Joe_Carrick

I guess I have to ask why CA appears to be so resistant to making this more flexible. It's not something that would be difficult to change. They could just replace the 15 and 7.5 degree radio buttons with a drop-down of the following: 7.5 15 22.5 30 45 60 90 and have just a single "special angle" entry for cases where someone wants to use 5,6,9,10,12 or any other number that will divide into evenly into 360 degrees.

You probably did not have all layers turned on in that CAD Detail Window. Each Window has it's own Active Layer Set. Schedules are usually created on the "Schedules" Layer but they can be modified and placed on any Layer you choose - including Custom Layers. If the active Layer Set for any Window doesn't have the Schedule Layer displayed then you wouldn't see it.

You must be missing something. The only answer is to Post the Plan

Dermot, The problem is that when the program forces an angle of 7.5 degrees it makes it difficult to draw at 22.5 because you can easily hit 15 or 30 degrees. Sometimes we want to force the angles to be in only 22.5 degrees or 30 degrees or 45 degrees or 60 degree increments and we want to do so easily without worrying about being off by a lesser increment. Actually, there are only a limited number of angles that can be used for drawing purposes (evenly divisible into 360). Those are 1,2, 5, 7.5, 10, 15, 20, 22.5, 30, 45, 60 & 90. However, 1, 2, 5 & 7.5 are pretty difficult to use as angle snaps. The larger numbers are the ones that are easiest for the human eye to discriminate. The program should not force the user to use a smaller snap angle than wanted or needed.

Scott, There is a Delete Tool that allows you to delete all Schedules in the Plan - even those you can't find.

Sherry, I think that what's happening is a bit misleading. When you enter 22.5 it sets 7.5 degrees (3x7.5=22.5) so it should be OK. Unfortunately that mean you have to be careful not to hit the 7.5 or 15 degree angles as you are drawing. To me, this is a programming bug which limits what we can do. Any angle that results in an integer value when divided into 360 should be allowed. The fact that 7.5 divides evenly into 22.5 should not force an angle of 7.5 for angle snaps. The same thing happens if you try to set the snaps to 30 degrees, 45 degrees, 60 degrees or 90 degrees. It's wrong and CA should fix it.

Mark, I think if you use the "Callouts for Labels" only on the overall Schedule it will be fine.

If you are using the individual Room Material list the tile, drywall, or any other wall material will not show. The Floor and the Total Building Material Lists those things will be included.

I use a single thickness wall (just the tile material) the thickness of the desired wall. It won't "frame" but that's not something I'm really concerned about.

I just noticed something this morning that I don't think is right: 1. When an appliance such as a Dbl Oven is placed in a Cabinet via the Plan it is properly sized and positioned (height) according to the Symbol Specs. This is IMO the correct behavior. 2. When the same appliance is added to a cabinet via the Cabinet dbx the height is modified to fit within the section of the Cabinet Front. IOW, a 50" tall appliance is squeezed or stretched to fit the height of the cabinet opening. I consider this to be incorrect behavior. Of course, if the Appliance Symbol has a stretch Plane set at z = -1 the symbol will not be resized in 3D but it will still appear at the wrong size in the Appliance Schedule.

That has to be the Best Answer. I knew that was true for feet/inches but never tried it with imperial vs metric input.

Kathleen, You can change the dimensions to be shown in any units from within the dbx and you can also change the defaults. This will not change the size of the model. That probably won't solve the terrain issue but at least it's a start.

Funny, I was suggesting how it might be fixed by programming, not any user settings.

Hmmm..... Might be an easy fix. disable_mouse - sleep_while_catalog_not_displayed - enable_mouse or just loop within an error_block.

Larry, In the Ceiling Finish change the 0 thickness layer to your t&g

Scott, Why should you get the "point"? It was my answer. Oh heck, I gave you a point anyway

This is better than just using Polylines - but LABELS for Polylines would be even better.

Alex, Annosets for different scales with different text styles, dimension styles, etc is the answer.

I found an interesting aspect of Polyline Solids that allows Text Boxes with Macros to maintain connections even when the PSolids overlap or are in contact. 1. A Text box with an Arrow will connect to the PSolid with the Arrowhead inside the perimeter of the PSolid. 2. Each PSolid can have separate Text Boxes connected. 3. Overlapping PSolids will not interfere with the connections of each others Text Boxes. So here's a scenario: 1. Convert the Property Line Boundary to a PSolid, 1" thick, Transparent Material 2. Attach a Text Box with an area macro to that PSolid with the Arrowhead pointing to a spot inside the boundary. 3. Edit the Boundary and the macro will display the new area - and there's no "Disconnect" problem Now repeat the above for other areas within the site that you want to get the areas of. Even though the PSolids overlap, they will not interfere with each other. The area's displayed are correct for each area. This makes it possible to do Area Analysis of Site Plans, Rooms, Groups of Rooms, etc without the problem of the Text Boxes becoming confused as to what they are connected to. It may take a little finesse to get the Text Boxes connected to the right PSolid the first time, but once that's done it works really well.

I have no problem with using a smaller scale for larger projects. You just need to have larger scale plans for the areas that need it like Kitchens, Bathrooms, etc. These larger scale plans can be referenced with callouts just like you would for a larger scale detail. It's basically a "Key Plan" system. Can you imagine trying to do a Hospital or any other large commercial project any other way?

Annosets for different scales. The Text Style(s) can be different for different Annosets

Have you updated the Video Drivers? None of those seem like current state of the art and the Drivers could well be out of date.

Graham, There was a similar problem with Library Browsing on systems with Intel HD Graphics. Basically it was related to having a 3D view displayed and then displaying a 3D preview of a Library Symbol. I'm not sure if that's been fixed or if's related but the problem you are having is not repeatable on my system with an NVidea Graphics Adapter.

Doug, Graham is using the 32 bit version of X7. Could that be the problem?

Just for the record....... I regularly go back to the materials available - Help, Reference Manual, Videos, etc - just to refresh something that I thought I knew how to handle. Chief is a complex application with a ton of capability but it's really too much to keep all in my human memory bank. Things that are not used constantly eventually get "disconnected" from my index system. A review tends to re-index.