rlackore

Thanks Joe.

In ACAD all it takes is one click, because you can have a dockable window open that displays all the layers, their properties (color, line style, etc), states (locked, hidden, etc), layer filters (layer sets), etc. ACAD also has dockable windows for object properties, referenced files - a whole bunch of stuff. This is a strength of ACAD that CA should try to implement so we aren't slaves to the multiple levels of dbxs.

If you've grouped the chairs and table into an Architectural Block, then the z-order gets all messed up. If the chairs and table aren't blocked, you should be able to select the table and send it to front via the toolbar button - but it's true that you can't control symbol draw order by the dbx.

Joe, Can you share the plan file? Thank you.

Larry, Do I HAVE to show a return? No - I imagine the house will get built just fine without it. But, as long as we're trying to get things right, I think this situation should show correctly in plan. The drywall return shows up in ortho, but of course any room moldings don't build along the return. So in instances like this, CA has it only half right. We always talk about building the model correctly. Well, in this case, I can't - and this is a pretty common condition.

Other than fixing this issue with CAD, is anyone aware of a method to generate a drywall return at a change in wall thickness?

Amen. It would also be nice if we could edit the schedule text directly, which would update the component data without the need to track down the actual object within the plan.

I commiserate with the OP on the difficulty of coming to grips with a move from ACAD to CA. There are a lot of settings in CA that are very useful, but are buried deep within defaults or preferences and many layers of dbxs. One of the strengths of ACAD is that you have instant access to these variable settings through a command line interface, or through AutoLisp. I think what is really missing from the grid snap / distance function is the ability to discretely set (through clicking on the screen or direct coordinate entry) the origin for the grid/coordinate system. This request has been mentioned several times before, both in this forum and the Suggestion forum.

Not as well as an automatic solution, which would give me a "pie slice" cabinet that would look correct in plan, elevation, and ortho. CA handles the situation reasonably well if I turn the corner with more cabinetry - but it can't build the condition correctly if I terminate the run at the corner.

Creating a shallow cabinet didn't occur to me. This method looks fine in elevation, but requires more work for plan and ortho. Thanks for the tips.

Lew, that would be the best. I'm just happy that CA chose a recognized standard and implemented it well.

Is there a way to place cabinets in this corner, using CA's standard cabinet tools, so that I get a nice "pie slice" filler? I can't figure this out, and any help would be appreciated.

Okay Lew, point taken, I was wrong. Other methods are used. Other opinions are available. Regardless, CA closely follows the ANSI standard. If people are interested in learning more about the hows and whys, they can reference the standard.

Thanks for the Preference option Perry - this helps me a lot.

Lew, Of course there is variation - all ANSI standards are voluntary unless mandated by the governing jurisdiction. That said, there is broad use of this standard throughout the industry, and the CA implementation conforms very closely to the ANSI methodology.

General Plan Defaults>Living Area To Selecting Main Layer will calculate Standard Area to the exterior face of the Main Layer. Selecting Surface will calculate Standard Area to the exterior face of the exterior finish of the wall, minus bay, box, and bow windows. This is in line with the ANSI Z765 method for calculating square footage, which is what developers, marketers, and realtors use.

You may want to check this post: https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/1743-recessed-window-casing-brick-walls/?hl=window

You probably can't until you generate a window schedule and notice the extra entry. I took a guess that it was a problem with the window buy examining the dialog boxes for the wall, both in plan and elevation. If you examine the 3D representations, the framing for the wall goes missing at the window location. So I selected the window and deleted it. That's when I noticed there were two windows. Here's the plan view dbx that shows half the framing missing: and the elevation view dbx that shows half the wall missing:

Can you explain your intent a bit more? There is no roof plane over the porch. Is this what you're trying to do?

When CA cuts a section, it generates Cross Section Lines (placed on an eponymous layer). The Cross Section Lines are what the dimensions will locate; unfortunately CA doesn't produce Cross Section Lines for everything. If you turn the Cross Section Lines layer off - dimensions won't locate anything, even thought the section appears unchanged. By assigning a bold color to the layer, you can see exactly what you can locate.

There is an extra window pasted over the Pella 4859. Delete one of these windows and your problem should be fixed.

Jim, When the problem arises, it is persistent across commands, saves, and sessions. Regardless of the Edit Behavior checkbox. From the reference manual: Note: Unlike other Preferences, the program always restores the Default Edit Behavior whenever you close the program. So, you'd think that closing/opening would resolve the issue. It doesn't.

This has happened in our office. It appears to be plan specific. And it's not always the terrain cursor either - I've had the intersect tool cursor stick also.

...which is also a really strange behavior, isn't it?

Yes, but then I lose the very convenient fact that while the command is still active I can keep inserting polygons. I know, I know - inserting into a blank area, terminating the command, selecting and copying the polygon so I can start pasting is only a matter of a dozen clicks and keystrokes - but that's the way this forum evaluates CA, by the number of clicks and keystrokes.