Components for Layout

A technique I use for automating plant symbols in LO is to prepare my landscape plans in SU site models by creating plant components that include both 3D plants and 2D symbols placed on different Tags. Then in LO, through SU scenes, presenting the 2D plant symbols on the planting plans.

1 Like

And absolutely a vote for components on LO.

A great idea, thank you for the suggestion/reminder! I used to do this, but stopped at some point and can’t remember why. I had forgotten I ever did it until you mentioned it. My hunch is that I stopped because Layout has such a difficult time letting a user work on a page when the model on it is rendered as Hybrid or Vector. But as I recently gave up and started working with my models in LO in the (ugly) Raster mode, and now that I am accustomed to it, that’s exactly what I’ll do: make my plant symbols in Sketchup.

*also, this Apple M1 chip in my new laptop has made it possible to work in LO in Hybrid and Vector mode, even with complicated models. No more lag, it’s a dream (as I posted elsewhere this morning).

@Mark @adam
I would strongly second what @bradodonnell is saying here. For small-scale but rigorous professional use (I am also an architect) Layout is lacking in robustness. I know this is not a newsflash, and I know there are best practices that help speed the program, and I know there are at least a few folks like @Sonder who are very satisfied and successful with it. But as someone with almost 30yrs A/E experience I would offer that - while LO does many things in a refreshingly simple manner - it is fundamentally held back by things like this. Another example is to compare the amount of time it takes to refresh one’s model in LO compared to the speed and reliability with which AutoCad loads xrefs. I’ve often suspected that SU needs to choose its target user, that it has long suffered from trying to cover too wide a use base. I am here because I too find Revit/Acad/Vectorworks to be bloated overkill for small-scale work, but amongst my colleagues I am the only one using SU+LO. Certainly IMHO making LO a more serious and robust tool for users like myself and (it sounds like) Brad would open up a large market.

7 Likes

I am also an architect and I have created sudo-components for use in Layout by simply creating a set of scrapbook pages and putting all my frequently used items on them. I though that this was the purpose of having scrapbook pages.

For anything I need frequently I draw them once, put them on the relevant scrapbook page and they are there to use whenever you need from every layout document.

If you need things to scale then draw something in SketchUp, then drop it into Layout with the viewport at the scale you want, then trace over the item and save the parts of the drawn item as a group. Put the group onto the relevant scrapbook page. I have a few items that are scale critical such as scale bars drawn up as scrapbook items at my most used scales. Anything other than drawing elements are however easier to add in SketchUp.

I currently have 6 different scrapbook pages for general drawing items (north signs, title blocks etc), services icons (switches, sockets etc.), some generic building details, and soft landscape - including trees. I imported images of trees for some of these, making them fairly realistic. Each item once copied-downloaded to the work page is infinitely adjustable by scaling/flipping etc. So you have a starting point for similar items leaving the original unchanged on the scrapbook page.

BTW I don’t use layers or pages - just makes drawings far too complicated to manage.

Really curious about your workflow with no pages or layers? So one page per file and everything on one layer?

1 Like

@bradodonnell, mate we are both in the same boat, though as @DaveR suggested I’d be nursing you to sleep! One of those things I’m surprised about is the number of architects who design in sketchup and then use LayOut as a documentation only tool, in lieu of designing in Layout and forwarding to sketchup to model up! I design a lot of homes for volume builders as well as produce a LOT of concept designs for developments and ALL just using layout!

I’m currently preparing a range of scrapbooks, video tutorials and a book containing example styles. They should be available soon. Trust me this method of working is so fast you’ll regret having lost so many of those 20 years working long hand!

What I’d love to see is the Trembling guys @adam introduce a way that any introduced layout component can be linked to a Sketchup component so when using layout as a design tool, an export to SketchUp creates a 90% finished model!

Here’s a shot of a design (1 day to design in layout) and a shot from my upcoming scrapbooks!


7 Likes

My way of working is that everything is drawn in SketchUp, usually for most projects in 2D, drawing everything “in plan”, including elevations, sections etc. Then transfer the relevant viewport to a single Layout drawing per element/topic. Just like we used to do with paper drawings, 1 drawing per element/topic. Whilst you have a lot more documents to handle each one is reasonably small so doesn’t take forever to redraw etc. (although I find that this also depends on the size of the SketchUp file size).

