How to name groups quicker
-
I had to go to Burma and back this last week so stil a bit tired, so I was trying to work out the meaning of pbacot post. Did I write more quickly first at first?
-
I would use "more quickly" because you are modifying a verb not a noun, so an adverb would be used instead of "quicker" which is an adjective. Noted this is the web, and who cares? After all it's proper in 'Meriken slang, but sometimes I can't stop myself.
-
@pbacot: They way you said it is more gooder.
-
We can learn you to talk proper.
-
You might find some use in keeping the outliner window open where you can right click on a group and rename it more better.
-
-
What I have always open when modeling is the Entity info. As soon as you create a group or component, you can go directly to entity info and change the name of the group, layer and name and definition name for the component.
No need to install that plugin, eventually you will want to make groups fast and forget about the plugin box in no time.
Components it's another story though you want to be careful when naming those.
See Rasteriza plugin Rename by layer. You will be able to batch rename groups and components, by layer or by many other ways. Useful!
-
@jql said:
Components it's another story though you want to be careful when naming those.
Do you mean you need to be more careful naming components than groups? If so, why?
-
Dave,
I think we've had this discussion before and in the last time you convinced me into trying a fully component project. It was no good and I reverted back to my previous groups AND components workflow.
All of you (and specially you Dave) deserve my utermost respect so I will take some time to reply:
If you create a component with a given name for instance "A", and you go about modelling and later create a new component called "A", it won't work or will it?
Well... it will work but the working isn't as simple as you made it sound like:
1 - It will ask you what you want to do with the component:
1.a - Replace component? If you do replace it, then the "A" component 10 meters below, and completely off screen, will be changed without notice (unless you're careful of course);
1.b - As you are careful, instead of replacing it you rename it and create a "A1", problem solved!Not quite, actually problem delayed:
2 - Then you're up and modeling again and create a new "A", wich you carefully name "A2", to follow logic.
3 - Then you want to copy a component and edit it in another place:
3.a - You edit it and forget about the other similar component that you shouldn't edit... this one is fine, the other one is a mess (unless you're careful of course!)
3.b - You were careful enough to remember this particular component you're about to edit "A1" has to be unique. Right-click menu > Make Unique and you're done... You can safely edit it now!4 - Then, later, you open outliner to check if everything is in the right place and tidy or to find a particular component you don't know where it is:
4.1 - There you have components "A", "A1", "A1#1" and "A2".
4.2 - That's annoying you say (it's more than annoying as it will also have implications on many possible workflows) and rename the component "A1#1" to "A3", (unless you're careful of course!)
4.3 - If you are careful and if you want to do it right, you'll rename components following Sketchup code "A";"A#1";"A#2";"A#3". If you do this and you make one of those components unique, SU will make a copy of the component "A" or "A#1" for instance, and name it "A#4".5 - But you'll soon have hundreds of "A" components and you are modeling a new one and it's not handy to make one of them unique:
5.1 - You model geometry and make component and it asks for the name. You type "A", no good "A#4" no good "A#44", no good, "A#444" Ahah this one is free...
5.2 - A mess if you ask me and a waste of time, so you find yourself typing in silly numbers unless you're careful of course!
5.3 - As you are you will purge your model regularly... AND keep using silly numbers all the time...What I would really recommend to get a tidy model wich will never mess up is to always be careful of course!
What I always do to be careful then is that when I'm creating this components I name them always "A" and replace them in dialog everytime. I do that because immediately after, I copy them to the side and use "make unique" on the one I want to keep, after wich I delete the one I don't want (wich has no "#n" on name).
This way I'm sure my model is always nice even if I have sometimes undreds of components "A#n". Thus, unless I purge my model, I always have a "A" component in the component manager but it's always replaceable and the dialog for component creation is easy to manage.
So are components usefull? Definetely!
Are they dangerous? Very!
Can they be safely used? Yes... if you're careful of course!
Is it a Tedious safety? Yes!
Then are there alternatives? Yes... GROUPS!
