Quote from: Fred H on July 29, 2017, 01:02:33 PM
Hi Nathan,

I'm using your plugin to guide the "look" of a house we're not sure we can afford to build. Until we get it to look like we want we can't ask for any bids.

To break up a too-large roof expanse I wanted to add a dormer. Since that's not fully implemented yet, I thought I'd just do an additional roof. But the result is weird; it seems to be rotated a few degrees clockwise as seen from above.

I put the file on dropbox so you can look at it: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9lnnksyct7nkz93/VT11.skp?dl=0. I made the "dormer" using a Fink truss with a 9/12 pitch, 16.6025" energy heel and 24" overhangs and gables. The three points I used are the two vertical dotted lines on the front where they intersect the green wall, and where the horizontal dotted line intersects the brown wall.

Either I'm misusing the program or there's a bug. Would you please take a look?

Thanks,
Fred

The vertical line next to your main entrance is offset from the exterior wall line, this is skewing your secondary roof (dormer) from the perpendicular to the main roof line. 

Another hint:  Click on the global settings and turn on layers and materials, this will let you peel back the roof  and look at things easier.

Version 1.9.6 - 07.29.2017
- Added a hip & ridge option for all hip type roofs.

I will now need to setup hip & ridge for all other roof variants (gable, dutch gable etc...)

I'm quite pleased with the way this has come out.  Within the global settings under the "Sheathing" tab you can adjust the width and thickness of the hip/ridge cap. 

This option definitely adds a finished look to the roof. 

The hip and ridge is now fully implemented for hip roofs as shown.



It can also handle pyramid roofs where there is no ridge cap.

In the global settings I will setup and option to enable this feature and also an option to set the (ridge/hip) cap width and thickness.

Its too late tonight but I will see what I can do tomorrow about rolling out a new version.

View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/7aa80c75-5183-4aed-b0fb-ee54aa094fe0/Hip-and-Ridge-Medeek-Office

Tonight I was thinking it might be kind of cool to enable an option for hip and ridge (cap) on hip roofs.

After about an hour of coding I generated this:



I've got the hip cap figured out at the eaves but I'm a little unsure how to terminate everything where the hips meet the ridge:

Fixed a minor bug with the tail bearing truss module.  The user should now be able to input a roof pitch up to 16:12.  This was such a minor fix that I'm not rolling a major revision, just a sub-revision:  1.9.5b.

Talking to my wife today about how much time I devote to all of the different projects I'm constantly involved with, in particular the plugins and my plans to launch the much needed wall plugin.  I'm coming up on two years since I started the Truss Plugin and I am quite proud of how far it has progressed but I'm even more amazed at how much more there is yet to do.

As you all know I work a full time job and only get to this stuff in my free time which is pretty tough on the family since all my time and energy is devoted to my "work".

My wife feels like I need to cut back on something, which I can understand.

My work is simply work, it pays the bills and it is fairly stable and decent income.

My passion is my plugins and other structural and design programs (design.medeek.com) that I have created and continue to create.

The last couple of days I've taken a hard look at the numbers and realized that the volume of customers is pretty good (currently about 350 active truss plugin users) but definitely not in the thousands or what I would consider "high volume" or "mass market".  If it was in that range then I could easily offer the plugin at much lower pricing and it still could pay for the considerable time and effort that I put into it.

As it currently stands, given the number of customers or potential customers I think I'm seeing, the plugin(s) is more of a niche item and not so much a "mass market" item. 

I guess what I am trying to say is that both myself and my wife think that in order for me to devote as much time as I do to the plugins I need to figure out a way to make it compensate me better for that time.  The only two solutions I am seeing is increase the volume or increase the price.

My major argument up until now for increasing the price is that the plugin(s) are not finished nor polished products.  However this is sort of a chicken and egg problem, more money would theoretically allow me to devote more time to the development which would make the plugin(s) more valuable and worth the additional cost.

Any ideas are welcome.  Bottom line is I think there is a lot more that I have to add to the SketchUp community, I just got to figure out how to do it.

Try it now.  The list somehow got reset that the map was working off of.  Its a little complicated how I create the map.

