Wall, Door and Window schedules

Al Hart

yes thanking you AL!

im sorry 4 hvg problems logging in to the forums..
in reply to your postings :

3] (c)

i) wld there be any possibilities that we can create dotted lines e.g dashes etc?other than using the existing 'tape Measure' tools button?

ii) how about individual lines as in individual thickness so that we can make precise construction drawings.these are the features to make this wonderful software practically complete!

thanking you again AL,keep up the good work.
Nic azharr

Do you want a dashed line tool, or dashed lines as part of the 2D lines for walls (or both)

We have a thick edge line (with varying thicknesses for different lines) in RpTools already, and we plant to use it for the 2D wall lines. These thick lines are not displayed thick in SketchUp - but only when you use RpTools to create a PDF output of the drawing.

We will plan to include both of these things in our wall product.

Al Hart

@unknownuser said:

I'm an architectural student in Australia, and software like Revit is what I use for construction drawing schedules. I would use Sketchup for concept designs... early stage in the design process. The advantage of Revit, is if the design changes after you've built the model, for say wall thickness or wall type, its a simple change of a parameter and everything in the model will adjust to fit automatically. With SketchUp thats not the case, there is no built in intelligence, I think its a waste of time trying to give Sketchup a whole lot of bells and whistles to make it work like a package such as Revit, it will never get there and professionals won't bother trying to collect all the bells and whistles to do things that way.

Its much better to invest the time in learning a package like Revit for a Building Information Modelling and use SketchUp for a quick design ideas.

I appreciate your comments. I wonder what other SketchUp users will think about using both SketchUp and Revit - or trying to get some tasks done with just SketchUp.

In the ARRIS Cad System, which we also developed, we gave a lot of thought to the "changing wall width" problem. In general, we concluded that it was an interesting feature, but not used very often. The main problem with doing it automatically is that some wall length are determined by outside dimension restrictions, and some wall length are determined by inside dimension restrictions - so it takes extra work to design a building where you can just say "Change my 6" walls to 9" walls" and have the program do the whole thing. However, "changing wall widths" is one of the features we would probably implement.

The value of Walls and wall reports in SketchUp are both money - SketchUp and a wall package will be less expensive and easier to learn than Revit - and convenience. It would be nice to design a building in SketchUp and get things like Walls and Schedules without having to export the model, or redraw the model in another CAD system.

Noohaldinho

First of all, Happy New Year to you all.
I'm a Bahraini Architect (from Bahrain if you ever heard about it .. Small Island in the Arabian Gulf) ... and I've been using Sketchup for almost 3-4 years since it was version 4 and I'm promoting for it among my fellows .... I've noticed some of the terrific and wonderful enhancement that came along the developing process of this wonderful, easy and fun to use software .... I did a lot of stuff in Sketchup but at the same time I've faced some difficulties sometimes to do what I used to do with Autocad, but none of them are really serious or unable to be solved ... regarding the questions I have answers and questions that are more like a wish-list ..

A1. Yes, those ideas are very nice and going to be useful, but haven't face something similar to them yet for Sketchup.
A2. I don't do construction drawings myself ... it's done by the draftsmen most of the times, but if I have to do them ... I use AutoCAD since it is the standard software that everybody is using here in Bahrain and in the region. Although, Sketchup users are increasing, but mainly Architectural students, but recently even some of the offices start to encourage their employees to use it but on their on and for special things as if they are not really fully confident that the SU package can give them all what they want and don't want to spend time (which means money to them of course) in investing in learning SU or letting their employees depend on it ... and here I agree with student from Australia who said that "professionals won't bother trying to collect all the bells and whistles" since in Sketchup for doing one thing you might find several ways of doing it (which might be an advantage) but also if some of those better ways to do things around are either un-known or a user has to search and dig to get them and have to learn him by himself most of the most of the times. This doesn't suit the offices and the professionals who wants a production line and a fast track process it suits people and users who like to explore like students and some of them maybe only to some extend and they also has to submit their work and some of it has to be detailed not just a concepts and ideas. And they'll just have to keep searching for the best way to do things right each and everytime while they can save the time by doing it in a process that is pretty know to everybody, which might even make it easier for them to get help ... and this is so applicable here in Bahrain as among some of my friends whom I introduced Sketchup to and convinced them to use, and they pretty like it and learn it quickly .... I have to lead them all the way to get the rubies and the plug-ins' and .. and .. just to inable them to work faster ... with a software that it was suppose to make things faster and easier ... but at the end they end up drawing their plans in CAD and the importing them to SU if they have enough time and courage and the problem they face later on is when playing with the model and elevations they have to go back to the CAD files to do the changes and I end-up either doing the work for them or guide them step by step .. just because I believe in SU.
One of the main problems that I've personally faced and they all gone through it and it is really related to Q3. is ... when cutting a wall for a section you end up with seeing actually the two surfaces of the wall (not a closed surface that appears for example only when cutting the wall) .. this is something that I really like to have in sketchup this is what make it necessarily to export the cut plane to Autocad to put the hatching ... which leads me my question ... which is concerned with the hatching process the question is that the hatching is a useful tool in Autocad that SU needs to implement on it's on way ... specially that when importing a CAD files un-less exploded (which pretty much make things worse) I can get the hatching plus it keeps that need for a cad software.

