RL-inc

Viki- Not sure who you have been talking to But I use High Desert Computers in Redmond- can't even imaging he'd be anywhere near that kind of $$$$ for a clean install. DM me if you want more info.

Agreed with all of the above- industry standards. common studs lengths: 88 5/8" 92 5/8" 104 5/8" Then add 4 1/2" for plates creates rough wall height.

Don't get me started on training new building department employees . Our plan review department has gone to an eplans system and requires that all pages be named in this way. It was a bit of a PITA in the beginning but has worked out ok.

Great idea Rene on the no room def. I'll give that a whirl sometime

To follow up on Wendy's contribution - yes, that page naming convention is an industry standard of sorts. (Our local jurisdiction requires pages be labeled in this fashion.) Architectural pages are labeled as follows: A0.0# for plan notes and general A1.0# for plan views A2.0# for elevations A3.0# first sections So on Mechanical M0.0# Structural S0.0# Etc.... Not at computer to delve deeper but I am sure a quick search will offer the full list and description.

You always have the option of creating any given material as needed in CA.

Yikes That's quite the design conundrum. IMO no matter how you work this roof you will have an odd look based on the footprint. Maybe more of a modern slant with a simpler shed plane would help.

Unless I am missing something Kbird's method is correct in regards to how I construct this situation and how it is built in the field. I am always manually adjusting the top and bottom of foundation walls for sloping lot conditions. It can be tedious but that's what is required and sometimes.

Agreed with all of the above. While CA does a passable job on most of the truss design I need the small details at the fascia line can be frustrating. One in particular are truss tails that show an unusual drop at the very end unless pulled away from the fascia which leaves a unwanted gap in plan view

Hard to tell for sure but it appears that the span on the addition is narrower than the main body. If so you need to adjust the pitch and set the ridge heights to match. If the spans are equal than plate heights may need to be adjusted. In general the overall roof design doesn't look right. The hip on the right side of the main body seems odd to me .....but that is just my opinion.

Will need to rebuild or manually lower roof planes as well if the have been created

Tigers idea makes sense. Should reduce the overall file size I think.

Very simple to import SKP file into CA- I download from 3D Warehouse to a specific file and then import as 3D symbol. Works great

I was not aware- didn't see it in the OP signature.

How about a dbx for the footing to check like "builds with wall footing" or something that tells the pad to generate as part of the continuous footing.

I have done several flat roofs as accents on designs and simply change the pitch to 1/4" and away we go. Not sure of any additional issues created.

I designed a TI for my wife's Barber shop and there are several additional factors such as ventilation and hygiene maintenance issue that you may want to check into.

I am assuming that the drawings will need to be stamped by an engineer? Member sizing and connection specs will need to be shown and documented? Not sure if this project is one that would be better left to an engineering firm with in an in house draftsman for the cd work.

You need to open copy the material and rename it first. Then you can open it and edit the pattern and texture size as needed. When done save to library for future use

Agreed Michael- an accurate thread title that describes a subject that I can help with or have interest in is always a great start in getting my help.

I only use it for rough design to keep an eye on the overall size of the structure as I am working on the early versions. Love the living area poly line to confirm actual sq.ft.

Sorry- don't help anyone.

Ditto to the above- and DRAW DRAW DRAW !!!! Anything - just keep experimenting with all the features of CA. One more suggestion that may or may not be important- depending on how much actual building or construction experience you have you may want to enlist the help of a more experienced designer or architect to help you understand what you are really drawing. Pretty pictures that can't be built do help anyone.

As Michael said- Must be done on each floor to regenerate the label for each.

This forum is one of the most valuable CA resources available and the members that frequent it have invested a lot of time helping each other here. It is not the job of this forum to teach the basics of CA that should be learned by proper training and hard work. CA is a great program that can rapidly produce amazing results in that hands of an experienced user but it appears that as it grows in popularity more new users feel like a quick post here will get answers that will take the place of real education. I find the OP attitude offensive and disrespectful to the regular contributors to this forum that have always been professional and helpful. Good riddance.