I've updated the user map so that it now shows all users at once without a time lapse effect:

http://design.medeek.com/calculator/sketchup/data/medeektrusspluginusermap.pl

and a new combined map with both the foundation and truss plugin:

http://design.medeek.com/calculator/sketchup/data/medeekpluginsusermap.pl

Making a slight detour back to the wood gusset plate question and nail spacing:


What I would like to compare is the following:





Same amount of nails in each test specimen. The tighter nail spacing allows for 66.6% the gusset length versus the 2 row configuration.


Any one want to venture a guess which one is stronger and by how much?


I just need to figure out a test rig and then load these two up and see what happens.


For a DF main member and OSB (7/16) I get 173.7 lbs per fastener (double shear) or a total of 1,389.6 lbs for eight 10d fasteners.


I'm wondering how much the connection will stretch at this design load (loaded in pure tension, parallel to grain of main member) and at what load will it fail, then compare the results from both configurations.

Version 1.1.5 - 07.18.2017
- Fixed bug with slab reinforcement for Slab-on-Grade foundations (Polygon, Face).

Version 1.9.5 - 07.11.2017
- Added energy/raised heels for quad fink truss (3 variant: wedge, slider and vertical w/ strut).
- Metal plate connectors now enabled for quad fink trusses.



This concludes the updates needed for common trusses.  I still have a number of updates for all the other truss types to bring them up to speed.

Version 1.9.4 - 07.08.2017
- Added energy/raised heels for triple howe truss (3 variant: wedge, slider and vertical w/ strut).
- Metal plate connectors now enabled for triple howe trusses.



Below would be a typical example of a 60' span using a triple howe truss. 



However, in most cases where the design calls for taller walls one would probably go with a steel building or CMU block walls.  This was the case on a building I designed about 10 years ago (Wasatch Building Supply, Utah) that had 20 ft. walls.  Its too bad I don't have an interior photo showing the trusses inside the warehouse roof, its quite a sight to behold.

If I ever do build my office I was thinking of doing some sort of cedar siding and then putting my logo or some of my other designs on the exterior:



View model here:

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/1bc480bd-0bc9-4f5a-b6fe-441d73c84183/Medeek-Office-with-Logo

Some of my other designs are here:

http://www.wilkersonart.com

On my Kickstarter campaign there was a recent comment regarding the pricing of my plugins.  I have been giving this some thought recently and I thought I might also share my remarks on the board as well:

I agree that there is certainly an argument that I charge too little for these plugins and I have wrestled some with this problem. Others have also privately messaged me or emailed me with similar remarks and recommended that I bump my prices, sometimes tenfold.

The current reasoning behind my low pricing structure can be summarized with the following points:

1.) All of these plugins are currently in a developmental phase. Unfortunately, I have not been able to exert my full time efforts at this development so progress has been slow. I find it hard to charge a "fair amount" for a product that in my mind is still flawed and imperfect. My "todo" list is currently about 60 items and written out covers about 2 pages. To charge a "professional" price requires that one provide a "professional" service or product, I don't feel like I'm there yet.

2.) I have looked at some of the competition such as Pluspec and others who charge considerably more than I do. Again the sophistication of the their product exceeds my own so the price differential is warranted. But more importantly I'm not a huge fan of pricey design software, that is what has led me to SketchUp in the first place. The SketchUp community in general has adopted this mindset (in my opinion) and I don't feel that they would get behind an expensive solution.

3.) I am also trying to keep the plugin within the reach of the casual user (DIY'er), someone who simply wants to model up a single house or garage for their own personal use. In some cases the trial version of the plugin(s) will work for that but I have recently limited it quite strictly so any serious design work will require a registered license.

4.) I have also considered a subscription model, but my own distaste of that licensing mode has kept me from going down that road. Once your purchase a software you should be able to use it indefinitely as it stands. Additional payment should only be required if you are requesting an update or added functionality.

5.) What better way to discourage copy cats and the competition to price it too low as to make it worth their while. No one in their right mind will try to recreate what I have done with trusses when the payback is so little and the effort is so large.

With all of that being said I do think that the sweet spot, which still meets the requirements of the above points, may still be a bit higher than what I am currently charging. I need to find the correct amount to charge so that the above points are carefully balanced with the fact that I need to be able to justify the amount of time and effort I spend in developing these products.

Tutorial 5: Hip Truss Sets (24:32 min.)