RL-inc

Agreed with Lew The model method is convenient when creating terrain as well.

Regarding the truss to wall connections it is my experience that they were generally required at he exterior wall lines and along ibt weereior shear walls. The main reason is to resist uplift. As mentioned h2.5 clips or h1 are pretty standard but there is a new toe screw detail that allows for an @ 4-6" timber-lok screw to be run up through the top plate into he truss on an angle. Much faster installation.

Joe Are you certain that you are not referring to the code section that requires braced wall panels to be a max of 25' apart in a wall line for lateral shear in a prescriptive path condition? While it is quite possible that the trusses are designed to have midspan support every 25' that seems like overkill.

May have to go direct to tech support on this one.

Sorry In the core

CA has a a librayvfull of cad details in he fire and more available as bonus content.

Also adding a proper signature is always a good idea.

The cad to walks tool has been used with mixed reviews. Try a search.

I would at least add the required cricket at the dead valley so the owner or builder can see what will be needed.

You are most certainly not using CA the way it is intended IMO. The program is designed to create a model that contiualy updates as you develope it. The big advantage is that as it evolves and changes all the lines that you have been editing are automatically updated as you go. (Not to mention the actual model that you have access to- which is the real power of the program.) Then as David mentioned using different anno and layersets is the key to keeping all layout views organized and associated with one plan.

Thanks Ted. Much appreciated

Might be easier to trace in current view and then edit area to reverse.

Great looking pool. Any chance you could post here as a symbol for others to use.

Agreed wit Robert- took me a while to catch on to this as well

In my experience using thecdwg as a base to trace over is the best way. Cad to walls has long been a hit and miss proposition

I am not all that versed in sketchup but I can't imagine that CA can't produce at least the quality that you would get from a skp model.

You bet Glad to give a little back now and then.

Michael- This looks very promising- In the images you attached how do you get the one footprint to show the solid fill with the no wall and the other to display as normal.

Here is a quick one I made a ways back face mount door.calibz

The timber truss out of P-lines is how I have dine in the past. See attached symbols for examples 10-12TT.calibz CURVED TT 10-12.calibz

Love to see the detail if you want to post it

Michael- are you meaning create 2 plan foot prints in the same cad detail and overlay them?

IMO I think the simplest way to get what most building departments are looking for is the plan footprint method. the footprint updates well enough to keep it live during revisions and the cad work for the site plan components is easily accomplished with lines and polylines.( fill added needed.)

I believe Scott is referring to using the live plan view that he is creating the actual model in. Meaning the view he is drawing the walls,floors,roofs in Them he adds the terrain and that becomes the basis for his site plan. The other method is the cad detail we have discussed with the plan footprint. Either way layer sets can be used to display the desired information. Try YouTube for additional videos

Are you drawing an actual building plan and Then creating a site plan off of it? Would recommend having a live plan as Chop mentions and then using cad detail as the site plan. Plan footprint is then located at the desired location on the site and details and notes added.