Sketchup in big architecture offices (running Revit)..

[kwistenbiebel]

I agree that my statement on Sketchup getting obsolete is a little over stated.
I was referring to a very particular situation where Revit models require to be ported to Sketchup for visualisation. I added 'Revit' to the thread title, not to generalise.

In my particular situation, yes , I do think the use of Sketchup will be downscaled in the near future in our office because of that.

[randolph]

Having worked in an office on some very large projects, and being, for most of that time one of only a few Sketchup advocates, I eventually found the following workflow to be pretty good. I use sketch up to start the design process in the computer and work back and forth between ACAD plans and sketch up models to understand the building as a whole. At some point the decision is made to move to Revit, which excels at documentation, to produce hardline drawings. In this phase, geometry built in Revit should start to contain materials. As I work through the design, certain things are easier to build in Revit (walls, doors, floors, etc. basically all the base building stuff) and certain things need more design time (reception desks, display cases, custom furniture, etc.) These are things that I want to explore in Sketchup as I design them. I build them with material-by-layer, and then when I have them the way I want them, I can then import them into the Revit model (since Revit imports .skp file natively) and assign Revit materials to the various Sketchup layers. I will then Render from Revit, which is slow, but pretty decent since it contains the mental ray rendering engine. I can't edit the model directly in Revit easily, but it cuts nicely in section and plan and really takes a fraction of the time it would to build things like that in Revit.

Thus I am able to both design with Sketchup, and document with Revit - pretty much the best of both worlds.

[Mike Lucey]

Well, as I said, its ''Horses for courses'

It will be interesting to see what happens with SU in the future.

[pbacot]

@randolph said:

I can't edit the model directly in Revit easily, but it cuts nicely in section and plan and really takes a fraction of the time it would to build things like that in Revit.

?

[gtalarico]

@kwistenbiebel said:

Using Sketchup (+ photoreal rendering) to visualize the project while the changes are done in Revit does not work.

I have say to do this quite often, and although it is not an easy process, I have found an effective workflow:

1> Model site and everything that will not change in SU (call this site.skp)
2> Export Revit model to a DWG (choosing "polymesh" instead of ACIS solids significantly reduced polycount... maybe is the other way around... )
3> Create a new SU file and import this DWG (let's call is bldg.skp) - I always use Thomthom's CleanUp tools to merge faces and clean up edges! It's a true miracle! (Tks TT!)
4> Place bldg.skp as a component inside site.skp.
5> When the revit model is updated, just open building.skp, delete all re import the new DWG.
6> Open site.skp and reload the bldg.skp component.

To help with the rendering materials, I use Convert layers to materials plugin (this paints the geometry based on DWG's layers (walls, glazing, mullions, etc)
and then associate this material names with my Maxwell's rendering materials. (when the model is re imported, the links remain and it is ready to re-render).
(assuming that different materials are not on the same layers, which is usually not the case).

I guess need to notice this only works well when people doing the revit modeling keep the modeling relatively clean, and extremely under or over detailed. - Thankfully, that is my case!

[caronte01]

For large projects, sketchup may be used only on the initial stage, just to get the general idea, and later on move it to revit, acad, archicad, etc. Also, sketchup is way better at creating non standard geometry. Creating these kind of shapes in BIM is awkward at best.

But, on small to medium sized projects, sketchup+layout can work very well. I'm developing 1 pilot project using these two tools exclusively, and even though layout could use some improvements, I believe it will be the way to go (for me at least), for these kind of projects. Check the layout subforum on sketchucation for some cool samples.

Also, you need to consider that sketchup is about $500 us, vs, revit, at about $7000, plus subscription costs, last time I checked. At this point, small practices such as mine, may only have 1 option!

[paolo]

Interesting thread! even more for people like me who will like to work in the field of Architecture.
I understand that most big Architecture offices are using Revit, since according to Randolph ''excels at documentation'' and '' Revit and 3d Max are now sold as an Autodesk package deal with 'smart' FBX linking between the two pieces of software'' any other reasons?
Since last reply was in june 2012, I was wondering if you guys now think SU could do what Revit does using plugins like PlusSpec?? are you guys still using SU in your offices? if yes, more or less than Revit?
I don't mind to use 3dmax again but I don't really want to do Revit. Excluding SU, Vray, AutoCad and/ 3dmax what software do you guys think I should start learning?
Regards

[srx]

1 The only software that could replace SketchUp for its intuitive user interface in the field of making working architectural models, or any other SPACE CREATION is the new version of SketchUp
It is the most transparent software I ever used. I am grateful to genius who initially made this work of art and I hope he is getting the percent of every SU copy sold.

2 Revit and alike are big and rigid monsters used for DOCUMENTING already created building. It has nothing to do with creating IMO.

3 Presenting already created and documented building is the third kind of task... SU could be used for this kind of work only if model is not too havy.

What will be used depends on what is the main priority. If it is the freedom of creation than Su is the best choice. Its abilities to make documentation and presentations are bonus. I use SU for making models, and AutoCadLT for documenting. They are good together. The main problem is synchronization, when model, or drawings are changed.I make manual bridge using blocks-components, and section plugins. Some kind of closer, more automated link between the two would be welcomed...

[thomthom]

@paolo said:

PS it worries me that we if loose guys like tomtom,fredo,Tig etc which actually made SU competitive we could end up doing things 'the hard way' using those 'monsters'

You ain't loosing me any time soon - seeing that I work for SketchUp these days.

