My earthquake experience dates from 1994, Rethimnon / Crete (25-05-’94)
My wife and I where still in bed, early in the morning when there was this earthquake, 6.4R
It felt like being in the back of a truck on a bumpy road. (hé, I’m talking about an earthquake now!) The lamp hanging from the ceiling started swinging. That made me conscious of what was going on. It all may have lasted only a few seconds. We jumped out of bed and ran outside. But I seriously doubt that we would have been in time if anything would have happened to the building. Fortunately there was hardly any damage on the island.

@chris fullmer said:

True, true

Yeah, I was glad bryce had a chance to sit and watch it - he's a busy guy! I was pleased that they found it entertaining enough to pass around the office. heehheee

Chris

Chris,
Besides this being a hilarious story let’s not forget it’s also the true story about two, let’s say, very very brave people.............
I enjoyed watching it (several times) and didn’t even notice that little “ping pong” ball going back and forth until playing it backwards.
Thanks!

Wo3Dan

@skaught said:

looks damn good! There are a few different variations of this material and your model looks pretty much exact to a # of them. If you scroll down this link you can see some of the ones that match.

http://www.interlam-design.com/Art_Product_Search.cfm

It's a pretty bada$$ product.

How did you do it?

skaught,

(sorry for the delay.)
Here is a model explaining how it can be done with only SU + sandbox tool.
The technique is simple but laborious.
One note. With the smoove tool you can input an offset. But unlike with other tools you type the value first and then release the mouse button.
See this model in 3DW:
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=68b60c0a964174c5b2dd3120ca5e0662

Wo3Dan

Thanks Hazza.
It makes sense. I thought you were refering to condensation together with moved dust particles by the "air-"flow.

@unknownuser said:

....This bug has been recorded for a future fix. So the only workaround is to create a new component where the geometry (or a subcomponent) is flipped.

Scott, others interested in flipped DC components,

(Thanks for the very quick reply!!!)

In that case it might also be worthwhile to see if an embedded flipped component will do (see my workaround: the flipped DC is at least one level down, nested in a "shield" to create correct axes.
For its geometry will be updated like normal copies of a component when changes are being made to the
original component.

Whichever fits best.

Wo3Dan

@unknownuser said:

.........So the compromise was to use all positive lengths, but to respect any "mirrored" state that was manually applied........

Scott,

I've noticed that mirrored Dynamic Components are flipped back whenever there is a rotate attribute included in the Component Attributes box. It's as if in these cases SU can't / will not handle components with axes that are mirrored. They need to be: Blue up / Red to the right / Green away from us on screen. Or rotated of course. BUT NOT FLIPPED in any way. (two times flipped is considered normal!)
This has been mentioned in at least one occasion. Please see:
http://groups.google.com/group/sketchupissues/browse_frm/thread/8f8ec49297b57d14/960b50e4e20fe1e3?lnk=gst&q=wo3dan%2Bnick#960b50e4e20fe1e3

Is there a correct way for SU to handle flipped components with rotations in DC attributes, better than my (miserable) workaround?

Wo3Dan

If you are still looking, here is my attempt in attached model.
I think I can do better now after this first one, adding a few steps to it, getting closer to the real thing.

Wo3Dan

sanddunes.skp

@hazza said:

@mannie said:

cleaned it out with air spray

Now take it to be repaired so they can get all the gunk out of it that is sprayed from the can of "air".

Hint to others, NEVER and I mean NEVER EVER blow out your camera with canned air, unless you want it to stop working that is.

Sorry for this off topic question Mannie.
Hazza, what's in the air to specifically warn us about this? Serious question!

Wo3Dan

@sorgesu said:

Wo3Dan,
The texture example isn't exactly the same.
Consider this.
Some geometry is created on Layer 0 and it is left in the default material.
We select the geometry and make it a component and the component instance is associated with layer 1.
From outside of the component we paint it with a wood grain and all of the default material appears as wood grain.

When we open the component for editing, the internal geometry still registers as Layer 0, but the material is no longer default. Even when viewed from within the component, the surfaces have been painted with the texture.
So here is the difference, the texture is applied through the component packaging and takes effect even while it is still a component. Exploding is not the cause of the change. Whereas with the layer assignemnt, it is the exploding that is the cause of the change.