If you're a noob doing a complex project think wisely on what to use because you HAVE to use one or the other if you are going the Sketchup route.
If you can't decide, use groups instead, make them components later if you are going to repeat them.
It's much easier to turn groups into components than the other way around.
It's even easier to replace a bunch of groups for bunch of copies of a single component. For that you turn each group into a component and use component manager (Window > Components) to find the component you want to replace. Right click it's icon and hit replace selected. All the selected components on the model will be replaced by the one on component manager.
Try to make the other way around without plugins and you'll know what I'm talking about!
At the end, do what you want, but if your project is large enough or needs a lot of components that have the same name but have to be different (doors, windows, columns, handles) I believe that I gave you a nice advice.
Best regards,
João
-
JQL, thank you for that long and considered response. I do see your points. I agree with you that you need to be careful in naming the way you describe. It would never occur to me to try to name two different objects the same. For example, if there was more than one type of door in a project, I would try to get away with calling the first one I drew 'Door'. I would use more specific naming from the beginning so there isn't any confusion. When I modify a component to make a different component, I do edit the Definition name immediately to reflect the change.
If I was designing a building I wouldn't tell the builder to put a door here, there and over there without telling them what kind of door to use in each place.
As for the issue of inadvertently editing copies of components, I don't run into that problem because I only use components and I know when there's other instances in the model. If I can't remember, it's easy enough to tell by looking at Entity Info which I always have open. It's easy enough to make the instance or a selected set of instances of the component unique with either a context click>Make Unique or using a keyboard shortcut. Since I only use components, I never wonder when looking at something whether it is a group or a component.
There are so many ways to leverage features of components that aren't available in groups and I use many of them regularly.
I don't expect my work flow to be right for everyone. It works for me and has for about ten years. The cool thing is each user can develop a work flow that works for them.
-
I meant to add:
Whatever work flow you choose, do yourself a big favor and don't create sloppy models. Practice good housekeeping as you go along. It isn't difficult to do and it'll make your work much easier later.
-
Naming components such as window assemblies that have multiple nested components (I try to keep the number down). Naming carefully should make it easier to use parts in the future. Most often I use Fredo's stretch to make new sizes of a window I've made. That makes nested components unique ( I can see why) and so renaming is often needed.
Anyway I usually go in and rename components to match the system of naming after making each version (size etc.). Takes time, but I hope it pays off in the end.
-
I also do that cleanup and renaming. It is key to know what is happening. My outliner structure is as clean and tidy as can be. I try hard so there is not a flaw when I get to construction documents stage, on my projects.
However as you might now, an architectural project takes a long time to deliver and I often work on more than once at a time with very short delivery times as can be. There is simply no time to check on all components and all groups names. This is where messy stuff starts to happen and so, at least, I know my outliner structure is coherent even if everything is named Group and Component#1. I often create groups for organizing stuff, for drawing stuff in 5minutes... I simply press a key and keep on modeling inside the group. Fast as hell and not dangerous.
However I use components for 2 typical situations:
Elements that repeat through the project
Doors and Windows; Hardware; Sanitaryware and taps or sinks; Render proxies for furniture and vegetation.
Special spaces that I save as Xrefs
Outer building shell (for masterplans); Kitchens; Bathrooms; Staircases; Elevators; Halls; any other interior or exterior space that needs a lot of detail and I can isolate on a separate model binded to one or several other models.
Note to Dave
I do see the point of only using components. It's just that with so many of them and with such jumping through projects something will be messed up.
Note to Trimble
Most of my component problems would be solved with a simple thing - when making a component wich name already exists, why not ask if user wants to make it unique based on the name. It would look like this:
"A component with that name already exists. Do you want to replace that definition with your new component?"
Existing Answers:
"Yes" and "No"
Possible Answer:
"Make Unique"
The result would be a component with the name that exists and the next available "#n"
Thank you again for your wonderful tips Dave and Pbacot and I'll be seeing you around.
João
Advertisement