SketchUp 2D/ Construction Drawings: An existential reason for SketchUp Pro?

Back in 1902 this was the state-of-the-art in construction documentation.
112 years later…
A 2D image of a 3D model has no more capacity to convey information than its 1902 predecessor.



There is no advantage in building a 3D model when the quality and quantity of information derived from it is no better than a century-old blueprint.
The information that belongs out in the field is in the active 3D model.
2D images of a 3D model belong on the office wall.

1 Like

Hmmm. Is it only those who build complex structures that get this? As in
those who produce information to build?

The clarity of a 2D view is really important for that purpose. It doesn’t
need to be on paper.

Paul Lee

CEO Viewsion Virtual Environments Ltd.
Founder DesignerDojo
+353.87.6049599
paul@viewsion.ie

www.corkcity.com

2 Likes

Unless a project requires curves, SU is my first choice for 2d plans for the shop. When I fabricate, or for that matter, lay out jointery, I seldom need to see things in 3D, I already see it that way in my mind. 3D just adds to my overhead.

Sometimes I build curved structures by bending flat parts. The 3D doesn’t help in the shop, I need to work on a flat piece so I need a flat layout.

When I am showing a client a design, 3D is great. It also takes longer and doesn’t translate 100% to paper. Different tools, different purposes, and it’s hard to imagine either going out of style.

3 Likes

i don’t know what you personally consider complex but the stuff i build and produce info for seems complex to me…
and really, if you think 2D views of this stuff is going to help in any way/shape/form – please let me know… (like- i’m not being (whatever)… if you think somehow 2D info is going to help this process along then i’d really like to know how… i mean, it’s my time and i’m not on some kick “oh- i work in 3D because it’s kewl even though 2D is more beneficial”… i work in 3D because it’s faster but more than that, i couldn’t design this stuff in 2D… there’s weird stuff/maths going on in some of these shapes and it’s not something you (well, I) can sit down with a compass and calculator to draw… the software makes many of my designs possible in the first place.


a typical on site ‘blueprint’ file for that :point_up: (it’s not in the cleanest of states here for showing to others but you get the idea)

obviously, i have to generate some stuff into 2D since the materials are flat: (still, doing this in 2D alone would be a bit of a nightmare… some awesome 3D software out there… i say make use of it :wink: )



5 Likes

hmm… i get it that this is just skateboarding and not ‘serious’ construction but use a little imagination and take a guess at how many different govt & non-govt agencies were involved in order to float a giant barge through new york harbor (and mooring at a few key locations in the city) while having people actively riding their toys around on it… hint- a lot

everything was done in 3D… the concept was a collaboration in which sketchup was used (hey, everybody has sketchup, right :wink: )… final design was done in rhino and these were the files shared with the engineers for their approval… the .3dm was transferred to .skp and that’s what nike+event coordinators received for their approval (and the event firm used sketchup for the non-skateable stuff you see on the barge)… the build was done off the rhino files…

the only 2D stuff was city&state approval/permit type stuff… but they were just getting screenshots… they don’t really need that much… they don’t need to see construction docs… they need a general idea of what it looks like with an engineer (or someone accepting liability) stamp on there… (and realize- lots of these state/city agencies still want you to fax stuff to them :smiley: )

the only reason “2D is a requirement” is being thrown out there is because people are still throwing it out there… try a project with the mindset of “ok, i’m only working in 3D on this one” and you might be surprised to find out it’s actually possible.

3 Likes

To me the best thing about designing in 3D is the consistency - if you can model it it can usually be built, too. The worst thing is that in the early stages of a design you have to take time to model things that in the traditional process you could put in the “I’ll think about this later” category and concentrate on resolving the main functional relationships with the client. And the more drastic modifications to the design that are often required in the early phase are usually more tedious when what you need to modify is a whole 3D model instead of a simple plan. Still, I wouldn’t go back to drafting.

Jeff, your works are great!

