SHCanada2

I did have a post on it somewhere, but too lazy to look for it today. There is a table in the building code for the amount of glazing you can have on the side of an exposed building face near a property line which abuts another residential building's property. The further you are away, the move you can have Exposed face is from grade to under the soffit, so this typically includes a couple feet of basement example where you can see the blue of the polyline defining the area. Its more of an opinion than a science when you start to consider what all gets included. But you have to do it for additions that have windows to ensure you are not over the limit

"surface" is typically drywall to drywall, where "main layer" is typically stud to stud. As to which one to use, that would typically depend on what your client expects.

X16 schedules can do quite a bit as Rene indicates in another thread. After some fiddling, I also got the schedule to work for the window area as a percentage of wall area (required in Canada). Wall area still needs the polyline. But this eliminates the need to store the windows in a global variable. So the request to publish the schedule total as an NVP is not actually required. The attached shows my original macro solution in the label, where the schedule shows similar output...except it does not have the "largest unprotected window"...not sure if that could actually be done in a schedule...maybe I will try. I'm thinking if one was creative one could essentially use the OIP to store variables, rather than use global variables...something to try and see. 26.01.2025_23.24.35_REC.mp4

that is typical house up here. Change the absolute elevation of the garage floor to be -36", and change absolute ceiling to be whatever your main floor is, or change the relative rough ceiling to your main floor +36

please post to Q & A,

mine does for at least width and height. maybe you are using a different column? you might want to post th eplan

did you try creating a wall type that has the brick, and draw the foundation walls with that new wall type

below ground footings? I suppose one could change the material from concrete to brick. You may wish to post an image of what you are trying to do

dimension defaults. You can also use point 2 point dimension and just pick where it dimensions to as you move the mouse along, at least for the plan view.

the dimensions can go to the framing or to wall surfaces. My guess is one goes to 1/2" drywall and the other does not. You could post the plan for more definitive results

I saw this type of thing (although not quite as uniform) frequently in X15, so far I have never seen it in X16. you could download the trial and see

and to make matters worse, if I delete that room and draw another in the same place, CA remembers the settings. So then I draw a new room off to the side and set the relative height to 48 (instead of 60) and then move the wall over (expanding the room) and CA sets it back to 60. Is there a way to make CA "forget" the last room settings that were drawn in a specific location? 23.01.2025_19.07.19_REC.mp4

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: