Plus it migrates the group to layer 0

Thanks Mistro that does shed a bit more light. I guess I need to learn a bit more about the structure of the raw container.

Lonnie, in architecture it makes more sense to refer to common details. A building may be represented at 1:100 for general plans but at the detailing end you could require a 1:1 drawing to accurately convey the required information. That level of detail is hard to justify in a 3D model even without factoring in the polygon count.

In engineering (solidworks?) I would expect the scale range to be more limited and therefore the prospect of a complete model can be justified. I have a small building project where the majority of the information is modelled to display at 1:20 but there are still aspects where independent 1:1 details are needed and are simpler to produce.

It doesn't look that difficult but you do need some basic dimensions!

The crystals look to be all the same size hemispheres so make them a component.
From a decent copy of the picture count the number of crystals in a ring. and use that in your array.
The alternate rows are staggered 50% of the array angle e.g. if there are 36 crystals then the angle between them will be 10 degrees, the next row should be rotated 5 degrees from the one below.
Before creating the array set the vertical angle of the crystal to suit the profile of the fitting.

This is all simple SU, no plugins required.

Edit: On closer inspection they might just be spheres in which case you can ignore the vertical angle bit.
Another tip would be you can create it so the top half is a (component) mirror of the botton but rotated that half angle.

If you click on the right pointing arrow next to the magnifying glass in the image above there is a "purge" option that will delete all unused components from the model. Any that remain are included in the model somewhere.

Hi Mistro, nice renders but I'm more interested in your structure. I see how you arrive at the volume from your sketch above but the floor plan suggests you the remove most of the internal structure as the container walls and the finished walls are in a different location. Does that not seriously compromise the container and offset the benefit of using the established volume? I'm not criticising, the concept has been about for a while and I'm interested to learn the implications of their deployment and how they are being adapted.

I find the reaction of the general public to be the most interesting when raising survival issues; they are typically ignorant of the lack of robustness in the utility industry. There is a blind presumption that water, electric & gas are free flowing until the supply is disrupted, then they just expect it to be fixed in hours. If the utilities ever fail completely I think you will see the "Zombies" appear very quickly as society collapses and people start to forage for food & warmth...

I work with option 2. At each stage you only model what is necessary to convey the requirements. I prefer to create details that are common to multiple points on the building without creating the same level of detail at each junction in the model. It is also easier to fix if there is a fundamental change in the fabric e.g. thicker insulation.

@trevorml said:

Is there any news/rumours/guesstimation/hopes/fears that I have missed… been out of the loop as far as SU is concerned for some time now

You have read the Trimble thread haven't you?

@d12dozr said:

:thumb:

Excellent tip, Jean! Sketchup's inferencing is definitely underestimated.

+1 Thanks Jean. SU looks so simple yet the tricks just keep coming. I didn't know you could get a parallel inference.

Just watched the demo video, it's a marker in their deployment of SU but not a game changer. I think we have a long way to go before we see SU BIM released.

As above, build up your layers so the layers list has the items you want at the "front" at the top and items at the "back" at the bottom e.g.
3. Notes
2. SU Imported Scenes

1. Paper

Not sure about the two way street bit unless I am mis-interpretting the workflow. I have always worked on a premeasured site survey and designed the building to fit. If the survey is accurate the building should fit and I shouldn't need a secondary varification, the builder can just "get on with it!".

I like the AR idea but my client's don't have pockets that deep.

I've just mocked up a half sphere and scaled it to be similar to your object with the same number of faces and it looks totally smooth. Couple of things to check...

1 Go to window>Soften Edges and make sure "smooth normals" is checked and the "Angle between normals" is at a suitable figure of typically between 20 - 30 degrees.

2. Look at the object in "Monochrome" mode and check all your faces are the correct orientation. If not they could be affecting the rendering.

The only other aspect would be your construction method. Could something have distorted the geometery?

I've tried to get into your kind of work because architecture is flatlining in the UK, but I'm not the right age and don't have the right qualifications. Glad someone is busy to clear the global deficit.

Another way to approach this would be to create an "OFF" scene that records just the layer settings. Turn off all layers in the layer window and update the "OFF" scene. As long as you don't have objects on layer "0", it is now quite quick to select the "Off" scene and then turn on the layer you want. To select everything then just do Ctrl-A. There are a few discussions elsewhere about the merits of moving groups & components from layer "0".

Hint: I also have an "On" scene to do the reverse if something goes mising.

Both very good images. The choice would depend who is viewing the image. In my experience the planners / council / local authority would prefer 1. and the client 2.

Rich, here' a couple of screen grabs resulting from importing a LO PDF export. All fonts are Arial based..

Yes the text is back to front, it's not got corrupted on uploading to the forum! If I use PDF Factory I can open the files without a problem.

What I would like to see in LO to help with the OP is a means to "move to a specific layer" rather than just the "current layer" and ideally a means of selecting/filtering specific entitites e.g. text or dimensions on the current or all layers so they can be moved to the right layer.