You may be curious about using “Groups” vs. “Components”. Often our blog posts have emphasized the importance and effectiveness of “Components”. On rare occasion we may make a Group, but Components are everywhere and much more important.
After all, without components, SketchUp would be critically handicapped, and not useful for furniture application. Furniture is an arrangement of multiple parts, and these parts are often duplicated. They are also duplicated in multiple Scenes to make an effective drawing package that displays details, optional views, and dimensions. Without Components, any change of a part would require manual editing on every copy of that part in the file. This would indeed create a significant barrier.
However, there are times when I intentionally make a Group. In general, this happens when I want to save the original part configuration even though copies of that part are modified elsewhere.
Mainly there are two situations when I want to save a configuration no matter what happens to copies:
- When tracing over an imported image while developing a new model. At this early stage of design, I am capturing key shapes and sizes of the furniture parts in simple faces that I make Groups. These groups are copied off and edited and eventually worked into Components. No matter what happens in this editing phase, the original shapes (Groups) are retained on the imported image. Often, I return to that original shape, and start over, when I’m not satisfied with the resulting component.
- When making a tutorial of SketchUp steps shown in successive Scenes. Groups make it possible to show and save successive steps in modifying a part. With Components, you would need to make each step a unique component to avoid losing the previous saved step. This complicates the process of making the tutorial.
Here, you can see parts of this cabinet being traced on the imported image. These Groups are simple faces, copied, and then modified in that same file to make the final components. These original shapes and faces on the image (the Groups) are retained no matter what happens later in making the final components.
Tim
Comments
One more situation where groups make sense: When you've drawn components for a door or drawer. Select all those components and make the collection a group. That way, if you need to show the drawer part-way pulled out of the case or the door part-way open, you can easily move or rotate the group.
David, yes that works..... But I typically make my drawer and door assemblies "Components". This has the advantage of automatically changing all copies of these assemblies in the file when modifications are made to the arrangement of the parts. Often, I make adjustments in the sizes of these assemblies after many instances of the assembly is in the model. If I used "Groups" for these assemblies, I would have to find every copy in the file and change manually.
Tim
I don't think it's a big deal whether you use groups or components as long as you're able to find a solution to your drawing and get the storage unit or whatever it is properly rendered.
Thanks for sharing the difference between those two terms which could be confusing at times as they have really similar characteristics. Nevertheless, I think the situation often occurs with large furniture pieces like storage cabinets which have multiple units that need to be combined together.
I think it's great that SketchUp offers users many ways to handle their models. In my work flow, for example, I only use components even when creating nests as I would for frame and panel doors or drawers. That allows me to leverage the special features of components that groups don't share.
Recently I was working on a large model of a workbench will a number of drawers. this model is being used to create detailed plans. I was waiting for specs for the drawer pulls which still needed to be added. In the meantime, however, I continued setting up the views for the plans which includes exploded and other views. Because I made the drawers nested components instead of groups, I only needed to open one instance of each drawer size to insert the pull into all the copies.This made adding all the pulls very fast and efficient. Had I made nested groups instead of components, I would have had to edit every single drawer group to add the knobs.
I know some folks make groups of parts unless there's more than one in the model. So a table top would be a group but the legs would be components. In a large majority of my models there would end up being two or more copies of the table top so it makes sense to make it a component from the beginning.
I've heard complaints from some users that they get irritated because they start to edit something and discover they're editing all the other instances because they forgot they made a component instead of a group and they can't tell just by selecting it which it is. I think by being very consistent in your process you can avoid that kind of problem.
Of course there are other features of components that can be leveraged as well but everyone should develop the work flow that they find efficient and easiest.
-Dave
Your points about components are well taken. However, there is one place that I used groups all the time. When I want to move pieces together. I make them a group, move them, then "explode" the group.
For example, I'm making a saw stand and discovered I needed to make it a bit wider. I can lengthen the relevant components, but rather than moving all the parts to the side separately. I just make the parts on the side a group, then move them to attach to the longer components. Once moved, I explode the group, leaving the components intact.
Because I'm often making shop furniture or built-ins I frequently change the dimensions of what I'm making, perhaps to fit lumber I already have, or to fit a tool, or to fit a certain space in my shop. I use this all the time.
@GoBlu, I'm curious. Why bother to make a group if you're going to explode it after you move it. It's easy enough to select the components that need to be moved without first grouping them.
Incidientally, when I do want to create a sub-assembly such as a door or drawer, I make it a component instead of a group. That way I can still leverage the power of components with the nested component.
Log in or create an account to post a comment.
Sign up Log in