I have a question also, related to walls .... in my designs and when modeling sketchup .. I start recently really try to get precise and more detailed and an organized models .. and while doing so and using interior and exterior walls separately and having everything pretty much outlined in groups and components etc. I face a problem with the edges and the lines that appears in the joints between the slaps and the walls and between the walls them selves after assembling the whole model together as I work on each floor on a separate file either ( because I import them from CAD files and each plan is done in 2D alone of course .. or just to make the Sketchup files lighter and easier to work with and more accessible) ... So is there a way to avoid this maybe through what you are trying to work with related to working with walls ....

Thanks and sorry for the looooooon reply ...

pbacot

Oddly there is a similar discussion right now in the forum for my favorite 2d CAD application. People like the straightforward and accessible application, but wonder if it will grow into BIM. I am certain it will not happen in that application, and I doubt it would happen with SU. I don't even see SU as close to obtaining the tools I use for production CAD. But each application has it's own use. I think if aids are added in modeling in SU, which relate directly to how buildings are conceived, it will be a great thing. I don't think it will put SU on a path to BIM, nor need it be so; even though SU can already be used in some building analysis. Sometimes you have a continuous workflow. Sometimes you just use the right tool for a part of the project. I like to see SU become a bit "smarter" in modeling buildings, and be closer integrated with rendering, so I can flow towards that goal easier.

Atl-Arch

I am an architect using both Revit and SketchUP. In response to the Australian, everybody is not as fortunate as we are by having access to an expensive but powerful program as Revit. So as an introductory program into the wonderful world of 3D, wall tools for SU would be helpful to those just beginning. I had the opportunity last week to show Revit and SU to a new student majoring in interior design. I only had an hour so I spent 15-20 minutes in Revit and most of the time in SU, downloading furniture and whole rooms from 3D Warehouse. That really got her attention. The thing that she needed was wall thicknesses. We could build surfaces and offset them, then cut holes through both surfaces, but the tools Al is proposing would be a tremendous time saver new users like her.

I started using CAD 25 years ago and think that Revit is the best and most intuitive ever for architects. SU is the best for mass modeling. Last week I needed to build a stone cap parapet for a sloped wall in Revit. After trying for half hour, I gave up and exported the wall out of Revit to DWG, imported it into SU. Built the parapet using "follow me" in 1 minute. Saved it, then imported it back into Revit. All the exporting and importing took longer than the creation of the object!

How about a plugin for Revit that will let us do quick SU modeling inside Revit?

jbpomy

@unknownuser said:

I use a hybrid system. I generate plans in a CAD software. Import that into SU for model generation and development of the buildings fenestration and roof lines. I then export the elevations back to my Cad software for CD completion. Idea 1 would be very useful for me. As would 3. I really don't do much as far as take-offs so 2 wouldn't be helpful for my uses.

Al Hart

@unknownuser said:

These functions are currently only available on parametric BIM (Archicad/Revit) or pseudo-BIM (AutoDesk AutoCAD Archtictural, Nemetschek Vectorworks, Bentley Microstation Architecture) type software costing a lot of money. If you can get a simple functional (logical!) version into Sketchup, I for one, would buy it. I’m pretty sure there are a lot of people (including Google) trying to implement this given the new parametric capabilities of V7. But if you have access to any of the ‘big boys’ software, you can see how to do it wrong. Someone needs to do it right, and Sketchup with it’s tradition of simple and logical is a great place to start.

Keep these replies coming.

Frankly, when we discussed walls last week internally, we didn't think we could do much useful.

Now we think that a routine which made individual 3D walls from the 2D wall polygon in SketchUp, and assigned attributes to the walls, and created a quick report would have some value.

In this example, all 4 faces of the 2D wall layout would be converted to walls - each individual wall as a group, like the highlighted one. The we could assign attributes to each "wall", and report on lineal feet, square foot of wall, volume, etc. And the wall group would let us cut openings into both sides at once.

pbacot

An interesting response from another CAD forum regarding BIM and where SU may fit in. In the post the term "PC" means "PowerCADD" a 2D drafting application.

