• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Larry_Sweeney

  1. I guess I approach showing the client their model in a little "thought process". I do a Zoom meeting with them showing their model. I feel like I have the most control/discussion of the project and I can show them almost any aspect of the model and answer any of their questions in "real time". I'm then not leaving the model in their possession. There are times when I might send some .pdf's of certain details, but there aren't many times where they will get "measured floorplans" till the model is decided on and a final cost is agreed upon. This might not always be the best approach for all clients, but for most projects it works out okay.
  2. What you are showing are the eaves. Try changing the sub-eave. If that doesn't work, send a screen shot of the "structure" dbx. for the roof plane.
  3. Glenn...........I think at one point along the way of my "trials & errors" I got those same results, but when I tried to extend the top 5/12 roof so it would have an eave fascia board the "crap hit the fan". Thanks for taking the time to look at my dilemma.
  4. Robert...............I appreciate you taking your time and knowledge in helping me work this "problem" out. I don't know what the answer is as far as CA is concerned. It shouldn't be this difficult. I guess the answer is more/better manual control of framing members.............especially rafters. I sent this into support. If there answer is "ground breaking", I'll put it on this thread. Thank you and have a great day.
  5. Robert...............Do you see any way to get the 36/12 rafter to frame up to the ceiling joist like I show with the CAD drawing? I did send this into support to see what they suggest. It shouldn't be this complicated. If CA would let us have better manual control of the shape of the rafter ends "things" would be much easier. Yes, it would take a lot of time, but at least we could then do the "odd things" that are sometimes run into on modeling as-builts. I've been associated with the home building/home design industry since 1972 and I've seen this type of roof/knee wall setup before a few times. I don't think I would design one quite like this, but since it's an as-built I'm trying to get it modeled how it is before I start designing the "remodel".
  6. Robert...............They are suppose to be on the same plane but there overhangs are different than the larger 5/12 pitch roof. The reason they are showing to be on a little different is because I've been playing around with the roof height in the process of trying to figure out the framing problem.
  7. I've been trying to model this as-built before I start a huge remodel on it and I'm having all kinds of issues with getting CA to model the roof framing as shown on the original prints. Cross Section 9 attachment shows how CA ended up framing it with the needed corrections pointed out in red. To the left of the actual framing is a CAD layout of how it should be as shown on the original prints. The next attachment shows how CA did the exterior. In the third attachment I show the areas on the exterior that need to be corrected with a picture of the area on the original house. I don't know if CA can frame this correctly, but it should. I've worked every scenario I can think of, but I'm starting to lose hair that I can't afford to lose. I'm nowhere near finished with modeling this as-built, but I sure would like to get a handle on this roof framing before I go any further. If someone could help me figure out how to model correctly my problem it will definitely be appreciated. It shouldn't be that difficult. I'm sending along a .zip file of what I have so far with "Backup Plan Files Only" because otherwise the file would be to large, so I'm hoping that will work for anyone willing to look at this. I'm anxious to see the work around to deal with this though I have mixed feelings. If it's something simple I'm going to be very angry with myself, but to be sure I'll also be extremely appreciative to whoever's time, knowledge and effort that it takes to help me out. BUZZINI AS BUILT
  8. Rene...............Sorry, my old mind isn't quite following what you are trying to explain to me. This detail may seem quite petty, but I've seen it done many times wrong I try to make it a point to detail it, especially when it comes to restoration work. Right now I don't have time to "ponder" your directions. Hopefully sometime this weekend I'll be able to work it out. Thanks for taking the time. It's always appreciated. Have a great day/weekend!
  9. Glenn.................I thought a couple of years ago I was doing a project where I 45 mitered some moldings. I must have been using a 3D molding line when I did it then. I guess the question now is, why a 3D molding line and not a molding line? At least now I know a few different ways to work out this problem. Thanks to all and have a great day!
  10. Renerabbit..........."Break your molding into two parts, the part that needs to be mitered, and the part that does not." I don't quite follow. I can easily break the molding into two parts, but how do I get the molding to miter on a 45?
