Since the introduction of Dynamic components I have been trying to find a script for doing reports for them.

I came across this and thought I would try it to see what it does

http://code.google.com/apis/sketchup/docs/tutorial_attrreporting.html

I am no script writer, and find when I copy and paste the text and save it as an .rb, I get this error message when I start SU (V7)

@unknownuser said:

Error Loading File attrreporter.rb
C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/attrreporter.rb:163: syntax error

Clean up any point rounding weirdness for purposes of display andfilename.split('.').last

                                                                                   ^

C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/attrreporter.rb:199: syntax error

the value of the attribute, or nil if it can't determine that

                                                   ^

C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 7/Plugins/attrreporter.rb:538: syntax error

Can any of you script gurus explain the problem and what I need to do to correct it

Thanks

Al, is there any news about this report. (Apologies if I've missed any update notice).

I'm waiting for my new Aspire to arrive and will test it out.

I just ran the test on my desktop with the following results

Scene 1 = 38.6 F/ps
Scene 7 = 0.2 F/ps

It'll be interesting to see the comparison.

I've ordered the second one in my OP. (Thanks chango70)

I'll post back my impression when I've had a chance to use it.

@daniel said:

don't forget to get as much RAM as possible, and unless your used to a small screen, I'd go for the bigger ones.

The ones I mentioned all have 4gb ram and 18.4" screens and come with 32 bit Vista (home premium). Although I'm not sure of the benefit of having more than 3GB ram with a 32 bit OS.

The Dells are way out on budget for my needs, and don't have HDMI output. I am getting the laptop to save having a PC in the house (loml does not like it sat on the dining table).
Most of my work is done in the office which is outside in the garden, and the laptop is for working on when I can't be bothered to go to the office (I hate the commuting ) and also as a secondary consideration to use for watching the occassional Blu-Ray disc on the TV without having the need for a stand alone Blu-ray player.

Acer seem to be the best value currently to give me what I need, but I am not sure which of the processor/video card combinations would be best to go for???

I am considering a new laptop and am looking at the Acer Aspire.
As well as performance for Su and video editing I also thought it would be useful to buy a laptop with Blu-Ray and HDMI so I can use it for watching HD discs on the TV without the added expense of a separate stand alone Blu-Ray player.

The range offered by Acer is quite complex and as I have lost touch with processor development since I last built a PC I was wondering if anyone would care to comment on which of the following configurations would be best (ie what are the differences?).

Apart from the processor and graphics card the specs are similar and I have listed the price of each laptop with the CPU V.Card details. Also added link for full Spec)

1. £755
   Intel Core 2 Duo (T5800) 2.0GHz Processor with 800MHz FSB, 2048KB L2 Cache
   NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GS - 512MB VRAM

2. £790
   Intel Centrino 2 Core 2 Duo (P7350 - 2.0 GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 3MB)
   Dedicated (NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT with up to 1791MB of TurboCache 512MB Dedicated)

3. £738
   Intel Core2 Duo T5800 2GHz 800MHz
   NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GS - 512 MB

4. £870
   Intel Core 2 Duo Penryn (T8300 - 2.40 GHz, 800MHz FSB, 3MB)
   Dedicated (NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GS with up to 1791MB of TurboCache 512MB Dedicated)

5. £899
   Intel Core 2 Duo Penryn (T9300 - 2.50 GHz, 800MHz FSB, 6MB)
   Dedicated (NVIDIA GeForce 9500M GS with up to 1791MB of TurboCache 512MB Dedicated)

All the above have the 18.4" screen except no 5. which is 16".

So which is best value for my needs??

@plot-paris said:

I do! I do!!! and as a matter of fact, I am writing this with the bespoken beast on my lap, listening to 'Air' by Johann Sebastian Bach from it's in-built 5.1 Cinematic Surround Sound speaker system (with subwoofer - in a laptop!).

(and, admittedly, my shoulders are still sore from carying it during my travel from London to the south of Germany two days ago )

Which spec was this (ie processor and video card? - and how do you find it for performance with SU?

@unknownuser said:

If not I recommend http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk you can build one with 512MB Nvidia 9600M GT graphics card for under £1000 pounds.

I couldn't see any option for choice of graphics on their laptops!!!

@dave r said:

You can split the rail component into three parts, the ends and a center. Then set up the DC so that the center section gets scaled and the ends get moved as needed. That prevents the tenons from being scaled but a cutlist will report three smaller pieces where there should only be one larger part.

I had this problem too - obviously 'cos that's how it works.

However, try adding a keyword (such as 'ignore') to the component name for the tennon parts, and then in the cutlist window add the word 'ignore' to the 'parts list box'. The parts are now ignored from the cutting info and added to the 'parts' table.

I raised this with the author who is also considering another request I made which will hopefully overcome this problem. That is to add a facility where certain key words are ignored from both the cutting list and the parts list.

@dave r said:

The flip side is that you can't count on people to draw things with the axes oriented correctly so just relying on the axes orientation in the component won't always work either. Still it's a good plugin.

I agree - it is a great plugin.
As far as the axis are concerned, it is a problem if people draw them incorrectly, but if the DC are already created (which I am in the process of doing) then hopefully it won't be a problem.

@dave r said:

Run the cutlist again and you'll see you also get an accurate report of the amount of wood required to make the rafter.

The problem with cutlist is it ignores the x, y, z axis for determining the analysis of the parts.