@unknownuser said:

Interesting discussion. As a structural engineer, I work with a number of different architects who range from doing hand drafting to designing in Sketchup then having a drafter use the Sketchup model to create 2D cadd working drawings. I also see this move toward BIM as similar to the move to Cadd from hand drawings. In both cases, I see early adopters getting hurt-In the move to Cadd there were several large architectural firms in my area literally destroyed by their early move to Cadd-after a huge expenditure on workstations and training staff, when it came time to create the prints, they ran into major problems requiring yet more expense-and then a year later the equipment, software and staff training was all obsolete, requiring yet more major expense to stay current, but they were still paying for the initial expense and in some cases went under. I see the same thing with BIM-there are a number of products which are expensive to obtain and train staff to use. As a design office, the benefit to use is questionable, and at the same time the contractors mostly want the same 2D drawings which they know how to use.
Last summer I decided to look more closely at using a BIM solution. My oldest son being a 3rd year Architectural student was able to obtain student versions of various programs for very low cost. I had a very complex large residential project, so I had him model (architectural only) the projects in Sketchup, Archicad, and Vectorworks. He had to learn to use each program. I felt this gave us a good feel for the learning curve and the abilities of the programs.
Sketchup had a fast learning curve, and while he was frustrated at some reactions of the program to what he was trying to do, he was able to create very good models of roofs which had compound curvatures which helped me understand what the architect was trying to do and create framing that worked. Sketchup will cut line sections in dwg which I was able to import into PC as a starting point for my drawings.
Archicad started off looking good, as it supposedly can create complete plan and section views from the 3D model. Very high learning curve, required some programing ability to do some things, and was not able to do some of the compound curvature that sketchup was able to do. We gave up on it after about 3 weeks.
Vectorworks we did not stay with long-in comparison to the Sketchup/PC mode it was, in our opinion, 'jack of all trades, export at none'.
Our conclusion was that it's going to be a long time before contractors want a BIM model in place of 2D drawings. On the projects where the architect did his design in Sketchup and then created 2D models, the contractors did use the models to supplement the drawings-but looked at this as a nice thing and in the end, still want paper 2D drawings.
As a design office, the effort to create a BIM model and 2D drawings at least increased the effort 50%, which is not going to be paid for by the client. So we decided in the end, as an engineer, there was no benefit to me to move to a BIM software at this time. As an architect, he could see that a software solution which had the ease of use of Sketchup for creating a model and which would then easily extract basic plan and sections, which would then go into a PC type 2D mode to finish up as working drawings, would be ideal. None of the software that we tried does this well enough. Perhaps Google will add on a good 2D back end to sketchup-I think then this would go somewhere. Until then, I think it's a trap which will eat up the early adopters.

cosmo99

Hi Al and others.

I think Atl-Arch has some interesting thoughts. I have taken a basic class in Revit and it definitely has some wonderful things going on for it. It is geared to those who are creating buildings on plots of land. I don't know if SU will ever do all what Revit can do. However, for my interests, mostly furniture and interior design, it seems like SU is just a lot easier to use. I feel like I struggle to create things in Revit, where as SU seems to "know" what I'm trying to do. I'm not sure if it's just my lack of practice in Revit or what? But for me, anything to make SU work better in a building design world would be great. On the other hand, if I were designing buildings for a living, I think I would use Revit and possibly import objects created in SU. However,I have tried this with mixed results. It would be great to hear from others who have worked with SU and Revit or SU and other programs.

cosmo99

@unknownuser said:

I started using CAD 25 years ago and think that Revit is the best and most intuitive ever for architects. SU is the best for mass modeling. Last week I needed to build a stone cap parapet for a sloped wall in Revit. After trying for half hour, I gave up and exported the wall out of Revit to DWG, imported it into SU. Built the parapet using "follow me" in 1 minute. Saved it, then imported it back into Revit. All the exporting and importing took longer than the creation of the object!

How about a plugin for Revit that will let us do quick SU modeling inside Revit?

Atl-Arch

I can relate to this. This is the type of thing that is hard to do in Revit and so easy in SU. There is a "follow me" type tool in Revit, but you have to remember so many steps to ever get to it. I think Atl-Arch is right, a plugin for SU in Revit would be interesting.

Al Hart

@unknownuser said:

Perhaps Google will add on a good 2D back end to sketchup-I think then this would go somewhere.

Only rarely do we get any hints of what Google is planning - and then we can't tell anyone what we know.

In general, we believe (and/or hope) that they are more interested in making tools for things - e.g. Dynamic Components - and leaving to ruby programmers like us the task of implementing specific applications for them.

