In the attached model, I try to pull this face to be 1.25" proud of the board that is perpendicular to it.
In the attached screenshot you can see that it is very slightly wrong.
I know that Sketchup rounds numbers… but I would expect that if I snap a face to be flush with that board, and then I push/pull it 1.25" away, that it would then be exactly 1.25" away.
What’s happening please?
1’25 push pull.skp (70.2 KB)
The “board” is floating 1/2" away from the wall… the face of the board is just over 1.25" from the edge of the window… this looks to be the way the model was built.
This is a view from directly above.
Yes that is exactly what I’m referring to. I pulled it and entered 1.25" and ended up with this dimension. This is the reason for my post.
It all depends on where you “anchore” the ‘Tape Measure’ tool on the wide board. You can find values of less than 1.25" and of more than 1.25" The geometry is not carefully created and that is a user fault.
My question is: what is happening.
Do you have a solution or did you just feel like replying?
I think you may be getting an inference from the edge of the adjacent stile, and SketchUp’s handling of small differences is forcing a snap to that distance instead of what you entered (the difference is only .000049", well below the snap tolerance). By carefully avoiding any inference to that stile, I got an exact result:
There is really no way to tell what you did in the past… I would suggest turning length snapping off and using dimensions rather than snapping when you move, draw or push pull.
The solution is to create your geometry with a board face parallel to the one you measure to. I felt like replying to help you out. If you don’t create parallel faces you will measure multiple possible values if you push one away from the other. What bothers you in my first reply?
Thank you for helping to investigate this. My issue is with the other object… but thank you for teaching me that such a small value is beyond Sketchup’s tolerance. That tells me that this is basically not fixable unless I remake these parts.
This all begs the question: why did you draw the stile to such a strange dimension? Is that the “other object”?
Everything was created with parallel faces to begin with. I was annoyed that you said the geometry was not carefully created when you have no information about that, in addition to the fact that you did not offer any helpful information towards a solution or cause, which is what I specifically requested.
Yes this is the “other object” I’m referring to. I drew it to a “regular” dimension. I had to adjust the room dimensions and changed everything by a certain, “regular” amount. Either snapping to objects or typing 1.25" in manually. When I went to snap this one I noticed that this was a very weird dimension, and then began investigating.
Here’s a way to fix it:
The result will be at exactly where you set the guide line.
Edit: and as @TheOnlyAaron suggested, turn off length snapping. It is quite often responsible for tiny errors that then propagate all over model. It does what it says: snaps the new end of a line to an exact length from the starting end. It does not snap to a grid, so if the other end was inaccurate, so will the new end be!
Is that working for you in the model? When I tried that it was still off by very small amounts.
Yes, I moved the face so the width of the stile was 2.18125 exactly. I don’t know if that is the value you wanted, but it worked for me.
@slbaumgartner, don’t you get different values around 1.25" when measuring the distance between both faces (wide board face and stile face) ?
In the lower region I get less than 1.25"
At the top I get more than 1.25"
All measured and thereby locked perpendicular to the large face.
I didn’t try that. I need to run an errand now. I’ll take a look later (I have one more reply to Nate ready to go now).
Here’s an animation of me getting an exact value using the method I described. A possible difference may be whether you stopped dragging the first pushpull before clicking again and dragging it back out to the guide line.
As @Wo3Dan is very helpfully trying to point out.
At least one of your problems is that surfaces A & B are not parallel to each other so you will get different results depending where you take your measurements from:
I was suspecting they might not be parallel, but I was having trouble fixing it as all my solutions kept ending up with still wrong numbers. Also if they were out of parallel, I would suspect that @slbaumgartner’s solution wouldn’t have worked
