dshall

I don't know what the issue is either. It's a non issue, it's Monday night football tonight! The Chargers won, the Cowboys won, life does not get much better.

Well, if it is only Moe Gia and I that have this issue, it is probably not an issue, we shall let it die a quiet death.

Posting a plan is an option, however, maybe someone can post a plan and layout that works and let's see if the posted plan and layout works for me.... I bet it will not work correctly... ..... JB, please post a very quick down and dirty layout with a plan file attached, I would bet it does not work as I and Moe would like it to work.

What is so frustrating to me with these kinds of posts is somebody says the sky is blue and some one else says it is green and that is where it ends. There is no consenses in regards to who is right. There must be a way that the two people can get together, share what they are seeing and then reach a mutual agreement. BTW, who is right is not important, what is important is for someone like Moe to be able to get her point across and for someone at headquarters to understand what she is saying and then for the person at headquarters to show her what she is doing wrong or learn what the issue is.

I said this a few posts ago........ Maybe we are not all seeing something funny going on, but I am and apparently Moe is a bit confused.... not a killer issue for me.... but I think it is there...... If I could post a vid I would....... but the vid gods are against me, anyway, I was just able to reproduce MoeGia's issue, and I concur with her, I understand what she is complaining about.... there is an issue she is trying to convey with headquarters... hopefully headquarters will try to find out.... I am on the phone with GTM now, maybe they can help me post my vids so I can show what I think MoeGia's issue is.

Interesting, I looked into this, I completely agree with Moe that the view selected should remember it's anno and layer set, however it seems to work for some plan views and not others....... I can't put my finger on it. Try this, go to layout and ..... open your floor plan, you get the proper anno and layer set open your framing plan, you get the proper anno and layer set open your foundation plan, you get the proper anno and layer set all is good so far,.... now tile the 3 plans vertically and alternate between selecting the different plan views, sometimes you get the correct anno and layer sets and sometimes you don't..... it's weird, it is not consistent...... I agree with Moe, if I select a plan view I should always see the proper anno and layer set. I think we are all seeing something funny, I am not sure if any of us can properly explain the behavior without doing a GTM to explain and discuss the inconsistencies.

This statement confuses me. Are you talking about lines weights for PLAN FILES or are you talking about line weights for LALYOUT FILES? I assume you are talking about PLAN FILES, if this is correct, then line weight of 200 would be way to heavy for me....... but... but...... I think this is dependent on what is spec'd out in the DRAWING SHEET SETUP<ADVANCED LINE WEIGHT OPTION.............. I bring this up for a newbie that may be reading this...... point being the line weights basis can be controlled by several different defaults........ oh so confusing........ all I know is football starts this weekend and hopefully the LA Chargers will have a good year before they locate in Perry's back yard....... that will be a sad day for us folks living on the border.

One of the frustrating policies CA has his to NOT TELL US HOW TO UTILIZE A FEATURE. Anno/Layer sets are a perfect example. I am not sure if anybody uses them the same exact way. Because CA did not explain how and why to use them, we came up with our own methods. So I think CA's policy of not instructing us on how to use a feature actually promotes different methods. I did the ANNO SET FOR DUMMIES videos many years ago. I still use that system. Wendy is promoting a different method and she has received some very positive feedback on her method. Another example of the power of CA, the option to use the features they provide us with many different ways.

This might be a video for the process compliments of Jona-Thank. https://youtu.be/lT3YcRzq108 I think I might get out of the vid business if I keep having these many problems uploading vids. not working, I might have to redo the vid when I have time. I just can not explain why uploading a vid is so hit and miss these days.... at one time I was able to do it blind folded standing on one leg, now I have to do a rain dance to get it to upload.... I just may retire.

Send me your email if interested, we will do it in less than 5 minutes.

Jona-Thank, this is good stuff. Would you mind doing a GOTOMEETING with me, you can explain the process, I will record it and we can post it. It would be easier for us peons if someone like you showed us how to do it. Let me know if you can do it with me and when would be a good time for you.

A neat little trick I learned from Stephen G. at the UGM...... what Jona-Thank did was to select all data info that had a z value of zero (useless data), he deleted them in one fell swoop and then relied on the remaining elevation data that did have a z value to create his terrain.

This is what John Jones talked about at the UGM. The ACAD info you get must have a z value associated with them. I believe he went on to say that more and more you will get elevation data with a z value, but older plans and plans from civil engineers who are working in the 16th century will not be giving you elevation points with a z value. Thanks for posting, I just wish you were able to post date that already had a z value so we could play with it.

You did not post the plan. This could be fun and informative.... at the UGM I saw John Jones do this, I would like to see if I can do it like John Jones handled the exercise. Please post the plan.

This is my preferred method. I did a vid on this awhile ago, the only variation was I used a wall with height edited in elevation vs a solid railing wall. Solid railing wall is the way to go...... except...... as Glenn said, Glenn's ramp method may be even more viable... not sure...... I will try a vid on the ramp method when I have time unless someone beats me to the vid. So: I think there are two good methods: 1- railing symbol on a solid railing wall ala Jona-Thank or 2- railing on ramp per Glenn's method....... (hmmmmmm, can we have a flat ramp? Thinking about the railing on solid railing wall around intermediate landing of stairs)

I have never seen it.... I bet it is from your T-24 person.

Niiiicccceeee! thanks!

It's a team effort.....

Use the door as the surround and call it a window? Turn the door into a window symbol? I don't know for sure.

Ain't that a pistol? I can't explain it, but if you were to take the door with the sidelights, explode the block, COPY, I SAID COPY THE DOOR, flip it and but it up against the other door, I think you can get what you want. BTW, always, I said always open the window default dvx and change min. separation to 0". I do not know why this is not a default.

It would of been neat to see his plan to see what the was.

Interesting, why don't you post a small plan with the doors in question and somebody will look at it. Seriously, you will get an answer much quicker if you post an example of what you are talking about.

It must be one wall. Wall framing is on per wall basis. So use one wall and then use wall material regions for different materials?

Or try flipping wall and then do framing.

There is a default somewhere that lets you look at framing from inside and not outside. Probably in framing defaults.