Btw - since this thread last as active, an important feature for the industry you talk about is schema support in SketchUp - which ships with IFC out of the box. Thought you can use other schemas as you like. Then there is also the IFC import and export feature that now allows for better interoperability within BIM related applications.

[paolo]

All right!
There still a lot I got to learn from SU but I noticed people are struggling to link SU to popular BIM like Revit and perhaps plugins like PlusSpec could fill the gap.

[srx]

@paolo said:

2. What's IMO?
   3.How large or heavy can be done in sketchup?
   I thought Autocad was mostly used for technical drawings but with Revit you document (detailed construction drawings, materials specifications, quantity, etc) while modelling a designed building for regulators and contractors. which I guess is a big part of a large Architecture office.
   How about PlusSpec?
   PS it worries me that if we loose guys like thomthom,fredo,Tig etc who actually made SU competitive we could end up doing things 'the hard way' using those 'monsters'

2. IMO = in my opinion
3. Could be very large if you do not add details which could be documented separately.
   I agree about ACAD. I use it for drawing 2D geometry, and later documenting the old way in a kind of my own BIM manual system. Big offices have to use international standards which BIM monsters provide.
   I haven't try PlusSpec.

[paolo]

1. Agree. Although SU is the most user friendly could be quite intricate by using many plugins.
2. What's IMO?
   3.How large or heavy can be done in sketchup?
   I thought Autocad was mostly used for technical drawings but with Revit you document (detailed construction drawings, materials specifications, quantity, etc) while modelling a designed building for regulators and contractors. which I guess is a big part of a large Architecture office.
   How about PlusSpec?
   PS it worries me that if we loose guys like tomtom,fredo,Tig etc who actually made SU competitive we could end up doing things 'the hard way' using those 'monsters'

[paolo]

Thx SI'X and sorry thomthom for misspelling your user name ... so how is SU looking in big Architecture office in 2015?

[maxhouserocks]

This is a very interesting topic and relevant to a very large task we are undertaking in our office:

Trying to determine the best workflow for each project and decide what tools, or combinations of tools will be best. I know it has a lot to do with project and personnel, but we are looking to develop some criteria for making a decision at the start of projects. I know that this topic has been coming up in many many firms around the world especially with Revits adoption rate climbing every day.

OBJECTIVES

1. Understand the tools available and their relationship with each other and their role within our Design Process
2. Try to determine the best workflow for each project and decide what tools, or combinations of tools will be best.
   Our tools:
   a. SketchUp
   b. AutoCad
   c. Revit
   d. Lumion

Some users are suggesting we remove sketchup from the workflow and only use Revit for Design Exploration, Presentation to clients, etc, and Documentation.
I am a serious Sketchup user who does not really think that is feasible considering the amount of time and geometry needed inside of Revit compared to the ease of use in Sketchup and the amount of detail, texture control, available component resources, etc. using Sketchup To Lumion. HOWEVER, i am just now in the process learning Revit, so that is based on observations only.

I believe there may be some cases where "basic" visualization can be produced with Revit only, maybe using Revits render engine or Lumion, which would avoid a sketchup model, but for many projects with a lot of design exploration i feel like a parallel workflow would be best, Revit & Sketchup, each doing their different tasks, but the sketchup model being updated as needed by importing Revit DWG exports of plans and RCP's. The Revit model is moving towards CD documentation and informing the Sketchup Design Exploration process, and the Sketchup file is being changed often, with different materials, furniture, etc. and rendered in Lumion for design development discussions and client coordination/buy in.

Any and All comments/discussions welcome. This has become a hot button topic as people take sides based on their preference. i would like to explore this in the most objective way possible and consider all possibilities.

I would love to see some input from any type of users about how they (or their office) decides what to use and when.

1. Revit Only – Can include Lumion
2. Sketchup first then Revit. Sketchup may fall off during Revit production– Can include Lumion
3. Revit & Sketchup - Parallel Path – Can include Lumion
4. Revit or Autocad first then Sketchup - allowing cad documents to inform sketchup

I am still trying to parse all of this info, so please be kind if something seems ridiculous or obvious

Thanks,
Bob

[kmthor]

I also think it is an interesting topic I am a structural technician and I have been using Sketchup for over ten years but it is not my primary Cad package this is due I think two reasons in the structural field one is the packages that are available like Revit, Advance steel, autocad and Solidworks these engines are design for engineering based drafting and it is hard for Sketchup to compete. Secondly I think it is down to cost, in the engineering Field there is a definite desire for companies to do the bear minimum when I comes to documentation to the point at some places draftsman are regarded as a necessary evil. Although I believe this is defiantly a false economy when you take into account the RFIs from site there is still the perception of increased profit.

It is down to the presentation of the documents and this is were sketchup comes into its own especially details were you can easily build up a library details. If you look at the standard of Nick Sonders documents and Dave Zachary on the engineering side. I also do a lot of presentations on buildability issues of a project where sketchup Is a great at live presentations.
I think other things you have to take into account are the job size, BIM and at what level, learning curve of staff, saying that I have use sketchup on some massive projects were it handle very large models as good if not better than some of the aforementioned.

I should also mention on some of the larger projects I have worked on there is a perception that sketchup is only a free toy 3D package (until I put them straight)