1Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksWondering if there is a workflow around or tried with any success that has the basic modeling of a family happening in something like SKETCHUP and imported to Revit as a family. Anyone know if such a thing is possible, realistically?
Wondering if there is a workflow around or tried with any success that has the basic modeling of a family happening in something like SKETCHUP and imported to Revit as a family. Anyone know if such a thing is possible, realistically?
I don't even think it's possible to import SU geometry in families (maybe through dwg). But if there is: DO NOT DO THIS!
There is no upside to it:
- elements won't be intelligent. Dumb solids at best
- elements won't have parameters, nor will they respond well to parameters that you apply later (if even possible to transform to native components)
- it will cause general revit instability & severely slow your project down.
You can import SKP files into the family editor, but I would echo Martijn's comments: don't do it. Sketchup geometry is crude. It's all faces, no solids, and everything is planer/faceted.Originally Posted by mdradvies
What are you trying to create? Maybe we can help you build it in the Revit family editor with real Revit geometry.
Not really anything specific just that I'm crazy fast in SKETCHUP and not so in revit. Sadly I have enough to learn in revit that my thought was that if I could postpone getting in the voodoo of family generation while I self train on everything else I have to learn in revit, maybe my ability to produce might happen sooner. Trying to cheat I guess.
Not possible, not convenient. A .dwg or .dxf file could help you most if you need something simple and fast. People here are ready and good to help you to make your family.
there's a reason for that: it has no intelligence what soever. It's easier to cut out a cardboard shape and call it a window then to actually build a window...
Experienced Revit users see no point in SU because learning Revit for them isn't an issue anymore. The Revit novice that's comfortable with SU has a different worldview than many of the people who hang out here.
Life is full of compromise. I've encountered designers that are just not going to learn Revit. Either they won't or the firm won't "make them". Seldom is it a "I can't do it" proposition, people can do most anything they decide they really want to do. It frequently puzzles me that people who can study, qualify for exams and get licensed to practice architecture or engineering struggle with software at all, but they do.
To the OP (original poster), if you are "crazy fast" in SU then you can technically import components into Revit families. You won't be able to control their appearance unless you are diligent about defining layers for each "part" of the SU component. You also won't be able to change the size of the component. If it needs changing you'll have to fix it in SU and repeat the process. At some point the value you feel you get in doing it this way will probably erode and that will mean you are making progress toward a cleaner Revit focused workflow. In the meantime if using SU helps get the design sold and moving forward at a faster pace I don't see the harm.
If you forgo SU...the truth is, if you forget parametric behavior, the process to create a solid in Revit practically the same as a "solid" in SU. You sketch a shape and set a depth. The difference is the User Interface, the dialog and work plane driven environment of Revit versus the draw planar profile/shape...push/pull nature of SU. So you could become more comfortable with Revit initially if you focus on drawing the forms you need and then tackle making things adjustable as a future goal. If a SU model is acceptable then it surely is acceptable to start simpler in Revit too?
Heed the advice of the members here and take a Revit minded approach as much as possible. When you find yourself up against a wall, you have an exit strategy perhaps through SU. Keep in mind that the members here are more committed to helping you be successful with Revit (the name of the forum should imply that eh?) than supporting the awkward back and forth strategy. But if you must... good luck!
Last edited by Steve_Stafford; April 21st, 2012 at 07:32 PM.
Steve, you are right off course. To each there own. If that was the whole story.
However, SU (as dwg) does have a negative impact on stability and speed of Revit. There's no denying that. Especially when working on large(r) projects, it will come back to hunt you. Not with time lost going back and forfth through SU to change an object size or appearance, but with projects crashing and getting generally fubar...
I find the easiest workflow is Revit one screen and Sketchup in the other screen....and ignore the Principal that says it looks wrong in Revit because they are looking at the perspective view in Sketchup
We have die-hard SU users who still hate "designing in Revit". It is understandable.
But recently, we have had some succes in "converting" the SU users to modeling and designing in Revit and Vasari.
Try looking at Vasari 2.5. Autodesk Project Vasari
It is very SU-like, "push-pull" modeling, and you can ( finally!) edit in Perspective! There is a new "Perspective Mode" view type.
The modeling toolset in Vasari and Revit Conceptual Massing does take some getting used to and is not quite the same as SU--but very similar.
But--it is WAY more advanced/powerful.
You must understand the "Conceptual Massing Environment" to use Vasari--and realize that you must create walls, floors, roofs, curtain systems from the Faces of the Mass forms in order to get "real" elements in Revit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote