@gadget2020 wrote:
One thing to keep in mind: your ponderings are based on boxes where every wall is at 90º to the next wall: Hard-coding the numbers might be a mistake for future developments where you might have (eg) a 45º wall or a shaped bay.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@robhurd wrote:
I understand what you're saying. I do wonder if there is more demand, or could be more demand, than what's apparent. As an example, I know of two companies working on similar projects for Revit, although quite a bit more developed than yours currently is. They basically concentrate on timber and steel construction.
http://www.aga-cad.com/products/packages/wood-framing
http://strucsoftsolutions.com/
In my personal opinion, I think the problem is that SketchUp isn't/wasn't all the well regarded for it's ability to satisfy the needs of professional architects and construction engineers. However, I feel the wind is changing direction. SketchUp just lacks the professional add-ons to create the demand. Our company looked into Revit, but it just seemed overly hard and complicated for what we wanted to achieve. Sketchup was quick and easy but lacks "off-the-shelf" add-ons to make it viable, for us at least.
↧
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Version 1.2.6 - 01.18.2016
- Sill plate option (advanced) enabled for top and bottom bearing floor trusses.Work on the manual is progressing however for those interested the red colored boards in the image are called "ribbon boards". This is fairly typical for floor trusses. The notch purposely left in the truss to accommodate the ribbon board is called the ribbon cut or ribbon notch. Continuous ribbons provide stability for installed trusses, and also provide a solid nailing surface for the edge nailing of floor sheathing. This eliminates the need for larger and more expensive “rimboard” solutions required by dimensional lumber and other engineered wood products. 2x4 lumber is common, but any dimension of 2x lumber can be used for the ribbon board.
Similar to the complex hip roofs I need to program the floor truss/TJI module so that it can automatically frame out any non-rectangular floor plan. It seems like my goals keep getting more lofty and ambitious as I dig deeper into this, at some point I should reach the end of the rabbit hole.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Version 1.2.6 - 01.19.2016
- Added Solid Sawn Floor Joists (metric and imperial)
- Sill plate and Sheathing options (advanced) enabled for TJI and Solid Sawn floor joists.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
In a related note but slightly unrelated I've decided to take a small break from directly programming of the Truss Plugin and apply some effort to the integrated Truss Designer. I've had a number of requests by various parties and individuals to add in plywood gusset plates to the engineering of the Truss Designer, in lieu of standard metal plates (Mitek, Simpson, ITW etc...). This will allow for the design of site fabricated wood gusset connected trusses, something still found in remote agricultural locations. I'm thinking a couple weeks and I will have this programming task complete, at least for the common fink truss, and then put it out there to gauge the response. This new feature will be available from the Truss Plugin when fink trusses are analyzed.
↧
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Version 1.2.7 - 01.26.2016
- Added advanced roof options for hip rafter roof (sheathing, fascia).Couldn't resist adding in these options for hip roof since it was mostly there already from the gable roof module.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
I've uploaded a test L-Shaped structure with a hip roof:
I've created both hip roof primitives with the plugin, that was the easy part.
I then placed a valley rafter with its centerline (top) inline with both roof planes. I think I've got it right. What I am unsure of however is the best way to terminate the framing at the intersection of the valley, lower ridge and flying hip. Once I have a handle on how a carpenter would actually construct that junction I think I can proceed to start work on a secondary roof module for both hip and gable rafter roofs.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@pcmoor wrote:
upload of DC hip roof
you can switch the hidden joints to see a correct view of the joint, but I use to put a 38x38 solder in lieu of a fancy joint, thus all hip and valley top cuts were the same for convenience
in perspective view, you wil note the center line follows the rafter top edge, rafters then meet the hip edge and set up higher than the valley so center lines meet
roof - broken hip.skp (1.8 MB)
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
This method seems to make sense. In a nutshell you are extending the lower ridge past the joint until it meets the next jack rafter, then the flying hip and valley are miter cut to meet the lower ridge.
My only complaint or disagreement with your model would be the height of the valley rafter. Should it not be raised up so that the sheathing from both roof planes rest on its centerline?
I've created a version of the model above with this method of framing at the flying hip/valley/ridge joint:
My other concern is the way I have the valley rafter miter cut where it meets the fascia and the corner of the building wall (top plate). Is there a more practical way or better way of making those cuts?
