Architectural drawing software for dummies

[singlecoil]

Equus said:

singlecoil said:

1. don't work from paper, I work from a screen, and I can measure anything I want on a Sketchup drawing quickly, easily and accurately. Point 2 and three the same response basically.

Show me a bricklayer, joiner or plumber who works on site from a tablet, and I'll start to listen to you. Maybe.

So really it all depends on the purpose of the design work. Which is something we can agree on I expect.

[Equus]

paulrockliffe said:

Back then AutoCAD hadn't really embraced 3D I don't think

It still hasn't - and they've given up trying (which is why Inventor and Revit exist with the intention of eventually replacing it). While AutoCAD is powerful, and I can do things with it in 3D that I can't always do with SketchUp, it's clunky, and very obviously a 3D capability that has been bodged on top of the original 2D functionality.

On the other hand (as my response above), Revit or any other current BIM software is overkill for simple designs.

paulrockliffe said:

I presume Sketchup will also create statutory 2D plans form a 3D model for you, though I've never tried?

Yes, even the free version will generate standard 'orthographic' 2D views and sections fairly easily, but the problem is that to format them to print as a drawing, to scale and with dimensions, you really need the 'pro' version, which comes with a (clunky) separate package called 'Layout' that does this for you.

This is a pretty basic set of elevations, on a simple extension job, generated from SketchUp Layout:

Edited by Equus on Wednesday 21st August 12:08

[Nimby]

Gosforth Handyman has Sketchup tutorials for absolute beginners. The first one is free ( link) and if you like it the others will cost you £1 via Patreon.

[Equus]

singlecoil said:

So really it all depends on the purpose of the design work. Which is something we can agree on I expect.

like I said:

you still need 2D architectural/engineering drawings for all but the simplest items.

Obviously, there are other practicalities as well: as I said, Planning & Building Control want orthographic drawings, to scale, no matter how much you bleat at them about the superiority of 3D.

Ditto most engineering shops or fabricators (unless they're using CNC). And working from a whizzy little tablet, in the mud and pouring rain in a steep, densely wooded valley in deepest, darkest Devon (where the OP's site is located) is hardly going to be practicable.

I designed a trackday car, a couple of years ago.... beautiful 3D model (if I do say so myself), with full detail of all components. We still had to get full sized 2D drawings printed out on drafting film (for dimensional stability) so that the fabricator could pin them to his table and lay out the tubes on top of them before jigging up, though.

Edited by Equus on Wednesday 21st August 11:45

[singlecoil]

So as long as you can extract 2D info from the 3D drawing all's good then.

[Equus]

singlecoil said:

So as long as you can extract 2D info from the 3D drawing all's good then.

Yes, but with Sketchup you cant.

See my very first response: Sketchup is fine for basic 2D drawings, such as are required for Planning (basically, pretty pictures, but orthographic and to scale), but a complete dead loss for technical architectural drawings such as are necessary for Building Regulations or construction purposes.

Even the very best, dedicated architectural 3D software (Revit) isn't quite as good as old-fashioned, 2D AutoCAD for those purposes, yet.



ETA: Actually, I lie: the free version of Sketchup isn't even fine for Planning drawings, as it can't easily present 2D plans and elevations to scale - you need the Pro version with Layout to do that.

Edited by Equus on Wednesday 21st August 11:42

[singlecoil]

Returning to the OP's question, no, there isn't a simple way of doing what he wants to do. The problem is the amount of information that needs to be input before a CAD model can be constructed.

Sketchup is a good choice for what he wants to do (other CAD apps are available).

The way I learned it was to go through a bunch of the many tutorials on Sketchup unitl I found a provider whose style I liked, then to watch a bit, pause the video, draw it on a separate computer, see that it wasn't the same, go back and rewatch, see that I missed a step, redo it, then proceed.

Took a while but it's the best value for the time spent I've ever had.

[Equus]

singlecoil said:

Returning to the OP's question, no, there isn't a simple way of doing what he wants to do. The problem is the amount of information that needs to be input before a CAD model can be constructed.

Sketchup is a good choice for what he wants to do...

Certainly agree with that, particularly the bit in bold.

There's a big chunk of time and effort required to master even SketchUp (which is easy peasy, honestly, by 3D CAD standards) to a level where it becomes useful, and in the time you'll spend doing that, you could communicate a HUGE amount of information to someone like me, equally effectively, by means of fag-packet pencil sketches.

One of the biggest mistakes that 'amateurs' make is using CAD for CAD's sake. They sometimes spend huge amounts of time drawing every tiny component in lovely detail, and missing the point that a construction drawing is a means to an end, not an end in itself. You should communicate the information in the quickest, easiest way that can reliably convey your ideas to the necessary level of detail, and the Mk. 1 pencil and whatever bit of paper happens to be laying around is often still the best way to do that - particularly at the conceptual end of the process.

