SNestor

Yea...knew that. But...someone else must be using? No/Yes??? We can't be the only 2...

So...I'm listening to a webinar yesterday that Dan at Chief Experts/Pro Academy was holding. The topic was new features in X10. Seems like a topic you would do in March...but so be it. Early on he covered "Plan Views" and made the categorical statement that to him this feature didn't do much for him. I was a bit shocked...as I use this feature all the time...and have found it to be very useful...but, he has been using the software much longer than I have and maybe is "set" in the way he uses the software. One thing I've noticed about Dan is that he doesn't seem to use "annotation sets" much either...and if you aren't really using "anno sets" then it's somewhat logical you'd not be using plan views either. For me...being able to assign a specific "reference set" to each plan view is incredible. This feature alone makes "plan views" very powerful. Just wondering what the consensus is....are you using "Plan Views" in your day to day work flow? Thanks

+1. Well said. PBR wasn’t needed...nor does it even really work OOB...all it did for me is create frustration. I don’t even bother with it any longer. The least Chief should have done is record a series of videos showing how to use it...or better yet, how to get it to work. Condoc’s and stair improvements...please

Yes...I’m slow. Just figured this out. Although the way this works isn’t exactly clear...at least to some of us. One of the reasons I posted this topic was to help those who may have not realized how rich text worked.

I have multiple text styles also...but my point is that you can "over ride" the text style that is assigned to the layer easily when using rich text. The text style that is assigned to the layer for text is just there as a place holder...for your default text style for that layer (hope that makes sense). When you place rich text you can assign any size, font or color to any or all parts of the text. It will be placed on the layer you designated...but not necessarily use the "default" text assigned to that layer. Yes? Or...am I confused.

I guess I'm just figuring this out...but, when you place text on a drawing using "rich text"....it will be placed on the layer specified in the annotation set...but, the size and font of the text is really independent of the layer. You can increase the size of some or all of the text and you can even change the font. So...bottom line, with Rich Text...the layer does not control the text at all. Am I correct...or am I missing something?

After 20 years using a PC I switched to an iMac...I will never go back to a PC/Windows. You can can build a faster PC...but I’m no computer wiz and I just want the thing to work when I need it. Have to say that Apple just builds stuff that works. If you switch you may find there is a short learning curve...and there are some things you can do in a PC that you might wish you could with your Mac.

+1. Thanks for the tip!

I switched my plan view to "Electrical Plan View"...which I believe is an OOB view...then, I switched the CAD layer to "electrical, connections". Then, I used the Arc Tool...start/end/arc. Worked perfectly for me. I like this method...much easier to control where the arc goes...and fewer clicks and editing. There is one limitation...and that is you can't bend and shape the arc like you can the standard "electrical connection" line. But...you can use the spline tool to achieve this "flexibility". I think for most situations...the ARC tool works adequately.

Disregard...I figured it out. You have to save the view...once saved, the arrows fill in solid. Somedays...are just weird.

Is this normal for a section callout. When a live view of the section is created...the arrow fill disappears. Is there a setting that will keep this arrow filled no matter... See the attached pic.

Thanks...that was easy. I had checked the box for "By Layer"...and when you change the line type in the layer...it changes not only the line but the circle for the callout also.

Is there a way to have the section line style be "dashed"...but the callout circle to be a solid line. The attached picture shows what I'd like to achieve... Can this be done thru some sort of setup...or will I have to use a cad line to connect to the callout?

Questions regarding REF SETS and PLAN VIEWS; - Do any of you create PLAN VIEW SETS for 1/8" scale drawings...possibly an electrical plan view...or maybe a view set for a home owner showing furniture placement? - Are any of you creating a separate "View Set" that just shows "ceiling framing"...either on the first or 2nd floors? I would think you'd want to keep this separate from "roof framing views". - How do you handle "roof framing" views when you have framing on two (or multiple) levels? Say...a one story garage and and two story main house? (see attached pic). Do you just use a unique "Reference Set" to refer to the framing on the hidden floor?

