Alaskan_Son

I personally don't use material lists, but in messing around with it for a bit, I pretty quickly discovered the following... First, you need to check "Insul" wherever you want insulation, NOT on a unique insulation layer. In other words, its your 5-1/2" stud layer that gets insulated so that's where the check should go. Secondly, the insulation won't show up in the material list till you have actually created an enclosed building envelope (i.e. you need to create an enclosed room).

Not sure whats causing you so much trouble but here's a crappy video if it helps... http://screencast.com/t/9H3n198n

There are a number of ways to get what you're looking for but what comes to mind first is to just create 2 separate roof planes. Hmmm...on second thought I guess it would need 3 separate roof planes. Maybe that's not a very good idea. Maybe a roof/ceiling plane, p-solid, or slab about 1/8" thick placed just below the soffit would be a better option. You should probably post this in the suggestion forum. I think its a good one.

You betcha

Be careful not to mix up ventilation requirements with make-up air requirements. 2 different things. Makeup air is required to replace air being exhausted to the outside (i.e. for pressure balance). Also should not be confused with relief air or intake air. I'm sure the fans you are referring to Perry, are installed to meet continuous ventilation requirements. They are not for the purpose of makeup air...rather they might cause the NEED for makeup air. You may already understand that, just clarifying for those that may not.

Uncheck "Ceiling Over This Room".

To answer your question more specifically... We've never been called for anything on remodels but any naturally aspirated furnace or boiler around here needs a combustion air vent anyway, so that one is a given, and we install the kitchen makeup air for any hood vents 400cfm or more "voluntarily". To date we haven't done a remodel that ended up tight enough to require anything additional ("Fresh 80s/100s ,gravity dampers, motorized dampers, etc.) so those have so far been reserved for new construction.

Here in Alaska due to our relatively unique climate, fresh air and make-up air are huge. We use those through-the-wall "Fresh 80" and "Fresh 100" vents on a pretty regular basis. We've actually deleted the whole section allowing window vents to be part of the calculation. Those are a bit of a "poor mans" solution though. I personally prefer to use an HRV, to install a makeup air system specifically for the kitchen exhaust and then to take worst case negative pressure readings before installing any additional vents. We try to get this stuff right regardless of whether inspectors catch it or not simply for indoor air quality, to reduce possibilities of rot and mold caused by condensation, and to meet code requirements for health reasons. Around here, I don't think I've had a building safety inspector call it out though. It's always been voluntary on our part. The inspectors that do call it out are energy raters which to date have rally been voluntary inspections that one could choose to heed or ignore.

I don't have an answer for you, but for clarification, are you talking about generic prescriptive calcs or using the actual fixtures and devices?

Ya, I realized that when I was messing around with it myslef. I was just trying to point out that its still buggy. Whether that little flat spot is a result of a limitation or not, point is that there needs to be a little flat spot. As soon as any shape comes to a peak...KABLAM!!! louvers disappear.

Feels buggy to me as well. Every shape will work right up until your shape comes to a point at the top. I think Joe is "cheating" by leaving a small flat spot at the top.

I think you supplied the answer in your own 2nd post...the code has simply become more stringent. Based on the 2003 IRC (cited in your attachment) you could go as close as 3ft. The 2012...not so much.

Not sure if you guys are really reading all the posts or not, but as Robert pointed out above, by very definition (section R202), Fire Separation Distance is measured to the LOT LINE and not to the neighboring structure (as I was also presuming). I assume the intent is to allow neigboring lots full and complete use of their respective lots to account for any and all future structures and usage without any regard for existing structures and usage. Makes sense to me.

Thank you. You are correct sir.

Not saying you're wrong, but where in the code do you get that idea from? As I understand it, the intent of the code is structure separation, not lot line setback.

The 2012 IRC is definitely more restrictive. http://publicecodes.cyberregs.com/icod/irc/2012/icod_irc_2012_3_par041.htm

There are very few places here in Alaska where we would build houses that close to the lot line so I haven't personally run into this, but I just opened up the 2012 IRC to read it through and it seems pretty clear to me... The 1 hr. fire assembly WOULD be required, but ONLY if the adjacent building was closer than 5ft. (not the lot line). The only potentially applicable mention of lot lines are in connection with accessory structures.

Try turning on AND unlocking ALL layers.

This post makes no sense to me. Are you downloading SKP files or "DXL" files? SKP files should import with no problems unless you're using something other than CA X7 in which case you may need to download SKP files as older versions.

Can you attach a picture of what you're trying to accomplish? When you say "window frames" I can't help but think that walls may not be the best method to accomplish your goal.

+1 to that.

If I owned CA, I imagine I would charge a late fee to discourage people from letting their SSA lapse and then waiting till they need something or till just before a release to renew (in essence getting full benefits without paying full price).

Yes, you should definitely be able to do this. This is what I would do. Easy peasy.

Like Joe, I am familiar with similar details for log homes, but I've never seen the gap at the bottom before. Don't want to hijack the thread, but I can't think of any benefit to putting gap at the bottom other than MAYBE not needing a moulding up at the ceiling. Is there some other benefit I'm not seeing? Not ripping the idea at all, would sincerely just like to know.

No problem. FWIW, I wouldn't say I think its the best method. Its just the closest I could figure to the same thing you described in AutoCAD. The method Doug described is probably better for most things. Another option: 1. Make a copy of your layerset (for working purposes) if you don't already have one. 2. Use the layer hider to hide layers that are in your way 3. Select your objects and Cut 4. Switch back to your normal layerset 5. Paste Hold Position. Now all your items are selected an all your layers are on.