idea,

The problem is that we're not allowed to use that material for the presentation models, the material we use is massive cardboard and it wouldn't be possible to create such a notch, but your illustration explains the problem very well!
I need to find a way to calculate this within su, and it it can be automated then even better!

Good evening

I'm looking for a clever way to help me with my paper/cardboard models that I create from my sketchup models.
Up to this point I have used the "Flattery" plug-in to unfold the geometry and then I lasercut the shapes and glue them together. This works fine for not so complicated models with thin physical material thickness but sometimes I need to produce 1:20 or 1:50 scale models where the material is 4mm or more in thickness and then the shapes from SU doesn't fit anymore due to the added thickness. What to do?!
I have given this quite some thought but I haven't been able to find a good solution yet.
When I work in sketchup I keep the walls as single faces so the "material" thickness is 0, If I extruded the walls to mimic the cardboard material then it might work but it would give me many extra shapes when i start to unfold it....
I hope someone here can point me in the right direction

I follow you,

I'm not very familiar with the solid tools yet, I'll have to explore those. I understand from your guidance that I need to fix the model according to your guidelines before I can use these tools to create a wall thickness.

Thank you

Thank you very much TIG, there's a LOT of information to digest, I'll get back when my mind has understood it all

Just to be sure, the problem with the manifold you refer to is that in regards to the hollow structure I would like or the model as it is now? I have uploaded the current model and their backend system said it was ok and "printable" so I assume the manifold issues are in regards to adding wall thickness?

Thanks again!