Anssi

3 Likes

right… adding-> what i really like about 3D is that once i’ve drawn it… like really modeled it… i’ve already built it… i know the design intimately and i’ve been able to work out all foreseeable problems (well, problems with the actual construction… there will be other problems which come up along the way (vendors,other contractors,weather,etc) that i can’t really figure out first on a computer :wink: )… since i’ve already built it, my days on the jobsite are much more relaxed and even fun… all i have to do is tell people what cuts to make and how to put it together but at least i’m not sitting around scratching my head all the time or stressing over the wrong stuff.

yeah, don’t get me wrong… i definitely use 2D in the early stages of a project… i’m in the process of one right now in which i’ve done the “i’ll think about this later” to the maximum (as in- left most of the design blank :slight_smile: )

as the process develops and more info becomes available, i’ll do more 2D work then probably start shelling out some of the stuff in 3D…

but my main point in this thread (again, just talking about my process here and i’m not trying to say “this is the right way :angry:”) is that once the contract or deposit comes in and other issues have been worked out, i start really developing the 3D models to build-able states… and after they’re in that stage, i never (and i mean never) turn around and start slicing them back into 2D sections. (ok, well, if something is getting 2D cnc or things like pipe bending, those vendors will get their info in two dimensions simply because they don’t need any of the other info in the 3d files… they just need a curve and me to say ‘follow this curve with a pipe along centerline’ (or whatever)… but that’s just me sending out one layer of the actual 3D file.

thank you.

Build a two storey structure without any “flat” information.

Go on I dare ya :wink:

idk, in 2002, i built a structure 85’ overall elevation changes with no plans other than some hand drawn sketches showing what radii i wanted to use.

… (i had just gotten sketchup at this point, like within a week or two of this gig, and i couldn’t figure out how to use it to my advantage yet)…

[edit] no wait, i’m confusing this gig with something else… i first started using sketchup, my first cad program, in 2004 [/edit]

for scale reference:

everything is flat or no compound bends so it’s very easy for me (i’ve been building this ■■■■ since i was about 7 :wink: ) to visualize and keep track of all the numbers in my head…

“2 story structure” doesn’t really translate to a certain level of difficulty… i mean, you could build something one foot tall that’s more difficult than a 2 floor house.


regardless, getting into that type of back&forthing completely misses the points being raised here… that being-> a 3D drawing has infinite 2D drawings within it… if you have the 3D model, you can get any measurement anywhere within the structure all from one single file…

if you have a 3D model, the information provided by a 2D drawing is entirely redundant and only offers a means of filtering out information which may be unnecessary at certain stages of a project… but even then, you can filter the model with things like layers.

a question-- why do you think i couldn’t build a two story structure with only a 3D model whereas i could if i had 2D drawings?

2 Likes

Hi George, Jeff and everyone and Season’s Greetings to all.

Look guys, all of my design work is performed using SketchUp…I’m a practicing architect and each of my projects is developed as a 3D model, so I look forward to a time when 2D documentation is no longer necessary. The only point my previous post attempted to advance is that the prevailing use and acceptance of flat drawings in our industry is a long way from its demise.

There are economic pitfalls associated with full digitization through the industry. Any additional costs to the public is not easily acceded to. Although most design and construction oriented professionals have happily moved into the 21st century, we have to recognize the reluctance of most municipalities to move beyond reprographic documentation, particularly in connection with the permit review process. Practicing in several different jurisdictions, I have discovered that in each there exists a common disinclination to invest in requisite technological devices for every day staff use. This has a definite negative impact on the universal adoption of 3D in those municipalities. There also is a prevalent concern about the investment in time (and money) required to train public agency employees to properly read and interpret digital media/data.

The use of 2D documents will remain as the primary mode of communication in the design/construction/manufacturing/code review community until 3D is universally accepted. This entails a fundamental paradigm shift in the “design/draft/print/review/approval/bid/construction” process.

1 Like

I think if we were all sitting down with a coffee or beer this conversation
would go a lot further and be more productive but we are limited to text
and emoticons, so be it. :blush:

I personally would prefer not to be bothered with 2D info. I’m lazy that
way.

