Richard_Morrison

This has been going on for YEARS!!! I have sent stuff in to tech support, and this doesn't get fixed. In the typical case (like the attached, just this a.m.), this just looks stupid. In the worst case, like Edward's, text vanishes. I have had a long text block of specifications where a critical sentence at the end got chopped off, which was not obvious. This often happens with text blocks inserted from the library, especially if the library contains blocks from prior versions. It seems to be primarily Rich Text, usually auto-width. Given the massive amounts of pain (not to mention liability) this is causing, I don't understand why we don't have a fix by now.

Joe, I was not arguing with the CAD detail window concept, just the advantages of having these detail windows split up in a multiplicity of files. IOW, you can keep detail parts for foundations on Floor 1, parts for floor details on Floor 2, parts for roof details on Floor 3, stair parts on Floor 4, etc. With a consistent detail naming system, like Uniformat, locating details within a single CAD detail list is easy.

Why is each separate category in a separate plan? You've got thirty floors. Why not make each floor a category of details, and keep all your details in one file?

In the past, I've found that there is a minimum that the muntins need to overlap the window frame, or it doesn't work. i.e. if they are just barely touching the frame, it may not work properly. You might want to look at this.

I hardly ever have in-person meetings anymore. join.me, gotomeeting, or even Skype can work. Most people seem fine with this.

You might get a more accurate response if you POST THE PLAN! Without it, we are just guessing.

At some point, based on our need for speed, we just draw a line and dimension to that.

Why don't you call local contractors to find out what they are paying? It would also give you an opportunity to introduce yourself, and indirectly find out if they might need your services in the future.

Wikipedia has an interesting article on the New Madrid seismic area in Missouri: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Madrid_Seismic_Zone, where thousands of deaths are predicted if the fault ruptures with an earthquake of a magnitude that was already felt there in 1811/1812. Building departments are doing a completely irresponsible job in preparing buildings to deal with this possibility. Many people probably will have to die to get significant changes implemented.

I see. So you go through the 16 steps here: http://www.ce-ref.com/Load/Seismic/ASCE_7_05_Seismic/ASCE_7_05_Seismic.html And then distribute the seismic loads to the various restraining shear walls, calculate the overturning moment, and then design the holddowns accordingly? Oh, and recalculate the beams with the correct omega overstrength factor when the upper shearwall is resting on a discontinuous element? Here's a simplified guide to learn how to do it: http://www.ce.memphis.edu/7119/PDFs/FEAM_Notes/Topic09-SeismicLoadAnalysis.pdf Okay, let's see a show of hands to see how many think "Anyone can do this.".... Next, we'll take up how to calculate connections and transferring shear loads through correctly sized chords. EDIT: I think is instructive to see from the map that there are a number of high seismic zones in the U.S. Not just California. For example, southern Illinois and Indiana. Right where the OP is from.

The WFCM is an excellent manual if you can get projects to meet the prescriptive requirements. We don't know where the OP is based, but around here, I suspect that maybe only 1 in 3 projects would meet the wall offset requirements, as well as the requirements for solid panels at the corners. We also have to evaluate the seismic loads and compare to the wind loads, and use whichever is higher.

How do you handle lateral load calculations, which are equally important?

Lew, While I may have butted heads a number of times with you on other issues, I have always respected your decisions about getting a design education, as well going so far as to join the AIA as an associate member.

I think it's great that you are asking the question. The best way is to start by recognizing that drafting and design are two very different skill sets and should not be used as synonyms. You can be a really great drafter but a poor designer. Drafting is a a technical skill that you probably CAN learn on your own, and it sounds like you have a good start on knowing what goes into building a home. Partnering ASAP with a good residential structural engineer will alleviate your structural concerns. Learning about building systems, waterproofing, insulation, moisture migration, etc. is an ongoing activity. Reading trade journals, like JLC or Fine Homebuilding is important, but you can do that at night. Design is something that you probably CAN'T learn well on your own, and will need to get training. If you sincerely want to be good, you will have to learn about good planning principals (circulation and flow), good proportion, architectural styles, lighting, furniture arrangement, and a myriad of other topics. I am not talking about being naturally artistic/creative/gifted, which might be nice qualities to have, but not particularly relevant. This is more about making additions not look "tacked on," that views and space are optimized; essentially creating a house that is a joy to live in, rather than an awkward and expensive container. I would look for local classes; perhaps there is a design school nearby, even if only an interior design school. You will learn things that will put you head and shoulders above your competition.

NAM = "Nap As Much"? (lol)

Are you suggesting eliminating driver's license qualifications and testing? Some people are bad drivers, but I don't see how reducing governmental oversight is going to improve the situation.

Maybe because this also establishes the adjacent wall as a bearing wall? (which the exterior/interior demarcation does, too.) Before the advent of bearing walls, this technique used to be the primary way to create a new framing area. However, I'm just guessing. Only the developers know for sure.

I agree that something has been lost. While I am happy to see technology remove drudgery, and improve accuracy in some cases, it has also made things appear to be easy to do, and the time and experience needed to learn what you don't know is getting short-circuited when people can just buy a software program and set up shop. A few years ago I found out that I was competing for a large residential addition against a financial planner who did residential design as a "fun" part-time hobby. I couldn't compete with his fees and I lost. Sheesh....

I think the OP was mainly asking if there is growing movement to require licensed professionals for plan submissions. As long as plans are being done competently, I haven't noticed it, and the unlicensed exemptions are pretty well established in statute. However, I have noticed that plan checkers are more demanding in what they are requesting, and will reject homeowner attempts at plans more frequently. Interestingly, there has been a movement where unlicensed designers are demanding to be licensed (primarily interior designers) that is getting pushback, including from designers who really DON'T want to deal with licensing issues.

Well, let's see. Back in the 70's, I was a college kid working at a very large engineering firm in downtown Chicago. Because some of the buildings that the firm was working on were designed decades before, revisions were being made to the original LINEN drawings. Lots of other work on onionskin or sepias. The chief drafters were already old guys when I was there, and were treated almost like gods, only a small notch below the actual engineers, who were not that numerous compared to the drafting staff. Some of the older draftsmen actually wore green eyeshades and most wore aprons. There was a very clearly defined hierarchy for the drafting staff, with job titles including junior, senior, etc. Most of the drafting staff were not interested in pursuing an engineering degree; they already had a profession. Calculators were a novelty and hand-written calc's were the norm. So, excuse me if your attempt to school me on how things really "used to be" is falling on deaf ears.

PTP. (Post the Plan)

A court/deck/porch etc. is an EXTERIOR room, whereas "Unspecified" is always an INTERIOR room. So with the wrong room, you accidentally might have an exterior wall extending "inside" the house. Also, it's possible that adjacent attic rooms might have an impact. Don't know.

There are actually quite a few structural and other qualities set by the room type, which can affect the model display. The Reference Manual pp. 335-336 has a good summary of these, which is a surprisingly large list, and worth reviewing.

I was trying to figure out why your first floor walls were two stories tall in that location. In general, I think it is not a good idea to leave rooms as "unspecified." Just pick a room type that is close. For the wall over the front door, I changed room types in adjacent rooms, but couldn't find anything that had any effect. So, I would just pull down the top of the two-story first floor wall. It seems to stay. Since it's not really an elegant solution, may I have my choice of just one grandchild?

dshall, Here's an easier fix for your problem plan. Change the second floor roof deck room type from "Unspecified" to something like "Court." Fixed.