Dimensioning Elevation Plans

[ambrozac]

If you put a "#" in the text for your point marker and put a value in the Height box, it displays that value (see attached image).

Thanks for the tip Sarah. I can see some use in this, especially if the Height Field would automatically update, once placed in Elevations, to the current "Absolute Location" (Z), or in the case of the Transform/Replicate tool, the (Y) value. Would do away with having to type in new values.......And, possibly add another field, that will place the Marker automatically, in a specified Absolute Location.

[WendyWelton]

You know - I'm not at a machine with Chief right now - going on memory. I felt confident posting from memory, because I do this all the time - copying & moving lines and text - in X1, in elevations - and know for sure that there's been a change from Chief 10 to Chief X1, where the old Y was replaced by Z.... The reason I'm so sure is that it confused the livin' crap out of me when I first tried to work in elevation in X1!

BUT, .............

it's entirely possible (and sounds highly likely) that my brain is skipping steps or something. You know that old thing where you travel the same road so many times that you forget how many turns and stop lights there really are, and your directions end up missing the? I appear to have done that to you. My apologies for adding to the confusion.

btw - Even if Z is up in the 3D model, it's not up in any cad detail. Cad details are still 2D, and there's no "up" in a flat 2D world.

For the 3D world - now I'll have to drag the laptop out tomorrow and look again, maybe grab some screen shots. Even if this group has figured this out, it would be worth posting a clearer explanation, with pictures, for the next confused migrator.

'gnight all.

[sutcac]

the next confused migrator.

Hmmmmm.... that would be ME.

I found Lew's idea of automating elevation markers for finished floors, plate levels, maybe even roof peaks intriguing. The whole talk of consistency in the Z axis got me thinking, maybe the markers could be placed automatically as 3D sybmols in space (a sphere with rods penetrating the center through the three axes?) that would then be viewed in the various ways as you would anything else in the model.

Hare-brained?

[ambrozac]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WendyWelton
Even if Z is not up in the 3D model, it's not up in any cad detail. Cad details are still 2D, and there's no "up" in a flat 2D world.


This is true. Another confusing factor, is that the Z field, Transform/Replicate, shows to be active in Cad/Wall Details, when it should be grayed out.

When you test the Elevations later, make sure to check "Absolute Location" under "Move". You change the height through the Z field, but once changed and you reopen the same object with the Transform/Replicate Tool, that value will now be in the Y field.

It doesn't bother me because I know how it works, but I can see how it could confuse the heck out of someone, that didn't know.
__________________
Cliff
X1

[WendyWelton]

OK - I was not dreaming - but I can absolutely see how this is confusing.

Here are two screen shots - using Transform/Replicate to copy a line on an elevation.

None of the X, Y & Z fields are available until you check "Move".

I think the confusion here is that I keep saying "Transform/Replicate" - which does work the way my memory thought.

However, other ways of moving do not. If you're using Copy, selecting the center handle and then hitting the Tab key for direct distance entry - no Z, uses Y like in Chief 10.

A big old "Jeesh"! I never found it confusing because I'm using the one method that's consistent with how they 'splained us during beta. If I was trying to use other methods or multiple methods - heck yeah - it's confusing as all get out!

Yo Chief Dudes. Personally I think y'all need to decide - either Z is up for any view of the 3D model, or it's not. If that's the rule, your verb and noun alignment didn't get completed.

Anyway - here are two screen shots of doing this with Transform/Replicate. My Chief machine is in the other room. I'll be back in a minute with some screen shots of the other copy method.

[WendyWelton]

And here's the part I was wrong about. Z is not "up, towards the sky, in the 3D model - period". Z is up if you're using Transform/Replicate. Y is still up if you're using other methods!

Here's how to do this operation using the Tab key for Direct Distance Entry.

I couldn't get the screen capture to show it exactly, but, here's the blow by blow

1 - Select item
2 - Select copy tool
3 - Grab item by center handle. You should get that four-way symbol. Drag it in direction of desired copy.
4 - Without letting go of mouse button - press Tab
5 - You will now have a dialogue box. Unlike with Transform/Replicate - towards the top of the page is Y. This screen shot shows the correct settings to copy it 36" upwards. If you wanted to move it sideways, let's say 60" to the right, you'd put 0 in the Y box and 36" in the X box.

