jbaehmer

Hello.  Sent you a PM

Hello.  I am out of the Tacoma, WA area.  Sent you a PM.

Sent you a PM

Hello.  Sent you a PM yesterday.  Thanks.

I have multiple template pages, however, I put them at the end of my layout.  That way, when I look at the sheet number for the program, it corresponds with the actual sheet number of the plans.

Try resetting the side windows in "Preferences->Reset Options->Reset Side Windows

This should get it to appear again.  You will need to rearrange the other side windows if you have them docked somewhere else.

Thank you!  I was a pleasure working you also.  

22 minutes ago, Adam_Gibson said:

 

 Yes, I mentioned it. It was a revelation because I always have to make sure I'm referring to the correct layout page when I draw a callout on an elevation. 

ok.  Then open the camera view and in the "text below line" check "automatic".  As long as the view is sent to layout, a number will show up there.  If the view is not, it will be blank.

3 hours ago, Adam_Gibson said:

Hi, Joe,

 

At the Users' Group meeting in August, it was pointed out that there is a way to automatically link elevation callouts to plan callouts. I've known that the bottom line populates correctly in the plan, based on where one places the elevation in the layout. E.G.: if I move the elevation to a different page, the plan callout changes automatically. But I've always (and continue to) enter the corresponding information in the elevation callout manually. For the life of me, I can't remember how it was done automatically. But thanks for the response. Hopefully, someone from the meeting was taking better notes than I!

Just taking a wild stab... but are you referring to a camera callout of the elevation view and showing correctly in a plan view?  Where the page is automatically changed depending on the page the viewport is on?  I think I remember you and I briefly talking about that at the UGM....but don't remember for sure.

19 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

Thanks Jared, I appreciate you taking the time to try and help us out, but your example is not quite the same.  Try creating a much shorter energy heel or try using larger top and bottom chords.  

 

Energy heels work just fine down to a certain point.  Where that point occurs I'm not exactly certain but once the combined height of the top and bottom chord reach a certain percentage of the heel height, the energy heel will no longer generate.  Try getting an 11-1/4" heel with 2x6 top and bottom chords.  

Gotcha!  I wasn't aware of the specific parameters you were going for.  Yes...trying to do that doesn't give the same thing.  I see where you are going with it now.  Definitely an issue that needs attention.

2 hours ago, jcaffee said:

Both Dropbox Business and OneDrive (via Office 365 Business and SharePoint) offer advanced file library features.  Not sure about GoogleDrive, as it's been years since I've used them, but I would imagine their business service has similar offerings.  That said, CA is not engineered for multi-user collaborative operations.  Therefore, any efforts will always be a kludge.  Backup early and often.

1

I do not have Dropbox Business.  Requires 5 users from my research and it is just me and another person.  I don't believe it is possible, but since I don't have the "Business" version, I can be wrong.  I do have Onedrive, and I don't see where I can lock the files.  I would love to know how.  If you are at the UGM, maybe you can show me.  I do agree though that CA is not setup as a multi-user system.

On 8/25/2017 at 3:52 PM, Alaskan_Son said:

As many of you already know, energy heels do not automatically generate properly for some of the most standard truss configurations.  Here's something I would definitely consider a workaround but its a lot quicker than what I think most of us have been doing...

 

• Build all your trusses as usual setting the appropriate trusses to be Energy Heels...

• Group select at least all the energy heel trusses, change top and bottom chords to a very small dimension (1" should probably do it), check Force Truss Rebuild, and click Okay...

• With the trusses still selected, open them right back up, check Lock Truss Envelope, change your top and bottom chord back to what they should be, and click Okay...

 

Again, it would be nice if energy heels behaved properly on their own, but until they do, I think this is the best we can do.  If anyone knows of a more effective solution I'd love to know it.

You could just set the default to raise the roof plane a specific distance (under Roof Defaults) when you draw a plane.

Then in the truss, you select "energy heel", you would get this.....

The one thing I do differently in my template is that I have a wall type for my attic walls that do not have framing in it.  If there is framing in the attic wall, a small wall will be built on top of the exterior wall.  

File locking would not work with Dropbox or any other cloud services.  It would only work if someone on PC B connected directly to PC A and opened the file from there and not a local copy on its own drive.... Assuming it was already opened by one of the computers.

1 hour ago, MrWizard said:

Looking for a Chief Architect design/drafter who can create full set of construction plans & details for simple 1350 sqft cabin design.  Home Designer Pro model completed & spec/illustration pages available.  I believe this will be a prescriptive design.  

 

Hello.  I can definitely help you.  Feel free to call me any time.  253.777.2362

1 hour ago, Alaskan_Son said:

I've come to think this problem might have something to do with the screen resolution of the machine the plan is being viewed on.  I made a video on a very similar sort of issue recently and sent it into tech support.  It's obviously not the exact same issue but it definitely seems like it could be related.  In the video though you can see how zooming temporarily affects text.  It just seems like this same thing may be happening on a bigger scale when the plan is being viewed on different machines.   No matter what the problem is though, it's definitely something tech support needs to be looking into...

2

2

 

Thanks.  I did a quick search and didn't even see this video you did about a week ago.  Thanks.  

