Long overdue standard feature; Double lines


I have been trying to find a viable solution to this problem. Quickly and easily making double lines. I tried the various extensions and they work but found them lacking in one specific area; making a double line with the outside diameter being where i want it and the inner diameter whatever width is designated between the lines. With the ends snapping and closing.
No using offset is work around and not as efficient as making double lines once, no other actions to make it happen.

I know that I’m not the only person who needs this. How difficult will it be for the Sketchup team to add this basic feature which is present in competing products?


If you select two lines (or more) on the same plane, you can use the ‘offset’ tool to… well, offset them - making a double line.

In what context do you want/need to draw a double line? If it’s for walls, then you are stuck in a 2D mentality and have not embraced the whole 3D way of thinking/modeling. Lines are a 2D representations of were two surfaces meet or where a surface changes direction. Model the surfaces and the lines just happen as a bi-product of creating the model.


Two (parallel) lines “with the ends snapping and closing” is by definition a rectangle.

If you draw a rectangle whose length is established by snapping from A-B; you needn’t be concerned about the initial width.

After you draw a rectangle you can enter a single dimension via the Measurements box without altering the rectangle’s other dimension.

Say you draw a rectangle whose length is established by snapping from A-B along the X-Red axis.
Now you want the width along the Y-Green axis to be 6”

Simply type the dimensions of the rectangle, omitting the X axis dimension like this…
,6 > Enter


Both of these responses are making my point, too many hoops to jump through. Making a rectangle with double lines should be as easy as making one with a single line. A choice in the Draw menu.

For instance, choosing the Architecture template should present double lines as an option as buildings have a lot of parallel lines of different widths.


No; very few buildings have parallel lines - most buildings do have walls however. Very similar to a rectangle… with a thickness.
I repeat; what are you wanting to draw with parallel lines? I can almost guarantee that you are wanting to use a 3D package to draw in 2D. The whole point of modeling in 3D is that you are representing the whole building in 3 dimensional space; any 2D output is a bi-product. it’s a way to convey the information within the 3D model. That’s what Layout is for.

If you want to automatically draw walls instead of lines, then have a look at some of the architectural plugins (1001bit tools is quite nice, but there are others). Or try drawing with the latest Autocad or Archicad or true BIM modelling programs (Actually, I’m sure there is a full architectural BIM plugin for AS)


I still maintain my point. It should be a basic feature. I used Architecture as an example, but by no means are are double lines limited to that field. If you read my original post, you will see that I have tried plugins but they are a bit lacking.

I’m not asking for something unatainable, two lines at once. After all, Sketchup does a lot more complex tasks than this.


Why? Where? Show me an example of where you would use a double line.

I draw hips, lead raggles, window frames and cills, floor plans, walls,… and a load of other things where there are parallel lines used, but I have never found the need to have one line I am drawing replicated at a set distance while I am drawing it, in fact I seldom actually draw lines - I find it much faster and less clicks to draw rectangles, use push/pull and off-set. (or off-set and push/pull).

Give me an example.


It’s not a question of attainable or complex, but rather of priority. The points made by the others argue that in the context of 3D modeling your use case is weak. So Trimble will most likely conclude that there are lots of other feature requests they should address first.


You have gotten used to used to doing it one way, so see no validity in doing it another way. Sure I could use the offset tool and/or lay down lots of measuring lines to do a simple floor plan layout.

With double lines which snap shut I could get it done faster with a lot less prep. No I haven’t been using Sketchup as long as you have but I am trying to solve a problem that does exists and would make me more efficient.


AutoCad has a double (or multiple) lines feature that was introduced very long ago, but to my knowledge almost nobody uses them.



It would be nice if they say something, a yeah or nay.

Correct me if I’m wrong but 3D modeling starts with lines and it doesn’t go X, Y and Z instantly.

I’m asking for 2 parallel lines in addition to the default single line. Why should it be complex and low priority?


For an offset to both sides, sdmitch has two solutions in his plugin list http://sdmitch.blogspot.de/ (search for double)…


Trimble never comments publicly about requests or other features they may or may not be considering, so don’t hold your breath :kissing_closed_eyes:! And priority results from a combination of a persuasive use case and a lot of people requesting the same thing; complexity has little to do with it.

I think one point of confusion here may be the distinction between a stylistic double line, which is a presentation of a single logical entity (akin to dashed, dotted, etc. - all of which are lacking in SketchUp and more typical of 2D than 3D) and a pair of parallel lines that just happen to be drawn simultaneously.

This is mainly a quibble, but I would argue that a line in 3D space though 1D itself exists in x,y,and z right from the start.


Just say`in …and…Peace…


3D Modeling starts with surfaces - normally a rectangle, sometimes a circle, occasionally a triangle. It starts with placing a complete 2D object on a plane and extruding it into a 3rd dimension.

If you want to take it backwards a step, then you could start with putting points down and connecting them to make 1D lines together forming a 2D surface, then use more 1D lines to form another 2D surface and join it to the first one to make it a 3D shape…The tools are there to do that. If you have been classically trained in “how to draw architectural plans”, then this is the only correct way to draw.

Please open your mind to the possibility that there are other ways to produce the same end result, and there may be some that are more efficient than the way you work just now. If you can show me an example that could speed up my work-flow or make things easier for me then I will gratefully concede and back you 100%.

(PS - while mrwmruski shows one way to trace, personally I find it easier to enclose the whole building envelope in a box, then off-set that outline, then draw boxes for each room)


There is at least one plugin that does what you want.


I have tried it and it doesn’t work for me in 2015. And yes it would be handy if it worked like autoCADs double line.


At last page there is a commentary from TIG with the plugin compatible with the version 2015.

Last page - TIG


To enter parallel lines in a 3D environment, you would have to specify whether you wanted to create the lines on an x/y, x/z or y/z (blue green or red) axis . Wouldn’t having to input this parameter each time add to your drawing time and defeat the purpose of the command. I think using rectangles, as advised above, seems like a simpler solution.


I know that there are many ways to skin the cat. However, I will say this again. The power of technology is to make thing easier, not to make complex task as hard as it was before.

If I’m doing floor plans, why can’t the software do double lines for a product aimed at the architecture market. It does single lines, why can’t those who keep telling me of all the different ways to work around my request admit that that my request does have some validity?

I have tried several ways, and don’t find them efficient, what is wrong with saying so? Double lines which close are more efficient. Why use several steps when one will do?