Richard_Morrison

You should make friends with the "Fence Select" tool in the Edit toolbar.

Hey cousin Mike, You know the drill. Post the plan.

Generally, I've found that "QuietRock" http://www.quietrock.com/product is cheaper and performs almost as well as resilient channels in a wall.

Mick, I was doing it the way I described in my original post.

Glenn, I think you may be the only person in the world who completely understands this program. Thanks!

I am trying to put a larger fascia gutter on a house. I unlock the gutter layer and replace the default gutter with the fascia gutter out of the library. When I switch views (like to an elevation view from the plan view), the gutter switches back to the small default gutter. WTF? Is there a trick I'm missing here? Am I going to have to place these all manually with a molding polyline?

I think I need a video.

I am trying to wrap my head around when it is better to use the "Floor supplied by foundation room below" vs. just doing a lowered slab with stem walls on the same level. I have never really figured out why garages, for example, use this concept. The reference manual is no help. I'm thinking that it can help show all the concrete work on one level, but beyond that, I am unclear. Anyone figured out the logic here?

Check the material texture source. The good one is probably pointing to a valid texture location, whereas the bad one is pointing to a different directory that doesn't have that texture, so it is defaulting to a generic color. EDIT: Oops, just saw Jared got there ahead of me. I should read all prior posts first. FURTHER EDIT: Okay, took a closer look at this. Even though named the same material, the "Not Good" texture is pointing to an old X3 library material, which you probably don't have any more. The "Good" texture is pointing to an X6 user library material, which you probably still have. Most of us don't have either, so they will look identical to us. (Just like your "Not Good".)

I miss Tim O'D.

Tricia, Your description is confusing. (If it's fixed, how can it spin around the arrow? What arrow?) Can you post a screen shot?

A more robust detail management system, where the details that are stored in the library remember their scale, and can be placed directly into layout at the correct size, correctly titled with the scale shown.

What I want in schedules is bi-directional associativity, so that you can make a change in either the object or the schedule, and it will update the other accordingly.

Who said I didn't want it in Chief? I've posted that suggestion before.

One of the reasons I use Archicad for CDs is the automatic referencing feature. You can create a detail bubble and point it to a specific detail, and the reference will be forever correct and updated, even if you move the detail to a different layout page and different position on the page. That said, even with a full page of door details in Chief, with labeling like "Threshold at Front Door" or "Pocket Door Jamb", is a schedule reference to that detail REALLY necessary?

Foundations with no wall above can do this. Make sure you delete any foundations below deleted walls.

Let me put it another way. To even check the reference, you have to verify first where the door/window is by looking at the plan or elevation, and then make sure that you've referenced the right detail. Why add those extra steps when you can just put a reference bubble on the elevation? This is a system that is set up to make referencing tedious and prone to errors. And in general, it buys you very little extra information in the residential world. In a commercial project that might have several types of metal door jambs, I could see it, but I would only reference a particular TYPE of profile (like Type "A"), not a location on the plans, which has a VERY high possibility of typographical error and future change. It creates additional potential liability. Only a masochistic architect would institute this type of schedule.

More seriously, while this system has been used frequently, I think it is a not a great way to reference door & window details because it is very hard to cross-reference. I believe (and most of the architectural production gurus seem to concur) that any non-standard conditions should be referenced off of the elevations.

Can't you do this with a macro?

It's important to have a separate file folder for X6 and X7 projects, if you are mixing the two in your office. I am surprised, though, that there seem to be major hardware issues. I run X7 on an old laptop sometimes, and it seems to work as well as X6. At this point, unless you are trying not to upgrade licenses for cost reasons, I'm not sure why you wouldn't just get the whole office on X7 and be done with the version compatibility issues.

I wouldn't blame the engineers for this. They are just following the Code relative to fairly recent provisions for concrete.

Huh? Unless you use a birdsmouth, the rafter forces will be normal to the slope of the rafter. A clip doesn't change that.

Yeah, but if vertical, you really should be cutting a birdsmouth into the rafter to avoid introducing lateral forces.

One interesting aspect to Sketchfab is that the online models can be set to use VR technology with a very simple renaming convention. (You can then use Oculus Rift, for example.) I am starting work with a client who works for Oculus, and will be interested to see how well this works with architectural models.

Interesting. I use Chief to create concept designs and do the construction docs in Archicad. (Unless it's a small project.) DWG is the best way to go, though.