SHCanada2

and then when I try and change the 60" I have to 48", it changed it to 81" and then I retype in 48, and it changes it to 60". around and around it goes 23.01.2025_18.59.00_REC.mp4

for future users, one has to check the "shelf ceiling" PRIOR to changing the relative ceiling height to make it work Me thinks the documentation needs to document this behaviour Documentation: Check Shelf Ceiling to prevent Attic Walls from generating over the interior walls that define the selected room. When unchecked, interior Attic Walls will generate if surrounding rooms have higher ceilings than the selected room. See Shelf Ceilings.

I noticed on the main floor it works, and changes the absolute elevation. but on the basement it leaves the absolute elevation and shows the walls to the ceiling. And if I change the absolute elevation manually, well it changes the whole floor even though I did not change the other room next to it. Any ideas? 23.01.2025_18.43.48_REC.mp4

should post in Q&A forum

the walls will typically extend to a roof. My guess is the roof plane has been lowered? Did you try auto building the roofs and see what happens

isnt that what I showed above, take off the side and back panels of the cabinet, and the toe kick? you are just left with the countertop, which is what it would be IRL

I compared the object properties of his vs me dropping the CA chef series dishwasher into a cabinet these are where his differ...that look like it might be what he did. The first one below is "side type" from the screenshot I put above (which is the chef series wiht right side set to none, and you can see the right side missing. right_side --------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- NVPublisher actual_type ---------------------------------------------------------- "None" -------------------------------------- String left_side ---------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- NVPublisher actual_type ---------------------------------------------------------- "None" -------------------------------------- String back_side ---------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- NVPublisher actual_type ---------------------------------------------------------- "None" -------------------------------------- String has_toekick -------------------------------------------------------------- false --------------------------------------- FalseClass chef series with the above set like Mark's

ceiling planes is pretty straight forward. I think CA has a video on them

when you ask "accurately upload into Chief", are you referring to the companies which output a Chief .plan file, or software that just produces a floor plan that you can bring into Chief as a dxf or some other type? I tried out cubicasa a couple months ago. It worked pretty good. $10 per plan, and you can just trace over the walls. or $35 and they provide dxf. It uses photogrametery technology so any phone will work One of the companies I work for use magicplan, but so far it has not provided sufficient detail to draw up a plan in CA without me having to ask some questions like "whats that". And "is that where the stairs start or the landing starts?". Anything that is not a wall, these programs have a hard time with, so I also ensure a video is taken, and then I try and piece it together. I tried to get polycam to work because it will spit out a floor plan immediately, but I could not get it to work on an android. All other apps I researched required you to wait until the next day or x number of hours to get a floor plan. None of them are that accurate that I researched. Most claim this "1 or 2%"., which in my view is nonsense. Accuracy should be delineated in +- x number of inches. So 1% of a 40 wide house is an error of 5". In my view, I'll pay $10 for inaccuracy, rather than $50 or $100 for some of the other apps for the same inaccuracy. Matterport might be an exception for accuracy, it has its own hardware. For me my plan going forward is to use cubicasa for where I do not care about acccuracy (floors of a house which are not being modified), and then use my bosch laser 50C for where it is critical, and inches matter

If you want only the terrain below grade to have a pattern, you could do something as shown in this

cut pattern? what are you looking for.. a picture might help

they are also in the dimension defaults if you want to change them permanently going forward

I randomly found the CA "chefseries dishwasher" a few years ago because I liked the handle, that goes into the cabinet. It does not have the proud cabinet frame that you show. just doesn't colour the toe klick to match, although yo can paint it:

in alberta, for residential, the floor plans are imperial feet inches, the site plan is in metric (metres to 2 or 3 decimals), or can be both storey poles can be either or both, although geodetic elevations are always metres ASL. for multifamily mid rise (4 storeys or more) it is typically it square feet and sq metres. rooms are typically both Actual surveys are always metric in metres 6 storey midrise: storey pole

bar counter top is not a solid material? maybe put a camera under there and look up

I use the pan all the time for kitchen elevations. Never thought if it was even available for 3D views. Thanks

so if I understand, you want to draw a pline along a wall in plan view to the length of the wall, and set its "height" somewhere and have CA calculate Height times length? plines do not have length, per se, as they are not guranteed to have 2 sides the same length. They have perimeter. so you could use a pline stored in your library, which is a rectangle, and then stretch it to the length of the wall, and then make it the width you want, and then use the area of the pline in its label and I'm guessing you do not want to use the wall length or wall OIP?

