RScottG

I was thinking this issue thru a bit further. Perhaps this will help illustrate my point.... It is possible to create a layout that receives data from the plan file that includes the design completed in one location and the terrain located at its geospacially correct location. Further, it is possible, after sending "screens" of both areas to the layout, to overlay and rotate. This is an example of managing the "view" of the design data, not manipulating the design data. I'm glad to see this capability, but it doesn't solve the issue. As soon as the design data is rotated, in this case, -19 degrees relative or absolute, the trusses and walls resolve with design failures. As a designer, I would be concerned that the stability of the design algorithms playing against the design data is volatile when dealing with angles other than 90 or 0 degrees. As an update, my first response from CA support showed how the design could be moved to the terrain data area. No issue with that....it's the rotation that is the single issue I'm raising. For those of you that would like to give it a go, here's the design and terrain in the same file. I added a CAD block in the terrain area representing where the design needs to reside. First, display the framing in a perspective view to see what it looks like in its pristine condition. Then use the "area edit" command to rotate the design....then take a look at the framing. Thanks again for the dialogue! May4FarmHousePlan3ForTesting.plan

Thanks for your thoughts. So, when you complete your construction documents, are they only inclusive of the building and then you pass that (or perhaps just a foundation outline) to a Civil Engineer to perform the site grading? Seems like the architect would have great interest in the views out of the house and its appearance on the site. The terrain tools in HDP seem to move in that direction, but as you suggest, doesn't support the construction plans very well. The site design in my project is not very difficult and I could simply do the grading and the like by hand calc and then display that as offset/elevation/slope to the house. Yet the basic problem still remains about rotating the design resulting in corrupt trusses, walls, etc. I have CA looking into this and will post their results. Good dialogue....thanks.

Keith, I respectfully disagree with your perspective. Let me explain. The issue is one that differentiates a "view" of the design work and the actual functioning of geometry used behind the scenes to create the design. If you examine the AutoCAD or Bentley based architectural products, they all have the ability to orient the "view" to whatever the designer wishes to present on the drawings. I am in full agreement with you that no contractor (or anyone else) wants to look at a set of construction documents where the design is oriented in a way that impedes the design intent. Framing the design in the construction document is a production issue and not a design issue. In this case, there appears to be no way to rotate design elements to place them in the correct site orientation after the fact. In the products noted above, the orientation of any design elements is completely independent of the "view" orientation. In other words, the design data is maintained and utilized in a separate database. So, in effect, you can rotate elements to any angle desired (quite precisely) since the rotation means changing values in the design database. When you rotate (or for that matter, scale or move) views of the design to orient them on the plan sheet (layout in HDP) there is no modifications of the design database...it simply is an interface that applies the appropriate routines to visualize the elements in the plan. Even when selecting those elements in the plan (layout), you can query real world coordinates, bearings and angles. I'm not quite sure I understand your comment about "CA were to try to make the program allow for every conceivable angle that you want, there would be no room left in the program for the building design information." It concerns me that this may be an issue with precision management within the software. Really appreciate your thoughts. I've had the great opportunity to work in the AEC industry for the past 40 years and was hoping that HDP would be a low cost tool that I could use to accomplish my personal home design and associated site work. Don't get me wrong...HDP does some really cool things....it got my wife and I through the floorpan programming process and offers some nice visualization capabilities, but I need to produce construction drawings which doesn't appear to be one of its strengths. All the best.

Robborito - thanks for your thoughts....i consulted the reference manual and it indicates that the "Allowed Angles" setting is used when the "Angle Snaps" are enabled. This would be for selecting (snapping) to elements and setting elements. The smallest setting is 1/2 degree which is OK, but not precise. I set an optional setting at 0.5 degrees and used the "Area Edit" command in conjunction with the "Transform" command to move and rotate the building to the site. I first rotated the building at its current location and that's when everything went downhill. The first thing I noticed was that the roof trusses that I had placed across the long axis of the building were now redefined to be parallel to the long axis. Walls then started giving me warnings about inconsistent angles. Unfortunately, designs will often start (floorpan programming, visuals of the elevations and general structure) long before the survey data is received. There needs to be a way to move the design to any precise angle and any precise position in space to accommodate the survey data. Moving the survey data (terrain) to accommodate the building only serves to provide a visual tool for design, not a tool that results in coordinates or angles that are sufficient for construction documents. Thanks again for your thoughts. Does anyone know if Chief Architect has this issue? I've been contemplating the upgrade (steep as it might be) but if it doesn't solve this issue then maybe I need a different solution....advice appreciated.

