Offline
@cmeed said:
I highlighted all and then moved
I'll look into the bounding box, probably will create the su doc differently now i know this happens
thank you all, very much appreciated
cheers
c
if you highlighted all of them and moved... you definitely broke the connection to the model.
it will happen if you do this with a bounding box too.
only way i know of to move / adjust them and keep them relating to specific geometry in the model is to do them one at a time...
went down this path last year. needed to upgrade the old dell laptop, as my design software was suffering on it. been stuck over in pc land for the last x years since getting into design and architecture and i'm married to acad and a 3rd party overlay. was planning on weening myself from it with sketchup for most work, but had the dual boot option for when clients needed acad / 3rd party work.
priced it all up, and landed a dell precision m6400 for about half of what a comparable powerbook would have set me back. and i got the larger size and nicer screen. i did have a copy of xp to load for the dual boot on the mac so i could run acad and other software but i don't have to mess with it now.
i do miss some of the recent innovation on the mac hardware / software side. and i'm envious of shiny aluminum boxes that weigh less than the power brick for my dell... (i hate lugging this thing around for presentations... but i'm on the road enough that i do design work when i'm out of town)
but, for the $$ i couldn't beat it, especially being self employed.
now i'm looking at upgrading off of vista, and running my presentations from my android phone.
ideally i'll be picking up one of those google chrome notebooks (when they become available) or wait for HTC to come out with an android tablet so i can do road work on a smaller device. (no modeling, just estimates, presentations, etc.)
and i'll need a workstation. the current machine is great for portability and modeling... but i'll need something to render with and do more complex work...
@dale said:
This one will start a conversation though. (Royal Ontario Museum addition designed by Daniel Libeskind.)
"Let's see what sticks when we throw some ideas at the board."
Intersect with model, or use the solid tools in Pro 8.
Here's a video on using intersect: (no audio)
Use a dummy block where your platform is.
Edit the 'pole' component.
Select all the faces and lines.
Right click > Intersect with model.
Close component.
Delete dummy block.
Edit component - delete unwanted faces.
Using the solid tools, or the BoolTools plugin is faster.
edson, i like the work.
regarding this:
@tfdesign said:
I'm a big fan of Richard Rogers' social housing designs. These are a nice example;
is there a social context to which those shapes / colors / proportions / windows / facades fit into?
will those materials age gracefully? are they easy to maintain? will that curtain wall age gracefully and keep water out? when a panel fails - will common, easy to find materials be available to make repairs?
is it a norm to not have 'defensible space' in the fronts of houses like this?
are the interiors as sterile as the exteriors? will inhabitants be living in some sort of IKEA box?
are people comfortable in the front - or do they hang out in the back yard (if there is one behind that fence)?
will there be more trees?
is this on a street with auto traffic, or pedestrian traffic?
is the plaza or street sterile? (looking pretty sterile in its current form).
can owners personalize the units?
why not integrate lighting into the units? or do the social aspects of this area include living with parking lot style lights above one's head?
just some questions. those aren't very warm or inviting. i can see a graffiti'd version of these with broken windows, broken down cars, and broken windows not far into the future.
if the owner's don't have a stake, or a say, in how their environment looks / feels / is used / etc... its likely that they will have little respect for their surroundings. this was part of the problem of the housing issues from the 60s on in the states. herd people like cattle into housing that 'the experts' designed and programmed.
i'm much more interested in the approach of the rural studio, started by sam mockbee in georgia. i wish i had known about the program before i jumped into a hi-tech, theory based grad program staffed by marquee named architects in a big city...
@dave r said:
If I remember correctly, the tenons get added as separate components? That doesn't work so well for my use but it looks like it makes drawing up timber framed structures easy. I'd like to build a timber-framed house and build my shop as a timber framed building.
The 'timber' is a container component, and any joinery gets added inside of that, as a separate component. This lets you build libraries of common parts / joints / etc. - and is also how the rubies determine how / what to intersect / remove from the mating timber when you create a part drawing.
