Skp at +ve tipping point with extensions/plugins

facer

SKETCHUP IS AT A TIPPING POINT TO
IMPROVED APPLICATION TO ARCHITECTURAL AND BUILDING DOCUMENTATION

I think Sketchup is now at the "tipping point" where it can become
an integrated tool for architects and building designers.

Profile Builder 2, Double-Cut, LSS Arch (Lite) and other well-designed plugins now offer an integrated extension of Sketchup that allows Sketchup's use for a more fluid design and documentation of architectural projects. Better IFC integration with ArchiCAD and Revit will further accelerate a more economical and professional use of Sketchup in the total workflow of design and documentation of projects.

I think Trimble have a similar "vision" and I am hopeful they will introduce
improved IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) in each new Sketchup version.

If the above is accomplished I suspect that more small architectural firms
will adopt Sketchup using Profile Builder 2, Double-Cut, LSS Arch (Lite) and other quality extensions/plugins.

The above advancements would allow integration with larger firms using Revit and ArchiCAD. This would give the "young and smaller" architectural and building design firms the confidence to invest their early efforts in Sketchup using quality extensions/plugins.

The great advantage of Sketchup is the ability to use third party extensions and plugins.
The great problem with Sketchup is the number, quality and application of third party extensions and plugins.

Over the years a solid core of plugin authors has risen to a trusted level of producing quality plugins. This increased improvement in the application of improved extension/plugins is taking Sketchup to a more professional level.

The improvements to Sketchup's use and management of extensions/plugins
is enhanced by:

Qualification and certification of extensions/plugins
Improved procedures for application, updating and management of the extensions/plugins
Dovetailing of third party extensions/plugins into a hierarchical methodology of producing improved tools for the design and documentation documents that architects and building designers produce.

pbacot

Sounds hopeful, though I think smaller firms are using SU this way without the tools mentioned. (don't use any of them myself, used to use PB1). Why would a smaller firms integrate with larger firms?

facer

Small architectural and building design firms offer the potential to subcontract
specialised skills at a lower cost to medium and large firms.

Medium to large firms is subject to staff level fluctuations due to the changing staff requirements
dependent upon the stage and number of jobs in the office. The result of this is that specialised skill levels can only be justified economically if there is continuing workflow.
Medium to large architectural firms are notorious for large fluctuations in staff levels due
to changes in commissions, delays and other circumstances.

Sketchup offers a cost-effective way to quickly produce design and design development documents.
The level of Sketchup expertise to fully utilise savings is not readily available in medium-large firms. Medium and large firms tend to discourage a high use of Sketchup due to the inability to reuse the full 3D model in their high-end CAD software as ArchiCAD and Revit.

Medium to large firms main software as ArchiCAD or Revit use operators whose salary is very expensive. They are best used for Design Development and Documentation when templates and fixed procedures can be utilised.

The previous disadvantage in investing too heavily in Sketchup CAD work was the inability to fully
utilise the 3D CAD work produced by Sketchup. My previous experience in a 2016 Revit import
was IFC components imported into Revit were not fully interactive.

As IFC export improves in Sketchup to the level where components are interactive in ArchiCAD or Revit
the attractiveness of using Sketchup 3D CAD becomes viable for large firms. At this point, it would be cost effective and offer a smooth workflow to use a subcontracted specialised in the use of Sketchup to complement the team.

The Sketchup subcontractor would work directly with the design team as would be the case if employed by the larger firm. The 3D CAD work done would then be able to be more fully integrated into the ArchiCAD or Revit workflow.

The main reason for this option is economic and time savings with the bonus of selecting a subcontractor specialised in the project type and environment being considered.

srx

I don't think this is possible with Sketchup. IMO full parametric model remembers the process of modeling, it is stored in it. The freedom of SU, on the contrary is in modeling it any way you want. I think that plugins that imitates Revit in SU are waste of time. It is not in its nature. Attaching information, attributes to SU made model is a way to go. Not exporters from SU, but importers in bigger packages could solve the connection by recreating elements on low level.

facer

Does not full IFC classification solve the problem?

***Quote from Wiki
The Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) data model is intended to describe building and construction industry data.

It is a platform neutral, open file format specification that is not controlled by a single vendor or group of vendors. It is an object-based file format with a data model developed by buildingSMART (formerly the International Alliance for Interoperability, IAI) to facilitate interoperability in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry, and is a commonly used collaboration format in Building information modeling (BIM) based projects. The IFC model specification is open and available.[1] It is registered by ISO and is an official International Standard ISO 16739:2013.

Because of its focus on ease of interoperability between software platforms, the Danish government has made the use of IFC format(s) compulsory for publicly aided building projects.[2] Also, the Finnish state-owned facility management company Senate Properties demands use of IFC compatible software and BIM in all their projects.[3] Also the Norwegian Government, Health and Defense client organisations require use of IFC BIM in all projects as well as many municipalities, private clients, contractors and designers have integrated IFC BIM in their business.***

juju

IFC should solve the problem, but SU2017 has 2x3 as standard and 4 is current. Also SketchUp (Trimble) is one of the development partners if I read the buildingSMART website correctly.

medeek

As much as enjoy programming within SketchUp and creating plugins I still don't use it that much for regular work, 2D drawings. AutoCAD has been my main workhorse for years and I imagine will continue to be just that. However, when it comes to conceptual work that is where SketchUp shines for me. I can throw something together in SketchUp very easily as opposed to other 3D software that I am familiar with (ie. SolidWorks). Ten years ago I was actually using AutoCAD for some 3D work but that was quickly replaced with SolidWorks once it gained more traction.

Lately, I rarely use SolidWorks at all for 3D modelling it is now AutoCAD (2D) and SketchUp (3D). The programmability of SketchUp is its big draw for me. If I can ever create the Structural Plugin I've been contemplating for years then it will become much more than a drawing program for me, it will facilitate all of my engineering work. The fact that you've got Ruby built into SketchUp is huge, the possibilities are limitless.

kirill2008

According to my observations there is still much work to be done to claim that "interoperability" between different BIM software is something real (not just a good intention). For now it seems like even big players in the field haven't yet figured out how to provide a way to interact (fully and safely) with objects transferred using IFC format between BIM software of each other.
However progress in this direction never stops, for example I've seen recently a new interesting innovation, which allows to insert a reference to an IFC file into a project, so it is possible to collaborate with engineers, detect clashes etc:

https://youtu.be/vUNxCW3weH4

Changes in a referenced IFC file can be observed in a project after refreshing (similar to a model inserted into LayOut) as far as I understood.

BTW big players may deliberately restrict interoperability between products of each other to protect their market position maybe (just an assumption though). Maybe it is the reason why progress in this direction is not that fast as we all would like.
I'm not sure how much time it may take to make possible to start working with some IFC file using one software package, then safely continue working with that same file using another software, then save to cloud and proceed editing using third software right in a browser window

On the other hand I have to admit that different software packages perceive even simple common objects like walls, slabs, openings sometime very differently (provide different ways to create/interact/edit) and such difference obviously affects how information about even basic elements is stored. Standardized data storing format even if it is excessive like IFC still may impose restrictions on certain functionality provided by certain software. So sometimes it feels like even smooth and lossless transfer between different BIM software products is something unachievable by definition not to mention real interoperability.