dshall

I don't remember any of his 3D stuff........ 2D, who cares anymore? I was looking at his floor plans in post 22, interesting floor plans, but we can all imagine how much more powerful it is to show that as a model, especially to the homeowners who cannot visualize the house they are about to spend 3 million dollars on. The 2D stuff is telling only part of the story.

Hey, I know you know your stuff. Believe me, you do some great stuff. But a comment, I do know in the long run CA is faster, and I would not be surprised if CA was faster in the short run...... maybe faster than your 2d stuff. I have heard comments from several users recently who picked up CA, became frustrated, put in on the shelf, and now they are thinking about coming back to it. I say they did not give it enough time. Learning CA is costly, in lost production and in educational costs . All of us who use it everyday can tell you stories about how much it cost us in the beginning. I remember a job I did, structural was rather complicated, I did the architectural in CA and I did the structural on paper. I got lucky, the job went pretty smoothly with minor changes. But imagine if there were some bigger changes what a mess I would of been in? That is when I decided to go all in. The financial rewards were not important, completing the entire job in CA was paramount. I bit the bullet. It is paying off now. It does help that the CA of today is light years ahead of X10 which is the version I started with back in 2005........ I can't wait for X-8, maybe at the UGM they will give us a sneak preview...... they did 6 years ago when I went, I forgot what happened 4 years ago....

Johnny's 2d stuff is very artistic, but if I was a home owner, I would much rather see 3D. Black and white tv or color? Mono or surround sound? Flip phone or a smart phone? Fax or email? At some point, we all had to bite the bullet and spend time to learn CA...... or whatever 3D program turns you on. 2D is so archaic, not even worth talking about anymore.

I think Johnny does some awesome presentation work. Some of the best I have seen. We could all learn something from Johnny, but I want to learn from Johnny using CA as an APP. Johnny, you are so proud of how quickly you do your presentations, but I bet I could match your speed, and I would have a floor plan drawn, sections if I need them etc. If you would only bite the bullet and learn CA, you would be a great resource for the rest of us. You would push and expand the possibilities we have with CA.

I go play golf.

Thanks Joe for the explanation. That is a method I have explored. As stated above, there are issues that arise when you use the third level as the second floor, but definetely a method that works. Depending on the SPECIFIC, I SAID SPECIFIC situation, there are a number of solutions and none of them are perfect, pick your poison. Nobody has come up with the perfect solution, again, this is something we can touch on in workshop and bring it up at the UGM.

Please, lets's not play games and guess at each others method, let's lay it out on the table. I have been through all this stuff a thousand times, if you have something to share, please share.

Are you going to keep the method a secret? If I were to guess, you created that using the floor above, but there really isn't a floor above, you used the used floor above to create the soffit.... no surprise. Let me see if you can do that with an entire second floor above and the framed soffit below.

Good point, in meeting now, but quick scenario, two story house, on first floor in lower left quadrant build a room with invisible walls, build a dropped ceiling soffit in this room, you will see the ceiling but the sides of the soffit will be open. this is the scenario where the walls should not be invisible but you put in a door opening that is the height of the dropped ceiling.

You used the 1/16" wall for the room definition..... why do you need to define the room? If you need to define the room for floor definitions, I get it. If you need the 1/16" wall for the ceiling height definitions, the 1/16"wall is not necessary. I love dealing with these modeling challenges, and that is why in my previous post I alluded to the fact there is not one easy answer to a modeling challenge. Shane, I know that you appreciate the back and forth banter that we go through to solve an issue, thanks.

The more we understand the program, the more we understand there is not a simple answer to what can be perceived to be a simple question. The initial question as to how to deal with different ceiling elevations is predicated on many different parameters...... and if you think I just said a bunch of gobbledy goop without really saying anything, I am inclined to agree.

