Having an odd issue where i try to create a component, and when i hit create, it reverses one of the faces, but never actually creates the component.
in the screencast below, youll see me explode the group, and try to create a component
Tick box at the bottom of the dialog.
1 Like
what the heck… i must have accidently turned that off hahahaha
Specifically, @Box means the one labelled “Replace selection with component”. When the selection touches other loose geometry, SketchUp needs guidance to decide what you really wanted to happen. When the box isn’t checked, it creates a new component in the model’s collection, but leaves the original loose geometry in the model. When the box is checked, it captures the geometry in the component and then replaces with it with an instance of the component in the same location.
2 Likes
can loose geometry include other groups/components? because all other geometry in the model are components so they dont entangle eachother haha
If the selection consists entirely of components or a mixture of components and loose edges or faces and the box is not checked, nothing will happen when you try to create a new component. The selected components will be unchanged and the loose geometry will still be loose. If the box is checked, a new component will be created that nests both the selected components and the selected loose geometry.
opps, what i meant was the selected stuff was loose, but all the other surrounding geometry are there own components.
The box remembers the last state.
2 Likes
Just to clarify this, with the box unticked nothing will happen to the parts selected, but a new Component containing those parts will be created in the component browser. This can be useful for creating components for later use without changing the model itself.
2 Likes
Box, you remember everything!
BTW, generally there’s no reason to explode a group to make a component. just right click and “make component”. It will be as if the group did not exist.
I rarely find “explode” to be needed, and it can have drawbacks, such as lagging and changing the tags of geometry.
2 Likes
I agree with you on this, and on this particular model, i had to. each piece was its own component and i wanted some of them to mesh with the base. so i had to explode it, allow the geometry to mesh, then make the component. This was strictly for a visual representation for fluid dynamics class, so having it a solid was not needed.
another example is when i have a cube, and i want to use solid tools to make holes in it at an angle, but i want more than one hole, i will make an array of the cylinder component, and then explode them all, and make all the cylinders in one component so that its just a single click operation with solid tools vs 8.
other than those 2 times, i do what you say as well:)
You’re working harder than you need to.
here is what i mean:
to may clicks with solid tools or eneroth tools
i then select all the components, explode, then make one big component and then its s single click for solid tools
and im not flipping you off hahaha, i promise:)
Why bother to make the individual cylinders components in the first place if you’re just going to explode them anyway?
That is true, and sometimes i do that, but then i get lazy and forget to use components. i also like to keep the geometry separate from others, this is a process i learned from solidworks and it stuck with me. granted the box was its own component, but the biggest reason, keeps the habit up of using components rather than not.
Nevermind… that was what I was going to say after I saw your video, then realized that’s exactly what you are doing.
1 Like