I downloaded and installed the De-DC-ify extension, but no matter what I do I the tool remains grayed out and cannot be used.
Is anyone currently using this extension on the newest version of SketchUp?
Has anyone experienced this issue?
Any advice @eneroth3?
Having it grayed out in the menu implies that you either haven’t selected a component to De-DC-ify or the component you selected isn’t a Dynamic Component in the first place.
What operating system are you using? “2025” doesn’t identify an operating system.
No selection:
Thanks for the reply. I have selected the object in different ways because I was thinking the problem was what you mentioned. I am using Windows 10. I am new to SketchUp, so it is possible they are not dynamic. I assumed that if I made it a component, it was dynamic. Also, there is another extension that isn’t working properly, and it said the problem might be caused if your components are dynamic, then it won’t work. This is what led me to download this extension in the first place. It is a bit of a rabbit hole.
A component is not automatically dynamic upon creation. You would have to give the component dynamic properties first.
What extensions is that?
Share your .skp file. That will help us help you.
Please put that in your forum profile.
Gotcha. So they wouldn’t be dynamic then.
The other extension I was trying to use was GetFabber.com
That extension is supposed to prepare components for cutting on a CNC. It creates an SVG file that can be imported to a Vectric software program. It creates the file just fine but it isn’t orienting all the pieces properly. By that I mean that it doesn’t flatten the parts. Some of the parts are left in their vertical position. So instead of cutting a 14” long piece out of 3/4” plywood, it is trying to cut a 3/4” long piece 14” deep.
Cabinets Only 1.skp (16.0 MB)
None of the components in your model are dynamic. Note the lack of the green icon in the component thumbnails.
Here my drawer box components in this collection have the green icon because they are dynamic components.
I suspect that has to do with the axis orientation for some of the parts. I’m a little familiar with Get Fabber but haven’t used it for a while. I would suggest checking the user guide for information on that.
I do notice there seems to be a lot of unneeded nesting in your model. I would suggest exploding some of those upper level groups since they will just get in the way of an efficient work flow.
I would also suggest ensuring all faces are correctly oriented. There should be no exposed blue back faces as on the bottom of this case.
It looks like you should go through and make sure all of the dimensions are correct, too. Do you really want all these approximate dimensions and weird 32nds and 64ths? (I know that Component#2 and Component#3 are just the feet. But it looks like you’ve been using Scale to resize the cabinets which is probably responsible for the odd dimensions in the case parts.
I understand now about the dynamic components. Thank you.
I didn’t use scale to adjust the size of my cabinets, but on occasion, I did use push-pull. I am still learning the proper way to build things.
Nice catch with the faces, I didn’t know that was an issue. Thank you.
Push/Pull would typically be the right option for changing a dimension. That or the Move tool. Surely though you don’t really intend these dimensions for the three selected components.
I’m not sure what GetFabber does regarding reversed faces but they can be a problem in other situations and part of keeping the model clean is ensuring proper face orientation.
I didn’t intend for those specific dimensions. I drew them into the space. Those rails I wasn’t too concerned about because the SketchUp model for the face frame was really just to get an estimate on how much poplar to buy. Everything else does need to be accurate. I will have to go through the model and adjust it. I already went and altered the model to have 1/16” accuracy.
I think I didn’t catch the face orientation because I applied a material which hides the orientation of the faces.
Is that OpenCutList that you are using? That is what I used. I recently found that right after I spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to solve the puzzle of getting all of my pieces laid out on plywood. Haha.
Yes. You applied the texture to the object container instead of the faces so the exposed back faces would be masked. Especially if you care about proper grain orientation you should apply the materials to the faces instead of the component/group containers.
No. I showed the result from CutList 4.1.
Open Cutlist is good, too but I use the old extension to show things like this.
That is good to know. Thanks for the insight and for your help with this issue.