Thanks for your thoughts. I did the house design with the walls parallel and perpendicular to the system axis (yes, parallel to the screen). All worked well. The problem is that I have site design (drainage) around the house among other things (like utilities) that need to keep the geospatial coordinate system intact in order to export coordinates for stakeout. If I use your approach, then the coordinates would be lost. The house design rotation is no doubt the problem. The software should appropriately account for any element rotation when it runs its algorithms. Thanks.

I successfully loaded survey data and moved and rotated my design to the site location geospacially using the "Area Edit" tool. Now there are all sorts of issues arising....such as walls that are being reported as not being at the correct angle, roof framing that isn't able to connect and just general drafting issues (among others). So, the other obvious choice is to move and rotate the survey data to be where the house is designed...but of course you lose all the X/Y coordinates....everything remains relative, but has no field value. It would be really handy if there were a "View Rotate" capability which would allow the user to see the house and site "square to the screen" (and allow the software to calculate correctly behind the scenes) but leave the house design "data" in its true site orientation....all the survey data would be available for query (offering correct information) but also be oriented properly. Seems like a very basic CAD function that I've not found in HDP.... Any work arounds?? Does this exist in Chief Architect Premier?? Thanks in advance.

Bingo!....thanks LawB10!

Pass-thru worked well...thanks for your thoughts...wonder how that is accounted for in the quantity take-off....the reduction in concrete since the foundation walls are set to LF. Cheers.

Thanks...I'll give "pass-through" a try....

I like your idea on breaking the wall....I did that and selected the "small" intermediary wall to lower the top. After opening the object the it indicates that the wall height is set by default and greyed out. Also, I notice when working on level 0, after breaking the foundation wall and opening the small wall, that after I close the dialogue the small wall seems to go away. Open to thoughts...

I wouldn't expect that the system would be able to automatically set the foundation elevations automatically aa those are terrain dependent, but I can't seem to find a way to edit the foundations or the stem walls manually. I tried cutting a cross-section and editing, but no luck...can't select the elements. I suspect that HDP wouldn't be able to do that even if I had a DTM loaded. Thanks....I did find a "window niche" which almost fits the need....only challenge is that I can't set its depth to the same as the stem wall....it will only do 7 13/16" on an 8" stemware.

Two quick questions....in HDP 2020 can you: - Build a foundation that has a footing that slopes from one corner of the building to another where the terrain is lower? In other words, a sloping footing with the top of the foundation wall maintaining a constant elevation? - It is common practice to add vents to a crawlspace. Those vents are typically "notches" in the foundation. Suggestions on adding these notches would be appreciated. Thanks.

Thanks, Rookie65....appreciate your thoughts and time. I have no doubt that your work around for the paper size works....and trust me, I have done that sort of thing since 1987 as CAD was emerging.....my point is simply that you shouldn't have to do that as it contributes risk to potential errors outside of the design environment. I've since seen where they disclaim the paper size on their website....buyer beware. The level sets and display appears to be well managed in Cheif Architect Premier. They could have provided a rudimentary "layer" and "level" control scenario in HDP that would at least provide some functionality....doing the work-around via file management is extraordinarily cumbersome....and yes, new user here so I may not have found the answer....wasn't in the reference manual, videos or forum. I used to work for one of the larger design software companies who had an approach that the production capabilities needed to exist at all levels (i.e., printing, plotting and drawing management) and that it was varying degrees of design capabilities that would drive a user to higher level product....what sense does it make to slow anyone down on printing, plotting and drawing management? Thanks again....probably venting more than I should.....

Is there an upgrade path from Home Designer Pro to Chief Architect Interiors? If so, what would be the CAI discounted price?

Thanks, Rookie65. That's a reasonable "work-around" and one that I've used in other products. But the fact that I need a work-around for such an obvious need is very frustrating. They say that HDP can produce construction drawings....well, those are often at sizes greater than 18"x24"....so, in-fact, they are misrepresenting their product. That restriction doesn't exist in Chief Architect Premier....almost worth asking for my money back.....sorry for the vent, but that in addition to saving level sets and controlling level displays is so basic to a good product that it should not be left out.