Thanks Eric, I'll work out the model and post there.

@dave r said:

No need, nothing to forgive. Your point was well taken. It should be a well known thing and I should not have omitted it. No worries...

@gaieus said:

I was just joking, men, and adding a link there that way. I hope no-one misunderstood me.

Dave R, Gaieus,

No misunderstanding at this side, pure irony, so sorry for asking forgiveness
btw, where do I put a request for a ruby plug-inn that might be useful to some/many?
In Ruby-discussions maybe? It will most likely be a very simple ruby (and this is no joke).
My request will come with a simple model to show the workaround so fare.

cheers,
Wo3Dan

@gaieus said:

Oh, come on guys, everybody (should) know that trick:.......

Gaieus, somewhere around Nov 18 some people didn’t seem to know ‘this trick’ and I bet you that his three year old still does not know. But not for long.
You see, both of them are putting a perfect component together. This could be applied to similar components since SU does not handle parametric components.
And I know, it was just a minor thing to mention. So please forgive me this time, please!!!

cheers, Wo3Dan

@dave r said:

Remus, for something like this just remember to hide (Shift+Eraser) the edges that would form the seam line. Don't soften them. FWIW, I expect that the file size could be reduced even further without showing much in the model. If you notice, I quareted the sphere that makes up the little "toggle" on the end of the pull cord. Reducing the number of faces used to create that sphere would have helped a lot too.

Remus, Dave R,

Dave R, seamless?
It was only yesterday (= last year!) that I read about your advice somewhere in another thread about putting components (parts) seamlessly together by also erasing the inner faces.
Unfortunately now I can’t find it anymore.
Something you forgot to do here. But still, your credit. Nice useful component approach, also to Remus, thanks.

To all of you here

Happy New Year
and
All the Best Wishes for 2008

Wo3Dan

(still 10 fingers and no headache!)

Malte,

I don't know if this has to do with what you experience but some of the
window components do have some 6 unnecessary extra lines/edges in them.
Looking from the purple side: nr.1, nr.8 and nr.12

cheers,
Wo3Dan

@collin alexander said:

........ import a 2D photo as a background, then change the view of the model while keeping the 2D photo unmoved?........

Collin,

goto:
Window > Styles > Edit > Watermark Settings (=icon4 > (check 'Display watermarks' and click [+sign > import your picture and proceed/follow instructions to adjust settings.]

cheers,
Wo3Dan

jstubler,

This is how it could be done with 'Smoove'. See in 3DW:
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=ddd73336a94a3809c64f5c20341137c8

cheers,
Wo3Dan

jstubler,
I have to disagree with you about the lines at the bottom in a vertical or slanted plane like in the back, see:
http://www.hillsport.com/images/7-a-side.JPG
The distance between knots stays the same (above each other)along the line and going from left to rigth.
You will see part of the net on the floor/ground in real life.

Anyway, If you insist I will try to explain how what you want can be done with the 'Smoove' tool.

Normally all points on (a) blue axis stay spaced like they were before the use of the tool. That,s how it works. The further away from the center, the less the points move in a smooth degree till nothing happens (no move at all) at radius distance.
I guess that is why the tool is called Smooth+Move = Smoove.

I'll be back (where does that come from? )
Wo3Dan

jstubler,

(low reply-rate)
What you are after can easily be done with tools from the sandbox ()
Make a grid (will be in a component) on the ground applying the ‘From Scratch’ tool ()
you can adjust the grid-spacing rigth after selecting the tool.
Next edit this component (edit mode), pushing the grid down with the ‘Smoove’ tool. (*)
The sides are done in the same way. Here the grid is positioned vertical before ‘Smooving’
Also for the back: the grid is rotated in a slanted position before ‘Smooving’.

After selecting the ‘Smoove’ tool you can adjust the radius in the VCB (+[Enter])

With some practice you get these grids together nicely.
%(#BF00BF)[You can even try to have all the grids connected in one component (one level)
and only then apply the ‘Smoove’ tool to save you some extra work.]
The ‘Smoove’ tool always works vertical as does gravity!
(unless….. you use ‘Smoove’+holding down [Shift])

cheers,
Wo3Dan

Paul,

About the twist when applying ‘Follow Me’ in NOT-coplanar curves I knew.
Also about the handmade stitching method. It’s the ‘out of plumb’ result of Bob Janes solution that I was pointing out and that could lead to (serious) problems when just depending on the accuracy of the construction. The top isn’t that important.
(I couldn’t believe my eyes seeing such a simple method for a curved ramp-like wall construction)

cheers,
Wo3Dan

@greyhead said:

Hi,

Here's one way of doing it, it seems to be pretty smooth but may not be the minimum size.

Bob

Bob,

I don’t want to spoil your fun but looking at your curved wall made me curious.
It looked so easy and for presentation it might be alright. But there is definitely something wrong like when you use the ‘Follow Me’ tool on a path that is not coplanar; that would cause a twisted cross section.