For example:
Make a panel 500mm wide, 700mm high and 20mm deep. Run cutlist and the width, height and material thickness are correct.

Now stretch the width to 1000mm and run cutlist again - you will see that the width and height are now reversed in Cutlist.
This makes it inaccurate for correct parts listing if you have a Dynamic component where the user can alter the width of the cabinet and does this so that the width starts at less than the height, but is enlarged to a width greater than the height.

I wrote to the author about this, and he is considering changing the way cutlist determines the width and height based on the X and Z axis - when he returns to doing coding as he is busy elsewhere at present.

If you have the time (not that many of us do ) have a look at the image below and see if you can answer the following:

• Is it real or a bit of artistic doodling
• If it's artistic doodling, what software was it drawn in
• if doodling what was used to render it
• if you think it's real, what is it
• if real, has it been altered in any way

Sorry there's no prizes but that of self satisfaction for the right answer

The answer next week.

@unknownuser said:

.it looks like the picture is not leaning on the wall.

It may be viewing perspective, but to me it does look like it is leaning on the wall - at the far back corner - but I could be wrong.

It seems to have been placed in the way that I often find panels or pictures are left if I just lay them down on the floor in a hurry so to me looked quite realistic.

By the way - Nice job

@shotster said:

Thanks though.

My pleasure.

One thought though, 'if' their product can interact with SU animation or dynamic components, then others will hopefully follow.

Have a look at the question about animation in the FAQ page here
http://www.walkabout3d.com/faq.php

I haven't studied the other product they mention, but I wonder that does what you need.

@dmitry ushakov said:

But again, the support of components is in our 'todo' list.

Something else to look forward to.

Driving Dimensions inside Dynamic Components would be very powerful.

@dmitry ushakov said:

We plan to improve the arc/circle treatment in the forthcoming versions of our plugin.

That's good news.

One other question.

I have tried to set the 'Driving Dimensions' inside a component, but so far have not found a way to do this.

Is this possible and if so how do I do it.

I saw this and thought it could be the answer to a particular parametric problem where lines of a component needed to be 'fixed' when scaling, but I am having a problem with it and hope someone can assist by telling me where I am going wrong.

Here is an image of an arched rail. The dimensions are shown for the total length of the rail and the 'driving dimensions'.

I then stretch it by a factor of 2, and it has stretched OK, and as expected has left the 'Driving Dimensions' in the original position.

BUT - when I fix the dimensions the panel is resized again to the inside position of the original Driving Dimensions (ie 100mm on either end) resulting in it being 200mm shorter overall, and 100mm along the X axis from its origin.

Any thoughts anyone??

@remus said:

as you can just adjust all your formulas by a factor of 10 so you can input mms

Not sure I follow this ?? - but it is late

I too work mostly in mm's.

When I set up the components I always have to remember to divide my measurement by 10 to enter it in the DC boxes - which at first I found frustrating.
However as you can set the input boxes in the Component Options dialog to 'End Users Model Units' or 'Millimeters' it does minimise the problem once the model attributes have been set.

Ok, here's a starter.

The attached is a staring point.

It shows 2 components, one is the starting size of your T1. The second is a copy of the component, made unique and re-sized.

The report shows it is scaling properly with correct output (although the model is in mm and the report is always in inches).

Pay particular attention to how the X Y Z positions and X Y Z sizes of the Beam and Beamguide vary because of the different orientation and location of the AXIS for each sub component.

See if adding the other subcomponents to this start to affect the way it scales.

Hope this helps.

timbertest3.skp

I had a similar experience with another 'simple' cad system.

A colleague of mine started a first session which was a bit similar to 'let them see what it can do and let them loose on it'.

Although the kids enjoyed it, it ended up as very unfocused and they did not really achieve anything constructive.

For the second group I first had a discussion with them about something they would be familiar with that was not too difficult to visualise and understand - in this case it was a storage box for their bedroom to lock away all the things they did not want their mum and dad or siblings to have access to.
I then took them through a step by step process creating a simple box with a lid. When it was finished we went through the drawing changing it by re-colouring it, changing the shape of the lid and putting partitions inside. Then I left them with a project to create their own interpretation of something similar but using their own design.

The kids really enjoyed it, and one of them even went as far as changing the subject of his drawing and instead he had a go at creating a wardrobe (primitive but effective), and the rest of them then wanted a go at doing the same.

Finally I gave them a project with no guidance on producing it on the PC - to create a shelving system with a 'desk top' for their computer or TV. We discussed what it should be like it and I sketched one on the blackboard following suggestions from them, then left them the task of reproducing something similar on the PC. Some of the results were very inventive - some were also rather amusing.

What I took away from that session was the opinion that if you give them a focus and some guidance, but leave them to explore their own ideas using something familiar to them, they move on very quickly and enjoy applying their own creativity.

Mike.

I have played a little with this and found that it is the position and orientation of the Axis of each subcomponent, along with the lack of setting the lengths and positions of them that is causing the corruption when scaled.

If you don't fix a proportional or arithmetic relationship of the sub components to the parent, I've found it can cause corruption when resized by scaling (as opposed to doing it via entries in the Component Options dialog window).

I have not had time to experiment fully, but have a look at the changes to the axis and the attributes entries of the Timber reference and beam at the right in the attached file to give you an idea of what I changed to start correcting this problem. On quick test it now seems to scale with the correct dimensions shown.

I'm not saying its complete (short of time) but I hope it helps.

timbertest2.skp