not sure what you are looking for, dimension to the outside of the foundation wall, or to the outside of the footing, or both? A diagram or marked up plan might help

I draw a polyline on the elevations to get the wall surface area as the grade(terrain) may be different. The area of the pline then feeds a global variable for use in calculations (which i use for limiting distance calculations)

Looks like even simpler for those of us who do not put the basement on floor 1 and only ever put it on the same floor (0) as one can then hardcode floor 0 into the logic. add OIP for "Above Grade Floor" and OIP for "Above Grade Area" for floor 0 set "Above Grade Floor" to 1 (instead of zero) and for "Above Grade Area" set it to std area, except if it is floor 0 then set the area to 0. The sum similar will then group the basement with floor 1, but it does not matter as the above grade area has been set to 0 for the basement It does get a little tricky on the foundation, where an attached garage would have stem walls but no actual real life room but has a CA room. This would not be part of the GFA, so one would need to set it to a specific room type and exclude it in the macro. It is typically denoted as "unexcavated" here, so I suppose one could key off a specific room name rather than type. But I will say, it does look like a very clean approach for "typical" area calculations around here Building footprints for the purposes of parcel coverage get a little complicated as height of cantilevers off the ground determine if they count or not. I suppose then cantilevers could be made into their own rooms and marked as included or excluded. But then the adjacent room label dimensions would be incorrect. Maybe a small price to pay for a relatively straight forward dynamic system

that reminds me of one of my favorite quotes. "analogies are like statistics, I can always find out that goes my way" my two cents, everything is being branded "AI", where 90% of it is just normal software. In my view, unless the software is looking up and scraping information from large databases of disparate historical information, and bringing that into context, it ain't AI. but this thread did give me a good suggestion for CA: I should be able to search for backgrounds with lakes, and the software cycle through them on my RTRT view with a backwards and a forwards buttons, allowing me to then pick the one I want. Vs today where I go in try and find all the ones with lakes, then go into the dbx and select each, close the dbx, rinse repeat.. And then CA can do a side by side video of that functionality compared to archicad above where I have to sit there typing it. This all reminds me a bit of the difference between calling into to a system that says press 1 for x, press 2 for y, vs the system that says, tell me a bit about what you would like to do, and then the software keys off of keywords to then ask you another question, and another. I've sworn at those systems more times than I can count (plus once you swear they just send you to an agent). Well that wasn't considered AI back then (15 years ago), but I'm sure whomever is selling that system today has rebranded it AI. sexy sells

or spend 5 minutes on it just to say you have it, as sexy sells. or have someone do a side by side video with a timer to see if the AI above is faster than just using the UI. I can't imagine sitting there typing. background:next sowny, and then looking at that one and not liking it and then typing background: next snowy I'd go crazy Now if it did each snowy one for 5 seconds giving me enough time to tag my favorites and go back and forth like a music player, that might be useful. But that is not AI, that is just regular software

I will give some tidbits, keep your top of first floor subfloor at 0, per default. Create your terrain and set at 12" below the first floor. Create a terrain region at the curb with -12. Then create a story pole and use a grade reference(-24") to show the curb at 0

yeah the more I was playing with the schedules last night and got the parcel coverage going with the one global variable for the pline parcel (which like you I had already as my current macro uses/needs it), I was coming to the realization you could do it all with the schedules and OIPs. And then I was thinking today you could OIP the basement to flag it off from being included in the top two floors sq ft schedule. or like you said have a specific room type. I like your "non livable" moniker. We call it "unfinished" up here Looks like yours would cover the vast majority of cases (although I had a new one the other day doing up a house for my brother, the basement is included in the FAR if 60% of the volume is above grade. I cant imagine trying to calculate that for a walkout with different side slopes...maybe solid subtraction/intersection etc. my guess is the DA just looks at the elevations and tries to do some basic math with straight lines or just believes whatever I put down. But no one is doing this automagically with plines or schedules I dont think) I haven't looked back at your other thread yet wrt to the schedule updating. So I need to, as that only leaves the, when I update the pline, the schedule does not update unless I go into the room DBX issue, presumably because CA has no idea the global variable is in the mix. The only other downside is I am guessing there is no auto vertical adjustment. In your snippet, I assume if one had three floors, one would have to move the lower schedules down. or one could just have the whole think duplicated, one for bungalows, one for 2 storey and one for three storeys and just move them around on layout for whichever is needed. But overall I think you've got the solution for the vast majority of the cases, or at least the ones I have seen.

in western Canada (excluding BC), yes