Alchemyjim

Bummer. I hate that. Have you looked into your program Archive folder? Most of your file should be there. No need to redo the plan. When you find it, make sure not to rename the file. It will be called "youproject"_auto_save_bak.layout. You will need to make this your primary file name. If you change it, all the plan files will be disassociated. Good luck

I disagree. This NIMBY'ism (if that is a term) of the last few decades that has led us to this problem. California has a severe housing issue that only infill will begin to address. Having more housing closer to essential services makes a lot more sense then building new residential in the outlaying areas. Especially when you consider that the only open areas left are hampered by high fire insurance premiums, lack of services, high cost of construction and environmental impact studies. I'm also not trying to get political, just a realist. If your only argument against this is about your "high living standard" then move to another state. California is expected to have 44.1 million people by 2030. Where are they going to live? In shanty towns by the railroad tracks?

Also a good tip for Twin Motion users... Make sure you start your building near the 0 point of the X Y axis. If it is way off from there you will have a very difficult time finding it once you import to Twin Motion.

I'm a building designer on the central California coast. In this area there are a few restriction on what you need an Architectural license to design. Basically you only need that licence to design a residence over 6400sqft of commercial over 1000 sqft. However I have gone over those limits and not had an issue. The important part is that a structural engineer sign off. There is no way around that one and for good reason. Even an architect has no business preforming complex structural calculations unless they also went to school to learn the math required to assess force loads, which is not an in depth part of the architectural curriculum. I could go of on a long tangent here but basically I suggest "De Architectura" by Marcus Vitruvius Polio (of Vitruvian man fame). He lays out a very clear case for a building designer to be a structural engineer, general contractor and designer before they can call themselves Architect (Greek for Master Builder). It makes a lot of sense because you have to know what you are building with, the material availability and the labor force before you finalize a design. But that was in Augustus's Rome. With the complex nature of supply, labor, design and structural suitability required of today's buildings each aspect must be delegated to professionals in their respective field. Basically my advice is that it is great that you have a solid knowledge of materials and construction. Focus on designing the space, that is a difficult enough task, let an engineer do the rest (and accept the liability if it falls down).

I like the smoke coming from the fire place, I just wish you could adjust the density. It is too black. Now it just looks like you are burning tires.

Here is one I just started. I created the model in Chief then exported to Twin Motion. Still needs some work but it is getting close.

This image was not rendered very long but it shows how the Offset Distance effects the end product.

In the recessed can DBX go to Light Data. Under Offset, set the dimension From Base to 6". You can play with that offset dimension based on the pitch of the roof.

Ariel fan here too.

Thanks for the input everyone. Looks like I have a long weekend of playing with roof eaves.

Hi fellow Chief Nerds, I have been using Chief for awhile now. I thought I could pretty much handle anything the real world threw at me. Until I got this curve ball. Anyone have an idea on how to create these rounded wood shingle eaves? The shingles curve all the way back under the eave. What would you even call that? All I can think of is creating half tubes with a poly solid, rotating to align with the roof slope then painting them with wood shingles. Fortunately none of the roof planes are being changed for this remodel so I don't need to be too detailed, but I still need the elevations correct for the design review board. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks y'all.

Hi. Solver is correct. There really is no reason to create the model with the FPSF design. Mono Slab and details should do it.

That looks great. What software are you using? Is that Lumion?

Sorry SOLVER, I should turn this into TIPS AND TECHNIQUES. I could probably turn this into a small tutorial. Maybe I will (the kids are in bed)... So first of all I consulted with my local structural engineer to confirm this is mostly an uplift issue. My local concrete yard happens to make interlocking traffic barriers for Cal-Trans out of the extra concrete from pours. So we had an abundance of cheap foundation blocks. I configured these to support a standard "BrightSpan" covering which the truss plates would be connected to. Next I took a scaled PDF of their truss system and built on it in elevation view. It was too irregular to create a roof truss in Chief so I made individual poly line solids of 1.75" thickness (the hard part). Their truss tubing is round but for this application square seems to work just fine. It was very tedious but once I had the first one all I had to do was turn it into a CAD block and drag it across the plan view at the desired spacing. So much for the trusses. The fabric proved more difficult. By using a polyline solid, also in elevation view, I created a 3/8" thick covering just above the top cord of the truss (I simply made a polyline solid and turned the sides into an arc). Then in plan view I dragged it across the entire structure (like pulling a tarp). The end walls were much easier or course. Then I painted the entire fabric structure "Bright White Shear". Next I went back to the elevation view and imported a PG&E logo to the end wall. I traced over this with a poly line solid of 1/8" and applied the colors, then reflected about the structure for the other side. The dump truck is a whole other thread, that took hours. Piece of cake really.

I've been getting some requests for designing "Brightspan" covered buildings. Has anyone had any luck creating those in Chief? I did this one for a PG&E material storage yard in nor-cal. It was tedious. I had to create the truss system one little piece at a time based on a "brightspan" cad file then turn that into a cad block I could replicate. The simi-transparent covering was a whole other story. They also wanted to make sure a company dump truck could back in so I had to find schematics for their standard truck and model the entire thing to scale. Finally I had to make the PG&E logo piece by piece. Long story short it was a whole lot of fun Anyone else tried this building system in Chief?

That should work. But if it is note or notes that you use often, they could be saved in a separate plan file and cut and copied to your current one. Just an idea.

I put all my notes and schedules on a separate cad detail file that can be accessed through the project browser. That way I can send each to the layout in my preferred scale. I also save this with each plan so my schedule defaults remain the same. Something like this... I'd love to hear if anyone has a better method.

Yeah. That's a tricky one there. I think your best bet is with the poly line solid. Make sure to change the line style to dashed so it looks like the footing on the foundation plan.

You could also try placing invisible walls around the columns. It will create a small room. Then adjust those rooms to have a slab footing with no ceiling. Rebuild foundation and that should work.

Go to VIEW-Color. Or if you are on windows press F8. Not sure what it is on MAC.

Hi Chief-aholics, I have a question for the general audience... What has been your experience using a MATTERPORT 3D model to create an As-Built floor plan? I have been fortunate enough to have a MATTERPORT file for every as-built plan I do lately. It has taken hours off of the process. I no longer need to measure every dimension and draw it in a sketch book, then transfer it to Chief. Now the camera can be set up and dimensions can be taken from it as we are creating the model. In the attached files I wanted to give you an idea of my process for making these as-builts. Please let me know your thoughts. One day we will have robots doing all this for us, but until then, we still need to quickly turn around as-built plans before we can move on to proposed plans. (For obvious reasons). (Also, I'm not affiliated with MATTERORT in any way. I'm not trying to sell something here, it just seems like a valuable tool. Seriously, let me know if there is a better way). Steps- 1. Take MATTERPORT of the entire interior space. Also take exterior camera shots because MATTERPORT doesn't do that well. 2. Measure to confirm dimensions, Assess services (Gas, Elect. HVAC, Watse, ect...) , framing and foundation size and condition. 3. Create model of the structure including; foundation, wall/floor/roof framing, floor and plot plan,materials, etc... 4. Send several iterations of the proposed project to the client until we get it right. 5. Create the plan set. 6. Submit to Engineering/building department. This is obviously simplified, but you get the idea. The files I am attaching are from a tricky project. It has 6 different levels. I used the MATTERPORT floor plan and imported into the plan file. I resized it to scale and then drew over it. Then in the 3D view of MATTERPORT I was able to measure the elevation changes between rooms. This is definitely not the best way to create an as-built but it has worked great so far compared to the old fashion method. Does anybody have a better system? I look forward to the lively debate.