If that is the case then there is something wrong in your original model, what that is we can only guess.
@slbaumgartner uploaded a video fixing it, though I haven’t been able to reproduce that.
You are more than welcome to look at my original model.
Crosby Library - 5_11_23.skp (3.1 MB)
I looked at just one cabinet after turning off the Trim, Wall Panels, and Walls tag folders.Here’s the cut list for the objects in the cabinet.
Lots of approximate dimensions indicating that you may have had Length Snapping enabled when you created those groups (Length Snapping is not enabled now) or you’ve got something else messaed up in your modeling workflow. Your choice to use groups throughout and not name them kind of makes a cutlist useless. Even the one component in the selection has a thickness of zero so that’s not useful.
Similar sort of thing going on here as well as through the rest of the model.
Some of the items had to be divided evenly between things, so not everything in the model is an exact number.
Length snapping was off since the creation of the model.
I don’t know what component has a thickness of zero, and I don’t use the cutlist feature. If there is any tip you’re trying to share with me here I’m likely missing it.
Even if you aren’t using a CutList extension to get a list of objects and their dimensions for the shop, it’s a quick way to check for errors in the model. Even if you are dividing things evenly you shouldn’t end up with the dimensions you have in your model.
Your decision to use groups for all of the parts means you are working harder than you need to. Since all of the groups have the same name, even Outliner, which could be useful, isn’t.
Then there are other problems with your workflow that are inducing issues with your model.
The zero-thickness component is an array of circles that I take to indicate shelf pin holes.
You seem to be pointing to a lot of things and describing issues, and I’m unfortunately still not understanding what you’re saying.
What dimensions are you seeing that are wrong?
How am I working harder than I need to?
What is not useful or wrong about the shelf pin holes?
Are you creating the model to use as a guide for building it in the shop?
Even if you aren’t using a cutlist, are you seriously going to cut parts with the dimensions as they are in the model? There’s no reason your model should have so many approximate dimensions.
First by not modeling with precision. You are making it harder on yourself as you go through adding more details. It’s no wonder you wind up with gaps and misalignments.
Second, by using groups instead of components you make the modeling process harder. Especially when it comes to editing those objects. It takes more time to do any sort of editing and leads to potential errors that are difficult to catch.
I didn’t say the shelf pin holes aren’t useful. But since you chose not to name the component, that component is useless in a cutlist. Without digging into the model you can’t tell what that thing is in Outliner or anywhere else.
Maybe you’re happy with your imprecise models and don’t mind the extra work. If so, I won’t try to help you find ways to improve the models and your experience with SketchUp. Just know it doesn’t have to be that way.
→ I’m reading your message as perhaps that I’m trying to deter you from helping me, and I am not trying to deter you from trying to help me find ways to improve. I am always looking to improve and learn. I am only not seeing what you are saying is imprecise or extra work. I hear you saying that there are ways I can improve, and I am not seeing what those ways are.
Have you spent any time at the SketchUp Campus and at the SketchUp - YouTube channel will be very worthwhile. Both sites are from the SketchUp team. On the YouTube channel, pay attention to the Square One Series. It covers the basics for each tool.
2 Likes
I’ll take a shot at addressing items @DaveR raised that you are evidently struggling to understand. Perhaps the negative phrasing “you are not” instead of “you should” or “do this” is interfering?
There are lots of dimensions in the model that have a ~ at their start. That is how SketchUp tells you that the displayed value is not a true presentation of the real value in the model because it had to be rounded for display. There are numerous values that are not even exact to 1/64 inch, which raises the question Dave asked about whether you are really going to cut pieces to a finer measurement than that. It’s not a question of gaps or misalignments, it’s one of “did you really mean that? Is the space this must fit in really measured to less than 1/64 inch?”.
But it also suggests that you need to be more careful about either using inferences and guides to size and align things exactly or to be entering exact lengths in the measurements box when you draw or move things instead of eyeballing them. (BTW he just used a cutlist as a quick way to show the dimensions of every group in the model, not to imply that you should be using it.)
You say the strange measurements result from dividing a space. But I don’t see anywhere you divided a space into a peculiar enough number of sections that imprecise dimensions should have resulted. For example, what sensible starting value would you divide into how many parts to end up with a fraction 13/64, 45/64, or 57/64? Multiples of those numerators don’t work out to sensible whole values unless multiplied by a larger number than any place I see divided space! The situation looks like GIGO, that is, start with a strange whole and divide it into parts to get more strange values! Somewhat like the issue with length snapping.
Perhaps you are dividing by eye? It would be much better to enter exact measurements if they are known or to use something like the move tool’s array copy capability, which can space copies evenly and even subdivide a distance automatically to space them evenly.
Regarding naming things, you should always name a component or a group as soon as you create it. Otherwise there is no easy or quick way to know which is which, either in the Outliner or in a file exported to Vcarve. Particularly when there are similarly sized parts, lack of names makes you do extra work to figure out which goes where when doing the assembly. That’s another place a cutlist could help, even if you send the model to Vcarve for cutting. “Hmmm, I have a 12 13/64 part and a 12 1/4 part. Which goes where?”