[Equus]

To add:

If you do decide that you want to go to the trouble of learning SketchUp, then once you've mastered the basics, THIS is quite a nice guide to some functions that you may not easily discover by accident or tutorial.

[paulrockliffe]

Equus said:

To add:

If you do decide that you want to go to the trouble of learning SketchUp, then once you've mastered the basics, THIS is quite a nice guide to some functions that you may not easily discover by accident or tutorial.

Good link, will read later.

On the scale drawing thing, anything wrong with printing something out, measuring how big a known dimension is on the page, working out the scale and scribbling it on with your pencil? :-)

[Equus]

paulrockliffe said:

On the scale drawing thing, anything wrong with printing something out, measuring how big a known dimension is on the page, working out the scale and scribbling it on with your pencil? :-)

Yes: for Planning and B.Regs (and anyone else, being practical), it needs to be to a recognised scale (1:20, 1:50, 1:100 etc.)

...On account of the fact that you can't buy scale rules marked with 1:43.64.

[duffy78]

Kitchen fitter arguing with an architect about industry standard drawing requirements.


Classic.



Duffy, 23 year experienced Civil / Structural Draffy, where everything STILL gets drawn in 2D to be fabricated, constructed, erected etc.

[singlecoil]

duffy78 said:

Kitchen fitter arguing with an architect about industry standard drawing requirements.


Classic.



Duffy, 23 year experienced Civil / Structural Draffy, where everything STILL gets drawn in 2D to be fabricated, constructed, erected etc.

Thanks for that unnecessary and inaccurate piece of unpleasantness.

First, I'm not a kitchen fitter, and second I am not arguing about what is standard industry practice, I am arguing about whether it ought to be. Equus has made some good points.

[plasticpig]

Equus said:

No.

The majority of the industry still uses plain (non-BIM) AutoCAD, for simpler work of this sort.

I can't be bothered fking around converting/importing IFC to .dwg before I can even look at a drawing.

Fair enough. My experience is on the software side for the main contractor / sub contractor in terms of construction rather than actual design. Although plenty of small firms seem to use Revit these days.

Equus said:

Show me a bricklayer, joiner or plumber who works on site from a tablet, and I'll start to listen to you. Maybe.

Not quite down to individual tradesmen yet but in some medium / large construction projects the gang leaders will be using a tablet.

[Equus]

plasticpig said:

Although plenty of small firms seem to use Revit these days.

You've got to use Revit (or at least BIM) as a contractual obligation on a lot of government work, so yes, lots of small firms use it.

But beyond the cost of the licence (which isn't actually that bad, these days - it's only £864 a year more than 3D AutoCAD) is simply the point that Singlecoil has made: you need to feed the computer a lot more information to create a 3D model than you do to create a simple 2D drawing, and yet more, where you're feeding it BIM attributes, so there's also a time (hence cost for the client) overhead in doing so.

It comes back to the point I made above: a drawing (and other construction information, for that matter) is a means to an end. If you don't need detail, there's no point in wasting time creating it... but 3D/BIM forces you to do so. It's simply not necessary on smaller projects.

BIM is great, and advantageous, on large commercial buildings where you're integrating CAD designs from several consultants working on the design in parallel, and where you need that information to be handed over to the client as a record for the rest of the building's life. If you're knocking out a domestic extension for Mr & Mrs Smith, it's a costly irrelevance.

Even volume housebuilders have yet to see any major advantage in Revit (and most that I know haven't moved onto it, yet), because it doesn't make sense even at the scale of an individual housetype.

[biggiles]

If I'm creating a 3d design (probably a small widget, but same approach for a house exterior) then I use Sketchup, but I keep being advised to use Fusion 360 as it's "better". YMMV. Do you really want to fight a computer to do a 3d drawing - the learning curve is steep.

But OP it sounds like you really are looking at simple floor layouts at the post-Post-In stage? In which case something like HomeStyler (free) is very simple to use and gives you good-enough 3d / 2d representations. I designed an extension using this, then gave it to a pro to dress up professionally in his software (and point out better ideas). It's probably good enough to print out for a simple planning application. Draftsite has also been recommended on PH before.
https://www.homestyler.com/floorplan/

Autocad export is helpful, but unless it's a super-detailed design, it's pretty fast for a technical draughtsman to draw up a printed design on their preferred software.

[anonymous-user]

Equus said:

It depends what you use SketchUp for.

If you try to make it do 2D plans and elevations (ie. traditional architectural drawings), then yes, it's a pain in the ass.

If you use it to do 3D work, then my personal opinion is that it's as simple and intuitive as it's possible to make a reasonably flexible 3D CAD program... but yes, you need to understand (and be disciplined about using) basic CAD concepts like components, axes and layers.

I love working in SketchUp, though - to the degree that it's a nightmare for us, commercially, because I spend far too much time adding unnecessary detail and playing around with the presentation, instead of just getting the job out of the door, invoiced and onto the next one!

