@malbertsen said:

...... I change the axis within a group, I leave the group and everything looks nice. I go to another group, and imidiately after, the first group has changed its axis.

How did you change the axes inside the group?

@moot said:

Thank you, good tip... but I still have the problem that the face is still split...
If I enter the edit mode for the group, select the Push/Pull Tool, only half the circle is selected for, in my case, trying to pull the face to make it longer... I have to pull each half... when I tried that the halves were not 'joined' , so the model ended up with an open face and can't be printed. I would have to manually try to close the face...
[attachment=1:ygmbntds]<!-- ia1 -->Tee-Core.jpg<!-- ia1 -->[/attachment:ygmbntds]
[attachment=0:ygmbntds]<!-- ia0 -->Tee-Core.skp<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:ygmbntds]
PS, like your animation... how did you do that?

Unless you intersect the two cylinders, the edge needs to be there. It is part of the round surface. Turn on X-Ray to see the other edges.

@jorgensen said:

...
Date was 22.06, time 19:19.

Your model shows UTC+1. Shouldn't it be UTC+2? It's summertime now!

Change it to UTC+2 and you'll get desired results.

@jorgensen said:

i just wanted to test the shadows in sketchup.

i placed a one meter stick on the ground measured the shadow lenght to 2.8 meters.

i then created a 1cm x 1cm x 100cm object in sketchup, added my location sat the correct time and date - and used UTC -1 (denmark).

the shawdow lenght was 5,14m in sketchup - almost the doubble lenght.

does anyone know what i'm doing wrong?

i did the same test in revit - and it was 2.82 meters.

/jorgensen

I looked at your model and on june 24 at 12:20 I get the shortest shadow, being about 73 cm.
You didn't give a specific time to check the model for.

@infinitekiff said:

.......and you know of an easier and/or more logical quicker way please do tell........

You already applied the 'Scale' tool, snapping the green grid point(s) to guide(s).
Try the same tool but after dragging to arbitrary size type in the new dimension(s) plus units and [Enter]. See third post in this thread.

@pilou said:

diag_beam remember a cool challenge resolved by Fredo ! (11 pages ! ).....

Hi Pilou, you always manage to surprise me with existing plugins that can do the job quickly. Thank you for sharing.
Although I normally try to find native options in answering "newbie" questions, it's good to know these plugins. They are time savers.

p.s. you are right that attaching an image or a file in the first post/question can be half the solution where we should not have to guess what the problem is about.
Thank you.

@slbaumgartner said:

Here is an extension that I did a while ago but never published. ....

Great plugin you got here. It must be a joy to (be able) to program in Ruby to get such "simple" new tools.
+1

p.s. Dave, no doubt you know all that stuff. It was the image I wanted to post as a solution to "connect" your question (practical example) to what OP was looking for. More or less addressed to the wrong person.

@buggy b said:

.....for trying.

Trying? All you need to do this with native tools is the 'Pie' tool.
Here's a practical situation Dave: (Jef once made a nice DC to resolve this but now SU can do it without plugins)

@wo3dan said:

.....
Your question has been asked many times.

Hint: apply the 'Pie' tool as in attached image:

@buggy b said:

... Let's say I have a face which is tilted or whatever so the red/green/blue axis are not helpful.
I have two points on this face. And instead of connecting them I want to create a line that "misses" the point by a specific distance (in this example 0.25m)

I see what you are trying to do.

First of all if you do have that arbitrary face in space you can right click on it and select 'Align Axes' in the context menu. That would make the new drawing axes very helpful. Red and green are now in plane of the face and blue is perpendicular to the face. You can even rotate the red/green axes about blue to better suit your needs.

You are after a circle (blue dot is its center) with its (radius 25cm) forming a 90 degres angle with desired new edge or line. Try if by adjusting the axes you can get things working for you.
Your question has been asked many times.

@pbacot said:

Nice idea, Gerrit!

Thank you.

@freeflyerds said:

....... The basic idea is that I always start in top view and draw the exterior lines of the garden and put this in a group called "groundplan". This area is automatically filled up with a face.
Then I start drawing the outer lines of plant areas, grass areas, concrete path, shed, etc... Each entity is put into a group while I am still in top view ........

If it's just the outline of the garden with a face, then you might have better luck creating "glue to + cutting" components of grass, trees etc. They'll cut the groundplan's face if they are put directly on its face, i.e. inside the groundplan group. They cut only one face, say the lawn, when put on there. Not the face of say a separate path's face drawn in the groundplan's group. Unless you put them there first. So each component entity can only "belong" to one face to glue on and to cut.

