I just bought Sketchup Pro ver. 24.0.594 64 bit. I am modeling threads, using Curve Maker by Terry Ross. I followed the instructions from a YouTube video by Tyson, and was able to re-create his thread using the helix tool. However, the next time I tried to use the tool, it failed. The properties would not load and display during helix creation. I tried disabling, deleting the ruby file, reloading from the extension warehouse and re-installing. Nothing worked. Ideas?
What size? SketchUp cannot create very small faces.
I haven’t had any problems with Curvemaker working in SketchUp 2024 when I model screw threads or anything else, for that matter. I do model them as if inches or millimeters are meters to avoid the tiny face issue. Most recent ones here.
1 Like
Is this an inputbox or a web dialog window? And did you have more than one display the first time and afterward unplug a display?
Dan, I am typing into the box that appears in the lower right corner of the screen after I start the helix. This input box cycles through radius, # turns, height/turn, cw or ccw, and segments per turn in the model. What happens when I choose 1 turn in the helix, I actually get 12 turns; 2 turns gives me 24 actual turns.The other inputs seem to work.
I could be doing something wrong here. I opened a new model, and the helix function of Curve Maker worked perfectly. Then after the third time, the number of turns displayed 12 turns when I selected just 1 turn; two turns would give 24 actual turns in the helix. The other parameters seemed to work fine. Also, I am using feet ’ for measurements and plan to scale back down to what I need by 100. I had just about duplicated what Tyson did in his second video, but I’m still learning. (Two weeks)
What are all of the values you are using when trying to draw the helix?
Here I’ve modeled three helices one after another. In each case I changed the number of turns a few times before stopping. No issues at all. This was done with units set to Feet.
Maybe you can show a screen capture video that shows your steps?
FYI, SketchUp uses inches internally and so extension developers must also. So when you desire 1 foot, internally the code must use 12 inches. 2 feet, then 24 inches. … and so on…
I know you are speaking of turns here, but it is possible that the code has an error that is applying the units factor to the wrong input field.
There is a way that extension developers can accept model units in input box fields and SketchUp will convert the input into inches automatically. But the code must follow a certain protocol to do this. It may be that this extension does not follow the protocol.
For reference:
Hi, Dan. I managed to get my first model made with the helix function of “Curve Maker” after learning more about solid geometry tools. I made this a component. A little back ground: I am building an engineering drawing for a plumbing adapter that goes from BSPP to NPT (British Standard Pipe Parallel; National Pipe Thread) so I can have a machine shop in Texas make them. In Sketchup, I first created the hex portion as a solid component, then the sealing collar as second component; these were joined into a single component. Then I added the BSPP pipe thread portion, and made that another component, which I connected. I am adding pieces as I go… The next one was a tapered NPT thread which I am trying to build using the “Draw Whorl 2” by Rick Reed (outdated). I have created a suitable tapered thread, and a tapered solid cylinder that I slid inside the thread. I finally got both items lined up, and used cleanup and solid inspector to attempt to generate another solid component. However, I get stopped with a message from solid inspector saying I have one “nested instance” that I just can’t find.And it appears I won’t be able to smoosh the NPT threads onto the model unless it’s a solid (component.)
So aside from a long description, can I do anything more in forums? Like attach the component …skp file for someone to play with? Thanks!
Have you tried using the Outliner to find it?
You can if it is small enough. If not you can share it via WeTransfer or Dropbox, etc., and one of the solid gurus around here could take a look.
I tried to find Outliner, but couldn’t locate any tool named that. Then I thought it might be an extension. So went to the Warehouse, typed in “Outliner” and two extensions popped up. Have not downloaded either. Is this what you’re referring to?
Before I download a file, I need to go back and review my construction technique. I may have made a mistake…
Outliner is a utility window in the tray. Go to Window>Default Tray and select Outliner if it isn’t already checked. Then look in the Default tray for it.
Share your .skp file so we can see what you are working with.
By the way, if you are making a drawing for a machine shop to work from you shouldn’t even need to model the threads in 3D. A 2D drawing with simple geometry to insinuate the threads and the dimensions of said threads should be enough. They can get the specifics for the threads from Machinery’s Handbook or the like.
You should be able to call out the threads like this.
You can add a label with that sort of information in LayOut.
Found Outliner. Didn’t seem to help. Solid Inspector also says I have short edges, and I can’t fix them. at any rate, here is the file…
Component_1.skp (35.8 KB)
The Short Edges message on its own doesn’t indicate there’s anything wrong with your model and there’s nothing to fix. It is a warning that if you do other operations to the model that involve those edges, they could made short enough that you do have problems, though.
There’s nothing wrong with your model as it currently is. When I make it a component it immediately reports as solid in Entity Info.
You can disable that warning if it bugs you. With Solid Inspector2 open, right click in the model space to open the setting window and click on the first line to toggle the warning off.
If you have it active you can set the threshold by clicking on the second line and changing the value.
I normally have that warning turned off.