↧
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Compare Rev 2 with Rev 3:
This version of Hip Roof 4 has the flying hip extending as a full hip to the exterior wall and then the lower ridge framing into it with the valley rafter framed in last.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Rev. 5 is a slight variation of the previous roofs. I have shifted the secondary roof over by 24" to create a T-shaped building. The question is how to best frame the long and short valleys:
Maybe which valley is long or short doesn't matter, but it is something I want to put out there for discussion.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@pcmoor wrote:
yes you are correct, my bad. there are a few issues with the hip/valley DC that needs fixing. Its a project I started 2 years ago and found that the modelling was becoming too complex and gave it a rest. There was and still is a need to improve DC work ability, naivety I thought the Sketchup coders would resolve some of the issues and increase the DC abilities, I have since come to the conclusion that I need to incorporate some ruby scripts.
In regards to the valley - fascia ends, it depended on the fascia and eave type, for timber fascias and boxed we would cut off to one plane and send the fascia through. For exposed then one had to cut a fancy joint. The cut you show is correct, however in a practise, trusses and rafters are installed with extended overhangs, to be cut off after to a string line, this allows for any discrepancies in the walls and pitching points. If the fascia were steel then just plumb cuts just short of the fascia line, okay and could be done off the bench.
Personally I would leave this aspect of your modeling of the valley end as you have drawn. Then in the final takeoff or list, the option of overhang finish could be addressed
In regards to the broken hip designs, if possible I would incorporate both, one where the hip runs through the other where it is cut. The difference is dependant on size and how the roof is supported. For large spans the rafters can be supported with underpurlins, struts, strutting beams... generally a cut broken hip would require a strut.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
My head is hurting just thinking about the programming and logic that will be required to make just one of these options work, giving the option for both is going to be insane. There will be a lot of conditional states, if the roof pitches are different that will make things even more interesting, the effects of which I have not even fully considered.
The most common secondary roof condition will be either an L-shape or a T-shape roof. Then there is the case where you have two offset rectangles.
↧
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
The intersection of the supporting valley rafter, valley rafter and lower ridge I had framed incorrectly. The corrected method is shown below:
Also note that the segment of the supporting valley rafter between the upper ridge and lower ridge would need to be beveled or "backed" otherwise it clashes with the sheathing. I noticed this when I originally added the supporting valley rafter but confirmed my suspicion when perusing DeWalt's carpentry and framing handbook this morning. I probably should have pulled this book out before beginning this study but it only confirmed everything I had managed to discover myself once I started examining the model.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Now that I've got a gable and hip rafter roof I was thinking about adding in a dutch gable roof, but I'm a little unclear on the best method to support the end rafters. Has anyone ever seen something like this used?
I've checked all of my carpentry and construction books and there is absolutely no reference material on traditional framing of this type of roof, online is also quite scant, any resources, framing diagrams etc... would be quite helpful.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
This is my first crack at a dutch gable roof framed with rafters:
Without the sheathing:
Please examine the model here:
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Dutch Gable Rev. 2:
Same as previous except for doubled up common rafters at dutch gable.
↧
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
Dutch Gable Rev. 3:
Doubled up gable common rafters with the dutch ridge/ledger is sandwiched between them. Found a paper by Larry Haun, Mar. 1995 "Framing a Dutch Roof" that was published in Fine Homebuilding magazine, that describes a very similar method of framing.
View model here:
Disregard the common rafter sizes they are undersized but look at the method of sandwiching the dutch ridge/ledger between the last common rafters. I would probably also install some blocking between the double gable common rafters. I'm also not showing all of the ceiling joists and bird blocking etc...
If the roof gets large enough then one could go to a double ply dutch ridge, or even a deeper LVL member, assuming there is no internal support available from internal walls.
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
@medeek wrote:
I've also realized that for hip roofs I need an option to set the depth of the hip rafters since they are often larger members than the common or jack rafters.
Here is the new icon for secondary roofs:
This category will contain the following items:
- Gable Roof Minor
- Hip Roof Minor
- Dutch Gable Roof Minor
- Gable Dormer
- Hip Dormer
- Shed Dormer
↧
Truss Plugin/Extension
↧