@dave r said:

Changing the axes inside a group is not a permanent setting .......

Changing the axes inside a group by redrawing the axes with the 'Axes' tool will most certainly change the group's axes accordingly and permanently. Or am I missing the point the OP is trying to get accross?

@pmolson said:

....... To each his own.

I offered some (to some an awkward) solution. But like I said, I don't see this as an option for me since SketchUp gives me the 3D view in real time in perspective. I hardly use parallel projection mode when modeling.

To OP:
b.t.w. even isometric view is possible combined with the other views, front etc. If you correctly set up a copy instance.

@cuttingedge said:

..... Im thinking of customizable scene , can be floating, resizable. Dont need to be 4 at once. .....

Maybe you could achieve desired results by working inside a model component (entire model as a component) with multiple instances of that component all rotated about 90 degrees (top / front / L-side etc.). This workflow is very flexible. Assign different layers to each of these instances and work with scenes to view either one / two / three / four / or whatever number of "views" of your model.
Just an idea.

Although like Dave, I prefer just one perspective view of the model to work in.

Lengths of (part of) an ellips do not show rigtht. This has been mentioned before.
I hope you can see this thread. See posts around 17/4/2008 and on.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sketchup3d/ellips$2Barea%7Csort:relevance/sketchup3d/z70T5xdUm_I/g-ChcSEcL2YJ

*"Taff, Google SU team,

Very nice approach Taff, almost precise. Here again there is the
lack of a precise ''snap to" with these rotations. But it's the best
you can do!

But I noticed an (important) bug in the "Entity Info" and "Text"
tool output.
The curve length shown is only half of what it should be.

Before you exploded the 1/4 ellipse curve the Entity Info reports
141.371669' as the curve length (also through Text tool)
It should however be: 282.743338'

16 segments out of the exploded curve add up to: 281.923143'
just a bit shorter which is obvious.
The more segments the more precise Taff's approach will be.
Even better when there were a "rotate snap" option to a curve.

Regards,
Wo3Dan "*

Macker, forget my two posts, I get that some weird changes occure while saving -> reloading your model which makes the direction change. Never experienced that.

I was "triggered" by Alpro's reply with random, taking that for random direction for P/P.

@macker said:

......
I am well aware of how the Push/Pull tool works, but this is not the issue that I outlined in my first post.

I'm not saying that you don't know how P/P works on double clicking (except for its direction): it repeats the last value, but which way?

Since SketchUp does consistently follow certain rules the developers rolled out for it (opposed to what some see, that it is randomly doing so) that can't be wrong, can it? It's not unpredictable, as mentioned above.

I agree that these rules are hard to remember so I don't even bother to do so.

The only thing I'm saying is that right from the first P/P you that you make you'll know (or can know) exactly the next one's direction. If you would have wanted it to go the opposite direction, then start in opposite direction.

@utiler said:

... Just wondering if there is a way for scenes to recall a DC's properties?
......
Currently, I'm having to update my plans, export to PDF then closing the doors and updating my model to export to elevations.... bit of a pain.

Is this possible? Would it help others?

FAIK it isn't possible. The Scene Manager doesn't show anything other than saving the state the geometry is currently in the model, nothing related to DCs.

If you have many different DCs to update before updating a scene, this might help a little:

• create one scene that shows some location/space on the side, not conflicting with any other needed scene/view.
• in this scene you have copys of each of the uses doors and/or windows (or whatever) DCs in your model that need to be changed by 'OnClick....Animate',
  -Since you have them together you can click these to swing open/close. The plane and elevation will do accordingly and you'll not likely forget one.

You might even try to have all these DCs as childs inside a parent container component and have them change by clicking on the parent container. Just one click in this particular scene so to speak. Then return to the appropriate scene, plan view or elevation. Just worth trying I guess.

@alpro said:

......, never could find a pattern or somehow reproduce it, just seems to happen randomly.

Fortunately for SketchUp there seems to be no inconsistency about how the next extrusion will come out. It all depends on what the first P/P did.
You need to determine if the P/P face is enclosed and even that doesn't seem to matter too much unless you you "trow in" using [Ctrl].

If you push or pull a face the newly created perpendicular faces do match the push/pulled face as if it were part of a box. This seems pretty much predictable to me.

Now:

• If you p/p a face and see blue (back) inside the box, then all next ones have blue (back) inside.
• If you p/p a face so white (front) ends up inside the box, all next ones do have white (front) inside.