In both Erics and your method the top cross section line is slanted but here the wall is getting ‘out of plumb’. This could lead to problems when relying on a straight wall construction.
See:
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=1c1b49900ebd37b44e97381e9f105417

I can’t yet figure out why this odd behaviour occurs but unfortunately it’s a fact.

cheers,
Wo3Dan

Amiral,

Only after you have followed Jean’s advice try this:

answer to 1)
Select and group the square, move+Ctrl (=copy) it (any distance) to the left and
directly after type 12 (this will go in the VCB) and hit [Enter].
Now move that new group up, type 16 and hit [Enter].
(Or move it down and immediately type 6 and hit [Enter]).

answer to 2)
Move+Ctrl (=copy) the top edge downwards any distance, type 3.5 (=solution a) or 6.5 (=b)
and hit [Enter].
(Or move+Ctrl the bottom edge upwards any distance, type 6.5 (=a) or 3.5 (=b) and hit [Enter]).
(no guides needed this time)

Using SU successfully is a matter of practice.

success,
Wo3Dan

@unknownuser said:

@wo3dan said:

Matsuo,
Unfortunately we have never seen any result from answers in this thread:
http://www.sketchupforum.nl/viewtopic.php?t=353&highlight=matsuo
The presented method there works just fine, with only SU tools.
I don't think that you will find a ruby script that does this automatically.

Wo3Dan, did you not follow the link I provided just above your post?
I think it was a clear answer and solution to his problem.

Eric,

My apologies for this (far to) late reaction. My post to Matsuo was more of a challenge to him, no more, no less.
I see that you answered his question clearly but was wondering why Matsuo never did anything with our replies.
In the other thread the next questions and answers were about positioning the elements (automatically) in a way like in a chain with equal lengths (pitch). (However, you could not know from his question!!)
This could be done in a ruby but I don’t know if any ruby exists, covering this subject.
Once again you gave a precise and clear answer. I hope Matsuo will meet the challenge, although no obligations from his side!

@matsuo said:

Another quick question (one I haven't found a clear answer yet).

I'm looking for a way to make tank tracks. Perhaps there's some sort of array script, which makes it easy to copy a single link along a path.

Thanks in advance!

Matsuo,
Unfortunately we have never seen any result from answers in this thread:
http://www.sketchupforum.nl/viewtopic.php?t=353&highlight=matsuo
The presented method there works just fine, with only SU tools.
I don't think that you will find a ruby script that does this automatically.

P: Wo3Dan

Mike,

Jean-Franco is right about 'there is no need to explode the group or component'.
However I think you are talking about a group or component painted 'from the outside'. In this case you don't have the option 'Texture' when right clicking and indeed you do have to explode or repaint from within the group/component.
What you need to do to avoid this is to paint the groups/components faces from the inside, in 'Edit'-mode. That way each face can have its own texture and will give you the option 'Texture'>'Position' etc. when right clicking on the face in question.
Shortly: make all the groups and/or components bla bla bla... till you have your whole model finished. Now when you are going to use texture go in to 'Edit'-mode of each group or component. Don't paint the whole group or component at once unless you don't want to make ajustments to the texture.
Texture done 'on the lowest level so on face level' will let you ajust this texture.

Wo3Dan

@randallwise said:

Ok, I THOUGHT I was doing it the right way by starting over, but that must not be the case!!!!!

Now my components won't insert correctly.

Based on the plan I uploaded, how would any of you sensibly start on this project?

Thanks

RSW

RSW,

I would say:

1. -start with Window=>Styles=>Edit=>Edge Setting: Color: By axis
2. -then select Face Style: X-ray
3. -look up towards the bottom of your model
4. -now start correcting, it doesn't look that bad!

BTW, why not use components in the future, less hassle!

SUccess
Wo3Dan

Even if you don’t care about layers you will undoubtedly admit that having a separate ‘text’-layer and also a ‘measure’-layer can be very useful. In other programs you can toggle text and/or measures on and off. In Su you need layers to do so.
And how about a different layer (or even several) just for helpful construction lines (within a component to be non sticky). I don’t mean the guides that will all disappear if by mistake you click the wrong button: ‘Delete Guides’.
Apart from that layers can be useful to keep items together that have something in common: 4 layers=>foundation//floors//walls//roof or
4 layers=>electricity//water//heating//gas or…..
There are endless ways to make good use of layers. Even if only to control visibility as said here before.

P: Wo3Dan

@utiler said:

It is interesting that this thread has been viewed 126 times and yet only two responents; obviously not as important as i thought it would be.....

Andrew,

Yet this thread is very important. There was a thread about layers where people also discussed their workflow concerning layers and layer names.
I know I had a small contribution in there but even a search does not bring me any further, yet?!?
I guess it has to do with transformation of all that was posted in the past. In due time it will be there again I hope.
In the mean time I will follow this discussion closely, thanks.

P: wo3dan

@utiler said:

Thanks for responses guys, sorry if I confused you, Jackson...
[see attached image].

If I want to select the colored room of the plan then i feel it would help to have the selection window rotated. As does all orthogonal draw functions when you rotate axes.....

As for just orbiting around the plan; when I need to select geometry in a plane it is obviously easy to convert to parrallel projection and it is here that orbiting won't help. When you want to view an absolute plan of the model in PP, SketchUp always defaults to the original axes settings, not the altered axes....Maybe if this was introduced into future releases it would solve the issue...

give it a try and you'll see what i mean.

Thanks again, Cheers,

utiler,
Now that I have seen your floor plan I see what you mean and agree.
If it is just for incidental selections this might help since
just orbiting in ‘Parallel Projection’ does not help a lot.
Try orbiting combined with Ctrl, describing little circles clockwise or counter clockwise in different places on screen. It only takes a little practice but you can get close to the perfect view.
If like in your case %(#BF0000)[you have different local R/G axis you can have the right aligned view(s)
stored in a few scenes. Then it is just panning and zooming from there] each time you need to make such a selection.

P: Wo3Dan