SHCanada2

in the app there is a little icon to save it to the cloud. Then in CA there is a manu item off of the File menu to import->CA as built. in other wors it has to go up to the cloud, and then back to your computer

Rob, later this week would be good if you are around

You can see, while scanning, in the CA app when it outlines the windows. It's one thing I am considering not measuring manually and just using the CA app's determined size and location..at least for the rooms not being renoed.

hmm, i dont get this part. why not just adjust the walls in the CA app directly, vs sounds like you are still going to type in the dimensions for each room in the trace app,, then adjust the walls in CA? Are you doing it in the trace app so you have a permanent, unaltered record? (this is why I do it on paper today...walls can't move on paper)

I'm curious as to how this will be done. today when I take dimensions, I will need to correct interior dimensions that i took to reflect the building outer walls. In this respect, I dont want to accidentally adjust a wall in the app and move the exterior wall(the CA app gives you the ability to put in reference measurements, but that is static. You seem to be saying you will correct actual wall dimensions in the app). In CA you can easily see this and control it. Running around with a tablet and adjusting, I would think would be prone to errors. I think in my ideal workflow, I would go scan, download to CA, print it out and go measure each room, and then reconcile in CA. It's like ordering food at a restaurant, it used to be the server would write down the order. Now they bring a tablet and are constantly asking sorry what did you say you wanted with that...because they have to sit there navigating the menus and drop downs on the tablet. Maybe I'm wrong and you can get the efficiency in the tablet by fixing the walls in the app. It was an excercise in frustration when I used to try and do it with the measureon app. So much that I gave up and now just draw the plan in CA onsite on my laptop (after sketching out the layout on paper). I asked Ca to see if they could provide us a point cloud as well. If they did then we could reconcile where the app made an incorrect decision(in aligning walls). So yeah I'm curious if you will find it to be more efficient to use the app, take some control measurements, and then download to CA and finish fixing the plan. Or if you will fix everything in the app by taking more manual dimensions and moving the walls around in the app and curious, where are you noting bulkhead AFF, and dimensions?

Is their picture to scale(I assume so as it came from lidar)? if so, you could take one dimension across the building, scale the picture to that, and then measure everything off the picture in CA? i.e. did you consider, drawing in the widows and doors, measuring the offset of the windows to the walls, all in the app. Then import into CA, and forget about measuring every room? or did you try this and the walls were not correct enough to the actual dimensions?

I tried this last year, it did not do anything useful related to floorplans. Polycam was the closest I found to a working product, but it also uses the roomplan API from Apple, so only works on Apple(although it has photogrammery(uses a constant taking of photos to determine depth and distance as opposed to using lidar) mode, but in that mode it will not produce floorplans) but it also had issues with finding walls in the proper location for the lidar method. So i think to Rene's point, anything that uses the roomplan API is only as good as the Apple programmers make it.

curious, it looks like you measured every room manually. Why did you do this, vs relying on the program's measurments?

i've tried it a few times, and compared it to laser and to cubicasa. I do mostly basements, and it has trouble distinguishing bulkheads (sometimes thinks they are walls) and cantilevers where a 12" wall portion goes across the top. I'd be curious to hear your feedback. It uses the apple roomplan API, so I think it may be apple's limitations as opposed to CA It's nice though as it brings in windows and doors, so the elevations are less work, but based on my testing you would still need to take laser measurements for your area of interest

Most of my work is basements, sec suites, and the odd addition. The basements and sec suites are very straightforward. I find the details and RSI calcs for oddball assemblies on additions take the time, and looking up the actual requirement. i.e. for a detached garage that is heated, what is the wall and ceiling RSI requirements. what if there is a workshop in the garage, is that treated differently. And then the fire rated assemblies for stuff like soffit with 1'6 of PL walls within x of PL I have a bit of a catalog, but I would not consider it organized enough to quickly find what I need. I have limiting distance calc that works well, just adjust the pline already on the elevation camera, and set the window category to be included on the schedule. the schedule and macro logic does the rest. same with floor area. So I am ok there The other PIA is terrain elevations. I have an object that shows the elevation on the site plan and the section, but everytime the terrain rebuilds I have to open up each marker to get it to refresh. If you have an answer to that I'd be interested I also refuse to manually draw fake grade lines, so I use a terrain object 1" deep by 10ft high that slices the terrain, one for each elevation, but each has its own layer, so its a bit of a PIA as I need to maintain 4 layersets. If you have a better answer for that, I'd be interested. Then there is the whoie detail management. If I change the wall to have 1" foam, and the foundation to have 1" foam, am I manually changing all the details to ensure they match. You'd be surprised at how often I get,, oh go put some purlins on that roof so we can get some airflow or uhh ,make the roof 2x10 so we can get more insulation. Then I have to change the roof structure, and the details. Ultimately I would think I would want notes put on the cross section with W1.1, and an associated detail called W1.1 and its RSI, same with ceiling and floor. but that doesn't cover the detail where the truss heel is, so not sure what the answer there is

I've seen this before and I thought I was just going crazy. good to know it was not me.

I thought maybe that's what you were after. I checked mine and I don't have anything like that. I suppose you could assign to a global in or from the oip, but then you are having to spend a bunch of effort managing that , which you are probably trying to avoid in the first place

i don't see anything in the object properties of a mulled unit that would give you that

I use them in macros: custom_fields below. isElevationReference is an OIP but these are hand inputted, are you looking for results from a calc/macro within an OIP? if custom_fields["isElevationReference"] == "Y" ... or are you talking about something else?

i thought you could download a CA that was only usuable for the VR...its been a couple years since I've tried. I'll see it if I can find the thread