[WendyWelton]

Tommy,

If you're using another method, maybe you could post a couple of screen shots and some directions?

I'm sending this in on a support ticket. At a minimum we have two methods here, both working in the 3D model, following different rules. That's not a good thing.

[ambrozac]

The first jpg is placing a level marker into the plan. When placed in the Plan, it shows to be at a height of 1, placed under the (y). In this example, it needs to be set to an Absolute Location of 97-1/8".

The next jpg shows that you will add 96-1/8", in the Z field, in order to get to the correct height.

The last jpg shows the 97-1/8" height in the Y field......

You move the marker with the Z field, but the information is stored in the Y field. As an example, it gets a little more difficult, if the marker comes in at a location of -38 7/16. Then you need to add 38 7/16 + 97 1/8 and place in the Z field, in order to get to an Absolute Height of 97-1/8". In V10, you place the height needed, in the Y field, and you're through.

[WendyWelton]

Cliff & Tommy & friends,

Well - it's so confusing that I made one brief try to follow Cliff's jpegs and gave up! My internet is not on the same machine as Chief - and trying to do this in my head made my eyes want to roll back.

Once you depart the one way I've been doing this, it's hard to explain, gotta be hard to understand, and there's clearly math and extra steps. I'm adding my "yuck" to yours!

Whoever said it would be very sweet if the elevation marker were truly a 3D object - I vote for that. If wherever we place it, it gave us the correct height. And possibly could even be a single object - place it in plan, and if that location is visible in a section view - show it.

[Tommy Blair]

Cliff & Tommy & friends,

Well - it's so confusing that I made one brief try to follow Cliff's jpegs and gave up! My internet is not on the same machine as Chief - and trying to do this in my head made my eyes want to roll back.

Once you depart the one way I've been doing this, it's hard to explain, gotta be hard to understand, and there's clearly math and extra steps. I'm adding my "yuck" to yours!

Whoever said it would be very sweet if the elevation marker were truly a 3D object - I vote for that. If wherever we place it, it gave us the correct height. And possibly could even be a single object - place it in plan, and if that location is visible in a section view - show it.

Wendy, ditto on the "yuck" but I'm not really worrying about it since I know how to place the text markers in the elevations and make them display at the correct height. I don't mean to irritate you if I did.

[WendyWelton]

Tommy,

I'm a whole lot harder to irritate than this! (and along with stealing grapes at the super market, irritating me is not a felony in all 50 states!) Besides, all you did was that same thing I did - 'splain over and over until the point was understood. I was stubbornly talking about how I do it, and not reading carefully.

Anyway - I think it was productive in the end. The next time this comes up, whichever of us is trying to 'splain will undoubtedly be able to do it better and quicker. I did send this in on a support ticket. Whether it's a "bug" or not can be debated, but it sure isn't great.

[ambrozac]

Yep, I have a very hard time explaining myself. Sorry for the confusion.

[John D Atkinson]

"You move the marker with the Z field, but the information is stored in the Y field."

Cliff, exactly! I wish I could have been as precise and brief in my explanation.

Thanks

[ambrozac]

You're welcome John. Another mind thinking like mine, is a scary thought.

[sutcac]

Whoever said it would be very sweet if the elevation marker were truly a 3D object - I vote for that. If wherever we place it, it gave us the correct height. And possibly could even be a single object - place it in plan, and if that location is visible in a section view - show it.

Hellllooooooo? Okay, just for fun I made a little symbol for this purpose. I made it a bit large for display purposes, but it would be nice if these could be automated for all the F.F.'s, the Roof Peak(s) and even adjacent grade from the terrain data. Then they would all move with each design revision and could be placed on a layer to display or not and mabye even be like CAD lines where you could display that data of the point or not.

Of course this is coming from the person who just today was informed of the Aerial View Window.