This is an example of a 24' x 24' garage that I would like to build on my property this summer or the next. 



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=77329ddc-a170-4dde-945e-4e413304f620

I created the foundation and roof with minimal effort using my own plugins.  The walls were created initially with the housebuilder plugin however I then manually edited the walls.  Note that the top plates overlap properly as they should.

Also note that the garage door wall is a double portal frame.  I would like for my wall plugin to automatically create this standard type of portal frame (PFH) both single and double (ie. Garage Door Option). Notice the embedded Simpson Strong-Tie STHD14 holdowns.

I like to use 2x jamb boards around the door perimeters when the stem wall projects above the concrete slab, this may be atypical constructon for others.  Local contractors like to embed a pressure treated nailer into the concrete.

In theory I should be able to create this exact model using the Foundation, Wall and Truss Plugin and do it all within 5 minutes or less.  That is the goal.

With the wall plugin I will have the standard linear wall tool but I would also like to have a rectangle wall tool that will immediately throw up 4 walls given three user selected points, similar to the truss and roof plugins.

The blockout methods seem to be all over the board, I've even talked with some of my engineering friends and the response is mixed there as well.  I guess I just need to provide the option for any of these three configurations within the plugin.  Sometimes I feel that I get bogged down in the details but I hope some of this level of detail is appreciated.

The other issue I'm having with slabs within garage spaces is the slope of the slab.  I'm trying to determine if is worth trying to incorporate a slope into the slab as it would actually be poured. As far as I know there is not a minimum slope specified for garage floors in the IRC 2015 or earlier only this fairly general statement:

The area of the floor used for parking of automobiles or other vehicles shall be sloped to facilitate the movement of liquids to a drain or toward the main vehicle entry doorway.

Typically the garage slope is 1/8" per foot or 1:96, how critical is this to you the user of the plugin?  Flat would be easier to program but then your blocked out entries on the side of a garage would be only theoretical.

I should point out I've also seen a sort of a combination of the two options where the blockout does not extend to the footing but a thickened edge is employed at the slab/door interface and the thickened edge is typically 2x the slab thickness, or called out as a minimum dimension of 8".

Option 3:

I'm trying to determine which is the preferred method of blocking out a stemwall foundation for garage doors where a slab will be poured in the garage.  I've seen it done both ways.  Option 1 does not typically block all of the stemwall out and seems to be more common in locations where the frostline is deeper (24" or deeper).  Option 2 completely blocks out the stemwall at the garage door and then a thicken edge is poured where the slab meets the footing at the garage door.  From a structural point of view which is the better method and also from a construction point of view what are the pros and cons?

Option 1:



Option 2:



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=9052ff81-b3c2-4aef-b40a-39a8be9e520b

When the user selects a type B footing (stemwall foundation) a keyway is inserted between the stemwall and footing:



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=242c0e7d-db46-43b7-baf6-ce322a842e4e

Version 1.0.2 - 07.08.2016
- Added stemwall foundation type (rectangular outline only).
- Enabled post and pier interior floor beam(s) with a strip footing.
- Added brick ledge option to stemwall foundation.



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=0b7542df-71cd-4908-8aef-731c9bb95f8a

Version 1.6.5 - 07.07.2016
- Added energy/raised heels for polynesian truss type (1 variant: vertical w/ strut).
- Fixed HTML truss selector menu so that window size no longer truncates truss images.



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=c4ecc314-9702-4c99-9148-ca0790178583

If an exclusion area is simply a hole in the slab then it is probably easiest just to push/pull a hole in the slab.  However, if the exclusion area is a large opening with footings required at the perimeter then that is a different matter.  It might look something like this:



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=2348e047-381b-4cb9-94fe-5b8dc8155413

Note how the opening bisects the interior footing, which does potentially complicate any algorithm that would generate the hole and perimeter footing.  I will have to give this some more thought...

The ability to go back in and easily edit a foundation without having to recreate it will be crucial to the success of this plugin. 

Version 1.0.1 - 07.05.2016
- Enabled partial width interior footings for slab on grade foundation.
- Addressed minor bugs with UI geometry menu: Interior footing depth can now be specified.



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=44ac26c8-b403-4a9b-9840-365887260a23

Interior footings quickly complicate things but a well designed html UI should clarify things greatly and make it much more intuitive.  That will be the next objective.

My wife kindly pointed out that the interior footing might not extend the full width or length of the building, very good point.  To correctly specify an interior footing you also need a start and end point, so five inputs total to define this feature:

Direction: X Dir or Y Dir
Footing Width:
Footing Depth:
Start: Measured from first selection point that defines foundation outline.
End:  Measured from first selection point that defines foundation outline, must be greater than Start length.

An example of a partial width interior footing:



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=c6935965-9939-43cd-b682-ffaf67a8a1cd

The problem with the basic UI is that it only allows for one interior footing.  If I webdialog this input menu I can show the layout of the foundation in plan view and allow for an unlimited number of interior footings as well as have footings running in both the X and Y direction.  The possibilities are really endless. 

The same methodology would apply for an arbitrary polygon shaped foundation.

Link to the plugin web page (under construction):

http://design.medeek.com/resources/medeekfoundationplugin.html

The toolbar icons:

Version 1.0.0 - 07.03.2016
- Created Medeek Foundation Plugin, utilizing SketchUp's Ruby API.
- Added slab on grade foundation type (rectangular outline only).
- Added garage curb and interior footing options.



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=1b5e9234-04a5-4e6f-bd4d-ec3006a2f6a4

https://www.qrvr.io/p/K7bzyt

The thing that would make this plugin particularly useful is if the user could define a polygon outline for the foundation, that will be next, then onto stemwall foundations.

12:12 main roof with a 8:12 hip roof return.  The interesting part is the hip rafter
where the return meets the main roof plane.  The dropped hip rafter is off center so that it supports the sheathing from both planes.  The calculations might prove challenging.

Version 1.6.4 - 06.27.2016
- Added roof return option within the advanced options menu for common, scissor and vaulted trusses, configurations: (HIP).



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=790b256d-72fe-46c9-b49c-dd7da0209a02

This option is available for most typical triangular shaped trusses.

I will be adding the gable and full return at a later date, currently only the hip return is available.  Another limitation is that the return roof pitches currently default to the main roof pitch.  I need to add some additional code that will allow the pitch of the return portions to be set independent of the main roof pitch.

This is an excellent link:

http://spot.pcc.edu/~rsteele/BCT122_123/return_eave.pdf

They run the outside hip rafter back to the gable wall and don't run the barge rafter (rake board) to the fascia like I've shown, maybe I've got this wrong...

This method would allow for sheathing of the return without having to notch around the barge rafter.  I call this the floating barge rafter method:



Compare with extending the barge rafter all the way to the fascia board: