I work with a local contractor that has a robotic plasma cutter. We designed several specific wood/steel connections solely in SU. I then exported .dxf files from SU for input in their plasma cutter software. It was remarkable how seamless the process was, and the results were nearly immediate - 3 days. I'll try to find some pics of the process, but it clearly represents the BIM capabilities already available in SU.

Very cool Gai. The method I use is I make the trim a component that cuts the hole since most of my projects have trim both on the interior and exterior, but I like your method very much.

@unknownuser said:

definitely not off topic but I'll label it as such anyway..

[off:2bp7mwqv]
@brewsky said:

@unknownuser said:

The fact that SU works off planar geometry is also a powerful tool for quantity take offs, by area or material.

I like what you say here.

<<well, aside from the fact that a 12' rad sphere in sketchup reports about 8 cu/yd less concrete than what's really needed.. (or around 25 sqft less surface area) >>

just a friendly reminder to be careful when using volume and area reports in sketchup on non-box shapes[/off:2bp7mwqv]

I hear you Jeff. Thankfully I'm not designing any concrete spheres! I guess if I were, they would be more cost issues in the forms than the $1400 difference in concrete.

I've used ACAD for years. I was trained on version 2.3 and used it until 2010 (yikes that's 24 years if you do the math), when I started my switch to all SU. Depending on how you organize your modeling in SU, there are many aspects of SU that inherently create a BIM model. The components and how they are tracked are wonderful in maintaining instance count as well as descriptive information. The fact that SU works off planar geometry is also a powerful tool for quantity take offs, by area or material. If SU could then quantify this information into simple schedules, that would really make a giant step for the BIM community.

That said, the last thing I want to see is SU turn anything close to the beast that is Revit. I review lots of other Architect's work here as I serve on a design review board. I can't tell you how many times I see inaccuracies in the use of their BIM software. The one complaint I here is the learning curve and lack of intuitive control is not what they had expected. These two elements alone are probably the greatest attributes of SU.

I want to see something different and unique. The technology is there and it is amazing what is being developed by several companies based around SU. BIM has such a broad meaning and it certainly shouldn't be confined to what Revit produces.

If you are using the section tool to create a group from slice, what I do is:

1. Edit the group and make the entire slice a component. I then copy the component vertically forced on the blue axis above the model. This way you can edit the component outside of the model.
2. Save the view looking vertically down on the slice - since it is stacked exactly above the slice located in the model, you only see one plan.

What is nice about keeping one of the slices in the model area, is that you can see if there any deviations from changes very easily.

@jgb said:

Just a note on how I'm connected.

My NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS card supports HDMI, DVI and VGA outputs to 2 monitors.

The 24 HD-Monitor also supports HDMI, DVI and VGA inputs. I have it on HDMI, max res 1920 X 1080 32bit. It is my primary monitor.

The old 19 monitor has DVI and VGA inputs. I have it on VGA 1280 X 1024 32bit. I have it as 2nd monitor but with the "extend" setting "on" in Windows Display control panel as well as "unify" in the NVIDIA control panel.

For now I am keeping it on VGA, mainly so it will behave properly in the event I need to go into "safe mode". I'm not sure how my Boot ROM or Win XP in safe mode will handle DVI connections, as everything in boot mode or safe mode seems to be at low res VGA.

When my PC cold boots each morning the old 19in display is where it all happens, both in ROM boot and Windows IPL, then the 24in wakes up, displaying the desktop and takes over as primary.

Aside from physically putting both monitors up side by each on my cramped and messy real desktop, it all went way easier than I expected.

A (long) while back I was given a 32in HD-TV with a VGA input, as well as the usual TV oriented inputs. My old ATI vid-card only had DVI and VGA. It was redundant (sort-of) as a TV in my house so I connected it to my PC. It was totally unreadable in anything over 800 X 600. Now it is an HD-TV in the guest bedroom, and is on maybe 2 weeks in any year.

If it was older, it was probably a 720P resolution. My 47" is 1080P and it reads beautifully. I'm hoping 3 of them don't give me a sore neck, but they are so cheap these days, I figured why not since the new computer can handle 3 monitors.