For projects such as yours, look for opportunities to use components instead of groups. Anything that has multiple identical instances should be a component because then you can edit one of them and all the others will immediately see the change too. For example, if you have 10 shelves that are all the same length modeled as groups, you have to open each group separately to edit it if you need to change the length. If they were instances of a single component, you could open one, edit the length there, and all the others would instantly share the change. Similarly, the sides of a cabinet are usually mirror images of each other. So create a component for one side, then move and flip a copy to obtain the other side. If a part is similar but needs a unique difference (as in your comment about plinths), copy the component, make it unique, then edit the copy. That’s only one small step more effort than copying and editing a group. The other advantages of components to a workflow far outweigh that small step.
3 Likes
I appreciate you jumping in.
Some dimensions are ~ because of specific reasons. I don’t know of anything in the model that has the ~ that I didn’t intend for, except the one instance that I started this post with.
In the one cabinet Dave grabbed, there is a trim profile outside that cabinet which dictated the strange height of that cabinet. It was the fastest and simplest decision for me to proceed with that cabinet exactly as drawn, and allow the builder to cut the trim to fit, as he’s going to need to do for all the rest of the panels in the room anyway.
My comment about dividing and getting weird numbers is sometimes when I am using the divide tool, I end up with a .3 repeating somewhere, because of the math, and so I just leave it because of our process of making doors, and it’s better to have things look cleaner in sketchup for our purposes than to have exact numbers in these instances. I don’t know if it happened in this model, it just happens often for me/us.
I haven’t used the outliner before. We group items specifically to communicate what’s attached to what, and which things get installed together. So I don’t know if it makes sense for us to start using the outliner, but it’s an interesting idea and I see the merit in it.
That’s one way, though not how I do it. When there is trim or scribe filler involved, I don’t try to make the main cabinet precisely meet the trim at some strange measurement, I make the cabinet the next “nice” size just overlapping the trim and expect the trim to be adjusted to meet it. An overlap of 1/16 or even 1/8 is usually easy to sand off the trim. And since the places I work are never exactly level, plumb, or flat, trying to match every tiny quirk by tweaking the cabinet size seems like the cart pulling the horse.
Yeah, on a computer, division that doesn’t yield a binary fraction will cause a trailing sequence of some digit and cause a ~ in SketchUp. I suppose that living with those tiny differences is something that relying on CNC makes possible. I don’t have CNC, and even measuring something to within 1/64 is too much for my weak eyes! I tweak the size or placement in the model to arrive at something that I can see to measure. Provided the tweak doesn’t need to be more than maybe 1/32, nobody can tell the difference in the finished cabinet.
1 Like
Nate,
You are beating yourself up.
I’ve been designing cabinets 50+ years.
First thing you need to understand is “You are the designer or detailer.” You can make the job complex or simplify it. Simplify means designing so parts are common fractions. Common fractions are like 1/16, 1/8" or 1/4" minimum size in parts. Machinists work to thousandths. Cabinets are in reasonable fractions. 1/16 or 1/32 are “last resort” sizes.
Second thing you need to understand is SCRIBES. Scribes are those trim pieces or filler pieces that go between the cabinet and the surface it is being installed against. Scribes are drawn in the plans and then noted to be cut oversize (most often in width). The installer sets the cabinet Level and Plumb where you show it on the plans. The installer then trims the scribe to fit to the wall or other existing surface. If your installer does not want to work with scribes; you don’t want that installer.
Third thing to understand is dividing up spaces. You are the designer. Divide the spaces so the result is a “reasonable " number. By reasonable I mean consider the number of spaces first. If you’ve got five spaces for an overall dimension of xx 5/8” could work out. Or 55". any measurement divisible by 5 after subtracting your divider panels, which could be 4 or 6 dividers ( the 2 difference is the end panels). Think about the best length for multiple spaces. For 3 spaces xx 3/8" may work best.
After YOU determine the overall workable width for the cabinet; design the scribe to take up the remainder of the space.
Lastly the ultimate goal of your work is to make your work look and function well. To attain that goal your design must be workable to be successful. The CNC setup, the parts cutter, the assembler and the installer NEED good plans to build nice cabinetry.
Several comments have suggested naming your groups. Naming groups and parts is vital to success for you and all those working your job.
You are the man Nate. Make yourself successful and you will earn a nice living.
I know this is over a year later - no I’ve not read every reply yet, so i apologize if this has been said. But ive come across this many times in many different ways in 2023, not as often in 2022 (I stopped using 2023 for a while bc of this and other issues).
Maybe check your drawing settings and see if its selected as feet/in or engineering, decimals, whatever the other options are. I import my 2D drawings from a CAD program - usually use architecture value, but sometimes the drawings i get have been done in a different value, and the import will reflect that by being off by stupid small amounts.
I’ve been using Sketchup for years, since about 2012, and I’ve never had as many issues as the newer version have given.
1 Like
Thank you for replying!
That’s a good point I had not thought of.
I always work in decimal and have it set to the maximum amount of decimal places. But I don’t check the settings that other people have built models in. Now I will though!
1 Like