@dave r said:
bmike, you make a could point. Only draw what you need to draw for your purposes. Any more and you're wasting time.
I have tried Daiku's plugins. They work pretty well for that kind of drawing.
Thanks, they are a great contribution to timber framing / woodworking and SketchUp, and daiku is a great guy!
When I get through basic design of the house / building, and I move onto doing the actual detail 'timber work' - my flow goes like this:
Rough shell extracted from my presentation model (which often included furniture, windows, doors, etc.)
Timber frame structure isolated and modeled with components, timber list extracted for estimating purposes
Timber frame broken into 2d sections and bent views in LayOut
Client approval of scope / frame / design intent
Joinery goes on - this is modeled as male components only, added into my 'timber' components
Engineering checked, timber list extracted (from the model using the rubies) for ordering materials
Joinery finalized and cleaned up, then piece by piece extraction as needed to develop part drawings
Part drawings assembled and detailed with dimensions as required - I used to do this in individual SKP files, I'll now do this in LayOut as I've been working with it more and more.
And yes, model only what you need, and try not to model anything that requires multiple steps to adjust / correct / remember if the client opts for size changes or design changes. This is why I only work on joinery after getting 'design' approval, and I only model joinery as needed. Using the rubies typically allows you to move pieces up / down / left / right / adjust size and only correct the joinery on 1/2 of the equation - which minimizes the chance that you'll end up with errors should you forget to transfer a design change to the other part of the joinery...
Also - I've been playing with daiku's rubies and dynamic components to automate the process further... Here's a video of a work in progress... skip ahead to 3:50 for the part relevant to joinery.
for timber frame work (big furniture) - i don't model the negative half of the joint. only the tenons, etc. i use daiku's timber frame rubies to automate part drawings... works for furniture scaled objects too.
saves time and hassle - you never need to move both sides of the joint - just the male components - so if things shift or change sizes - updating a design is much easier.
sorgesu, i'm tryng to PM you with some links, but I'm having some forum issues. i'll try again later...
i have a few JPG examples in the construction document thread - but i can get you a few full size PDF pages you can show...
@mitcorb said:
Unless there is something I missed in using Fredobend, I don't think you can bend accurately to a precise destination. Here is where Chris' Shape Bender might be the tool of choice.
I've bent to pretty accurate locations. I set up a reference line, and always picked the same points when selecting the geometry (I had a large model and had to break it up otherwise my machine would crash). After selecting my components I would enter the same numbers into the dialog, and repeated this 6-10 times depending on the model. If I remember I had to enter 2* the angle that I wanted to bend to... to figure out the numbers I needed I did some pre-test bending of box components using my reference line, with a locked reference curve as a guide.
Wow. Quite the ordeal. I've upgraded 3 times now with no issues. O.ly time I had serious lag was waiting for a path / response to a question on transferring my license to a Mac from my PC. That took quite awhile. Bit otherwise - easy.
2 projects, same building for a family owned, fun bike shop that underwent an expansion.
Steel cable rail using reclaimed bike parts and a stair rail using XC skis.
The timber frame rail for the loft rail was in place, I purchased the steel cable and channel. The bike parts were recycled. For the stair rail, the timber was recycled and the skis came from customers and a pile of trade-ins from behind the shop.
@honoluludesktop said:
The drawing of the lumber shed wall elevation is a sheet from a set of production drawings? I have seen other drawings published here that were credited as production drawings, but like yours did not have drawing labels (A-1/10 North Wall Elevation), drawing scale (scale 1/3"=1'-0"), detail labels and notes (see 5/A-9 for wall header), revision labels etc. I guess I am used to seeing more information as part of a contract document then you are.
Btw, whats PE stamped? I can't see where you are from and am unfamiliar with that term. I am a licensed Architect in Hawaii, USA.
Here are a few details.
