dshall

Try this vid to see if it helps.

That is what I was trying to express ..... thanks Tom for clarifying.

The answer is no. Have you ever seen it done? Do you have a picture where it has been done? Are you living in la la land where anything is possible or are you living in the practical world. In the practical world the answer is no, if you are living in la la land, I bet I could do it if you post your plan.

The box window and the bay tool is essentially useless in my opinion. I am not smart enough to use it.... and apparently Joey isn't smart enough either. I always manually build. It is a room with a raised floor and I have done multiple vids on this many many years ago...... but I am sure I could not find them.

Because it would be very difficult to do it. I am so glad CA spends their resources moving forward vs. trying to make their program backwards compatible.

Not possible, period.

Here is the why, if you do not have a soffit, it means you can see the rafters/trusses if you stand outside the house and look up. Don't we want the EXPOSED RAFTERS/TRUSSES to be the same material as the fascia? So if there is not soffit, the framing material defaults to the fascia material. CA did a good job on this....... BTW, I can't stop watching the news.... I swear, this is such a fascinating time in our history. I just love watching the two major news outlets and hear such contrasting views.

Steve, just to be clear, I bet if you TAKE THE SOFFIT OFF, you will probably find that the RAFTERS & TRUSSES use the same material (the fascia material) and you have very little control of the materials....... I am trying to be clear.

BTW. if you look at Steve's 3d framing view, you will notice he uses many different material/colors for the different framing members. In fact he uses light yellow for studs @ 16 and dark yellow for studs @ 24. Good stuff. Where he did not do a good job was with his rafters and roof trusses. I think he is using the same material for both. I would of chosen different material for each. It is so much easier when multiple material/colors are used. Note that I changed the truss material to a brown....... of course all of this goes out the window if you have a closed soffit vs. an open soffit... Thanks for the post Steve.

Steve, this is so interesting. You should understand that you can control the size of the sill plate on a wall by wall basis. Your default sill plate is 3.5/ Change it. Experiment with it. The sill plate will center under the wall above. Make the sill plate the width of the conc stem wall. Play with it, see what happens when you use different plate sizes.... hard to explain.... Bottom line, change the width of the sill plate to 8" and you will be happy. In fact, change the DEFAULT WIDTH OF THE SILL plates.... and you will be happier.

I think it should go on the CAD, FRAMING layer period...... maybe this should be a request?

Well ain't that a pistol? You are correct.

Yes please, let's find out what the issue is.

Thanks Steve, I never realized this.... actually you are wrong..... it goes on the CAD, DEFAULT layer, not the CAD, FRAMING layer........why would they do this? .... is there an advantage? Interesting.

Try building a 4x2 floor beam and defining the location.

Give Chief Architect a call, they can help.

I could be wrong but I thought every job I do in San Diego the FAR controls. The city of San Diego does not care about COVERAGE for private homes unless on a steep hillside.

I am going to guess, you have ref sets on and that line is on a ref set. Turn off ref sets and see if it goes away.

Thanks Glenn, easy peasy... and you are correct, once rotated I do need to relocate all text blocks in the vertical direction.....

This was not a workshop that I got a lot out of. It is not Mark's fault, it's just that I do not need this stuff for what I do. My motivation for hosting this was to help others that need this for their business. Mark has spent a lot of time working on this. It is my hope that with Mark's help, The 20/20 clientele will move over to CA. The more clients CA has, the more money they will have which means more resources CA will have to hire more software engineers which means a better product for me. It's all about me, me, me. I hope CA continues to work closely with Mark and any other user who feels trapped into using 20/20 but would prefer to move to a better program like CA.

Joe, the votes are a waste of time. It varies between jurisdictions. For example, decks and balconies are rarely included unless...... blah blah blah. You are wasting your time trying to work this out. This is one of the reasons that we users must be able to determine which spaces to include in the FAR and the COVERAGE. This is also one of the reasons I asked for PLINE LABELS. With PLINE LABELS I was assuming that CA would help us out in determining the area analysis tabulations. I am so fed up with trying to get CA to listen to what I/WE need, this may be my last post on this topic. The Alaskan Son has been the only person so far that gets this. Using Alaskan Sons method, I can get what I need. I absolutely love what Michael did for me. It cost me a small fortune to get him to write the code, but it has been worth every cent. This crap that CA give us (THE LIVING AREA) is useless to me. Let me give you an example. I am working on a project and I will need to graphical show the City how I came up with the area for the FAR. How do you do it? How does CA do it? You guys can't do it. But I can do it by using the PLINE, dimensioning it, an then turning on the PLINE LABEL which will give the area of the PLINE auto. Let me state this again. We need to be able to graphically show the area and to be able to dimension the area. And god forbid..... and it happens on every job of mine.... any changes to the area should be auto updated. I understand that you think by giving a space a certain label, it will be included in the necessary area.... but how do you explain that to a plans examiner?

Glenn, if you have time, I would love to do a skype with you in regards to this. Thanks.

BTW, I do not know how I did this..... I flipped the plan vertically.... and this is what is interesting..... see pic, the section cut lines are pointing down to bottom of page, but the original before flip plan , the section cuts were pointing up. How did I do this? I do not know.

I am going to flip a plan. I believe Glenn believes in the T/R method or the REFLECT ABOUT method. I think both methods work. IOW DO NOT ROTATE PLAN Here is the question. The text gets flipped. How do I select all text a flip about each one in lieu of flipping all around the "body" See pic

I have latest version... if it is possible on a mac, maybe a mac user will help out..........