I'm insane! I have a 47" LED, with 2 more on the way!

I've used the Wacom Intuous 3 for years. Absolutely love it. I just bought the new Intuous 5 touch and love it even more. They work really well with SU.

@chris fullmer said:

Where is that Sonder?

Chris! Your in Davis. It's Alpine Meadows. So come up and ski.

Btw, my sister was just hired as the director of equine medicine at UCD.

This is where I ski every week. 20 minutes drive from my office. Not the alps, but pretty amazing open boundary ski area!

And the car that replaced the bimmer:

Here's another fun one. This is my old car - BMW 335xi after a heavy storm! You have to look closely.

I try to do this three times a week.

I love snow!

@gaieus said:

We were not really talking about real construction drawings here but 3D models based on imported images.

I'd certainly do my models differently if I am "designing" that building or if there are proper dimensions given in the image for instance. The above example was only a "quick and dirty" method for a model. It will not be accurate to dimensions but at least all the walls will be of equal thickness and parallel to the other side of the wall (oh my, how poor models I have seen!)

He mentioned these would be for a builder though. I typically start with something similar. I draw basically rectangular "bubble" diagrams, but sized to construction standards. Once I have a basic layout that works, I use the offset tool to create the walls, then trim accordingly. This goes very fast.

I draw all my floor plans in sketchup, but I would never set them up based upon the centerline of the wall. All contractors build based upon dimensions set to the face of stud or masonry. If you establish the wall based on the centerline you will always have to adjust your line to compensate for half the wall thickness, unless you don't care about framing layout.

Yes, I like the overall look! Nice work.

Very nice work!

@unknownuser said:

Perhaps a shared benchmark file is in order?
(For .pdf export time/file size...I know...I know...but perhaps it is simply not hardware related).

& fwiw, the 2 projects I mention are ~ .25 acre and probably ~6+ acre respectively.
Unfortunately I cannot share the actual project files...maybe a vanilla/pseudo variant?

Thoughts?

Charlie

I'm getting a new machine in two weeks, but my current setup is:

I7 2600k
Nvidia gtx 550ti
16gb ram
(1) 47" led

New machine:

I7 3930 super clocked to 4.2-4.6
Nvidia gtx 680
64gb ram
(3) 47" led......he he he.

Well, if you want to see crazy PDF file size, I have one set of CDs for a 4000 sf house that is 415 mb. I exported on high quality. What I found is that exported to low quality printed on 24x36 inch paper reads really well, so that is why I export on low quality now. In fact the difference between high and low when printed is minimal at best.

If the file size is a problem, there are PDF exporters that work well. For me, the ease of export out of layout is great. If you are vector rendering an entire model, that is where you will pay in time. Mine are all raster with isolated line work vector rendered, so I never see exports take longer than 30 seconds for the larger files.

Nothing fishy going on Jeff. My comment relates to the fact that while there is this error of an arc (which you have shown here), the use of that arc overall in a design, at least for me, represents a very small factor of the overall accuracy in a set of plans - getting back to my .1% number.

Contractors, at least good Contractors read plans. I'm in the field with them 2 days a week.

As for the frustration part, you just need to temper that without making personal attacks on others.

Jeff, the only reason people would get upset is when you are condescending, which you are in just about every post. Thankfully I'm thick skinned. I've been a licensed architect for over 20 years and have designed and seen constructed over 200 structures. I was trained in hand drafting, used ACAD for over 20 years and SU for the last 10 years. For me the most accurate and coordinated solution is SU. If it is so worthless for you, move on.

My comment on the .1%, is related to how often an arc is used as a specific element in an entire building. Unless you are FG, then it probably is .1%. SU is dead accurate with straight lines and angles with both offset and follow me.

I am fine with the arguement, and I agree a fix for the arc offset would be great, but there is no need what so ever for you to make the comments you have above, and I didn't even see the post before you edited it. Considering you are a moderator on here, I'm quite surprised.