Canada/Québec
Joined: Jul 26, 2020
Post Count: 63
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
So I started a new project and set it to meter. Everything looks good.
Then I just wanted to test something so I put the setting back to the imperial system and made a new project.
Look nice from a distance.
On closer look at the misalignment is back....
This is rater odd
----------------------------------------
I'm more comfortable writing in English, but I can also write in French. ,___, (OvO) Hoot /)_) " "
Netherlands
Joined: Apr 8, 2022
Post Count: 1223
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
All my models are created using the decimal system. As far as I know using models created on a system with the decimal system on a system with the imperial system should not make a difference. Models exported to OBJ/MTL and compiled into a library are stored with decimal numbers anyway, even when created on a system using the imperial system. That's what the OBJ/MTL specifications require.
So, I tried it on my system too. I set the preferences to foot/inch and used the same models to align next to each other. I got the same misalignment you have. I switched back to centimeters and had to remove and add the models again to get rid of the misalignment. I tried to find another kitchen to test with but couldn't find one that had appliances like the dishwasher to fit in a row.
I thought the problem was that the depth of the dishwasher model is 0.02cm (0.00787") less than the cabinets (different handle). Using the original parts of the dishwasher I moved the handle 2mm down and exported the model. Now it's depth is the same as the other cabinets. I aligned the same models again using the imperial system and it got even worse: now even the height is not converted the same for each model. Using the decimal system everything aligns perfectly. Of course there is a conversion needed to display models in the imperial system but the misalignment seems rather big to me.
I'm sorry that I (obviously) can't resolve this problem. I have made a note of the problem though to ensure that when I rebuild and optimize the kitchen library I will use the same type and position of handles for both cabinets and appliances. Maybe using one of the other imperial units in the preference dialog gives better results.
---------------------------------------- Dodecagon.nl 950+ 3D models, manuals, and projects
France
Joined: Nov 7, 2005
Post Count: 9418
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
You should add furniture with magnetism disabled. When magnetism is on, the size is adjusted to the closest 1/8 inch in Imperial system.
----------------------------------------
Emmanuel Puybaret, Sweet Home 3D creator
Netherlands
Joined: Apr 8, 2022
Post Count: 1223
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
@Shralen Notice the post from Emmanuel!
Add your models with magnetism off and the alignment is correct. I tested it and I'm very glad that it works. Problem solved.
After more than 15 years working with Sweet Home 3D I still have things to learn Thank you Emmanuel for your fast respons and working solution.
---------------------------------------- Dodecagon.nl 950+ 3D models, manuals, and projects
Canada/Québec
Joined: Jul 26, 2020
Post Count: 63
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
Thank you both, I did all the models with magnetism off and the alignment is correct. I will try to remember this trick for future projects.
----------------------------------------
I'm more comfortable writing in English, but I can also write in French. ,___, (OvO) Hoot /)_) " "
Netherlands
Joined: Apr 8, 2022
Post Count: 1223
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
A tip for users of the Imperial system: As mentioned in the previous posts: import models from the catalog into your the 2D plan with magenetism off to avoid rounding of the conversion from decimal to imperial.
But of course you want magnetism on to align easily aling models. After import in the 2D pane you can switch magnetism back on, you only need magnetism off when you add the models from the catalog in your plan. If you didn't know: there's a button in the toolbar for easy switching magnetism on and off.
---------------------------------------- Dodecagon.nl 950+ 3D models, manuals, and projects
Australia
Joined: Sep 1, 2024
Post Count: 7
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
@Keet Thank you for a fantastic contribution. I am currently designing a Kitchen / Pantry using your library and have a suggestion for an addition to the Cabinet High 60 range.
Australia
Joined: Sep 1, 2024
Post Count: 7
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
After I posted the image, I went for my evening walk and realised I should have made your shelves invisible and added some at the correct heights. So here it is with its mate.
Netherlands
Joined: Apr 8, 2022
Post Count: 1223
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
Nice idea, but I would do it a little different: why have doors in front of the sliders?
A little heads-up: the total downloads of libraries is almost at 10.000 and the kitchen library is by far the most popular. It is also my oldest library and one of the few that is not optimized yet. It also has several flaws that I want to fix. (Someone tried to be funny and downloaded the kitchen library over a thousand times within an hour but I killed that run and removed those from the download counts.)
These facts changed my planning. Contrary to what I said a few days ago I started rebuilding all cabinets in the kitchen library. That's a lot of work and I have a few other projects I'm busy with so it will take some time before it is finished, with a little luck before the end of the year. The new library will have a model added like your idea but as a high cabinet version of the current lower version. The first design of that is already in progress. Put two of them next to each other and you get something that closely resembles the model on your image.
---------------------------------------- Dodecagon.nl 950+ 3D models, manuals, and projects
Australia
Joined: Sep 1, 2024
Post Count: 7
Status:
Offline
Re: Dodecagon
The reason I went with doors over the sliders is I felt with the doors closed, it gave a much cleaner look with 4 handles as opposed to 10, that is 8 for the sliders and 2 to access the storage shelves above the sliders. Initially I mounted a slider on top of another but the problem was it introduced another cabinet height that would need a top cabinet to be consistant with your 2400 high cabinet and top of your upper cabinets. On these designs the top of the slider unit is set at 1665 because that is how it worked out, but if it was much higher, visibility into the sliders would be a problem.