I use SketchUp like an electronic drawing board, working in 2D most of the time. I only go full 3D where the overall shape of the building is complex and needs to be seen in 3D to fully understand it, and/or the client needs to see something in 3D to appreciate what they are getting. When 3D is required I build up the 3D model by copying the 2D “master” file, extruding the walls upwards, and then rotating the various elevations into position on the 3D building, finally drawing the roof in 3D.

To get 2D I select parallel projection from the view menu and then work along the X and Y axes ignoring the Z axis. I have a reasonably comprehensive set of 2D components to drop into this “flat” model. To be frank I would like Trimble to let us select a 2D environment to avoid “missing” my drawing plane, although I appreciate this isn’t how SketchUp was designed to work.

I have a Layout template page with usual title plate and other bits and pieces on it, and create separate documents for “plans”, “elevations”, “sections”, etc. etc. This saves messing around with layers or pages and all the complications of getting everything on the right layer. I started off using layers but kept forgetting to switch between them when adding or altering something ; its much much simpler to draw everything on one layer on separate drawings.

2 Likes

50 aint old !

1 Like

Steven, I just have to say it, but that must prove to be the most bloated method of handling a workflow I’ve ever heard of! It seems crazy. Sketchup is NOT a great 2D drafting tool, in fact if using in for just 2D output it’s actually rather cumbersome if just for the lacking of line weights if not using tags. Whilst I use SketchUp for modelling and to export renders, I find the use of LayOut invaluable to prepare clear 2D details.

3 Likes

I must say components for Layout are not high on my wish list, plugins for layout on the other hand, well yes that would be great.

Before you read this it is important you understand my perspective, I’m not an architect or a draftsperson and I make a living from designing and building, not creating plans for others.

The most important things to me are:

  1. The quality of finish of the actual project
    a) Value to the client
    b) Profit to the subs
    c) an acceptable margin to the business.
  2. The engineer understands the loads.
  3. The subs know what to build
  4. The suppliers know what to supply.
  5. The client understands what they will receive for their money
  6. Minimal issues on site
  7. Minimal waste
    None of the above items require comprehensive 2d documentation provided you add sufficient detail to the model and get the team using Sketchup.

Guys, I’m no Layout genius, in fact, I am average at best. I do use Layout and I do find the improvements in the later years to be helpful, especially the ability to turn tags on and off inside of Layout. As far as content on each page and components in layout go, I personally would not have a use for it as I simply save my template with everything I need (including pages and layers) around the outskirts (for me it’s quicker than using

image

Is it just me or do others simply farm out the 2D documentation side? I find once the model is complete people will draft for peanuts, as essentially they are just tracing or replicating. The main reason I use 2D plans is to appease the council and authorities and i can’t wait until the day they accept 3D over 2D.
I never get trades or suppliers to quote from 2D plans, yes we’ll send them the basic plans, however, the quantities and in many cases, the pre-agreed rate as a purchase order that’s associated with the model is better faster and more accurate. With Google docs or Trimble connect it is easy to ensure everyone has access to the 3D model and many now use their phones or Laptops to view the model onsite.

Guys, in case you were wondering, I do not build cookie-cutter homes, every house I build is a one-off and we build them with Sketchup.

I’ve always wondered why so many people put so much time into turning an amazing 3D model back into a static paper plan… Just saying.

4 Likes

This is the most interesting LayOut conversation in a while for some reason.

I’ve met one builder who used 3d. I don’t think I’d get anything but silent stares if I gave most contractors a SketchUp file. They understand 2d plans. They do tend to like the renderings to decorate the job office. And of course the building official wants a static plan. I’d like to do more with the models, but it’s not wanted.

5 Likes

We’re straying off topic…

I concur with pbacot in that the level that I work at, all builders that I know would roll there eyes if I tried to get them to work more from 3D - and I don’t think there’s a cost effective 3D workflow that could successfully convey the required information to structural engineers, building control and planning officers and the builder if they decided to accept 3D.

There is one builder I know who uses SketchUp to help him visualise his projects and understand details.

The 3D model does, however, provide context and help with discussing aspects of the project but at the end of the day everyone I know wants those 2D documents.

I don’t see it as a waste of my time working in 3D only to translate it into 2D.

The 3D modelling process helps me visualise the constraints of the space and how components would work together.

And, if my 3D model and my 2D workflow is efficient, then it makes the production of 2D documents much easier.

4 Likes

Well, maybe I was naïve but when they announced an API for LAYOUT years and years ago I thought the next revolution was about to happen… what a false dawn that was… Personally I would also love developer access to allow extensions to LAYOUT… my sights are set much lower though now… Components would be a big productivity bonus…

PS agree with you on paper documents… we know everything about the project in the 3D model … but then have to go a regurgitate all the information in 2d for the archaic systems the construction industry still persists with…

4 Likes

Great to see this conversation! I started out building detailed 3D models for construction because I didn’t want to make mistakes. This was 20 years ago, and I had more than one case of a triangular portion of the top of a beam end sticking out of a pitched roof! It was so embarrassing, I started modeling in 3D. I ended up loving it and never went back. It adds tremendous value to my design process, is really wonderful with clients, and can be helpful with builders.

Nevertheless, @AndrewRubySketch, your point is very well taken: turning our detailed models them back in 2D seems nuts, yes. Much of the information in interior elevations, floor plans, sections, exterior elevations have all got to be easier to pull directly from a model, if that information is location, size, relationship to other parts, etc… Still, what about notes and specifications? How do you deal with text if not in some sort of 2D environment, and don’t we want the overall design to be able to be printed on paper, and not just on an iPad? Also, consider details. It has to be more efficient to create some 2D details than to model a house down to the anchor bolts if your goal is to tell the builder the anchor bolt depth, spacing, and size.

I could be wrong about those previous comments, but giving Layout more robust CAD capabilities, or the ability to compete with the 2D capabilities of Revit/ACAD/Vectorworks would be helpful to many people’s workflows, regardless of whether we really ought to be trying to push the whole building industry to 3D.

Lastly, @gsharp, about Layout components vs the API: I 100% agree. Components in Layout would be helpful, but the ability of all our wonderful extension creators to add to Layout’s capabilities as they do to Sketchup is the single best thing Trimble could do for Layout. It’s win-win: as with Sketchup, it saves them the effort of creating all that functionality themselves. I cannot fathom why they’ve never added the capability.

2 Likes

@RichardJeffrey These are stunning! I am a bit confused. I see that the details on the right could have been made in Layout, but the graphics (the geometry) in one on the left, which are simply extraordinary, must have come from Sketchup, no? I’ve done many cut-away 3D details in my time, but none had such clarity, detail, and especially richness in materials. Is that rendered? It doesn’t read as being taken straight from Sketchup.
Lastly, where did you get those materials? The wood grain? The concrete? The XPS? Gorgeous!

As I mentioned, details are easily prepared in layout, the rendered image is modelled in SketchUp and rendered with Maxwell. I’ll flick you the textures I used!

Next level!

Thanks for the textures, too.

You’re a rock star!

1 Like

@PaulMcAlenan I think the more modern (tech savy) builder would happily work off 3D models given the chance. BTW this doesn’t mean they won’t of in fact don’t, @AndrewRubySketch is probably the best example I know of. Andrew’s application PlusSpec for me must be the ultimate tool for demonstrating a project to structural engineers and for the purpose of building. If you haven’t checked it out, I’d suggest it’s worth looking at!

As far as planning officers go developing a model that can demonstrate compliance with maximum building envelope and the impact of any non-compliance must be the most efficient means. Quite a number of Australian councils now have digital city models and it’s a requirement to provide a model they can place within the model to measure it’s impact, this will surely continue to be the trend. But still these councils require submission of plans, in part to allow public participation in the making of decisions!

I’ve developed a system for SIP construction that doesn’t even require a 3D model to be referenced during 90% of the home’s manufacture and build. We do however need a bottom plate plan but there after labels adhered to the panels inform of the panel’s material options, fabrication, cut size, position and orientation within the build. Again the only reason plans other than the bottom plate plan need to be produced is to permit sign off by the client.

1 Like

“I’ve developed a system for SIP construction”
i am interested, where can I find more information?