  11. TeaTime............................I had thought about something like your suggestion, but I was hoping for something less complicated. Well, at least, there's is a way to get the job done. Thank you all for taking the time to reply----much appreciated. Have a great day.
  12. In the attachment I show a chair rail molding ending next to a window casing. Is there a work around to show the chair rail molding clipped at a 45 where it protrudes past the casing? I thought that by running the molding at a 45 after I drew it to the casing, then making the 45 molding "no molding on this line" would clip the molding at a 45 but it doesn't. It just breaks it at a 90 degree cut. There must be a work around, but I haven't figured it out.
  13. This is what support had to say. SUPPORT..........Thanks for sending this in, Larry. I'll definitely report this to our developers to look into.Pre-X14 we had both "Polyline Solids" and "Solids" - often times Polyline Solids had to be converted to Solids in order for the Boolean operations to complete well. These objects were combined into "3d Solids" in X14 so it makes sense the behavior may have changed at that time.What's happening though--or, at least the cause of the issue--is that the Subtraction is causing problems with the geometry of the curved edge of the 3D Solid. When I slid block A slightly to the left so that it only intersected with the squared section of the bullnose, and not the curved edge, it worked fine. This isn't tremendously surprising to me since doing complex cuts with curved surfaces adds a lot more complexity to the operation.What I would recommend is to try to avoid using Boolean operations on objects that contain Arc segments. Of course, sometimes you need curves, like with a bullnose molding! So, selecting object B by its Side edge, you can select the Arc segment, then in the Edit Toolbar press the Convert to Polyline button, breaking the curve into a segmented polyline of a pre-assigned number of new sides. The default is 6 but that can be pretty chunky depending on the angle of the arc. I bumped it up to 12 to smooth it out.I hope this helps, MY REPLY.........Is this a "temporary" solution and is it going to be corrected in the future or are "us users" just have to deal with it. The object I was working with was quite simple, but something more complicated will, I think, be much more difficult to deal with. SUPPORT.........We tend not to treat any issue as something that users will just have to "deal with." I suppose in my initial reply I should have said "What I recommend *for the time being*--".As for if/when it will be resolved, like many issues the best answer we can give is a diplomatic one; I've submitted this issue to our developers and they will have to look into the cause and prioritize how important it is to fix--that is not to say, "should it be fixed?", but rather "how soon?" Please know that every single issue reported to us are given attention; addressing them, however, is a matter of prioritization and resource allocation. I'd love to be able to say that given the nature of this issue it should make sense to give it higher priority and we'll have it fixed in the next update, however even trying to give you an educated guess may end up being a disservice to you if it circumstantially doesn't get resolved in what either you or I might consider a reasonable timeframe.We'll just have to wait and see when this gets addressed--hopefully it's very soon!
  14. I sent this in to support this morning. I'll put the response on here when I hear back from support. Have a great day.
  15. I don't know if this subject has been brought up before, but this is the first time I've noticed the "problem". This is a very simple plan. I'm subtracting "A" solid from "B" solid (Plan View). Render 1 shows the two pieces before subtraction. Notice nice smooth bullnose edge on "B". After subtracting "A" from "B" notice the roughness of the bullnose on "B" (attachments "Render 2 & Plan View 2). I went back to X14 and had the same results, but when I went back to X13 everything looked as it should on the subtracted bullnose piece. I either never noticed this occurring in X14 or X15 before or is this a bug and has been around for two verisions and mentioned before since in X13 the subtraction works correctly. Just one other thing I noticed and I'm questioning, with such a simple plan does anyone know why it is so large in size? (8 mb) SUBTRACT
  16. I understand what they are now and I don't have a problem making a symbol, but how would they be shown in a CA plan view? Just draw a cad representation? The other thing is, from what I've researched, the climate is to cold around here to use them due to the fact they are hard to "weather seal". Especially the sill area because of the pivot hardware. Am I way "off base" with my thinking? Would/can you use a pivot door on the exterior in a colder climate?
