SHCanada2

I do lots of recreation from plans, and I can say the move to notes on plans from the old text everywhere probably adds 20% more time to figure things out. The worst is companies that have note schedules with notes that arent actually on the plan

yes but I think you need to "know" what is the first detail in the layout, and the second detail... For instance, your BWP WSW actual detail is on the left in your layout and it is labelled 3. I presume, by looking at the layout one thinks, "this should be number 1 not 3, so I will go to the schedule and set it to 1". And then you go to the schedule and move it. or is it a different workflow?

if the home is built after 1985 here the homeowner can order the plans from the city for $60. I tell them that is best and cheapest way as my stuff is either basements or additions. additions require full elevations by the city here. its easier to recreate in CA than try and measure. If I need something, I will ask the homeowner to take pictures

thanks , that little arrow on the arc is the trick. and to rene and ryan, thanks...not sure how I missed that...late night ...

do you know how to get rid of the bottom doorway sill? or maybe I wasnt doing it right how does one "match it to the symbol...easily...go chase down the properties from the original arc and plug them all in? after getting frustrated with that....I created a couple psolids, and subtracted them, which worked ...after taking 20 minutes trying to place the psolids in the right place to begin with. For some reason I couldn't find them on the plan view(yes the layer was on) for that long, and I was moving them around in circles in 3D. No idea why they werent in plan view. But even so, I think I need to watch some videos on how to move psolids around in 3D..literally I was moving them in circles (I'd move the camera to be more or less on one elevation, then move it, then move the camera to another elevation then move it, then move the camera to be on top and then move it, rinse repeat) ...there must be a proper technique that I am missing that being said, I'd like to see if I can get the symbol thing going ...or the pass-thru doorway/window. The latter seems the simples if it could work...and that is where I got the arc from to begin with for the psolid

i placed it from my library onto the wall in elevation. When I click on it, in elevation, i get which now I notice has the "convert to symbol" but missing the icon so I did it again, selected the 3d solid, click to convert to symbol, a dbx pops up with a checkbox to add to library, which I check, except I also check the advanced options , and check to insert into wall (where before I opened up in the library and checked it). then I select it from my library and when I place it it, low and behold, it cuts into the wall. Then I went back to my original in my library and placed it on the wall, and now it cuts the wall, without having to move it in plan view go figure anywho, it is still the same look (square cutout), but I have that menu item now, if I click the symbol , I get interesting that it has "convert to symbol" but now what do i do, I dont see something that will cutout the arch instead of the box I currently have

its in the first post

I have an arch I created in 2D CAD, converted to a solid, converted to a symbol, and set the "Inserts Into Wall" but when I put it on the wall, it cuts a rectangle instead of the arch. Any idea why? symbol: plan view: then I move the symbol to the left over the wall and widen it and I get a rectangular cutout: then I deselct the layer for the symbol Any ideas why I do not get the arch? btw I tried the pass through window and door for the arch, but the bottom sill always showed 694 Muirfield Cr - fe (3).zip

interesting. my walls have basically the same settings, i changed my room height for the cant to be 48 to see if something would change, no change, still the 24" roof. I tried pulling the exterior wall right through instead of just breaking the exterior wall to a bump out, no difference. ...a little stumped

? not sure what you mean I just highlighted it. i didnt draw it \..and if i try to delete it, it gives me the warning ...with aout rebuild turned on your changes will be lost

trying to auto do it. doesnt seem to work just tried setting to 2". made no difference

trying for a 14" roof (12+2 overhang). CA looks like it will only do 24 as a min, or perhaps I am missing something? 48" overhang specified on the long wall dbx: 6" specified as overhang 694 Muirfield Cr - fe (2).zip

3 things I have found save time beyond the SPVs 1. Plan template has the 4 elvations already on it. Kitchen already has 4 elevations on it (even though you may only use two) 2. Layout template has the 4 elevations, and floor plan layout boxes already on it, and a schedule page on it 3. Windows and door schedules already on the plan template I also have two cross section cameras on my plan template. I also have 4 walls(room) and an autogenerated foundation on my plan. This allows easier "testing" of the layout, when I make changes to the plan template.

You could try printing to different page sizes. This combined with the DPI seem to determine quality of output. I PDF to 24x36 for better render quality

i'm thinking the specific sequence of operations set something in the program which is not visible ...thats my theory

..well that worked, plus change the end type to none to eliminate the post at the wall, and then changed the newels on the right railing wall to 4" and voila thanks Glenn. That was a long haul Now we all know how to get it to that look..from scratch

plan 1871838887_NEWPLAN20x72actually works.plan that works

i saw this after i did it. and actually doing both identified different differences. I made them as close as I could (cant change some things on the object properties, but did use the no change thing to identify differences, and then changed them The only i saw which was kind of different was the stair location. so I moved the stair and it left the opening, moved it again, and it left it again. ...in both plans. I tried rebuild framing but that didnt work I had to pull the wall back and then rebirng it back to fix it. anywho, once the railing was back to normal on both, cheking the object properties, other than wall id, there are only 2 differences between all three railing walls: Top railing wall - No differences Bottom railing wall: (works on left, doesnt work on right num_whole_newels ----------------------- 1 num_whole_newels ----------------------- 0 Right railing wall: num_whole_newels ----------------------- 2 num_whole_newels ----------------------- 3 and these would look to be calculated numbers...so no more insight today than previous. attached is the spreadsheet and both plans made to be as close as I could for those 3 walls deckcomparison.xlsx 1543674498_24x502bed doesntwork.plan

what I did as well. I also tried reversing the wall, to no avail I might try and verify using the object properties macro and comparing in excel to see if there are any differences. if not I will send it to support.

..but... It auto worked before per the earlier part of the thread (and I verified it works with the other plan from above) But I tried changing per above and comparing the settings to see what was different and could not find the problem, which leads me to my question: Have people found that it randomly works, so in reponse to this people do it manually? ...or (and is my hope) there is a way to make it auto work?

the issue with that setting is then there are posts where the stairs are, which given it will be trussed, are not required. Any idea how to get rid of them?

I'm still getting this issue. the dialog shows it as full post, but it is not in 3d if I pull back the front railing, then a post will draw any idea how to fix? I tried redrawing the wall, rotating the wall 180 degrees, extending it out then back. nothing seems to work the corners do show differently on plan view: just not sure how to get it to be a post attached\24x50 2 bed.plan

Just happened to me for the first time yesterday. No idea why or how

I see now. Although your snippet above changes the numbering, it is still looks like a bit of a pain as you have to have the layout open to "watch" the numbers to make sure they are incremental, and the schedule open to re-order them?

interesting concept. I try and stay away from overlaying on layout, as I will move the layout boxes around depending on text annotations and how they fit. To me we need either one of two things, Joe's method X,Y coordinates of layout boxes, or an incrementing callout number. I personally stay away from live details as one cannot see the little things clearly like bolts, ice & water shield, WRB. So I have a bunch of CAD details in my template plan with the predermined names and these get passed through to the label for the layout so I never have to type them then on the plan, I link the callout to the detail. The problem is the callout number. There is no way to know if my last callout number was 2 or 3 or 4 or 5. So when I put a new callout on the plan, I have to guess. Then when I look at the layout I realized I guessed right or I guessed wrong and I go change it. Of course I could also go look first. But it does seem like the program should be able to do this on its own