Solid Tools Changing Names and Deleting Parameters

You’re right. So use Eneroth Solid Tools or BoolTools2. They respect components.

This has been a complaint of mine since the native Solid Tools were released. At 3DBC in Vail, I got to talk with the author of the extension and he agreed that there’s a problem. Unfortunately there have been more pressing fixes and features that have precluded changing them. Fortunately there are alternatives.

1 Like

That’s a long-standing aspect of how the native solid tools were programmed. You can use eneroth’s solid tools or mindsight’s booltools to avoid the issue.

If SU is intended to be used as more of a BIM application, maintaining data parameters should always be paramount.

I have no use for SketchUp as a BIM application but I still want the Solid Tools to treat components the way other tools treat them when they modify them. As they currently are, the Solid Tools create more work for me than they save. Thanks to Eneroth3 and Dale for their versions of the tools.

1 Like

Thanks for the reply, I’m basically an “experimenter” now that my CAD/BIM Management career has ended, so these issues are much more on my plate. I’m glad there are alternatives, I just hate having to recommend Extensions to my clients which have to be maintained when changes could be made to the main application.

1 Like

Fingers crossed that they can work in an update soon.

Fortunately maintaining these extensions hasn’t been any trouble. In fact I don’t think I’ve had to do anything with them since they were installed.

1 Like

Great to know. I only wish SketchUp had Version Migration.

1 Like

That’s been a long-standing request.

I’ve worked out a system that makes it painless for me and gives me an opportunity to do a bit of house cleaning.

1 Like

Unfortunately, changing the native behavior might break the 3rd party extensions. It’s a “catch-22”.
What would need to happen is for the API methods to remain as is “under the hood” and/or expose a new non-destructive functionality with an extra method argument. (Ie, old behavior by default, new behavior by explicit option.)

The user UX could do the same with a Preferences option to set the default native tool behavior.

One of those “this should have never happened and now it’s too late moments.” Time to just press on and recommend the workarounds.

1 Like

I do understand the sentiment of this, in wishing to keep things simple, and I also wish many extension functions were native. But extensibility is a huge part of SketchUp and many of the specialized functions they allow are not all realistic to be included off the shelf. Just saying Extensions are really worth exploring because as good as SketchUp is, it really starts to cook when you incorporate extensions. Version migration is a bit awkward with extensions, but really just an hours work once a year, small price to pay.

I am well aware of the power of extensions (having used SketchUp since day one). I often make Extension recommendation lists for my clients. Having a version migration tool would make things easier to manage.

To avoid this, I have been successfully using the following method with Solid Tools for years (not only for dynamic components):

  1. Copy the group or component (A) after which you want to make changes to another group or component (B).
  2. Open B in edit mode.
  3. Select all entities and group them (solid group C is formed).
  4. Paste in place A (inside B).
  5. Apply the required Solid Tool (A on C).
  6. Delete copy of A, if necessary.
  7. Explode C, which has now changed its name, possibly also axis orientation and other characteristics.
  8. Exit B editing mode.

As a result, neither the name of the component nor its dynamic properties are changed.

2 Likes

Yeah, You have to be conscious of the current context and with the right shortcuts assigned, it’s not a big workaround.
In Bim, every component is wrapped inside a larger context, one level deeper does not make a difference, you all teady need another approach of entering (outliner)

Data on objects is better handled in Trimble Connect with the property manager, IMO.

For BIM related stuff, check this thread:

Thanks, I’ll check it out. I’m experimenting with SU as a BIM application and what can be done natively.

If everyone used the same software , it would be easy :slight_smile:

Using an outer wrapper or double wrapper where the top level holds all the data has another advantage. You can easily swap the lower level for another door type or window type, for instance. All the data is then preserved .
Pinging Philip @pcmoor

If a component can be saved as a little SketchUp file and having ‘raw geometry’ in a model is considered ‘bad modelling’, each component should consist of at least one group.

OK, but does changing the data at the Top Level change the graphics of the model?

You can try Eneroth Solid Tools. They have a weaker algorithm that sometimes fails with complex geometry and are probably a bit slower, but they honor components, material inheritance, attributes, axes and so on.

3 Likes

If you want to swap a DC with a different type and wish to update any of the native attributes, then you include the CURRENT formula in the saveas DC, even though latter it maybe overwritten and it must have a sub-component of the geometry that references them.
If you wish to swap any sub-component then you must have a matching custom attribute and use the generic parent! as a prefix

It shouldn’t. You are just applying an invisible “data wrapper,” namely, the outer group. Attributes can then be attached to this outer group object without affecting anything about the stuff dwelling inside the group. Indeed, the objects inside a group or component don’t even “know” they are inside one. You can swap them in and out, or edit them at will.
As long as you don’t explode the outer group, its own attributes should survive, even if those of its child objects do not.

1 Like