VHampton

With GPUs, the model number indicates some basic information about the cards. Here's the simple way to read them. - For Nvidia, their naming scheme is based on numbers. Let's take an RTX 3080ti for example. The "RTX" Letters at the beginning indicate the type of card that it is. Nvidia makes RTX, GTX, and GT type cards. RTX cards offer hardware-accelerated ray-tracing and AI processing features. GTX cards lack these features, but are otherwise fully-capable Nvidia GPUs. GT cards are typically marketed as display adapters and are not intended for gaming, generally speaking. The first number (30) indicates the series (generation) of card. Newer generations offer better efficiency and more features. Nvidia's last five generations were 9, 10, 16, 20, and 30. The second number (80) indicates the performance tier of the card. 10-40: Budget tier-- usually a GT card. 50-60: Mainstream tier -- good performance for most people. 70-80: Performance tier -- high-end cards. 80-90: Enthusiast tier -- Flagship, top-of-the-line cards. Finally the suffix Ti or SUPER refers to a "boost" in performance over the "standard" model of whatever card it is. For example-- a GTX 1080ti is a 10-series Flagship card. It's several generations older than the RTX 3060ti, but manages to match or beat its performance in many games. "80" places it in a higher tier. Back to the OP... Will a 4090 be fast? Absolutely. The question is, does the work require that kind of horsepower. Unless one might be making movies in Ray Trace mode, Chief runs quite well with a 3090. Everyday drawings and an occasional render may rarely result in GPU overclocking on a 3090. If renderings however are the primary output one's day to day work, then the 4090 makes sense. This from a 2020 tech article may shed some light on the 3090 vs. the 4090: "When fps are not CPU bottlenecked at all, such as during GPU benchmarks, the 4090 is around 75% faster than the 3090 and 60% faster than the 3090-Ti, these figures are approximate upper bounds for in-game fps improvements. The fact that the 4090 is currently the fastest performing graphics card available is reflected in its jaw-dropping MSRP of $1,600. Since PC gamers rarely buy AMD GPUs, Nvidia only have themselves to compete with. Surprisingly, $1,600 is actually reasonable value for money, when compared to previous gen. flagship cards. Prospective buyers will need a top of the line system to extract maximum performance from the 4090 and because of its monstrous dimensions, many will also need a new PC case. Consumers that demand value for money, should wait a few more months for the 4060 / 4070 models by which time AMD's 7900 series will also probably be heavily discounted. Alternatively, shoppers looking to buy in the near term should consider the last gen. 3060-Ti, which offers excellent real-world (1080p) performance at a fraction of the price ($400 USD)."

Presumably, the slab elevation is literally less than one step above grade and therefore no rails will be involved. If that may be the case, why not try invisible walls and call the "room" a slab? It seems like there literally is no deck, but rather a patio.

Incredible. Your knowledge base is amazing. Many of us old timers may only be using one or two tools of the Swiss Army knife by comparison. Which is perfectly fine, but what you've got going on there is MACRO in every sense of the word. My compliments.

PBR is a memory hog in general. Tech support will confirm. Maybe save that camera in plan - and send to layout as necessary - but again - only as an image file.

Suggestion... Keep the PBR viewport out of the layout sheet's borders. Save the viewport off to the side as a way to gain quick access to the camera which is set to update manually. Never have cameras set to refresh automatically. Send whatever that camera view is to Layout as an image. PBR's watercolors, active cameras, and even line drawing cameras become a fairly large memory request even with the most robust hardware when they live on a layout page. Secondly, even static camera views (on a layout page) can turn a PDF in an astronomical size when going to print. On CA's sample projects. there's not an active camera in layout ever. All image files. In sum, image files only in layout will shut this bad behavior down quickly. Hope this helps.

This is excellent guidance. When doing any big plan changes, it can be helpful to go to > Manage Auto Archives. ...and then do the "trial run" on the archived copy.

Apparently, this is a feature w/ another software. It would be great if CA could consider. Without naming the the product... it's called: the "spot slope annotation". Elevations will show the roof slope triangle. Over the years I've saved almost every CAD slope triangle in the user library, so no big deal. But as new bells and whistles are inevitably going to make their debut, this one more tool in the tool box would be very handy indeed. Thanks for suggesting Rob.

Agreed Maureen. The underside of an exposed deck can provide nooks for just about anything. The elevated deck in the image shows covered seating below, and presumably, it's water-proofed, with a soffit (which would eliminate bee concerns). 100% agree. The rail posts will probably want to be centered on the girder. It's common for a spliced connection w/ blocking and bolts.

Excuse the earlier posts about girder center etc... Just now realizing that the question was more about the "ladder framing" along the outer edge. Alan's sketch is exactly how it's done when the flush girder terminates the joists, but the deck framing needs to extend past the columns.

Edit... (as per Alan's sketch below). That Ledgestone is probably all non-load bearing veneer. With the girder (and post) presumably in the center of the column... The outer deck perimeter is probably packed out. In the same manner as one would do w/ rake boards at a gable end overhang.

A few suggestions... What kind of line weights are being used in the .dwg file? On average, anything in the 18 - 25 range is good. What output for the export is being used? Is it in inches or feet? That could explain the variation in line heaviness. Not sure. Lastly... The issue is not all that common. If for some reason, exporting as a newer version of AutoCad is an X-15 quirk, then "back dating" the export file could be a possible solution. Try sending the .dwg as an older release of Auto Cad. Like early 2000's.

If an older Layout has functionality when it comes to printing, that says something. Especially when all other projects files are printing ok - including the new layout. Rather than embarking on a journey down a rabbit hole, it sounds as if all went well. Glad that worked out.