One thing is for sure: if you struggle to pick up SketchUp, you'll really struggle with AutoCAD/Draftsight. You'll need an understanding of orthographic projection, for a start, because the program won't do it for you.

I used Sketchup for 3D modelling for 3D printing. Then, I switched to Fusion 3D and that is when i realised Sketchup was a huge compromise.

It's a great tool, but seems to be a compromise.

[jules_s]

Equus said:

plasticpig said:

Although plenty of small firms seem to use Revit these days.

You've got to use Revit (or at least BIM) as a contractual obligation on a lot of government work, so yes, lots of small firms use it.

But beyond the cost of the licence (which isn't actually that bad, these days - it's only £864 a year more than 3D AutoCAD) is simply the point that Singlecoil has made: you need to feed the computer a lot more information to create a 3D model than you do to create a simple 2D drawing, and yet more, where you're feeding it BIM attributes, so there's also a time (hence cost for the client) overhead in doing so.

It comes back to the point I made above: a drawing (and other construction information, for that matter) is a means to an end. If you don't need detail, there's no point in wasting time creating it... but 3D/BIM forces you to do so. It's simply not necessary on smaller projects.

BIM is great, and advantageous, on large commercial buildings where you're integrating CAD designs from several consultants working on the design in parallel, and where you need that information to be handed over to the client as a record for the rest of the building's life. If you're knocking out a domestic extension for Mr & Mrs Smith, it's a costly irrelevance.

Even volume housebuilders have yet to see any major advantage in Revit (and most that I know haven't moved onto it, yet), because it doesn't make sense even at the scale of an individual housetype.

Good post(s)

Revit is taking over - no doubt about that. I met with an Autodesk re-seller yesterday and I was told Autodesk are phasing out all their 2D structural/mep packages and going full on with the revit solution.

When you use Revit you can see why, regardless of the BIM influence. It has 2d drafting in it at nigh on LT levels (if not greater) and the parametrics take designing to another 'level' - excuse the pun. But (as usual) Autodesk will ride it's cash cows for as long as possible so its use wont increase until the cost comes down and BIM takes over

I'm quite surprised the housebuilders haven't caught on to Revit tbh. I'd wager a fair bet the implementation is a lot closer than we imagine (and BIM)

[Insanity Magnet]

motco said:

I've just looked at the free Draftsight and it's the 2018 version and it ceases to run after the end of December this year.

I'll comment on this. Draftsight is moving to subs from the start of next year, which is extremely irritating for those of us that pay Dassault a small fortune for Solidworks licenses. Draftsight was offered as a free alternative to AutoCAD, replacing Intellicad which was packaged with SW (once upon a time) as a lure for AutoCAD /MDT users thinking of transferring allegiance.

Looking for something cheap to load up for checking PCB outlines, laser cutting profiles and the odd house layout, I've been playing around with QCAD, which appears to make a reasonable fist of importing / exporting DWGs and DXFs. Cheap for the pro version (about £30), it will run in a slightly dumbed-down free mode if you don't want to spend out. No idea if it's used much for architectural / civil stuff. Interface will be slightly odd for seasoned ACAD users.

Nanocad is another free-to-not-particularly-expensive package that seems to receive okay feedback (though Russian software, if that bothers anyone). I might try this next.

I'm loathe to spend much money on this and I resent paying DS more cash.

Edited by Insanity Magnet on Thursday 22 August 03:09

[CubanPete]

singlecoil said:

Equus said:

singlecoil said:

Thing that baffles me is why anybody would want to draw or read 2D plans instead of 3D. It's the equivalent of using black and white film when high resolution colour digital is available and for free.

1) Because you can scale measurements from 2D drawings (you can't, easily, from 3D perspectives).

2) Because you can more easily and coherently add dimensions to 2D drawings.

3) Because you can show technical detail, such as on sections, more easily on 2D drawings.

4) Because you will require (for the above reasons) 2D drawings for statutory approvals processes like Planning and Building Regulations.

Ultimately, 3D drawings are just pretty pictures, to give people some idea of what the finished product will look like. If you actually want to manufacture/build it, you still need 2D architectural/engineering drawings for all but the simplest items.

I thought I'd get a bite or two.

If you are working from paper then point 1 I grant you, but I don't work from paper, I work from a screen, and I can measure anything I want on a Sketchup drawing quickly, easily and accurately. Point 2 and three the same response basically. Point 4, very true. Paper drawings are like the lingua franca of such people.


I design and manufacture kitchens and I've never needed a 2D drawing.

I use Siemens NX (at work) all modelling is done in 3D, and then 2D drawings (orthographic views / sections) are then generated from the models for dimensioning. Programming for manufacture is all done from solid models, with the drawing only really used for inspection. I can import or export most formats.

Probably a bit extravagant for building / home use though.