True. (But, groups are special components that are hidden in the “In Model” components collection, and aimed at having one instance per definition. If you edit a group instance (whose definition has more than one instance,) then SketchUp automatically creates a unique definition for the instance being edited, so as not to affect the other instance(s).
Yes. In your case the “parts” are going to be the same, whether they are used in the assembly, or the exploded view, or the individual part view (that will be used to generate LayOut viewports.)
So if you need to make edits, you will want to do it once, and let it affect all the instances.
Just did. And so did Steve.
@DaveR has shown how to do this manually quite a few times here in the forums with nice “purty” screen shots.
I hadn’t been looking at this thread until Dan added my name to the conversation. I’ll add my tuppence.
As Steve said, a purpose for using components is when you have multiple instances. Editing one instance edits the others. I use components exclusively for that reason and many others. Every part that would be made in the shop will be a component in SketchUp. Even if there’s only one of a part in the project, it will be a component in SketchUp. For example, this chair designed by Michael Fortune has only three components which have left and right counterparts (and they are instances of the same three components) every other part is unique. Many users would opt to make those one of a kind parts as groups instead of components.
That’s fine except for a bunch of power you give up by using groups instead of components
After creating the assembled model, I still need an exploded view and I want views of individual parts. The entire model gets copied and some parts get copied multiple times within the model space. so then even those one of a kind parts now have multiples within the model space.
If I had made groups and later find I needed to make a change to some part of the model, I’d have to go through the entire model space to find all the other group copies that need editing. Changes are inevitable but since I use only components, those changes are trivial and there’s no chance for error.
Some folks start by making groups and only convert them to components when they copy them… if they remember to do it. I’ve lost track of the number of users who have complained that they discover later that they forgot to convert a component to a group or they forgot they made a component instead of a group. This lack of consistency in their work flow creates a lot of havoc for them that I never have to deal with. Well, unless I have to work with a model created by someone else. But my first job with a model made by someone else is to fix it to make it efficient or I redraw it from scratch which is often faster.
As for views of individual parts, I create separate scenes for them. The front stretcher on this chair is copied twice to make this view which will get dimensions in the plan.
Again, one front stretcher on the chair but multiple copies of it in the model space.
Going back to your original question about aligning views, if you make components of the parts, you can align the axes so the component’s bounding box fits tightly around its geometry. You can see that on the desk top and pencil stop on the top of Christian Becksvoort’s Slant Top Desk. They were drawn in place whey they’d need to be but their axes were set to align properly. If I’d wanted to make them groups and have the bounding box fit, I wouldn’t have been able to draw them in place as easily. (It can be done but it’s a PIA to set up.)
There are several benefits to making the bounding box align with the geometry. First, it’s dimensions will report correctly when a cut list is created as well as when the component’s description is filled with its dimensions. Those dimensions come from the bounding box, after all. The other benefit is that you can drag copies of those components into the model space and they’ll automatically be aligned with the model axes. Then you can use the standard views to show them. No need for a Ruby script at all.
As for dimensions, you should be adding those in LayOut since you have SketchUp Pro. Put LayOut to work. There’s much more control over how the dimensions look and you can easily create scaled views in LO. Here are a couple of excerpts from the plans for the desk, above.
In this particular view, the parts print out at half of full size.
Often I am creating the full size views. In the case of the plans for the chair I showed earlier, there are full size drawings for the bending form for the front leg/armrest as well as for the other bent parts. And there’s full size patterns for the seat and back rest slats along with the other parts.
As for the labels, most of them go in automatically using the component descriptions for the text. I type out very few labels anymore.
Although there are a few extensions for making exploded views, I much prefer to make them manually. It’s much easier to get what I want when I’m in full control of where the parts end up and it really isn’t difficult at all.
Which I can confirm is not only frustrating but also extremely prone to errors if you are not careful. I used to nest components into groups for some silly reason, now I only use components.
@DaveR Thank you so much for the explanations!
As @DanRathbun advised, I’ve searched yesterday in the forum for this knowledge. But I did not find the relevant threads… So, it’s excellent that you took the time to write your -much valuables- comments here!
By the way, about the left and right counterparts,
(in your exemple, the arm-front-foot piece has a left and right counterparts), do you mean that this is the same component? In that case, I guess that there is some “flip along the right axis” operation.
Huum, I have to try this…
Yes, I confirm !
I made the test on my project: the left and right foot, when turned into components and flipped correctly, are identical.
Yes, exactly. As long as they are identical, even though mirrored, they remain instances of the same component. I don’t separate them until they need some different treatment. For example the legs in this low boy model began as instance of the same component. They remained related all the way up through cutting the mortises for the tenons on the sides of the case. The mortises for the back of the case and the the ones for the front apron and the drawer dividers required the rear legs to be separated from the front with Make Unique. Still, there are only two component definitions.
By the way, before you get much farther along with your models, you need to get in the habit of correcting face orientation. Your screen shots exhibit some blue reversed faces. You should only see white front faces. That makes me wonder how you are going about drawing those pieces.
I have modified my project and I use now components.
The only problem I have is get right orientations for “Top, Front, …” views.
You may have noticed that in my project, you can’t find a single piece that stands “up”. Every piece is “tilted”.
Aligning the axes in the component or in the scene does not help.
Do you understand what I mean?
If you know a good solution for this problem, it will be soundly welcomed!
Up to now, it is true that I did not pay any attention to the face orientations…
What do you mean about “drawing”?
I only need a scketch of each piece with the dimensions.
I repaired your model which included fixing reversed faces, correcting the axis alignment for each component and fixing the screwed up model axes for each scene. I made a new exploded view and redid the labels. There’s no need for as many as you had. Then the existing scenes were reworked and I added a few new ones. In no case did I need to use anything other than the standard views–mostly just the Front view. I didn’t do it because I was sticking with your scene labels but if this was my model, I would have included several parts in each scene. I expect you could get all the parts for the music holder into a single scene with 2- or 3-view drawings of each.
Since you have SketchUp Pro, I would advise you to use it. Add your labels and dimensions there instead of putting them into the SketchUp model.
!
