Convert SketchUp files to .calibz files?

[carowe]

I am working with CA x12 Interiors and do quite a bit of work with furniture that just isn't available in the CA catalog.  When I model the furniture in SketchUp and import into CA, the files are often quite large.  So my question is, is there a way to convert the sketchup files to a calibz file or is there a way to may the SKP file smaller so that it doesn't bog down my plan so much?  

[tommy1]

My guess would be to check the face count?

[Alaskan_Son]

5 hours ago, carowe said:

I am working with CA x12 Interiors and do quite a bit of work with furniture that just isn't available in the CA catalog.  When I model the furniture in SketchUp and import into CA, the files are often quite large.  So my question is, is there a way to convert the sketchup files to a calibz file or is there a way to may the SKP file smaller so that it doesn't bog down my plan so much?  

 

When you import SKP files into Chief, they are no longer SKP files, so it's not the file type causing you problems.  It's almost certainly the face count as Tommy suggested.  Sketchup has a handful of Polygon Reduction plug-ins you could try, but better yet would probably be adjusting your modeling habits.  If you need super accurate symbols then there's only so much you can do, but as much as possible I would consider these quick tips...

1. Only model the details that you actually need.  Take a toilet for example...If you never need to show the lid open, don't model the inside of the bowl, don't model the inside of the tank, don't model the seat, and just make the main body, the seat, and the lid all part of the same solid object instead of 3 separate objects with faces that will never be seen.  All those extra internal faces are just unnecessary.  You could very very easily model a toilet that looks the exact same as another this way but with only 10% of the faces.
2. Only model TO the level of detail that you actually need.  Take these 3 following symbols for example...

 

They're just some generic rings.  The one on the left is 1728 faces, the one in the middle is 288 faces, and the one on the right is 72 faces.  The one on the left was modeled using a perfect circle for the extrusion path and a perfect circle for the extrusion profile.  The one in the middle was modeled using a perfect circle for the extrusion path and a hexagon for the extrusion profile.  The one on the right was using a 12 sided polygon for the extrusion path, and a hexagon for the extrusion profile.  I just turned up the smoothing angle as necessary to help reduce the edginess (see attached files)...

3 rings.calibz

 

If I were trying to model a standalone marble centerpiece for a high end rendering I would probably use the symbol on the left.  If it was a floatie to toss into a pool I might use the one in the middle, and if it were part of small chain with 40 links then I would likely use the one on the right.  For the latter example, you can see how a chain with 69,000 faces could pretty easily be reduced to 2,900 with hardly a noticeable difference.

 

 

 

[robdyck]

@Alaskan_Son

Great Explanation!

[robdyck]

5 hours ago, carowe said:

I am working with CA x12 Interiors and do quite a bit of work with furniture that just isn't available in the CA catalog.  When I model the furniture in SketchUp and import into CA, the files are often quite large.  So my question is, is there a way to convert the sketchup files to a calibz file or is there a way to may the SKP file smaller so that it doesn't bog down my plan so much?  

I do a fair bit of modelling showing interiors as well so I understand the issue. Obviously you can take Michael's advice and work on those models to reduce the face count. But let's say that sort of thing doesn't interest you. A couple other options:

1. Buy a ridiculously fast machine...looks like you've pretty much got that!
2. avoid the really, really nice 40 MB chair with the throw and pillows and replace it with a chair that doesn't exceed, say, 10 MB (and so on for other furniture).

And to reduce the Chief plan file size, you can purge your materials and CAD blocks. I just did that with a plan and it reduced a 228 MB file down to 54 MB.

[Alaskan_Son]

You can also get into the habit of placing objects onto custom layers so that you can specifically toggle off layers for objects you really don't need to see in any given view.  For example, do you really need that chandelier with 500,000 faces while you're only modeling a cabinet in the bathroom downstairs?  I sometimes use working layer sets that are set up very specifically for this reason. 

[robdyck]

5 hours ago, carowe said:

So my question is, is there a way to convert the sketchup files to a calibz file

I'll also add that I rarely add sketchup furniture or lighting models to my Library, simply because I don't want those objects slowing Chief down on every plan. Rather, I store the sketchup files in organized folders, and I use a plan file to store models for which I've altered the materials that I want saved. 

[DzinEye]

1 hour ago, Alaskan_Son said:

If it was a floatie to toss into a pool I might use the one in the middle

FYI...Dept. of Consumer Affairs requires min. of 300 faces on pool floaties

[CADustin]

For Sketch up and CAD type modeling, I've found that the real killer is the resolution of your shapes aka your Level of Detail (LOD).

 

Using Alaskan Sons well done example, if I was going to make a ring in sketch up, rings are made with a circle looped around with another circle looped over each individual segment. 

 

 

So the polygon count is going to be the number of segments used to make these circles multiplied together, so we need to things like how large and visible this ring is going to be.  Is it a large part of some lighting fixture that needs to look smooth and rounded or is it a pull on some cabinet hardware?  Knowing where it's going will help you pick your battles on where to spend your polygons.

 

Example A

Example A has 60 segments around the circle and 60 sides around each segment which makes a very smooth looking ring for a grand total of 7200 polygons.  But wait!  60x60 is 3600!  It is, but all your quad surfaces will get divided by two into tri's on export so we double our count to 7200.

 

Example B

Example B has 16 segments around the ring and 6 sides per segment, doubled for Tri's for a much more Chief friendly 192 polygons.

 

So by reducing the ring segments and sides to something more manageable, we can drastically reduce our file sizes.  Add on top of that, AS's correct point about removing what isn't visible/needed.  If we assume these rings are going to be pulls for our kitchen cabinets, we know that they'll be very small, and no one will see the backside.  Looking at both rings together at a reasonable distance shows that we don't need all that detail in this situation and our low poly example with 192 polygons would be the better choice, more so if you ripped off the back of the ring leaving 16 segments and 4 sides for 64 x 2 = 128 per pull, lets say 10 pulls in the kitchen, 1280 polygons total for our pulls, still way less than if we used just one ring from example A.

 

And when you pull back they look pretty much the same...

 

Sadly, getting to a lower resolution is something that I'm unfamiliar with in Sketch up so I'll step aside and let some pros step in to help you with that but this might help get you started...

 

https://help.sketchup.com/en/making-detailed-model-lightweight-way

 

I'm curious how this works out since it's a question I get often during IBS/KBIS, keep us informed and let me know if I can help you out.

 

Thanks,

Dustin