Another item we have on the back burner - perhaps as part of the Wall project - is second display window for SketchUp which would add 2D CAD items to the SketchUp drawing - but only display them in the 2D CAD window. (With SketchUp we can add anything we want to the model, but we can't change the way SketchUp displays things)

cosmo99

@unknownuser said:

Al Hart wrote talking about Google:

In general, we believe (and/or hope) that they are more interested in making tools for things - e.g. Dynamic Components - and leaving to ruby programmers like us the task of implementing specific applications for them.

Al, I'm using your Irender nXt for Sketchup along with RpTools and RpEdits. I'm new at this stuff, but from the results I have gotten so far, I'm really impressed. And I hope they do leave you the job of implementing specific applications. The fact that you do so much to support those of us that use your products is worth a lot.

ashleyjoyce

Just following on from my comments before. SketchUp is great for doing presentation drawings in Architecture. Say for example you needed to do a perspective drawing of a commercial building around a city block. To Mass model a scene like that in sketchup is very easy and effective. You can add entourage, trees cars and create a wonderful scene extrememly quickly. You can then output the perspective line drawing as a jpeg and bring it into a software package like photoshop to add colour and more details. Architects may print out the line drawing add colour and details by hand and embellish even more details than scan the drawing into a package like photoshop for more processing. There is a great book called "Color Drawing" by Michael E. Doyle that demonstrates this process throughout his book to great effect. Now a BIM tool like Revit would be much more difficult in doing something like this quickly. SketchUp's free flowing nature is certainly an advantage here.

So SketchUp definitely has its own advantages over more expensive packages like Revit for jobs in the design process. I also agree with other earlier comments... "that SketchUp is a great tool for someone starting out and trying to learn the basics of architecture and design". Its a great educational tool!

However, over the years I've seen many Ruby developers attempt to add BIM like tools to SketchUp. Since discovering Revit, I now see its almost a pointless exercise because you don't want SketchUp to act in this way. Its much better to keep SketchUp the way it is, simple and effective for what it was primarily design for mass modelling and sketching.

For construction schedules, Revit is ideally suited. If an architect was modelling a commerical building they you just wouldn't attempt all the construction schedules using a package like SketchUp. It would be either Autocad or Revit.

The great thing about Revit is it is specifically designed to make this task even easier than Autocad if you know what your doing (the software can be difficult to learn). Because of the parametric nature Revit is much more powerful than Autocad for ongoing changes in the construction details. It also has very powerful rendering capabilities built in.

In saying all this, I don't work as a professional Architect. I'm still learning the profession. So therefore others might have a much better understanding than me in the professional arena.

ashleyjoyce

I found this good explanation on the difference between CAD, Revit & SketchUp in the book "Introducing Revit Architecture 2009".....

@unknownuser said:

In 2D drafting CAD, you draw two lines (objects) to represent a wall.

In Revit, the task of creating a wall is presented in the form of an interactive tool name "Create Wall". This wall has properties like width, height, bearing or nonbearing, demolished or new, interior or exterior, fire rating, and materials (such as boards or brick). The wall interacts with other walls to automatically join geometries and clean up connections, showing how the walls will be built. Simiarly, if you add a door, its more than four lines and an arc, it's a door in plan and elevation. Adding it to the wall automatically creates an opening in the wall in all views where the door is visible. The tools available for walls are specific to walls, allowing you to attach walls to roof and floors, punch openings, and change layered construction of the wall. Again, all of these interactions are not just properties; they are focused on specific tasks associated with architectural walls.

BIM is more than a modeler. Other software packages, like SketchUp, Rhinoceros, and 3ds Max, are excellent modelling applications. However, these modelling applications don't have the ability to document your design for construction or leveraged downstream. This is not to say these tools don't play a part in a BIM workflow. Many architects use these tools to generate concept models, which can then be brought into a BIM application and progress through design, analysis and documentation.

Al Hart

@unknownuser said:

I use Sketchup routinely for Construction Documents. I work for a designer and we do a layout in AutoCAD and then I use Sketchup to flush it out and show the clients what it will look like before it's built. The things that you are talking about adding would help me in my work very much!! The way I work is I import the plan from AutoCAD and trace it out in Sketchup. I then use the "push" command to "raise" the walls to whatever height they need to be. Where this leaves me now is manually cutting out all window and door openings, and this is the most time consuming part of the build.

Another idea for a new "tool" would be something where I can take my standard "group" or "component" of a door or window and place it in a wall (which would be nice if the wall was one entity), and then if there was a way to "cut" the wall around the component at the click of a button. In other words, if I lay my door group into the wall where it goes and click this button the wall where the door is is cut out. Then if I hide the door there would be an opening there between rooms.