In the Manage auto-archives, is there a former layout (for this project) prior to the watermark being used? If so, how does that layout print? If it works well, that's a helpful clue. In addition... To trouble shoot, have you cleared the printer cache? What happens when the print is changed to black and white?

Bazinga. You got a green arrow for that one.

How is that object (custom newel) being saved? If it's all blocked (as an architectural block)... Covert it to a symbol - then change the definition of the newels on the stair. That secondary crown under the newel cap should stay in place. Edit: Mr. T's post arrived about 30 seconds before mine. Symbol is the solution.

I'll take that as the highest compliment. lol Back in the V versions of the program, the ability to drag .jpeg files from the desktop, and straight into a plan file was ground breaking. It's a neat trick to this day, especially for tracing over floor plans.

Agreed with the replies. Everyone should be familiar with the 3D Solid tool which is invaluable. Making 3d shapes is quite straightforward once you get the hang of it. Here are some steps below. In addition, a CAD file of the bracket so that you can try it out for yourself. That's the best way to learn. All the best. bracket elevation.dwg

Hi Brett, So to answer, every project is unique. When starting from scratch, repurposing a former plan file with wall types A,B,C is totally fine. The exterior wall type which the clones were generated from will always be the default. (The clones can be used as needed, or they can be deleted.) Typically, I don't save wall types in the library since they're pretty easy to cut and paste from past jobs. But having said that, the "Library save" is a quite a helpful feature, even if some of us still do everything like it's 1999. Hope this helps. ...and thank you. ...and glad to be of help Jim. This is true! On a side... I just finished a project where your very same issue came up. A clone of the siding type was made for the roof fascia and BINGO... the roof facia was toggled to match the same spacing as the siding.

You're quite welcome... and yes it's a global change. When variations are required there's a simple solution. Click on a wall. Dialogue box will open. Copy the wall type - and rename it. Then make a new pattern pattern orientation on certain walls. This will provide a degree of flexibility if that's what you may be looking for. Caution... this is an old school Chief User's approach, so I may get bashed for suggesting. I don't use the paint wall tools. The earlier versions never had them - and the above literally takes two seconds.

Take a 3D view. Use the adjust material definition (rainbow icon). Dialogue box will open. Go to patterns. That's where the grout line on the CMU block can be raised or lowered.

Most states are now requiring HERS ratings. (Res-Check is becoming outdated to some degree. Especially on new builds.) The energy analysis by the rating provider involves fairly skilled technicians. Aside from insulation specifications, they can often provide a basic HVAC layout w/ equipment sizes. It’s worth looking into. Lighting and plumbing are still kept in the wheelhouse for most projects. These areas aren't nearly as complex as HVAC. Simple diagrams for permit applications typically gets the job done.

Viewers are indeed a helpful tool... but there's a downside sometimes. My two cents... sharing the model is a great feature, but occasionally this invites a bit too much client participation in the design. More often than not, they'll think that architectural design is fun, like playing MineCraft, and they'll want to start chiming in, even with the best of intentions. A really good video fly-over in standard view (with sunlight and shadows) is an excellent method. Clay model views are also really helpful. Maybe three or 4 minutes long. Upload the movie file to a video sharing site. This way, the homeowner can ooh and ahh... and the hands-off method often prevents them from become back seat drivers.

All sounds good Alan. It appears that you’ve got this well under control. The gravity load capability on the mini-flitch plates is pretty remarkable by the way. We’ve got a local source that specializes as you can see. They may have a minor degree of deflection though. Really small amount however. What we do is locate them right under the top plates, and then use a single or double 2 x to take into account any possible movement. Especially if there’s sliders involved. Good luck with your project! …and hopefully there won’t ever be any wind speeds that high. We’ve had a few major storms here on the island. They did so,e serious damage even though they were only Category 1 hurricanes. I tell folks to image their house driving down the highway as fast as a Ferrari. Needless to say, a stick framed structure will blow apart pretty quickly if it’s not held down right!

You're quite welcome. If possible, keep the dropped header condition, but specify a 6" structural header. Flitch plate being the more common approach: https://www.betterheader.com/Beam-Legends If the gravity load over that header is only rafters, a 6-8" beam should be fine. Again the main concern is that the wall loses integrity when the plates get cut out. A 50 mph wind only pushes on a window or door with about 5 to 7 pounds of force per square foot of area, whereas a 100 mph wind applies 20 to 28 pounds per square foot, and a 130 mph wind applies 34 to 47 pounds per square foot. Meaning that the wall is gonna want to flex. That's where the 'break' in the plate may not be ideal. If that were a floor condition rather than a wall, several people standing on the intersection of the header and the studs would eventually push the joinery apart (and that would be considered a low impact condition). 70 mph wind loads have ability to place over 1,000 to 2,000 lbs of force on an 8 foot wall with the 12 foot door. Please excuse over-explaining. (Structural engineering is my background). All the best!

Alan, if at all possible... I would suggest as both Gene and Ryan have, and run the plates straight through - then place the header above as if it were a box beam. Continuous load paths are common requirements on the East Coast where home are constructed in the 140 mph wind zone. Believe it or not, that top plate is providing a tremendous amount of structural integrity. That "break" in the plate is a known issue if the house gets hit w/ 100+ mph wind even though it's being shown as having strapping onto the king studs. If it’s not possible to upturn the header, then a section of steel angle iron would be the ideal solution. Like a flitch plate sandwiched between the 6inch dropped header. This would be a much better and stronger wall framing scenario: