Very nice cabinet. Well done and it has nice interesting texture, almost looks like reclaimed pine.

Best,

Australia well that explains it all. They do have a problem with shrinkage down under, because all the men keep their ice cold beer tucked away between their legs while relaxing in a lawn/beach chair. Or so I've been told.

Perhaps some folks who make woodworking parts will find this useful. This is a revived/revised ruby script from 2005 called "simplebeam.rb. It creates a component "board" or "plywood" from a dialogue box. I find this routine very fast, especially when I know the size of parts, and I have to make a lot of parts at specific sizes. (Perhaps this could be done better with dynamic components, I don't know, that's a matter for debate.) This script was half of what I needed and so I chose to use it. I don't particularly like the name "SimpleBeam.rb", but I kept it in deference to the original author.

De-script-ion:
This script creates a "board" or "plywood" component with input from a dialogue box. It names the component with its dimension values (thickness x width x length and the value "board" or "plywood" is placed behind the dimension value.
-- Originally this was downloaded from http://www.crai.archi.fr/RubyLibraryDepot/Ruby/en_arc_page.htm
-- Originally this ruby was attributed to Ben ???? and dated 10.24.05
-- This ruby was revised by me, Peter Kastmiler 02.07.09.
1. The names of parts were changed to make sense to me.
2. The order of values was revised to thickness x width x length.
3. Metric values were changed to inches.
4. The "attribute dictionary" portion was disabled, it had a serious flaw, which caused right click conflicts on all components.
5. The "context menu" portion of the ruby was disabled because it did not work. The titles in the Plugins Menu were revised to Lumber>> Board, Plywood.

Are there any drawbacks to this script?
1. If you change the size of the component, the name of the component will no longer reflect the true dimension of the part.
2. You must rotate the part into its final position. Length is set up to be along the red axis, thickness is along the green axis, and width is set to the blue axis.

I would like to eventually add another line to the dialogue boxes which would allow the user to give the component a user-defined name, such as "shelf", "top", "bottom", etc.

Best

SimpleBeam.rb

Both images are very intriguing and very attractive. I do favor the first one because it's unique and it strikes me as artistic. However the client always gets what they want.

Well done, very creative.

Best,

Good thoughts Zool.

One thing that beginners, myself included, overlook is the use of groups and components. It is easy to get lazy and not stop to take the time to group items, and then the parts stick together and then you have a big uneditable mess. Grouping is a little faster than components, but components have their place for repeating items.

The Second thing that can be frustrating for beginners is getting lines, and thus constructions, parallel to the red, green, and blue axis. When things don't immediately "skin over" to push or pull, it can become frustrating fast. I found a template on this or another forum sometime ago where the working window is a scene that has "Edge" "Color: By axis" turned on. This was a revelation to me. This gives you visual clue if something is misaligned. Under the "Styles" edit box choose the "Edit" tab, select the "Edge" icon, at the bottom of that box you will find the "Color:" selector with three choices, "All same", "By material", "By Axis".

I will post the template.

Lewis thank you wherever you are.

Tale Gunner sorry to hear of your problems,

Here are the guidelines for submittal from the Popular Woodworking website:
"... Here are a few guidelines for modeling:

•Make each part into a component and give the component the name it had in print
•Show the relevant joinery
•Make the model as clean and accurate as you can
•Don't bother getting fancy with the rendering, we'd rather keep the file size small..."

Best,

Here's how a carpenter frames what you refer to as the "outside wall". A concrete wall would be treated similarly because it has to be framed in a logical manner with plywood or dimensional lumber.

Two angled walls meeting, is an unusual situation I have to think about that one.

addedendum: Here is the most likely way a carpenter would approach two sloping walls meeting.

wall-outside carpenter.skp

There is a (good, with reservations) ruby program called "simplebeam.rb". It provides a dialogue box for you to input the size of your piece of lumber or plywood. I have used it and I like using it. There are several things to remember with this program:

1. You have to go in and change the centimeters to inches inside the text portion of the ruby, that is if you use inches.
2. The program has a major flaw, after you create one component with the program, if you wish to alter any component or one created by the simplebeam ruby you get 3 error boxes when you right click on any component.

I have used this ruby, and then disabled it when I am done. I have tried to look at the innards of this ruby to find the cause of the errors, but being a ruby newby I could not find the flaw. I hope that someone repairs this ruby, because it is most useful.

Best,

Tom, I will purchase one of your disks. I've loved all the trees you've put out. I would certainly like to own a collection of them. You might consider providing them as skippy files and png files. That way Photoshop users and Piranesi users as well as Sketchup users would be able to use them.

Best as always.

Nice stuff, trainboy. I really like the look of these.

This was designed by Benjamin Jones and Associates Architecture for a high-rise condominium in San Francisco. This was built out of Mahogany by Mayta & Jensen General Contractors & Cabinetmakers, the outfit that I work for. There are some more interesting pieces done for this job that I will post when I have time.

I've been experimenting with presentation techniques (based on "the Dennis (Nikolaiev) technique" and "the Grant Marshall technique". I am trying to incorporate the surroundings but de-emphasize them, since we are trying to emphasize the casework but not the surroundings. Our views are relatively close up, so I've gone away from the wiggly line portion of the technique because it makes the casework look somewhat cartoonish. Although I love that look in Dennis' water color architectural overviews.

Best,

Hazza, I modelled it but it is not mine to give away.

Best,

A custom make-up vanity that was on the drawing board as the final piece of millwork for a highrise condominium in San Francisco. Alas it was never built. Designed by the architectural firm of Heung-Iboshi in San Francisco. It was probably going to be built out of zebra wood. This was rendered with birds-eye maple. Done in Sketchup and post-processed with Piranesi or Photoshop. It was intended to have a glass top.

Best,

Is there really a piece along the front edge between the bracket feet? That looks odd because it hides some of the scroll work on the bracket feet.[/quote]

My SchreiberBike you've got a sharp eye. That is supposed to be cut out at the scroll work. And thanks. It is now on 3DWH.

Popular Woodworking's American Cabinet from April 2008 by Troy Sexton. I did it as an excercise and to try some page layout schemes. Compliments to Dave R. I don't usually model all the joinery, but this one has it all.

Best,

I had the same problem with this script in version 7. I downloaded the latest version and it worked. Try that.

Best

Wow, your tone is offensive. Ever hear of debating your point of view without vitriolic outbursts.

Best,

It's all a matter of idealogy. What do you want, what do you believe in?

Do you believe that money should trickle down, or do you believe it should trickle up. Both sides will re-distribute wealth, one to the wealthiest and corporations, the other to the lowest income, working, and middle class. Do you believe healthcare for everyone is a privilege or do you believe it is a right. Do you believe we should be stewards of the environment, or do you believe industry and timber should regulate the environment. Do you believe in the "yoyo" principle for American society (you're on your own) or do you think we should take care of the least amongst us. Do you believe banks should regulate themselves, or do you believe that government should regulate them. Do you believe we should invest in a superior education for everyone, or do you believe that the best education belongs to those who can afford it. Do you believe that we should use diplomacy with foreign countries, or do you believe that we should talk loudly and "carry a big stick". Do you think we should all shoulder the burden of paying taxes for national defense, roads, bridges, public education, or do you believe we should all get a tax break. Do you believe workers should have the right to have unions, or do you believe the benevolent factory owner will take care of his employees.

Over the past eight years we have overdosed on the "yin" side of this idealogy, it is time to let the "yang" side balance things out.

Best,

And...
I want my president to be self-assured enough to choose from the best and brightest America has to offer without regard to what side of the aisle they come from.

You can agree with the sentiment, but it rings painfully hollow from a senator who continually voted down minimum wage increases for 10 years along with his fellow Republican Legislators while they held the reigns of Congress. Where was his concern about the lowest income Americans then.

The minimum wage increase only passed after the Democrats took over more seats in both houses after 2006. The GOP agreed to an increase in the minumum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, phased in over three years, but only if the democrats would agree to the GOP's plan to decrease the estate tax, a 10-year, $268 billion cut to the estate tax. This effectively gave an estate tax cut to the 7,500 wealthiest families in America. Is this the senator who is concerned with the lowest income Americans? I can't see it. Sorry.