The other things that you mentioned in this email would all be great additions! Thanks for all you do.

peweuk

@unknownuser said:

Another idea for a new "tool" would be something where I can take my standard "group" or "component" of a door or window and place it in a wall (which would be nice if the wall was one entity), and then if there was a way to "cut" the wall around the component at the click of a button.

I think that this is what the 'rectangle_hole.rb' at the Ruby Library Depot already does?

Al Hart

@unknownuser said:

it's great that you will enhance working with walls! Personally I mostly use
SketchUp for designing custom furniture into rooms, to find out how much
space they will take, how the room will look like after putting in the
furniture.

My biggest concern is that I didn't find a way to make walls transparent
from one side. Although I am not a computer graphics specialist, it seems to
me that in OpenGL surfaces are visible only from one side, and are
transparent from the other side by default. Is that so?

Imagine, that you have to design something in a rather small room. You put
up the walls (of just that room, not the entire flat), and put in the
object. If you also want to put in some lighting on the ceiling, you have to
close now the whole room, making a box. Navigating around in that box only
with the scroll wheel and the shift/ctrl buttons is a major annoyance. It
would be great if it was possible to create walls (and the ceiling!) with a
property, that they are transparent from one side. So it would not be
necessary to get into the room through a door, and try to look around, but
we could also look at the room from further away, looking through the wall
which would be behind us if we would be looking from within the room, and
seeing the other walls and the edges of the disappeared walls (and the
furniture of course) from further away.

Do you think this would make sense?

We did find a way to make transparent walls.

The make room command in RpTools makes rooms with transparent walls from the outside. Basically, if you place a transparent material on one side of a face, and a solid material on the other side, it will be transparent from one side, and opaque from the other. we haven't tried it with "thick" walls yet.

However, this is only going to work for you with a single room, since with two adjacent rooms, you would still have an opaque wall on the inside of the closest room.

I have attached a .SKP with a room with transparent walls.

SKP model with a transparent one-sided walls for a room

Another trick we have used in the past is to create short "stub walls" for temporary display, and place the stub walls in one layer, and the real walls in another layer, then you can turn on the short stub walls while placing furniture and use the real walls for interior renderings, etc.

peweuk

@unknownuser said:

Another trick we have used in the past is to create short "stub walls" for temporary display, and place the stub walls in one layer, and the real walls in another layer, then you can turn on the short stub walls while placing furniture and use the real walls for interior renderings, etc.

What about a wall tool that creates 2 walls at the same time based on the input of the user.
The first is one on a layer called 'transparent walls' which is 'on' by default - this is the single thin wall like in RPtools which is transparent and is in the same position as the inside face of the 'Real Wall'.
The second is the real wall (or two walls for cavity type construction) set to the users required dimensions and placed on a layer 'Walls' which is turned off by default.

At any time, the state of the 2 layers could be changed at the same time using the layers dialogue, or two 'scenes' could be created for quick viewing, each with the opposite layers turned on/off. When the job is finished if it is not needed anymore the 'transparent' layer and its contents could be deleted.

Just a thought

Al Hart

@peweuk said:

What about a wall tool that creates 2 walls at the same time based on the input of the user.
The first is one on a layer called 'transparent walls' which is 'on' by default - this is the single thin wall like in RPtools which is transparent and is in the same position as the inside face of the 'Real Wall'.
The second is the real wall (or two walls for cavity type construction) set to the users required dimensions and placed on a layer 'Walls' which is turned off by default.

At any time, the state of the 2 layers could be changed at the same time using the layers dialogue, or two 'scenes' could be created for quick viewing, each with the opposite layers turned on/off. When the job is finished if it is not needed anymore the 'transparent' layer and its contents could be deleted.

Just a thought

The "new walls" will probably put each wall in a group, so we can place two faces in one layer and one face in the other, as you suggest, and store bot in the same wall "group".

The phrase "inside face" is one of our problems - because we aren't sure what is the inside of an interior wall. we may have to place the single face in the center, which will sometimes be confusing.

The single face wall would be nice for placing openings though - because it would be easy to align the opening to the center of the wall, and cut the hole through all three faces.

peweuk

@unknownuser said:

The phrase "inside face" is one of our problems - because we aren't sure what is the inside of an interior wall. we may have to place the single face in the center, which will sometimes be confusing.

I take your point AL. The problem with putting it in the center is that it would not make the placing of items on the real 'wall' very easy.

What about creating two single transparent faces - one on each side of the 'wall' - or is this not do-able?