In regards to this: - I think Shane missed the boat completely, in fact I am not even sure why he needs the 1/16"wall to build what he built. - I believe Jon is correct in regards to Perry's solution, which is the method I use (an opening in a wall) I use the Perry solution all the time in this situation which is a model whereby the ceiling is a DROPPED CEILING/SOFFIT under the floor above which results in an OPEN END AT THE END OF THE DROPPED CEILING SOFFIT. - I am glad Glenn posted a video, this is what I expected Glenn was talking about, I do not think Glenn and Perry's situation is the same....... with Glenn's #1 video solution, I think that is the way I would build it, The Glenn #2 video solution scenario is more common for me, but I am not sure I would necessarily use his solution. This is a great modeling challenge we can discuss at the Thursday Workshop that I posted in the Chat Room. And if Vista Larry were to attend, this model scenario could be used to help him understand how to modify floor/ceiling elevations after the engineer required 14"deep joists in lieu of 12" deep joists. I have saved this plan, maybe we can open the workshop on Thursday discussing these scenarios. And please, for all of you that are attending, please have models ready that we can discuss in regards to building models with the structural in mind. This workshop should include how to deal with differing platform heights, modeling mono slabs, mono slabs adjacent to raised floor assemblies and dealing with roof framing, in particular, overstack roof scenarios/truss bases and dealing with fascias..... Perry knows what I am talking about. So bring your funky and unique models so we can discuss. One of the purposes of this workshop is to gather ammunition to discuss with the CA programmers at the next UGM.

I wish both Glenn and Perry were clearer. I think I know where Perry is going, but a short vid would be much clearer, and I would love to see a short vid from Glenn because I barely understand the tool he is,talking of.

So funny, at one time you signed on as Jonathank, and I always read it as Jona Thank........ Michael Crump signed on as MCRUMP, and I always read that as McCrump....... from now until eternity he will be Mr. McCrump to me.

Steve, I think that is the vid I was thinking of. I thought I did a vid using cabs also, maybe not.

P deserves a point for that one.

I already did a vid. on this somewhere. If you can't find it, maybe someone will do a new fresh video.

That my friend is what we are looking for at the workshop. Let's keep a list of this stuff when we go to the UGM. We will corner Doug Park in a dark alley, and explain to him our needs, we might even need to get Scott Harris.

I sure wish you had helped him out before all of these miscreants posted their posts. Come to think of it, if this is a real person, I bet he would of seen the humor in all of the posts. It seems that we all have to be so politically correct these days that nobody has a sense of humor...... it is so easy for somebody to make a post questioning the political correctness of anything being said in this day and age. Come on DJP, lighten up, you know that everybody on this forum would bend over backwards helping this guy out if we understood what he was asking. I had better shut up for the rest of the day.

Larry, I did not watch the entire video, I watched it until 1:07. This is such a great vid that you did because it gives me the opportunity to point out the logic of CA. You dropped the ceiling over the porch, which is the bottom of the deck above. If you drop the ceiling of the porch, what do you expect the deck above to do? It will drop down because it's height is defined by the ceiling below. Why would you drop the ceiling of the porch? The ceiling of the porch is the underside of the deck. If you want the top of deck to stay in place, well, create a new ceiling/soffit ceiling under the deck at the porch. I think you were trying to control the wall height by controlling the ceiling height.... wrong wrong wrong. Anyway, see you at the workshop. After the workshop, some of this stuff might start to make sense to you.

Wrong, they should be connected. Finished ceiling is dependent on rough ceiling. You may be referring to a dropped soffit ceiling which is independent of the rough ceiling. Based upon what you said, you do not understand how CA is working..... I do not mean to be a smart a**, so please forgive me, maybe I have messed around with this stuff so much that it is actually making sense to my pea sized brain. So, I would recommend that anybody who is a bit confused..... and I include myself in these numbers..... may want to join in or at least listen in on the STRUCTURAL WORKSHOP....... https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/6090-structural-workshop-pre-ugm-thursday-aug-6th-300-pm-pst/

Glenn is the best, He knows more than me, he knows more than the CA Staff, in fact he knows more stuff than my wife, ........... but you must take into consideration how this will appear in plan view. Do you need to dimension the columns? How will the columns appear in plan view? Are your going to have half columns at the exterior wall of the house? How often are you going to use that particular setback of column from the edge of porch slab? How often are you going to use that style of column? Is the height of the column base going to change from project to project? How is the beam supporting the room going to appear in plan view. Bottom line, I advocate a less auto approach for the reasons I just referenced.

Just to goof around, I wonder what would happen if we took his initial post, and using Google Translate, we were to turn that initial post into Russian, and then into German, and then French, back to German, throw in a Japanese translation and then back to English. What do you think it would say? I am with The Curmudgeon, we are here to learn as efficiently as possible, throw in some interpretation requirements and I am out of here, too much time involved.

My day was probably not as long as yours and I do not know what he is asking.

If you look closely, the far mirror reflects the near mirror, but the near mirror does not reflect the far mirror. This is telling me that the near mirror does not have a mirror material on it or the near mirror is one of those mystery objects where a mirror material does not work on it.