glennw

Railing Specification dbx...Rails panel...Rail Profiles...select Beam...uncheck Automatic Width and enter a width.

This has to do with the difference between using the default glass material and the actual material. I am assuming that Auto Adjust Default Glass Properties is toggled on and left on. Lets ignore the left door, because it has Glass Grey as it's glass material. If you open up each door's dbx and check the glass material, you will notice that there is a difference in the glass material used between the doors that have clear glass and those that have the tinted glass. The doors with clear glass have the glass material set as "Default Glass: Glass Standard". The doors with the tinted glass have the glass material set as just "Glass Standard" - note, no "Default Glass". Select the door and open it's dbx. Materials panel...#Glass...select it and then Select Material...Material Defaults...select Glass (which is set to Glass Standard). OK, OK. You should now have clear glass. Or, as Alan says, you can select Glass Standard from the library. However, if you do this, the Auto Adjust Default Glass Properties will have no effect on how the glass displays - the glass will always be clear and Chief won't auto adjust it.

I can' imagine that bevelled piece of concrete staying in one piece for very long.

Try adding another wall layer to the inside of the wall definition. In this pic, I added another 12" thick layer.

The pony wall method works. What trouble are you having?

I guess it's easier to ask and get someone else to do it for you. Although it would probably be quicker to try it yourself than make the post.

What "certain things"?

Steve, Why don't you try it and see if it works.

Johnny, The height the cad line is always relative to Chiefs zero floor height. The height of the polysolid is relative to the terrain - because it is outside the building (no floor under the object). Use Absolute to avoid the difference. The floor structure shouldn't make any difference. Try drawing an object inside a room with Relative to Floor set, and then drag it outside the room so that it only over the terrain - it's height will change.

Joe, Come on, that's an easy one. The number of decimal places should be an option or preference.

Michael, I am not saying it can't be improved, but wouldn't you expect some problems if you built a railing wall composed of multiple layers?

Chopsaw, I deleted that post and this is the repost with some changes. I was probably out surfing 8 hours ago! I am not sure this is a bug, but it is one of those Chief intricacies. It is caused mainly by the use of a multilayered wall for the railing wall. Larry, Try this. Instead of creating your railing wall from your standard .Stucco-4 Existing wall - which is a 3 layered wall, create a new single layered wall 5" thick, and use that for the railing walls. Having a single layer wall prevents the stucco (or external layer) from building down in the floor space below. This is creating the rectangles in the floor space under the railing walls, which are visible in vector view. Now, go to level 1 and select the wall below, check "Balloon Through Ceiling Above". Do the same for the small side wall to clean them up as well. Things should look perfect in both vector and standard views - in fact all the render modes.

Looks like you need to buy more paper.

There are a couple of things you can do. 1.Turn on Print Preview in the layout. 2. Look at the print preview in the Print Layout dbx 3. You can set up a default printer and paper size in the Default Printer for View dbx - accessed from the Drawing Sheet Setup dbx..

No, not spline. Select Build... Distributed Objects...Polyline Distribution Path. Draw a single straight line. Convert to a curve (Change Line/Arc on the Edit menu). Open it's dbx and select and configure your seats. Change arc as needed.

Did you use a Distributed Path for the seats?

Maybe, but I am not prepared to spend any more time on this one until the walls are fixed because the roof will build off the walls. Its not just that the walls aren't square - there are also short wall sections. Also, have a look at the external room - something funny going on. And once things are right, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to auto built a roof on that house without Chief choking.

All else is not fine. To start with, many of your walls are not drawn orthogonally (90deg or 0deg). Fix them all up first and then repost the plan.

Or maybe even easier, use the Layer Hider command (LH is my shortcut).

Mike, No. The dimensions will not change their formatting if you switch the annoset back to an annoset with the original or a different dimension default. You are not changing formatting in the current dimension default , you are changing the dimension default itself, so that new dimension formatting will follow that new default. Dimensions inherit the dimension default's formatting when the dimensions are drawn. There are a couple of ways to change the formatting of existing dimension lines: 1. You change a setting for that particular dimension default (through the annoset, through the dim defaults or through the dim line dbx) - in which case all the dimensions that use that default will change, or 2. You can select a dimension (or dimensions) and change the Dimension Default they are using in their dbx, or, in the same dbx, you can also redefine that dimension default (same as #1 above).

Johnny. No. You don't necessarily need a new annoset for every dimension default you want to use - you just need to set up all the dimension defaults that you need. You can then be in any annoset and still select a different dimension default without changing any of the other annoset defaults. Set up your various dimension defaults, switch to a preferred annoset, now, if you want to change to a different dimension default, click the Active Defaults icon (the wrench with the red tick). You can now select any of your saved dimension defaults while all the other defaults for that annoset will remain unchanged. Your annoset will change to Using Active Defaults - but the only thing that has changed is your dimension default. I use this method quite a bit because I don't want a trillion annosets, yet it still gives me lots of flexibility.

Johnny, I find that the biggest problem with Point To Point is that they are not associative. Well.... they are associative, but only to the point, not to the object you are dimensioning. I would very rarely use a PTP dimension. Having dimension defaults controlled by annosets is the way to go.

Johnny, There is no dimension tail in Chief. More importantly, the question has to be asked - why are you using Point To Point dimensions?

Are you looking for something like this?

Rashid, I am not sure I fully understand your question. Are you suggesting that under no circumstances would a user want to alter their layer sets?