Some day:

When a Sketchup plugin can analyze a model to say that there are no spatial
problems (e.g. you won’t hit your head off a bulkhead going up the stairs
and ceiling heights are within acceptable limits throughout) and;

There are no human beings involved in construction (e.g 3D printing a
building.)-

then 2D information will be a nostalgic curiosity.

Paul Lee

CEO Viewsion Virtual Environments Ltd.
Founder DesignerDojo
+353.87.6049599
paul@viewsion.ie

www.corkcity.com

Being a professional builder,I have sworn at blueprints more than once,it would be awesome to be on a job site with an accurate 3d model on my iPad where I could take off my own dimensions. I Do need elevations,but I really want relevant dimensions.

… and the information contained is still useable… am not sure if you can use a SKP in 2126… seems like a big plus of analog data to me.

hey J

i don’t think anyone is directly arguing against what you’re saying.

also, no one in the thread has said “we are currently ready to ditch 2D CDs entirely”… everyone has recognized we’re still not technically capable of doing so as an industry(s) wide standard (well, i think we are actually capable of doing so with available technology… it’s just that the various technology has yet to been put in one central interface… a simple example, we can look at a model on a tablet but we can’t take measurements from it)

you are right- a fundamental paradigm shift is required… some of those requirements are technology based… some are people based… the shift won’t happen overnight and it takes a few renegades to begin the process… that’s the stage we’re in right now… eventually, the renegades will be joined by others who are slightly more adventurous then that wave will swoop up the rest… though there will of course be some hanger-oners chanting “2D or Die!!”… and they’ll in fact be using 2D until they die… (ie- much of the shift will have to happen in people’s minds as opposed to technological limitations)

further- 2D will never be replaced entirely by 3D just because 3D is not helpful in many situations and could be viewed as a waste of effort. it’s information overload… however, other cases will benefit from 3D information and in those cases, 3D information will be used for communication… it’s those cases where the flipside happens-> when you have 3D, putting the info back in 2D form can be viewed as a waste of effort or creating redundant information.

what i’m having a hard time conveying here is that 2D vs. 3D is not a valid argument… they aren’t different things… 3D IS 2D… just a whole bunch of 2Ds… surely, you recognize that, right?

you’re failing to convince… sorry.
why can’t you analyze ceiling height/bulkhead in a 3D model where as you can with a 2D drawing?
can you post some example images illustrating the problem you’re describing?

The need to coordinate plans sections and elevations is what drove me away
from 2D CAD. Really pointless to use a computer to do the same task as a
drawing board.

Paul Lee

CEO Viewsion Virtual Environments Ltd.
Founder DesignerDojo
+353.87.6049599
paul@viewsion.ie

www.corkcity.com

lol
why aren’t you answering any questions? i keep ending my posts with a question to you (as in-- i’m unclear on why you’re saying things so i’m asking for clarification… ie- trying to communicate) …but then you follow up with a different topic entirely :confused:

Jeff

I like to be inclusive and not sound like a [insert your choice of
derogatory term here] but I have to ask have you ever built a 2+ storey
structure in conjunction with someone else?

My aim isn’t really to convince you of anything. I’m just curious to know
where you’re coming from.

Paul Lee

CEO Viewsion Virtual Environments Ltd.
Founder DesignerDojo
+353.87.6049599
paul@viewsion.ie

www.corkcity.com

no. i haven’t… i rarely ever build other people’s designs.

but if i were to do that and they gave me a proper 3D file, i could build the entire thing off the single file… and i say that with full confidence… further- i would prefer to work off the single file as opposed to a stack of prints.

again (and again)–> what info is another designer’s 2D drawings going to be able to offer me, the builder, that i wouldn’t have available in a 3D model?

Jeff,

Our positions within in this discussion are more closely aligned than is suggested by your response. It appears we both think the demise of 2D is not imminent, yet we each advocate for a wider acceptance and functional utilization of 3D across the full spectrum of design and construction. Perhaps as the universe evolves into more of a future based reality than currently exists, 3D applications ultimately will become Everyman’s common design vernacular.

1 Like