Alaskan_Son

Actually, to be more precise, it just needs to be converted to an actual polyline. A circle is not a polyline. It can either be converted to a multi-segment polyline or to a couple arcs. Converting to a polyline solid does the trick, not because its a polyline solid but because its a polyline. During the convert process, it's just broken into 2 arcs automatically. Semantics? Maybe,,but I think it's good to understand whats actually happening. You can get to the same end any number of ways. No matter what you do though, a true CAD Circle object cannot be used with boolean operations.

I can't speak for the rest of the guys but I'm only gonna offer my thoughts and advice on this if you post the plan...even a stripped down version at least. Every little detail matters and in your scenario, there's a lot more than just a ceiling to contend. with. You can build the ceiling with a Ceiling Plane but that won't solve your wall problem...in fact it can even make it worse.

That's a good solution. It should be noted that a person should still know how to appropriately control the floor elevations. No one wants an 8" thick apron to trip over.

Agreed. A Terrain Modifier won't do that though. What's needed is some accurate Terrain Elevation Data, and as such, you would need to do work with more than just the few feet in front of the garage.

I might be able to do that. Terrain seems to work fine to me though.

You did realize that the garage is a totally separate structure in the example right?

To be clear here, there is a huge difference between taking the time to properly model the whole terrain (an accurate model) and cheating for quick visuals (terrain modifier or dropping the garage floor height). Its either quick and easy or accurate and I don't see that accurate was ever being discussed for this one. If accurate is the goal then we would need to be discussing a lot more than adding a terrain modifier. We would need to be discussing elevation regions, elevation lines, elevation points, etc.

You think a lump in front of the garage would be more correct good sir? I don't see for a second how either of those solutions provide for an "accurate" section.

I think you're missing out on the opportunity to actually learn something here. Chances you're having problems because it's an "older", "glitchy" plan are between slim and none. I think you're just doing something wrong. Post the plan (even a stripped down version and you'll likely learn something new so that next time you run into this you'll be able to do it right. In fact, the same thing that's stopping you from effectively moving the garage floor is likely to cause you problems in other areas anyway.

I think this advice doesn't apply when the rest of the terrain is modeled completely flat. A terrain modifier is going to produce nothing but an awkward and inaccurate lump in front of the garage. If a person wants to model accurately (which I agree is typically the best practice), then they need to model the whole terrain accurately. If they just want quick visuals though it makes a lot more sense to just drop the garage down.

You have all kinds of problems in that scenario. The dropped ceiling is the easiest one to deal with.

Something to think about... While there are definitely appropriate scenarios for using the ceiling finish layer to provide a dropped ceiling, I honestly don't think that's typically the best way to handle this particular scenario and it can cause a lot of heartache in the long run. Using that method requires artificially breaking your room up into multiple rooms using walls. Those otherwise unnecessary walls and room definitions can start to wreak havoc on cabinets, moldings, wall finishes, floor finishes, room schedules, room names in other schedules, room dimensions, etc. etc. If the dropped ceiling section doesn't align with a normally defined room area then I believe a soffit, ceiling plane, p-solid, etc. is a much more accurate and suitable method. Just my 2 cents.

Using the ceiling finish as Mick pointed out is probably the most accurate and suitable way to do what you're trying to do although you can also use a manually positioned ceiling plane, a polyline solid, or even a soffit amongst other things.

For that particular plan since it seems like you're not using an accurate terrain anyway, probably much easier and would look nicer to simple lower the floor for that garage room.

If I'm understanding your screenshot and questions correctly, I would typically either use a Polyline Solid or the Soffit tool for the lowered ceiling although there are other ways as well using room definitions or ceiling planes.

Sorry, Nothing I can think of.

Good video Steve.

As Eric pointed out, you should familiarize yourself with the tools you're using. When you paint an object using the material painter, you have several options. This is from the Help files (which all users should be using regulary)... Material Painter Component Mode is unique to the Material Painter Tools. It is the default mode and applies the selected material to a single component on the target object. For most object types, using this tool is the same as opening an object’s specification dialog and changing the material of one of its components on the Materials panel. See Materials Panel. • Material Painter Object Mode replaces all instances of a material on the target object. • Material Painter Room Mode replaces all instances of a material in the current room. • Material Painter Floor Mode replaces all instances of a material on the current floor. • Material Painter Plan Mode replaces all instances of a material in the entire plan. In addition, there's that little paint roller icon or the Blend Colors With Materials tool. If you have that toggled on, what it essentially does is leaves the Texture (image file) being used for that particular material in place but blends your desired color with the image. It should probably be noted that this is essentially the same thing as checking Blend With Texture on the Texture tab in the Define Material dialog. Anyway, if you paint a solid color onto an object while Blend Colors With Materials is checked (toggled on), it simultaneously create a brand new material with that "...PAINTED..." nomenclature. If you want to change it from that, you can either: Adjust the material definition for that color you created by using the Adjust Material Definition tool Adjust the material definition for that color you created by going into Plan Materials (Shift+C) Simply change the material being used for the desired component through the Materials tab Simply paint the object(s) the desired color again...this time with Blend Colors With Materials unchecked (toggled off)

Just a side note on this, but we've actually created this type of look by just purchasing a plain old solid core smooth panel blank and routering the grooves with a standard V-groove router bit. I was SUPER happy with the end results after staining and sealing too. It was either that or order the door to be imported from Europe for like $800 plus shipping. I originally had my doubts about how the laminated veneer would handle it, but it worked without hitch.

It's because length is a Measurement. Either convert it to a float first with something like length.to_f or use the Measurement class to your advantage with something like length.to_ft

That's cool. I hadn't seen that one before. There are a few others out there, but they're not as robust at that. Thanks for the link Kevin.

You don't insert custom fields in the schedule. You insert them in the wall. You only display those columns in the schedule.

It's in 3D View Defaults>Always Display Active Cameras, but it won't solve your current problem.

What are you expecting to happen?