stephenbc

5 hours ago, Richard_Morrison said:

a triangulated irregular network method, rather than a warped surface.

I am in total agreement with this. TINs (while honouring spot elevations and contour lines/break lines) with smoothing algorithms have been in use for decades.  There are a number of companies that specialize in providing the code and I suspect it would be quite easy for CA to incorporate such code in their system as a replacement to the horrible algorithm that exists today,   

The survey of the project area has to be spot on...and TINs can honour each surveyed point, yet open the door for surface tools that provide way better control over the end result. While we are at it, it would be great to have the ability to store at least two surfaces in a plan.  Elevation views need natural and finished grade...yes, I know, we create a symbol of the natural, and use it as such when creating elevations, but frankly, I can't even get the natural to honour the survey.

9 minutes ago, RodCole said:

I hope this is helpful and also that I understood what your question was.

Yes, you've understood the question.  And thanks for the advice...it's exactly how I've gotten around this issue...and others!

On ‎6‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 3:56 PM, joey_martin said:

Are you sure you aren't missing something in the process?

It's entirely possible!  I do have an issue with joists being placed in locations that don't allow for a standard subfloor (4'x8' sheets) to be properly supported.  A curved wall may have something to do with it. 

1 minute ago, glennw said:

 

Why not use a General Framing member?

Could do, but my question is really about whether the component name has anything to do with identification of specific framing members when reporting in a schedule or material list.

I need to frame floors manually, as the auto part of placing joists in CA isn't putting them in the best place.  That's fine, but I have a couple of questions related to framing members like sill plates, for example.  When sill plates are created automatically they appear to be assigned a 'component' (sill plate) name as the header in their Dbx.  I don't see a menu option for creating sill plates, so presumably one can create these from primitives, then simply assign the appropriate (sill) layer for display control.  But creating a sill plate from primitives doesn't allow one to recognize this as a framing component, unless perhaps one modifies a joist object to a sill plate.  Even after modifying a joist to a sill plate, the component name is maintained as a floor joist.  My question is, does this matter later on for processing material lists, schedules, etc.?  Are there any other implications of manually creating framing members from other framing objects?

Try this thread:

Michael did a video that nicely illustrates how to make these panels for each wall.

I did a couple of hours ago.

As I thought...thanks for your help and suggested resolution.

Did the alignment icon show after you rebuilt the foundation?

Looks like your approach will provide a wall that aligns the way I want it, but the program clearly thinks its wrong because the 'align with wall below' icon shows in the lower tool bar.  Solver...did you say it worked for you...specifically for the curved wall?

Interesting idea/approach...I'll give it a try and let you know.

Yes, I would like to have the siding overlap the foundation.  Is there a way to rebuild the foundation without having to delete the current foundation?  The reason I ask is that this test plan is a lot smaller than the split/stepped level foundation I'm working on, and I'd hate to lose all that manual work.  I've tried the F12 function (Rebuild Walls/Floors/Ceilings), but that doesn't resolve the issue.

I have Eric, but it doesn't resolve the issue.

I'd like to offset the above grade wall such that the outside of the sheathing is even with the outside of the concrete foundation.  This seems to work well for straight walls, but I'm having a heck of a time getting it to work for curved walls.  My project is quite big, so I've whipped up a test model which seems to illustrate the same issue.  Is this a bug or am I missing something?  I appreciate any assistance.  Thanks. 

Test split level x10.plan

Yes, draw walls for your first floor, set the layer display for walls to just Walls, Normal, and that should provide an outline for the building.  The rest of your lines/components are just cad items.

Yup, I'll add my thanks as well.  I constantly beaver away at learning new things, as a direct result of the issues and tips posted on this forum.  Perhaps one day I'll gain the courage to provide advice as well.

I'll add to this that there is an element of computer software awareness that needs to be understood.  One achieves this through a mentality that supports the understanding that software only delivers what you are after if you understand the workflow...each software program is different when it comes to workflow.  This takes time, patience and perseverance.  Utilizing this forum and CA's videos is extremely helpful for those starting out.

Picking up on this older thread, I'm trying to place nanawalls on two walls, one of them curved.  Using the pass-thru window as the initial work-around to create the opening, it seems to work fine for walls that are orthogonal to each other.  But, I'm having difficulty getting the required behaviour for a corner that has one slightly curved wall.  That is, I'd like to remove the corner portion of the wall.

Any ideas on how to get this to work?  An example is attached.

Corner windows.plan

Not sure what is going on here, but my analysis points to something related to having the adobe brick on the inside of the wall type you've defined.  For example, if you remove the adobe brick on the inside, it all seems to work fine.

good point, Glenn...thanks.

I suspected that's what would be required...thanks for the confirmation.

I'm looking at the potential design of a concrete drive that is about 250' long. Main restriction is maximum slope (code), but would like some sections less steep than others...basically it would be to accommodate code and aesthetics.

I'm wondering if one could simply draw a road and set its slope based on its segment length?  I don't see a dialogue box option to set a slope angle for the whole road segment, especially if it has many points along it's length.  

Given a better understanding of the behavior of these options, is there a way one can set a slope for a straight road/driveway or a spline road/driveway segment.  The application would be a design slope which ultimately defines the degree of cut and fill.  Or, is this too much to ask at this point?