[REQ] Edge 2 Groove

[Pilou]

what you've done can be achieved with a single tool - "Protrude" from Jim.

Effectively!
Can you post you your example in V6 ?
Does has "internal faces" ?

[EarthMover]

Effectively!
Can you post you your example in V6 ?
Does has "internal faces" ?

Sorry Pilou...don't have V6 installed anymore. See shots from V8. The internal faces are removed.

The protrude tool (http://sketchuptips.blogspot.com/2007/1 ... trude.html) is effective for doing flat surface grooves such as hardwood flooring, etc. It's where the groove has to turn a corner that is the issue. I wonder if it could be adapted to do the same thing, but instead of regular offset and push pull, use the Offset on Surface method and Joint Push pull. This would allow you to soften the corners, then the tool could just offset the grooves and JPP the faces.

[Jeff Hammond]

I wish Profile Builder worked on multiple paths at the same time.

it does.. select all the lines then use the 2nd icon (build along path followme.. or smthg like that)

the problem however is going to be that the vertical tubes won't orient properly in your drawing.. they'll all be on the XY instead of rotating.

[EarthMover]

I wish Profile Builder worked on multiple paths at the same time.

it does.. select all the lines then use the 2nd icon (build along path followme.. or smthg like that)

Doesn't seem to work on multiple closed edge loops, i.e. the test model I posted. Although you are right, on non closed edge loops, multiple selections does work, which is great. Creating the profile from middle and then outer shelling them makes a great groove cutting group, even with curves.

[Pilou]

Sorry Pilou...don't have V6 installed anymore.

Last V8 don't permit Save as V6 ?

The viewer V8 don't work on my old computer!

[Jeff Hammond]

I wish Profile Builder worked on multiple paths at the same time.

it does.. select all the lines then use the 2nd icon (build along path followme.. or smthg like that)

Doesn't seem to work on multiple closed edge loops, i.e. the test model I posted. Although you are right, on non closed edge loops, multiple selections does work, which is great. Creating the profile from middle and then outer shelling them makes a great groove cutting group, even with curves.

oh. my bad. I'm on a phone today with only a slight memory of seeing your model last night
I thought the grooves were Cs instead of rectangles.

[EarthMover]

Sorry Pilou...don't have V6 installed anymore.

Last V8 don't permit Save as V6 ?

The viewer V8 don't work on my old computer!

Sorry Pilou, I misunderstood. I updated the test model saved as V6.

[Pilou]

No Problem
Many Thanks !
In therory if the there no special element like DC or other news it's better to save in V6
As like, V6, V7, V8 users can reload it

[Rich O Brien]

@Pilou

Do you have v8 installed? Surely you must...

[Pilou]

Yes but on other computer
I have this old one (ten years) for test some programs for old configs for some coders

[sdmitch]

In my plugin, the top groove is not a problem. But the side grooves either cross or diverge when pushpulled due to the faces not being coplanar.

Grooves.png

as the image shows.

[Pilou]

So the plug is not optimized
Keep the good work!
I have not yet found a super trick with plugs existing
It's not very easy to select only the section between "elements" for some tricky actions

And carreful here you have quadrangular sections, but your plug must work with any polygonal "sections" !
So regular PushPull will not work!

[Pilou]

@ EarthMover
Why your model has no bottom faces?
That will not solids! So possibilitiy to use boolean operation will be forbidden!

[Pilou]

Curiously the Select Lines by Length By Chris Fulmer don't work with your object

[TIG]

As sdmitch has found, doing it programmatically is fraught with challenges...

[Pilou]

like this

Red and Green prism volumes are equal
Groove is constant
Click for all image

Kill_Add.jpg

[TIG]

That only works for parallel faced boxes - it won't work if it has non-parallel facets or only some faces are to be grooved...

[Pilou]

That is the case of the EartMover example asked
Just angle change between elements so the prism will be not always the same

[EarthMover]

@ EarthMover
Why your model has no bottom faces?
That will not solids! So possibilitiy to use boolean operation will be forbidden!

Sorry Pilou, I forgot I deleted the bottom faces while playing with Profile Builder. Forgot to add them back. If you close the bottom face, you can add the edges back using "Split Sausage".

The shape was made by drawing 2 curves, then using BZ Convert to Polyline Divider to regulate the segments. (Or SDMitch's EqSegCurve would work) I think I then used Extrude Edges by Vector in the Z direction and JPP to add volume. (Or you could go Extrude Edges by Offset, JPP) Thus maintaining the segments throughout the process.

Not sure why select edges by length doesn't work for you. Quad Face tools, select loops and rings should work fine as it's all quads. Also , with Selection Toys > Selected Quad Face Loops to select the faces in loop. Also easy to drag select all and Selection Toys > Select only edges or faces.

[EarthMover]

As sdmitch has found, doing it programmatically is fraught with challenges...

I see. The distance changes between the perpendicular offsets. I guess ideally would be to move the offset edges via their verticies, essentially moving four verts and connecting them, instead of four edges and trying to align them. Of course I have no idea if this is possible, just thinking out loud!

What if the top and sides were run with separate operations? Or if corners were restricted to only 90 degrees? My example is a bit extreme for most users who would need a tool like this. Things like furniture, buildings and other wood structures are typically square. I do a lot curved step treads, curved knee walls, pool copings, brick banding, arches, etc. However, what I do might be too generalized for what would benefit the masses. I just don't want to put my needs ahead of others.

[Pilou]

What is the "Split Sausage" function and where i can find it ?


No problem for push the top and botton face with normal PushPull

Joint Push Pull don't make these vertical faces Pushed
The Smart Puspull make the good internal Push face alas it don't make the erasing!

smart.jpg

[massimo]

What is the "Split Sausage" function

viewtopic.php?p=386610#p386610

[Pilou]

Many thanks : An another one that I had missed when i was absent

[Pilou]

Seems easy
Just code the repeat process

Push.jpg

[TIG]

Pilou... you faked the image !
Tinker!

[EarthMover]

I think Pilou is suggesting first and second push both on the Z. The second push requiring another offset first.

[TIG]

I think Pilou is suggesting first and second push both on the Z. The second push requiring another offset first.

All PushPulls are made perpendicular to their the face... BUT if the original faces of the edge defining the second groove are non-coplanar then PushPull will be square to each of them NOT align with the 'vertical' sides of the first groove we've made, so that PushPull is blocked by the impending geometry clash; if we were to 'force' it in code then the perpendicular sides of the different grooves would not be guaranteed to align where they meet, and we then need either 'mitered' angles at their junctions, or awkward 'ledges'...
I see that Pilou is PushPulling the second groove in the length not the depth, BUT if the base of the groove is not parallel with the top then it won't form a clean hole either
It needs more of a JPP solution...

[Pilou]

first and second push both on the Z

Yes
Line of the left element is an offset or a copy move along the side of left element
Line of the right element is an offset or a copy move along the side of left element

then you can push down on Z

It needs more of a JPP

the jpp don't make negative push
Smart PushPull yes as shown above but don't erase the inside !

[TIG]

But as I closed... That's fine only if the second groove's faces have no further faces at their end OR the further faces are in the same plane as the base of the first groove. These are special cases.
The general case where there are other face angles etc will NOT PushPull cleanly and fail to end the groove neatly...

[Pilou]

BUT if the original faces of the edge defining the second groove are non-coplanar

That is not the case of the EarthMover example


But i believe that will be the same in the no coplanar face of elements
I come back with an example

no_coolanar.jpg

And no problem for make the groove with normal push


Ps Crossing posts
your example is a double non coplanar face element
but I believe that another will be the same
I come back with your vicious example