I brought this up once before but thought I would again just in case.....

Here is the story.  Couple notes first.... we the same version of CA x9 and windows 10 on a PC.

I created the layout and plan file in X9.  (Not as a up-conversion from a prior version).  Created a piece of text in the plan file and sent that view to the layout.  I then copied that same text and created a text box in the layout file.

I created the PDF named, "Ver 1".

I then send those same files to a friend who opened the layout file and made a PDF called "Ver 2".   He did not adjust any text.  Just opened and printed.  

As you will see the spacing is off.  We use the same font and font size of Arial Narrow.  We went as far to him sending me his ttf file of arial narrow and I installed it.  Still the same results of the spacing being off.

I have sent into Tech support and they are looking into it, but thought I would throw it at you guys to see if you had any ideas.

Ver 2.pdf

Ver 1.pdf

Untitled 1.plan

Untitled 1.layout

9 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

I could be misunderstanding Jared's request but I don't think I am.  I believe the goal is to keep the drawing so that posts are drawn under beams, beams are drawn under joists, and ALL labels are brought to the front group.  In your example it looks like you are essentially drawing the posts OVER the joists...that is all except the row I mentioned which it looks like you left alone.  If the labels in that row had landed under a joist then once you moved the labels to the front of the drawing group then the posts would have been moved forward too and therefore they would be drawn above the beams and joists (incorrect).  

 

 

Yes, Michael... that is what I am going for.  I did download your test plan and layout file.  I think you found a fairly simple solution that I can save in my template for the time being for when these types of things come up.  Didn't think of using a reference layer for the labels and sending that to layout over the plan view.

I still think this is something CA needs to change since they provide labels and they show under objects like in this case with the joists.  Yeah, we can move labels around, but there are times where I want them in a specific location, but they do not display well.  Time to put a suggestion in for a fix.

5 hours ago, DavidJPotter said:

 

The settings that I alluded to exist and are there, that you cannot see them is your concern, not mine. There is no substitute for the ability to look and see what is there, I am sorry if you cannot or will not see what is there to see.

 

DJP

I did see the settings, so there is no concern.  Didn't say they were not there, just don't see how they would accomplish what I am looking for as the label being attached to the object is in the same drawing layer.  Even, after attempting the idea for a while, I just don't see how adjusting the line style or any other setting would do it...and I don't think it is possible... right now.  Essentially, I was going for the label of the beam to show on top of the joists while at the same time the beam itself is under them showing the joists running over the beam.   If there is anyone who understands what David is suggesting, I would be open to it.  I definately do not know everything with the program, so it is possible I am just missing it.  I just don't see how it is possible.  Again, thanks everyone for your suggestions.  

Thanks for the responses....appreciate all of them.  What I have put on was an example of the situation...not an actual client's plan.  I generally will do similar to what Michael is suggesting (with moving and rotating labels), but there are occasions where I am trying to do it differently.  So I intentionally left it that way.  I didn't make that clear in my initial post... my apologies.

Mark - It appears to now show the joists hanging off the beam which is not the desired result.  Unfortunately, it looks like the labels follow the display layer of the object.

DJP, not sure what you are suggesting with selecting the label and changing the line style.  Don't see any settings that would affect it in the way I am looking.

So, it looks like as of this moment there isn't a way.  Again, thanks for the suggestions.  Really do appreciate your time.

Here is a sample of what I am coming up against.  I have the joists and beams showing how I want in plan view, but the labels are partially hidden.  Can't figure out how to keep the beams/joists/posts to stay how they are, and yet have the labels more readable.  Thoughts?

Label Test.plan

Text style defaults are different regarding transparency.  I opened up a new plan on my computer and the fill stayed.

Hello.  Sent you a PM.  Look forward to speaking with you.

3 minutes ago, glennw said:

Mine only has the Cameras, Inactive.

I suspect that what has happened is that Chief has at one stage changed it's default layer setup and changed the layer name from Cameras, Inactive to just Cameras.

I checked on of Scott's plans and his only has Camera's, inactive as well.

I think we have both carried forward with old template plans.

 

That would make sense.  I remember there used to be an "inactive" layer before.

3 hours ago, stager386 said:

Also, it's frustrating that I can't save camera views from one design to another.  When I create options for a client, I like the camera view to be exactly the same to show the options more clearly. I have to recreate that camera view for every design option (or recreate the design and leave the camera view).  I am surprised it doesn't allow us to save a camera view to reuse.

 

Thanks.

 

I am not sure what kind of cameras you are using but depending on the camera, you actually can copy camera views from a plan to another.   However, it is only a 3d views that can do it.  Elevation/Cross Section camera do not.  This is because CAD work and text are in the elevation views.  If that is what you are going for, then I am with you in the frustration.   However, if you are doing 3d views, it can easily be done because there is not CAD or Text in those views.

21 minutes ago, glennw said:

I only have a Cameras, Inactive layer - no Cameras layer.

Do you have both or only the Cameras layer?

Is that a layer you have created or am I missing that layer?

 

I opened up my template and an OOB plan file to verify and it only shows a camera layer and a camera, labels layer.  No "Inactive" layer.  What does your OOB plan file show?