I use 'TF-XX' to denote timber structural drawings. In addition to 10+ sheets of mine there were a few extra sheet from the engineer's work for the foundation and another area of the building that has a conventional truss roof.
'Bent 1' on the other drawing I posted is referenced on the plan with section indications. A 'bent' in timber design is usually a section of the structure, often across a gable, usually in the short direction. A 'wall' or 'section' is usually used to denote a longitudinal structural assembly. I call these out on the plan, then in the title area, with scale, as required.
PE = professional engineer, in my part of the world (Northeast US).
The PE's portion of the work was similar to the details you show - 2d linework for piers, footers, rebar, etc. I was planning on doing all that work as well, in SKP, but let my PE friend just knock out the work as he is vastly more efficient at running the numbers and designing and calculating as he goes.
@honoluludesktop said:
bmike, your drawings are great, but they are still not production drawings. At least not in the manner that I am accustomed to seeing.
One of those buildings (the lumber shed example) is a PE stamped set of drawings including all connection details, call outs for sheathing, piers, fasteners, strapping, etc. etc.
It has been submitted to the building department, PE stamped and calculated and engineered, and went out to bid.
The other (the full building with interiors, etc.) has just moved out of the development phase. That particular set of drawings was used for presentation to the planning commission and to solicit bids. It has been turned over to an architect very local to the project for construction documents, as it is in a very unique site and requires lots of attention from local engineers (foundation) and the architect to fit it into the town's planning / zoning.
I have a house in the works that I am doing in the same method as the above pics. It will be a full set of build documents, likely PE stamped.
If we stray from SketchUp, I use an AutoCAD overlay specifically for heavy timber work (3d modeling, primarily of joinery, etc. that lets us talk to our CNC machine) - these drawings exist as machine language, 3d model, and full 2d printed shop drawings. We include your typical plan / section / etc. of the timber elements - but also incorporate 2d representations of the 3d structure - either details or full assemblies. The craftsmen in the shop (the structure is pre-cut) have access to a PC with the same software the designers use - so they can inspect the model, clarify how things fit, etc. etc.
It would be cumbersome to do what I've done on a very large commercial project (the full TF building depicted in my examples is a small medical therapy office)- but this brings us back to the whole BIM / representation discussion too... so... its a bit of a catch 22 - too much information would bog down simple software and make it unusable for the types of things SketchUp is good at, and it would need to be tailored to individual industries as the language and methods vary from an airport project to a small custom residence. I really like that its pretty easy for me to place 3d details / sections / etc. into my sections / elevations / etc. It brings a greater awareness to non-3d thinkers of how thing fit together, turn corners, and relate to each other. This has been especially powerful for me as I work with timber structures - and its nice to show how this very visible (and sometimes dramatic) part of the building relates to people / furniture / layout / windows / etc.
@honoluludesktop said:
Between each noted, dimensioned, orthographic view, is a perspective of the pair of views. Problem here (to my knowledge) is that there is no app. that effectively permits changes in the orthographic view to be automatically reflected in the 3d view, and for changes in the 3d view to automatically revise the noted, orthographic views.
Its not automated yet, but I usually include details or 3d views of the building with the elevations or floor plans when I get to use LayOut and SketchUp on a project... the dimensions and notes certainly won't automatically update... but compared to some Revit drawings I've seen - this is much clearer - and you don't have to reinvent your whole process to fit into a particular CAD package...
fixed. cleaned up my plugins folder and went back / downloaded / reinstalled all relevant files.
loading now, and toolbars popped up.
will test later when i get into a model.
Getting this error now when I open SketchUp.
I thought I updated a bunch of Plugins... apparently something went wrong.
Wouldn't you have a tie beam the runs diagonally (in the horizontal plane) and then a hip rafter?
What holds those mitered corners up?
Stumbled on this... sounds like what I need (although I would use it infrequently)!
I'll watch for a bug fix.
Can you post a link back to the original when you have time to get it updated?