Doodling this morning waiting for my coffee to brew. This is my version of your fitting with BSPP internal threads. Modeled using Curve Maker and Upright Extruder.Clearly I need to do the tapered threads on the outside. I have no idea what diameter threads you need or even if it’s BSPP on the inside or the outside so this is probably wrong anyway.
As I wrote yesterday, your machinist isn’t going to care about a 3D model of this thing. They’ll want a dimensioned 2D drawing with callouts for the threads.
Dave, thanks for the reminder about using orthogonal views for the machine shop.(I had drafting in college - should have remembered. I also have a copy of Machinery’s Handbook on one of my Kindles.) I may do that, but I still need to learn how to work with solid geometry in Sketchup.
After more investigation, I realized where I was making mistakes. After “connecting” the two solid groups together, I exploded both and then combined them into one new group. Of course, this stranded internal faces inside the model, which solid inspector reported but didn’t show me how to fix. What I should have done was kept the two merged groups as solids, and then run “outer shell” which worked. So I went back and correctly remade several of my components.
Now I have another model which won’t recognize as a solid, and I am downloading the file… This was created with “Draw Whorl” and an intersecting tapered cylinder. What did I miss?
NPT 1.25_ with cylinder.skp (367.6 KB)
Dave, I’m only a few weeks into Sketchup, but I get the impression that building complex models is done by joining simple shapes together, and this requires each piece to be recognized as a solid. (I have also been “saving” each piece as a component so I don’t have to go back to square one when something screws up.) Does this imply that a complex object becomes a single solid as it gets built? Can several solid objects be “joined” together as separate entities?
As far as architectural modeling goes, that seems to be mostly geometry, and not interconnected as a solid would be. Is that interpretation correct? (But items are still saved as components!) Enquiring minds…
This is most often the easiest way to approach modeling complext objects. Break it down into manageable volumes. If you think about it, most real life objects are made that way, too. The body of a car is not machined out of a single piece of metal.
Well, they need to be solids to be combined using the Solid Tools or one of the other Solid Tool extensions. Solids tend to be cleaner by definition. There’s no stray edges or holes or internal faces and the faces are all oriented correctly.
Certainly for 3D printing solids are critical but I make it a habit to make all base level components solids as I work whether they’ll be 3D printed or not and regardless of whether I need to do any Boolean operations with them.
Generally yes. When simpler components get combined into a single, more complex component, the more complex component should be a solid, too. There are some cases in which very short edges can be created that are smaller than SketchUp’s minimum. If an edge is too short SketchUp considers the endpoints are really supposed to be one point. This can lead to holes in surfaces. The various solid tools aren’t supposed to let that happen but there are cases where it does, anyway. I get around that by doing as you’ve seen and modeling as if inches or millimeters are meters.
I expect that most SketchUp users who are doing architectural modeling don’t concern themselves with creating solid objects. Personally I think there’s value in doing it even for architectural models. They are cleaner and can be much easier to work with. But I have seen that many people don’t want to be bothered with it and they just slog away.
Before getting into that, I would suggest editing the style. You have Depth Cue and Extensions turned on. Those are useful sometimes for output but not for modeling.
It appears Draw Whorl left you with a bunch of reversed faces. There should be no blue back faces exposed. Right click on a correctly oriented face and choose Orient Faces. That should straighten them out.
As for the tapered cylinder, I would increase the number of sides for the initial circle to the same number as in a single turn of the threads.
Although the tapered cylinder can be a solid object, there’s no way the threads on their own can be a solid so there’ll be a fair amount of cleanup to do. I would soften the edges of the threads and use Eneroth Auto Weld to weld all the edges that can be welded (not free but well worth the price in the time it will save). This will make cleanup easier. I would make the tapered cylinder a component so its geometry can’t merge with the threads yet. It should look something like this.
Then select all of the thread geometry, right click on it and choose Intersect Faces>With Model. When that completes, hide the tapered cylinder so you can remove the unneeded geometry in the screw threads. Here I’ve selected the upper waste surface after running Intersect Faces.
After the threads are cleaned up, unhide the cylinder, select all of the screw thread geometry, use Edit>Cut to cut it to the clipboard, then open the tapered cylinder component for editing and use Edit>Paste in place to put the threads inside. Next, hide the top face of the cylinder so you can see inside. With Select, single click on the surface at the base of the threads to select it.
Press Delete.
Unhide the top face of the cylinder and exit edit mode. The component should be a solid.
I hope that helps.
d
I’m making progress… I get to the point where I’ve merged the threads with the cylinder, intersected the faces, and hid the cylinder so I could go in and delete superfluous geometry. Then I get stuck. I see what you are doing after the paste-in-place operation. You want to delete the interior faces of the threads or this can’t be a solid. However, all the interior surfaces are the same (either internal or external) so when I try to delete the thread bottoms, the entire side of my cylinder goes away with it. I’ve upped the side count on the cylinder to 60, and that made the geometry behave better. I will go back and redo this to see if my faces on the threads were wrong…