rlackore

Got it. I think I recall this discussion in the old forum, many moons ago. I agree we need some kind of resolution.

The stair dbx allows me to check "Include Bottom Rails on Landings", but I can't figure out how to control the height or profile of the bottom rail. I would also like to specify the newel spacing on a landing, but can't figure that out either. Any insight is appreciated.

Didn't you view it as well? Tsk, tsk.

This would be solved if we could discretely set the origin point of the symbol, both in 3D and in 2D.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think the point is that we DON'T have the ability to offset the CAD from the 3D - only the ability to offset the 3D from the CAD. We should be able to specify the origin of the symbol, for sure. Personally, I don't think I've ever needed the ability to offset the 2D representation of the symbol from the 3D representation.

Problem is, it's a default. Lets say you set the default to 12" to eliminate clutter in your section; well, in elevation, you will lose your exterior framing members, such as deck framing, posts, etc. This default has potential, but it is poorly implemented.

Might be useful if it could be implemented on a per-view basis, eg I want to use a framing back-clip in cross-section, but not in elevation. We had a suggestion thread about more control over section clip planes, so maybe this kind of setting (or at least concept) shouldn't be abandoned entirely.

Parapets are an option. Either way, the roof will need a slope, typically 1:96 or 1:48 as minimums (check codes). You can achieve the required slope of the roof plane through the roof structure, or with tapered insulation. Of course, choice of membrane and proper detailing of flashing is essential.

From the image it appears you are in Standard view, so it may be that the siding has a texture file applied that may subtly change the color value of the material.

On-center stud spacing is set in the material definition for the wall's main layer (select "framing" as the material type). To control the framing within any particular wall, set a framing reference marker on the end you want the framing to start, then select the wall, right click, and "Build Framing for Selected Object(s)."

Dshall, nice video, thanks. However, offsetting should be easier, as you observed. I know I'm guilty of a bias, but in AutoCAD I can activate an offset command, enter a value for distance and angle (or click on two points to define distance and angle), then begin offsetting objects by selecting them. I can offset as many objects as I want until I exit the command; it's a very powerful, fast, intuitive feature, and CA should have similar functionality.

I've noticed the same thing. If the line isn't at a "nice" angle, the offset distance is completely fubar.

Symbol needs to be defined as Millwork.

I've tried a few different ways to create demo plans. I've found the method that Gawdzira and jscussel propose works the best, though imperfectly.

I was able to go in to the room dbx, Ceiling Finish, and change it to the non-rotated material, worked fine.

Maybe there is some confusion caused by the pattern not being rotated by 90 degrees as well? -- Never mind, my mistake --

X5 file attached. Plot X5.zip

Andy, Yes, you are correct. I'm no expert with CA coordinate entry - I must have messed up one of the arcs. The closure isn't perfect, but it's as close as you can expect. Plot.zip

The solid square is a utility easement. The survey data is incorrect. I'd contact the surveyor and ask for the file in dxf/dwg format, then import into CA.

It shouldn't be this difficult, should it.

Deck Railing Specification dbx > Rails > uncheck Automatic Width

Private if it's a single-family dwelling on a privately owned lot (but I don't live in California).

I've never heard of any code requirement for closets in a bedroom.

Yes, dshall set me straight on that account.

This program is attempting to be a BIM modeler. What, David, is the point of BIM if it's not going to be modeled accurately? If the model isn't accurate, then the BIM data will be wrong. And though I get what your saying, I just as often receive responses in this forum along the lines of "if you'd just take the time to model it correctly, then it will draw itself correctly." Regarding editing lines in layout (a point you have brought up to me before): sure, that can be done, but then you lose all your edits if you have to resend to layout. That is a fundamental problem with layout editing. If we have to manually edit everything, or make CAD details for something as basic as a building section, then CA is simply a 3D modeling program. And there are a hell of a lot better 3D modeling programs out there than CA.