dvogel1

I have adjacent roof planes with different pitches. Auto rebuild roofs is enabled. In the "Without" image the leftmost roof has a pitch of 4/12 and the 0.5/12 roof above the opening is disabled. In the "With" image the 0.5/12 roof is enabled and you can see that the leftmost roof has been altered. Is there a way to allow these adjacent roofs to build correctly? Thanks, Don X14

I would like to hire an architect for a custom home project located on a steep lot in Asheville, NC. I have a nearly complete design using CA X14 and I have started layout drawings. There are several areas where I need expert help. In addition, the neighborhood requires every project to be supported by an architect. Thanks in advance, Don Vogel

Thanks. I think I'd rather use the data and import only some of the CAD file layers. Live and learn!

The custom hole seems to be the best option since I don't want to hidden any of the terrain in 3D views. Thanks

Another question just came to light. Is it possible to hide the terrain contours inside the footprint of a structure?

Tracing over the resulting contour lines is a good idea, thanks. This is my first project. It's complex and so is the software (probably no worse than other software packages). It was a significant challenge just importing the survey CAD data from a file that has 27 layers, and understanding how CA presents it. It's only as complex as the surveyor provided. The property undulates and drops 100 ft over 230ft. Manipulating the data is just the latest, very steep learning curve. I also have the terrain data file (202 points). In some ways it's easier to make modifications with the points instead of polylines. I chose to use the CAD file instead because it includes tree locations, utilities, etc. Would you recommend using the terrain data instead of the CAD file? I have used Autodesk Inventor to design machines and it's frustrating to use CA and have such limited ability to work in the XZ or YZ planes. That's one more challenge to deciding what going on with the terrain.

The point grid revealed the correct (absolutely NOT intuitive) approach. See the attached pic of the terrain with the grid. It shows how the software modified the terrain poly-lines to achieve the outcome. I took a picture for reference, removed the point grid and then modified-added the poly-lines to achieve the same outcome. I had to modify the 87', 88' and 89' lines to closely match what the software produced. I'm guessing that a landscape architect would have said, "duh"!

I'll give that a try, but a couple of data points/lines are overwhelmed by all of the existing data and you end up with two little humps/depressions. Here are three pics showing the point grid method. My starting elevation reference is 90' at the intersection of the bridge and the elevated walkway (in the shadow). I don't like having all of those points hanging around, but it works.

That's what I concluded. The plane I described can only be created by a large number of individual points. Thanks for suggesting the automated method. I'll try it now.

Yes, I have been working on it. I'm starting with imported CAD data for a complicated, steep lot. I'm trying to modify the region in front of the house to create a slope in two directions to shed water. Ideally there would be an elevation line tool that would allow you to set the elevation at each end.

Hi. I'm trying to create a terrain plane that slopes in two directions. To visualize this hold a flat object (notebook) so that it is a horizontal plane. Then rotate one edge down a little. That's sloping in one direction. Now rotate an adjacent edge down. Now it's sloping in two directions. That is, all four corner points are at different elevations. Ideally, there would be a tool to draw a rectangle and then define each corner to be at a different elevation. Without that tool, how can you do this? Thanks, Don

Thanks for your help. This method works, with the normal amount of unusual results. I'm not sure how to get the corners of the footings to intersect. That is, there is an unpredictable gap in the footing at some corners. It seemed for a moment that setting one of the foundation walls to "No Locate" worked, but the next time I opened/closed the wall dialog the corner went missing again. (Update: There is clearly a bug here because the footings fill out every other time I open/close the dialog. In fact, the missing footing shifts from one end of the wall to the other.) One downside to this method where the wider concrete wall defines the room is that the intersecting interior walls don't join with the upper, exterior framed walls. And, because the foundation wall height is truncated (36" in this case) the height of windows need to be offset by that amount. Maybe that will change as I experiment.

Hi. That's correct, it is a crawl space.

Hi. Please see the attached plan and images. I have two areas where I am using pony walls to show exterior walls that are a mixture of wood framing and concrete. In one case (floor 0, back of the house) the wall type is Siding-6 and "Foundation Wall" is checked. The lower part of the pony wall is foundation. This is done to save money on concrete. In the other case (floor 1, front of house) the wall type is Siding-6 with a concrete pony wall. The concrete is 36 inches above the top of the foundation wall because soil will be in contact with the wall. I would like to know how to show the foundation in 3D with all of the concrete visible, but not the framed walls. Maybe there is a better way to set up these walls... Thanks in advance. I'm using CA X14. The plan was migrated from Home Designer Pro and then CA X13. 154 STC CA 18July22 Garage.zip