Thanks Scott...that did it. The trick is "DRAW REFERENCE FLOOR FIRST"

I'm trying to create a REF SET layerset to use with my 2nd floor architectural floor plan. What I want is to have all lower level walls appear as dashed lines...if there is no floor above the wall. - I know I could put some of the walls on different layers...and then turn on only the walls that were on the specific layer. But...is there a better or simpler way to accomplish this? Maybe I should just use CAD lines? - I thought if I "filled" the rooms with solid white color it would hide the walls below...but that doesn't seem to work either.

Joe - question about your saved views; - Will you be creating plan views that are 1/8" scale specific? Or...do you always send plan views at 1/4"? - How do you handle "roof framing" views when you have framing on two (or multiple) levels? Say...a one story garage and and two story main house? (see attached pic). Do you just use a reference set to refer to the framing on the hidden floor? - Also...do you create a separate view for the 2nd floor ceiling joist framing (separate from the roof framing view)? Thanks!

Ok...so the answer is no. Manual edit is required. Auto building floors then almost always will require “time” to make fixes. Thanks all for your comments and expertise.

Scott...great videos. I learned a lot about skylights...and especially tunnels.

Is there a way to control the number of trimmers created at stair openings. In the pic below...the software has placed a double trimmer at the stair opening on both sides...but, on one side there is actually a load bearing wall and only a single trimmer is required so that the joists can bear on the wall. Is there someplace in the software that controls this? Thanks.

Perry...thanks. I think that is a good plan...and what I am working toward. Are the lineweights thicknesses that are represented when you are drawing a good representation of how they will appear at 1/4" scale in Layout?

I understand how to set lineweights specific to each layer set...my question is more specific. - When you send a view to layout does it matter if you have lineweights turned on or off? I assume that the view goes to layout with the lineweights specified in the layerset...but, these can be turned on or off. - Also, if printing to PDF from layout...should lineweights be on? Or does it really matter? Thanks all...I appreciate all the feedback.

Just wondering about line weights.... - When you send a view to layout, do you have to have lineweights turned on? Or...can lineweights be controlled (on or off) in layout? - For plan views...what line weight size is a good place to start. Main layer vs Interior and Exterior Layers. This has always been an issue for me. For me...it's been trial and error. Thanks...I know it's a basic setup question but maybe some answers from those that use the software everyday to make a living will help the rest of us save some time and get the software setup quickly and so it works.

This past weekend I walked through 4 homes under construction here in beautiful Westfield, Indiana. The floor system used n each home was I-Joists. No conventional 2x10's to be seen...looks like that method of construction has finally been banished...at least in high priced homes. The homes I walked were all large and will probably sell for a million dollars or more...the lots in this subdivision sell for anywhere from 150K to 250K. For you California guys...this is a high priced home in Indiana...these homes will all be over 6,000 sf with full basements and very high quality finishes. All but one home used roof trusses...so, interior load bearing walls were mostly non-existent...except for the home with the conventionally framed roof. In all of the homes there wasn't a single case where I saw an I-Joist located beneath a wall above. In fact...it appeared to me that the joists were deliberately spaced to make sure there wasn't an I-joist under a wall. The spans were long in all cases...and the I-Joists were spaced 16" oc. Honestly...I'm not sure what our code requires here in Indiana...I can attest to the fact that code compliance for single family construction is not as restrictive as some states...such as sunny California. That said, I'm not sure what good it would do to place an I-Joist under a non-load bearing wall. The only thing I can see happening is an electrician or a plumber drilling out the top chord to get his work done. (apology would come later in the day...I'm sure). I also think that the lumber dealers here in central Indiana engineer the floors...and most likely even get the design stamped by an engineer. I believe I-Joist blocking is placed (and specified) for all point loads. As for Chief...I wish the software would just space the joists as specified...and let us manually place double joists as needed. But...I also want the stair tool improved. Looks like we will be waiting on both "wishes" for a bit longer.

OK...thanks for the info Michael.