Larry_Sweeney

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

Kevin......"So, of the 137,400,000 housing units in the United States, 9,700 people -- "many of them children" (so we can assume that it wasn't "most of them" -- hurt themselves by misusing common electrical receptacles. Assuming half of that number were children (4850), that's .004% -- or four thousandths of one percent " You forgot to divide that ".004%" over a 30 year period!

Scott................Thanks for sharing. Now it's just the "waiting".

Mark...................It's when I'm trying to do a "point to point" move in plan view and yes I do have that checked. I don't have a problem with dimensions and the snapping for point to point move only seems to be an issue in plan view. In a 3D or elevation view I don't have a problem snapping to a 3D solid for a point to point move.

When in plan view I have a difficult time snapping to 3D solids. I usually have to zoom way in and then I still have to be very patient trying to snap to a corner of the solid for placement. If I'm in a 3D view I can snap right to a 3D solid. Is this a X14 problem or is there a setting somewhere I can change to make it easier to snap to a 3D solid in plan view? I don't remember this being such a problem in earlier versions.

Sounds like a teardown all the way to the deck and start over from there.

I'm trying to reduce the height of each cell. What I'm trying to do is lessen the open space between the top and bottom of the window to the cell's line border above and below the shown window. "richoffan" mentions about "grabbing" the cell handle and that reduces the size proportionally, but I just want the size of the cell's height to change. The width is okay. I'm thinking this isn't possible.

is there a way to adjust the vertical spacing as shown with the arrows shown in this attachment? I've played around with the different areas on the "Attributes Panel" to no avail. I've done other searches, but I'm coming up empty. Thanks in advance.

I've added many different library items, architectural blocks, and moldings to the exterior of my design. With my design pretty much completed I now decided to add the terrain. As I'm adjusting the terrain elevation. I notice many of these items are moving with the terrain. There must be a setting for each of these items to prevent this, but I'm unable to come up with the solution yet. In the specification dialogue on the items in mention I use the elevation reference "finished floor", but it doesn't seem to matter where I have the "reference" the items move with the terrain. I've tried doing a "search", but so far, I haven't found what I'm looking for. Can anyone clue me in to my problem and the "cure"? As always, your time, patience and knowledge are always appreciated.

Michael.................I have some commitments and I'll be away for a day or two, but I will get back with you as soon as I return. Thanks to all for your input and have a great day.

Michael..............My "thinking" was when it was rotated on the layout the text was oriented wrong. I wanted the text oriented with the length of the paper for easy reading. I rotated the labels in plan view when I made the schedules. The problem is the rotation effected both the plan and the elevation views. I didn't think, when I started the design, it would not fit on the paper "up and down" or I would have laid out the plan different from the start. Maybe (I'm sure) I approached this whole "rotation thought" wrong right from the beginning. If you, for whatever reason, wanted to rotate your plan on layout and wanted the text oriented "left to right" once rotated, how would you go about doing so? Am I making any sense. I know I've had way too much coffee this morning. DBCooper..........I "think" I answered your question in the above area.

I have a plan that I rotated 90 degrees in plan view so it would fit on my paper size in layout. In doing this I rotated my labels 90 degrees in plan view so they were also property oriented. When I did my elevations all my labels are now oriented incorrectly and no matter what I change in my label options I can't get the elevation labels to rotate. What am I not doing correctly? Isn't there a way to rotate the elevation labels and not effect the plan view labels? Should I have not rotated my labels when I rotated my plan view 90 degrees? I'm sure I'm missing something very basic here. As always, any and all advice is very much appreciated.

Ryan..............My "Rebar" layer is on. At the bottom of my screen my "rebar cylinders" show as being in "Drawing Group 1 - FRONT" and my concrete fill in "Drawing Group 21 - CAD, but the rebar does not show. By what the Drawing Group order is showing the rebar should show. It just puzzle's me. I made a simple plan drawing a cylinder and then in elevation I drew a standard polyline with concrete fill across the cylinder. All items were Drawing Group 21 - CAD. Even the cylinder, which was covered by the concrete fill. I moved the concrete fill Drawing Group back one class and the cylinder showed. In my original plan I'm working on the cylinders I have as #4 rebar are in Drawing Group 1 - FRONT. (?) Go figure! How they got in Drawing Group 1 I have no idea. I'm not sure why/what is going on here, but for now I'm just going to cheat and draw a filled p-solid as representing the rebar and move on. I appreciate your input. Have a great day.

I had used "cylinders" and sized them for #4 rebar mats in a concrete floor. I then made a cross section of the floor and used a concrete fill in the concrete section. After adding the concrete fill I was no able to see the "cylinders" I had made to show the rebar for my 3d renderings. Is there a way to make these "rebar cylinders" show in the fill? I've found no place that shows a "drawing group" for the "cylinders". When making the cylinder you can add a "fill color". I would think one purpose of this fill is so it would show up in a cross section like I'm trying to produce and it would then also be associated with a "drawing group". The only work around I see is to just draw a cad object to represent the rebar in the concrete cross section. Is this the only solution I have or am I missing something?

Michael.................Just curious, do you know (or anyone for that matter) how this type of a section (gable rake) is handled by other architectural cad programs or am I just making a big deal of it?

Eric........................O-k-a-y....................I can blame the "memory thing" to old age---right?

Almost every design I do there's enough going on with the gable overhang (rake), as far as the cornice, frieze work and/or special framing, that I want to show a detail or two of a section through like I show in the attachment. To do this now I manually place the callouts and do all the details with CAD. As far as I know CA has no way of doing a section/cross section on an angle up the gable. Is that correct? If someone has a way (work around) please clue me in. How do you all handle these situations----just CAD? Has this ever been asked for or am I the only one? If you tell me CA can do this I'm going to fall off my chair!