  17. I live in north central/eastern Pennsylvania. The last three people that has contacted me about design work are talking about "pivot doors". Is this a fad all of a sudden? I wasn't at all familiar with them, but in trying to educate myself to their use and just how they work I've come to a conclusion that for an exterior door in our "local" climate it's a bad idea. I was hoping maybe some of you have worked with them and can "enlighten" me a little bit. Especially using them for exterior doors. To those who have included them in your designs, how do you represent them in plan view or show them in a rendering? My feeling is, that in our climate around here, I should do everything possible to talk these clients away from using pivot doors. Especially on the exterior. Your thoughts? I appreciate all advice on this matter.
  18. Sorry for not answering back to this thread earlier------Easter weekend had me away for a few days. DBCooper................Thank you for "enlightening" me to something I didn't know existed. I've been working with Chief Architect since V10 and I'm still learning things about the program, many would probably say, I should have known about long ago. This "old dog" is still in the learning phase. Thank you again and have a great day. Also, thank to all who answered this thread. Everyone's advice is always appreciated.
  19. I'm just doing a simple flat paneled end wall cabinet. The way I did this one was to make the paneled areas "openings" and then I just added p-solids for the panels. Now if the panels would have to be raised panels I understand there would be much more going on. It would be nice if CA had a dbx. in the cabinet specifications under the panels "custom face" that could insert a raised or flat panel or whatever. Yes, I'm sure, it isn't as simple as it sounds, but when give an option for a "custom face" then give me options. Not only the size of stiles, rails, blanks, doors, drawers and openings. Or at least a way to "throw" in a custom panel and be able to offset/inset it.
  20. I'm making a custom paneled side on a full height cabinet. Up to now I've, when wanting a flat inset panel, just made an opening and added a p-solid inserted in the opening for the panel afterward. I then noticed in the "item type" dbx. for the full height cabinet specifications there is a selection for a "Side Panel-Inset". In selecting this, the panel is placed flush to the face of the stiles and rails with no way of adjusting the panel in or out. You would think if you would have a selection for and inset panel you would have an option to recess it in the area where you are placing it so it looks like a panel. When you are making a custom paneled end for a cabinet how do you go about making an inset panel? I'm sure there are many ways to accomplish this and I'm interested in what other options are out there. The one thing I don't want to do is to apply a paneled door to the side for the "paneled look". Thank you and I look forward to how others accomplish this.
  21. Joe...............Yes, thankyou. I was typing my thread and sending it in just as yours came up. Thanks for taking the time. Have a great day.
  22. Okay, after giving it some more thought (which I should have done in the first place) I took the cabinet pull and placed it in my User library and offset in the "Y" direction 1/4". This new symbol then was used which would "fit" against the recessed panel area of the drawer. I'm assuming this is the work around I had seen in the earlier thread.
  23. Sometime ago I think there was a "discussion" about cabinet pulls not touching the panel face of a paneled drawer. I've tried a search, but couldn't find the subject. I guess what I'm asking is, was there ever a solution/work around to the problem without manually placing the pulls one at a time? You can adjust the horizontal and/or vertical position, so why not the "in/out" position?
  24. Everything, material wise, is set up correctly. Both the pattern and texture are in sync. I did "unsync" the texture and pattern so the texture was running horizontal, and the pattern was running vertical in the plan view. When I sent the elevation to layout the textures changed to vertical. By doing this, I think, the program is telling me it's some kind of bug. That is, unless I'm missing something.
  25. I noticed that when I sent an elevation to layout (first attachment) the vertical line texture on the "barn door" changed from vertical to horizontal (second attachment). I don't ever remember having this problem (or I never noticed it) before. Am I missing something, or could this be a bug in X14? I didn't move this plan to X15 to see if it does the same thing. I downloaded X15 the other day, but I'm having "issues" with transferring my User catalog and haven't had time to deal with it yet. (That will probably be another thread ) As always, all suggestions are much appreciated.