Susan,

You made me wonder if here they changed things in SU7. I checked and…. no changes.
So I’m going to be a bit ‘unfair’ to you, hate myself for doing so.

Hopefully you still have that file containing:
geometry on layer0 with default color, all put in one component (or group). The component is painted and assigned to layer1.

Before you open the component (editing context) turn to ‘Monochrome’.
Now open the component……
You can’t tell if the “paint”-information was passed on to the lower level default colored geometry.
Because you are looking at your model in monochrome.

You asked me to look at a model in “mono”-layer mode.

Now back to the same model to see if layer assignment is acting like paint.
First switch back to one of the face styles ‘Shaded’ or ‘Shaded With Textures’ like before.
In Layer Manager select ‘Color by Layer ‘ and open the component again.
As you can see layer information is passed on to the lower level geometry just as paint info is.

When we open the component for editing, the internal geometry no longer registers as layer0, but the material is still as 'outside' the component. Even when viewed from within the component, the geometry has been assigned to layer1. (in both paint and layer cases not quite true, check entity info)

The point is that maybe nine out of ten times we look at our model in a “mono”-layer way.
You should have a shortcut key set up to switch to ‘Color by Layer’ back and forth just like with ‘Monochrome’.

As for the inherit issue with layers, even that is the same when painted groups and components are exploded. And not only default front faces will inherit the applied paint. All geometry, front and back faces, all default colored edges and nested default painted groups and components.

All along the line both layers and paint work in a similar way when exploding groups and components.

Sorry for being a bit unfair to you.
Wo3dan

My post in this thread might be interpreted as if I'm in favour of how things work now. Well, I'm not.
Just tried to find some reason. As for components and groups, there could be an advantage. (Yes, could be.) But since simple (ungrouped) entities aren't filtered out to stay in layer0 when exploding groups or components this 'feature' is more of an issue, in contradiction with Googles own advice. And all of this has been mentioned before. See:
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=8088&p=47619&hilit=+layer+default#p47619

It would have been better if ungrouped layer0 entities could never be on another layer than layer0.
Except for text and dimensions!!!
And for nested groups and component... if we could only choose in advance (a setting) whether inheriting will take place or not. (I would turn it off though).

Remember that exploding works similar for applied texture on groups and components.

Wo3Dan

Nice render Mannie. I can see Charles Ingalls coming out of that barn any minute now.

Wo3Dan

@raduzik said:

Thank you for answer!

But that is not exactly what I need.
I am going to explain it again by help of picture which I hope realy helps.......
......

Rado, you asked for chain dimensions and that is what we gave you.
What you are after isn't chain dimensioning at all. %(#0000FF)[For all dimensions you are after use the same
reference point on the left, starting at o(zero), building up to the length overall.]

To do this with Su's dimension tool is tricky. I mean to be able to have them nice looking on screen.
The Text tool might help but for your convenience you then need to position your object with its reference point (zero) at the origin (temporarily though). The Text tool returns X,Y,Z and you still need to adjust the text which will not update when you make changes.
The best option is to apply dimensions only for showing the value in text at the right spots. So just dimension-text that you can alter (alligned to/color/font/height etc.)

(edit: file attached)

Wo3Dan

Chaindim.skp

Thanks Chris, I'm just experimenting to make movements less static (=follow different matematical
rules other than straight lines). Along the way I should get more familiar with DC_syntax.
The included dimensions aren't DC-features. Each of the four dimensions work with their own virtual intersection points on the axes. I posted about this weird behaviour (in SU6) way back, see:
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=8315&p=49280&hilit=+virtual+intersection+#p49280
Fixing semy associated dimensions (so they will update again) was also in SU6. Probably already in SU5. Here they come in handy to see what (some of) the DC-values are doing.

Looking forward to see what you come up with next!
Wo3Dan

Attached file is about an example of two DC's in RG plane.
DC1 follows a curved path while DC2 follows a straigth line.
(change some values and experiment / have fun)

Wo3Dan

Curved_path_DC.skp

%(#FF0000)[
@raduzik said:

Is it possible draw in sketchup something like chain dimension.
......
]

Yes chain dimensions are possible. But they are still all separated, unlike in some other programs.
(a chain of 7 dimensions mean 7 entities, not one)

There are several things you need to keep in mind with dimensions.
A dimension runs from end- or midpoint to end- or midpoint. (not edge to edge)
Dimensions on the same level (like in ungrouped geometry, groups or nested groups) line up nicely.
%(#FF4040)[Dimensions can be associated to geometry in their own level or to geometry in a lower level or
any combination. It can't be an assiciated dimencion by using an endpoint in a higher level.]

See attached file for examples.

Wo3Dan

shaft.skp

@sorgesu said:

Which version of SketchUp introduced an automatic Layer 1? I thought it was bug for the longest time.
%(#0000FF)[...............if one explodes the component or group, the geometry within that used to be on layer 0, has now inherited the layer association of what used to be the component or group.
BUT!!!!!!!

If the geometry is modelled on layer 1 or any other layer and then the component is made and associated with different layer, then if you explode, the inside geometry maintains its original association and does NOT inherit from the component. What is the reason for the different behaviour?]

Susan,

Like Chris said, Bryce is modeled wrong inlike Googles own advice. That's why we alsways get layer1 when starting SU.

%(#0000FF)[As for default assigned (layer0) geometry() inheriting layer assignment from the exploded group or component, I can only guess following reason: one assignes ungrouped geometry to layers for ones own very special reasons. So that assignment must not be overwritten. In other cases (default layer0) geometry() inherits layer assignment from one level up like you said. This may not seem logic as far as ungrouped geometry is involved. However, also nested default groups and components follow this rule. And here I can see the need to have them being assigned to their parents layer when the parent is exploded.

The very same thing happens with material applied to groups or components. Default colored geometry(*) inside the exploded parent inherits the parents material.

() with geometry() I mean simple ungrouped entities as well as nested groups and components.]

Wo3Dan

@unknownuser said:

......
Wo3Dan, I do not know exactly what you mean whit the shadows...?
........
Dirk,

What I mean is that at least in some of the 'Plattegronden' the information you get from the geometry
contradicts what the shadows are telling about the model.....unless the light source is close.
With exaggerated FoV it would be more difficult to tell but in some 'almost' topviews where walls
left and right are sort of parallel on screen it becomes noticable.
Have a look at attached file (with basic geometry of one of your 'plattegronden').

Wo3Dan

Shadows_Dirkkkk.skp

@unknownuser said:

........
I would like to know what you all think about it, all C&C are welcome.

Hi Dirkkkk,

C&C not only restricted to those two nice renders, I hope.
Your site looks great, the way you set it up. And so do the renders.
However, there is something wrong with some of them that you do need to take care of.
Shaddows from vertical objects (like window frames) on horizontal planes (floors) should be parallel if sunlight is involved. In some renders it's obvious that the light source is to close to your model.
Take it as a minor hint, not as criticism.

Looking forward to seeing more of your work!!

All the best with your young company (in Hollands glasstad).
Wo3Dan

This was sent to me today:

*Dear Paypal member,

As part of our security measures, we regularly screen activity in
your account.
We recently noticed the following issue on your account:

Your bank notified us that a card associated with your account has
been reported as lost or stolen, or that there were additional
problems with your card.

For your protection, we have limited access to your account until
additional security measures can be completed. We apologize for any
inconvenience this may cause.

To review your account and some or all of the information that PayPal used
to make its decision to limit your account access,
please visit the Resolution Center here:

(link left out here)

If, after reviewing your account information, you seek
further clarification regarding your account access, please contact us
by visiting the Help Center and clicking "Contact Us".
We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please understand
that this is a security measure intended to help protect you and your
account. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Sincerely,
Account Review Department*

What do you recommend I should do?
I think I’ll apologize to them in return. Let them know that all my money was with Icesave.
I can only lose it once.

@stu said:

.........time for a coffee, a nap or a quick walk in the fresh air.

Despite all: Axes allways ON when modelling.