Joe_Carrick

I might be able to create a text report with all of the above by using a macro in the default wall labels. However, I would really need for CA to provide an attribute containing the wall_type definition (materials & thicknesses) plus an "is_shear wall" attribute. If they just had a "Wall Schedule" and there was an OIP for walls then it would be really pretty easy.

Typically I have to provide "Wall Schedules" in my ConDocs for building departments. The information needs to show: Wall Type (construction) - Graphic Legend Lengths and Heights Shear Wall (Y/N) - Solid Hatch in Plan if "Y" Shear Wall Sheathing and Nailing if "Y" Demo Wall (Y/N) - Graphic indication and Lengths. I just spent an entire day meeting with the Planning Department and Inspectors - then manually revising such a schedule for California Coastal Zone requirements on a remodel project. Has anyone developed a means of automating any or all of the above? If so, please share your method.

It would be better if you could expand on your signature with system and chief version information. Take a look at what I'm showing.

For Finished Ends, you need to open the Cabinet dbx and select the side you want to modify. There's a drop-down that allows you to specify what sort of treatment that face of the cabinet gets. There's no easy way to specify inside colors different from outside colors. BTW, you should ask questions in the "Q&A Forum", not "Tips and Techniques".

You can select the Layout Box and open it. Then select "Plot Lines". There is also a "Plot Lines" option in the "Send to Layout" dbx.

If it's shown that way in the Plan View then it should be that way in the Layout. However, in order to make it stick you should be sending "Saved Plan Views" to Layout so that you aren't changing the Layout when you turn off the Referenced Floor as you are working.

The PDF is too grainy to accurately determine what the dimensions are. However, the way to create this model is to make it 2 stories and then designate the warehouse 2nd floor area as "Open Below". The brick on the pilasters will probably need to be done with a PSolid or Wall Material Region. There are several options to do this.

I think the key is to call it a ladder, not stairs, and make sure the loft is not livable floor area. I don't have access to the Alberta Building Code but the IRC/CRC allows Ship Ladders for areas where a means of egress is not required. Check carefully the definition of "Habitable Spaces" and the exceptions listed for low ceiling heights. If the loft is less than the minimum area or has a ceiling height that exempts it from being considered a "Habitable Space" then it doesn't need to have "stairs".

Flatten the PDF. It doesn't save that much in terms of file size - but it does eliminate or at least minimize the ability to edit.

Inserting works with the Insert Depth almost the entire depth of the Symbol. They display correctly in Cross Section Elevations and in Perspectives. But they don't display the symbol in "Room Elevations". The problem only occurs if the symbol is inserted more than 1/2 its depth. Try it for yourself.

So I found that when I created a symbol set to insert into a wall it displayed correctly in Perspectives & Section/Elevations. But in Room Elevations all I got was a hole in the wall. After talking with Nigel at CA I learned it was because the symbol wasn't in the Room and it was hard-coded in the program and nothing could be done about it. The problem with moving the symbol into the room so it would show in Interior Elevations meant that it was then wrong in the Plan view. So here's my solution: Offset the Y origin the amount you want the symbol to be inserted. Generally this would be the symbol depth (-) the amount you want it to project. Set the Insert Depth to 0 Set the Bounding Box Y value to just the desired projection Create and assign a new 2D Block for the plan view (just the projected amount) This works in all 3 view types. I've passed this on to Nigel with the suggestion that CA modify the "Create/Edit Symbol Dialog" so that the above is done automatically. Of course, like most things in Chief we probably won't see this fix for at least 3 more releases.

Try this Drawer Front Slab Drawer w J-Pull.calibz Note: You can also specify some drawer fronts as just slabs to minimize the number of horizontal pulls.

Dimensions in Layout are "Paper Size". You need to do all dimensioning in the Plan views (plan, section, elevations & CAD Details.

You might also need to move/offset the outlets to adjust for any backsplash and/or wall material regions. They normally only show relative to the finished wall surface and any wall finish applied may be obscuring the outlets.

Yep, I did that already. No Grilles - just Registers. I downloaded a Return Air Grille with plenum box from 3D Warehouse and modified to fit my duct chase.

I thought there were Return Air Grilles in the Core Library but all I can find now are Registers (supply). Any idea where these things went?

AFAIK, CA will not be a multi-user system in the way we would really want it to be. ie: It will not provide for simultaneous editing of a project by multiple users. If you can break the project down into separate plan files with a common background plan then it can work - but not with just one plan. In order for it to work within a single plan file; CA would need to devise a "Locking Scheme" based on users and "Layers" or "Layersets". The "Save Plan" system would need to be coordinated with that "Locking Scheme". It's not a trivial programming project so I doubt they are inclined to do it. Currently I don't know of anything in the Plan Database that identifies different users who have opened a plan file. That's a critical element in any multi-user system.

You can change the Default Wall Type to be used in the "Defaults": Edit > Default Settings > Walls > Interior Walls > Wall Type

Yes and the Steel Strong Walls are really good. I include their details as a PDF when using them.

San Diego Municipal Code 113-02S and 113.02T are a couple of them. I'd have to look further to get all the details.

The City of San Diego has a zoning ordinance that refers to the "Phantom Floor". Essentially this is defined as any: Crawl Space Area where grade to floor above exceeds 5' Open Area adjacent to a Mezzanine where the ceiling above is more than 5' high Attic space where the roof surface above is more than 5' above the attic floor. They use this "Phantom Floor" in the calculation of "Gross Floor Area" to determine the FAR. Apparently they think we're going to finish any or all of those spaces and rent them to the Leprechans. Does anyone else have to deal with this other than in San Diego?

Basically, that's true but there are a lot of new products available (Simpson Timber Screws for example) and changing thoughts on how the connections effect the twisting of joists, etc. I think I'm going to just start using the Simpson Technical Bulletin Guard Post Installation Using Strong-Drive SDWSTIMBER Screws It's only for the post being 36" above the deck - but the design load at that point is 500 lbs, well above the CRC required 200 lb point load. 500x3 = 1500 ft.lbs. 200x3.5 = 700 ft.lbs. I'm finding that many Building Departments are not only accepting but actually requiring this sort of documentation in ConDocs. The one thing that's really interesting is that in most cases they are not checking the guardrail itself - just the posts. I provide calcs for the guardrail as a beam with a 200 lb load at mid-span (vertically and laterally).

I've been doing calcs for wood guardrails (the rails and the posts) for decades. It seems to me that this is such a common thing that there must be software available to do the calcs. However, after extensive searches on the web I haven found anything at all. Does anyone know of such a program?

That won't be much of a problem since here in earthquake country we will need Simpson HD2's in key locations anyway.

Not yet, but I will probably go with the Simpson H1's. My eave overhangs are 3' and the site is on the high point of a relatively steep hill with about a mile clear of any obstructions. With the design wind speeds of 110 mph the uplift potential isn't insignificant. In addition I have a conventionally framed roof (2x14's) with a overhang of 6' and that I know is a problem without the H1's.