dshall

Okay, I think I understand, first, if you are making a custom door out of PSOLIDS, you must first turn it into a door symbol, now you can send to to the LIBARARY AS something....... I guess I get that....... I suppose I was hoping or thinking that if you send it to library AS something, CA would give you the opportunity to give it a NAME...... I hate adding something to the library and then having to go to library to NAME IT. Why can't we NAME whatever we are saving to the library, before it gets to the library. Think molding profile, I create molding profile and send to library and now I have to go to library to give it a name..... if I don't do this, the molding name is MOLDING. Do you know how many MOLDINGS I have in my library? I have more moldings in my library than JC has years under his belt..... we are talking hundreds...... love you JC.

LOL, that is funnnnyyyyy.

Really? Why? With cabinets it gives you the option to send to library as a CABINET MODULE or CABINET DOORS AND DRAWERS. If you use if for a custom door, what options does it give you?

I just noticed this button..... "ADD TO LIBRARY AS". Do this, open new plan, put in base cabinet, RIGHT CLICK on cabinet, you will see two different options: ADD TO LIBRARY and ADD TO LIBRARY AS does anybody use the ADD TO LIBRARY AS button? I have always used the ADD TO LIBRARY button......

Or you could select the wall at the second floor/attic and change it to a wood wall. This is another argument for creating more floor than you need. If you do that, CA is not trying to building the attic wall that matches the CMU wall below, it you who is deciding what kind of "attic wall" you will be employing.

I am assuming you are talking about the gable wall. If this is the case I need to know if the block wall has a sill plate on top and if there is a rafter on sill plate to roof sheathing and if you want whatever finish is on block wall to go to underside of roof sheathing. There are many possible details of how to finish this, what does the detail look like. Can you give me a detail of this?

Please give me a pic of the specific location.

Thanks for asking the question AND POSTING THE PLAN. The problem has to do with your wall definition and quite frankly I am not as well versed on this as I should be. Select the wall, open the dvx, WALL TYPES<DEFINE< and uncheck the check marks for MAIN LAYERS at layer 1 & 3. The only main layer should be layer 2. You will now find the sheathing goes up to the roof sheathing and all is well. By checking layer 1 as you did, I believe what was happening is the RAFTER was building to the face of that layer, in other words, the sheathing was stopping at underside of the rafter. By unchecking layer 1 as a main layer, the siding can now fly by up to roof sheathing. The option to have several main layers defined in the wall dvx came out in x6 I believe. Not sure why or how I would use this.... I need to study up on it. Anybody use multiple layers in wall dvx and why? I may have spoken to soon, this works well for the soffited roof, for the roof without a soffit, zero out the depth of the GABLE SUB FASCIA and all will be well. I do not understand why we have the option to ACTIVATE EAVE SUB FASCIA but we do not have the option to ACTIVATE GABLE SUB FASCIA.

Is that in the key of E minor?

A psolid? Nuts, never used one.

A psolid? Nuts, never used one.

Nuts, if you are dragging it down you are doing it the hard way.

Another way to ask this is ..... say I want the HEARTH TOP on the BASE COUNTERTOP LAYER, can this be done...... it's kind of weird..... as I said before.... it works but why?

Thank you Joe..... I had played around with this several weeks ago and it did work. Interesting..... how does the hearth base know it is on one layer...... easy, we put it on that layer, but how does the hearth know that the top is on it's own layer and not on the CABINET COUNTERTOP Layer. I know it works, I am just not sure why it works. Thanks again Joe..... another one of the CA mysteries.....

Okay, I am really into using BASE CABINETS for more symbols. Instead of using PSOLIDS for hearths, shower curbs etc., I want to use BASE CABINETS. The reason for this is the height of BASE CABINETS is base on the FLOOR ELEVATION. This is super...... but........ ... suppose I build a hearth out of of base cabinet and I use the countertop as the hearth cap.... the base cabinet/hearth is 5'x2' and the hearth cap is 2" bigger.......... I put this in plan.......... but what layer do I put it on? I want the HEARTH BASE to show as dashed, ala base cabinets, and I want the hearth cap to be a solid line, ala base cabinet counter top. Do I have to put the hearth on the BASE CABINET LAYER? Or do I have the option to put this hearth/base cabinet on it's own layer (FIREPLACE HEARTH LAYER). It seems if I put the hearth on it's own layer, I lose the opportunity to show the hearth base as dashed and I lose the opportunity for the hearth cap to be a solid line........ any ideas?

In spite of it being a famous suggestion, it is ignored as much as my wife ignores my famous requests........... so I get my own retribution by ignoring her requests for me to take out the trash...... hmmmmmm.... that explains a lot....... I may have to start taking out the trash.....

Interesting question. I specify a 80" floor height and it comes in at 80". It does not seem to matter that my floor thickness to 1/2". Gene, is there something here that I should be aware of? Gene, are you implying the height is dependent on the finished floor thickness?

Very disappointing. Work completed should ALWAYS be paid for....... Period.

I never use the icon, 0,8 to copy and then 0,4 for sticky mode, I'm with P. I use it all the time.

That reminds me of a quote from Thomas "Hollywood" Henderson, who at one time said, "Terry Bradshaw could not spell "C-A-T" if we spotted him the "C-A". Love you P.

What a genius you are...... I have this argument with P. all the time, I say Joe is smart and P. says no....... hey P., do you believe me know, Joe is smart?

Lew, I don't care about the average chief user, I don't care, I don't care, I don't care. If the average chief user does not have the time to learn the system, I don't care. There are some of us here who are pushing the limits and pushing CA. CA will never be ahead of us. BTW, I am not sure what the problem is, the retaining wall works for the average chief user. But us nit wits in here who live with stuff 24/7 are always looking for better and faster ways of doing things. So funny, you are worried about the average chief user, I wonder what the heck the average chief user did 4 years ago when this program was no where near what it is today. I pity the CA folks....... well not really...... but I was thinking today about how I am constantly tweaking the system to be more efficient...... and it is easy..... on the next job I adjust....... and those knuckleheads at headquarters are probably going through the same thoughts..... "if only we would of programmed it this way back in 2005"....... but it is not so easy for them to change the system..... they have to work with what was done back in 2005...... unless they want to "get under the hood" which is what they seem to do every 4 or 5 years.

Nice job Joe. Really nice job. I think the only problem is if the note is a long note, if I am not mistaken, the schedule does not allow for WRAP AROUND/MULTIPLE LINES. Is this correct? This is a great solution with the only limitation of a long note.

Not a workaround, just an option.

I agree with Glenn. The method Glenn is talking about is to use a NORMAL WALL and a TERRAIN BREAK in lieu of a RETAINING WALL. I have done many vids on this method. What Glenn failed to out line is you will find yourself editing both the top and bottom of the REGULAR WALL. This is not bad, just maybe a bit tedious for this particular plan. The advantage is you can control the top and bottom of the wall whereas if it was a RETAINING WALL, the top of wall will follow the top of grade (high side), and the bottom of wall will follow the bottom of grade (low side). I almost exclusively use the TERRAIN BREAK/WALL method.