SHCanada2

If I understand this correctly, one can no longer by a used, say X12 license and then pay to upgrade it to X14, after January. Is this correct?

I run 512 just fine. I know a lot of people say to get more, but not sure why. My understanding is you would have to check read/write speeds and then decide. But even that I'm not sure would make much of a difference with CA, as I assume CA caches to memory for the vast majority of functions (and I would assume you have enough memory that the disk cache is not needed). So the question would be how often does CA read and write to disk, and is it enough to make a difference. (queue the multitude of comments to come from people who have actually measured as I am purely speculating ...) My windows and installed programs are about 130GB this leaves > 300GB. With my CA directory for each client being mostly topping out at 300MB, I could do 1000 projects before I run out of space .well i just did some playing around and CA is reading and writing to disk fairly frequently, so probably best to check the performance of each size of drive. so maybe buy more for performance if it is significant and cheap, but for pure storage, 512 GB is lots, at least for me. I also have a backup drive, so storage is even less of an issue it does bring up a question, what exactly is the best bang for one's buck for performance, CPU, video card, video card memory, etc.

looks like the key here is to ensure it is flat on the x,y plane . this works: 26.11.2022_16.57.59_REC.mp4

perfect, I forgot about the cad Detail from view merci

I am looking for a CAD block for a heating element in a duct for a makeup air unit. I found a nice symbol, wall radiator towel warmer. but its 2d block is a top view. is there a method to convert the symbol's other plane into a 2D CAD block. i.e. I want the picture below as a CAD block thanks

curious, how would the client even know. It is fairly typical around here to have storey pole elevations in Metres above sea level, but that can be accomplished even if one does 2. ..maybe there is a downvote bot...as I cannot possibly see a reason to downvote your assessment

i would try: 0. leaving main floor at 0 1. entering all the terrain points 2. determine the distance from the subfloor to the terain at a specific point adjacent to the house 3. adjust the "subfloor height above terrain" to match so for instance if the terrain is at 97' ASL at the front of the house and 95' ASL at the back of the house and you want the subfloor to be 3' above the front of the house, the value would be 100' Below are two terrain regions left at 97', right at 95', and "subfloor height above terrain" at 100' but i've never found a way to autostorey pole it correctly. if you set the grade level marker in the defaults to -100 ft and then remove it from the storey pole dimension, it will show correctly... just requires the manual work, but maybe others have found a way.

I thought about this as well, but then decided maybe upgrading the hardware more frequently would be the better choice, as you never know what might be coming next, plus you get the new o/s when you upgrade HW

I believe you could implicitly figure out level 3 is the attic by using a room label macro, and then publish that to a global variable. But as the OP desires this on layout, the plan would have to be open as well to run the room label macro (or start reading and writing files). Me thinks it would be a lot of work ensuring the value was for the specific plan

one thing I have noticed is my memory is not pinned, video card memory is not pinned, and my CPU is not pinned but CA is not "lightning quick" . so I'm not sure the extras you are scoping out would be much better than half of what you spec. ...but that is just my experience. I'd be curious to find out what exactly if anything is a measurable difference, because then I think everyone could spend the money on what is making the difference. i.e I'd go spend the extra $500 on the better processor if that was the factor

i do a fair amount of basement entries, just not usually fully enclosed (usually post and roof, or just railing). But there are a couple things to ensure you do in order to avoid redoing. 1. set the terrain height correctly relative to the main floor of the main building. I typically measure this with a tape measure against a known entity, such as front steps or window (then you go inside an ,measure distance to floor) 2. Once that is set, measure your top of concrete stairwell walls from grade. Usually here it is above grade a few inches.your picture looks like ~8 inches 3. then adjust your exterior room height at the basement level you created to have the proper ceiling height to match 2 4. pull a section and make sure the measurements are correct then do the rest

nothing in the file?

i cant figure out what it is/does. It looks like something I had 20 years ago. It was an electronic pen with special paper. When you came back to the office you would dock the pen and it would download the images to your computer. It even had OCR but could not really read my writing

yes it matches yours ...or maybe I should uncheck it..i'll try that ...although its definition implies this would maintain the correct exterior layer When Auto Reverse Wall Layers is checked, walls will automatically reverse their layers to ensure that exterior layers face the exterior of the structure. Uncheck this to leave the orientation of the wall layers unchanged.

i checked and it is "main layer outside" yes that works nicely....eyedropper does as well...now that I know it is the exterior material that is being changed attached is narrated 13.11.2022_13.00.50_REC.mp4

now i know how it happened. CA is changing it 13.11.2022_10.58.04_REC.mp4

well i did find out the problem, the material for that wall's exterior surface is "drywall". no idea how that happened

attached is video showing how redrawing the wall fixes it 13.11.2022_10.25.50_REC.mp4

attached . it is a test plan Untitled 1.plan

that is how i have it and i do not get the extra rooms it is set to frame through which i think is correct based on the article i'm beginning to think this little -- is normal, just never see it because the layers are on

if I do not draw walls clockwise, when I modify existing walls(trying to create a cubby hole) I get the siding on backwards (not on the interior wall, but actually backwards on the outside of the wall) . It can be seen by removing the drywall from the wall. CA suggests to draw clockwise, but also indicate that the wall will be reversed if you do not (which can be corrected with the reverse layers) Reversing Wall Layers (chiefarchitect.com) The odd thing is if I put in a pony wall the bottom of the wall is correct, but the top is not ; pony wall, both the top and bottom siding 6: if i remove the drywall and osb from the wall I can see with a camera that the siding is on the exterior of the wall, just backwards. Is this normal? is there a way to fix it (other than redrawing the wall clockwise). The reverse layers doesnt work because the siding is not on the inside of the wall, you can see when zooming in it is actually on the correct side: 12.11.2022_21.17.41_REC.mp4

thanks, just discovered what the wall problem is, i will create a new post. it seems interesting.

I believe that is what I have. If I turn on the layers, it looks like: and my wall definition is the irony is the whole reason I started looking is because I was getting this: and I was trying to make sure the walls were all connected properly. they seem to line up top to bottom from foundation to second floor

hmmm I'm pretty sure the point of making it furred is so I do not have the 2x4 wall next to the concrete wall and then CA making a tiny room. as I used to do it that way and then CA suggested it be furred My wall is concrete, air gap, 2x4. I've been doing it like this for a couple years after having micro room problem.. but I dont understand what you are suggesting..., concrete wall and then a 2x4 right beside it? is it no locate to avoid the micro room problem

I'm sure I've seen this before just dont recall how to fix it or if i need to fix. these are furred walls. maybe it is just showing the intersection of the concrete wall? but if so you'd think it would have a vertical one too if i pull both walls past the corner (there are now 3 lines one vertical and two horizontal if I change to non furred walls I do not get the -- If I change back to furred its now different with the corner missing