glennw

Jay, We are pretty much in agreement. My point was that if you have single level floors (no split or multi-levels per floor) then there usually isn't a problem editing from the bottom up and this can usually be done by changing the floor defaults and using auto roofs and auto foundations. BUT...if you have a model that contains multi-level platforms that need manual editing on a room by room basis, you will find it a lot less painful editing top to bottom once the model is built. In these circumstances you can get yourself into a bind with Chief endeavouring to make changes to the platforms to compensate for the users input that causes conflicts in the model. Scott is hosting a Gotomeeting this afternoon on this very topic - if you are at all interested, I suggest that you try and get on board. You should be able to find the details on another thread.

Scott, Of course I don't know, but I suspect that the guys at Chief didn't purposely design top down platform editing into the program. I could be totally off base here by underestimating the programmers intent way back in the early days. Chief has developed over the years from what was a basic cad program that has it's own methodology for model creation. I think that for most situations (say single or 2 storey houses with single level floors) Chiefs "bottom up" paradigm works a treat, especially if you start by setting the defaults correctly. The "top down" method only becomes required once the platforms in that initial model need to be edited. Because of the way Chief works with rooms and platforms, it is easier to make any platform edits from the top down. I daresay that most of these edits COULD be done from the bottom up - but it would be much more difficult. Now, was "top down" a deliberate programming method or was it just a result of the way Chief works? - I haven't got a clue! As you say, this part of the programming paradigm is so entrenched in Chief that I really can't see any major change anytime on the horizon. There may be room for some user friendly tweeks though! Jay, A lot of users would disagree and would suggest that any platform modifications should be made from the top down. Of course the method used will always depend on the particular situation - particularly if platforms are split or multi level. I think that more often than not, platform changes can be made with default settings (assuming no split or multi level platforms - please don't reply by saying that most of your projects have split or multi-level platforms! ).

Whatever your name is, I am in Sydney and can give you some starter tips via Skype if you are interested. This is very easy with Skype's screen sharing.

Perry, Just thinking about this a bit more. This is probably a case where you need to reach a bit further into the Chief toolbox and maybe use the much underused Roof Baseline Polylines to build the roof and bypass the default roof building method.

Perry, OK, I know understand that your problem relates to the use of a manual Ceiling Plane and not the structure as such. I guess your problem with the invisible wall and Generate Between Platforms can be easily overcome by the order of building the model. Build the auto roof first, turn off auto build roof and then use the invisible wall to change the ceiling height. Or, just edit the roof planes up to match the higher roof planes.

Well, if we could see a plan that demonstrates Perry's particular scenario, then we could better judge what would be the better method to handle it, and wether the method I posted was suitable or not. Joe, You have no hope of stopping the drifting of the threads - they have a life of their own. So... I think that a discussion regarding the control of the vertical surfaces between stepped platforms is a crucial ingredient when discussing the control of the platforms themselves - admittedly not a major issue, but still a legitimate discussion point that shouldn't be ignored.

Ah, OK. That is controlled by the Generate Between Platforms setting on the Structure tab of the wall's dbx. This setting only works with invisible walls and railings - Room divider is an invisible wall. I was wondering why this wasn't automatic for some users as it is for me. Is this setting toggled on in your wall defaults for Room Divider and Railing walls? I feel a video coming on. http://screencast.com/t/i2Lf2BSO I couldn't stop at one: http://screencast.com/t/wwRIpPbTZ

I am still not clear? Can you post a simple plan?

Perry, I assume you mean virtual and not vertical! You can edit the "virtual slab" details by changing the Foundation Defaults. Admittedly, limited control.

Perry, I lost you a bit there, but doesn't checking Generate Between Platforms in the wall dbx handle that situation? As I said, I didn't fully understand what you were say, so I may be way off. Can you explain further - in English this time?

Alan, Where does that come from? I think you may have misunderstood. I don't believe I ever said I can't use the dbx to solve the condition. On the contrary, I believe that the dbx was being used without a full understanding of how Chief handles these settings. The dbx can be used easily to represent the required situation. Easily means that Chief works the way it works and the users have to work the way Chief works.

Perry, I'm glad you mentioned this. Here is my take on this. Because Chief is room based, when you have auto build foundation turned off and you build an enclosed room, Chief needs to build a floor. By default, Chief builds a mono slab on level 1 and I don't think that you can change this behaviour (to walls with footings) without having a foundation floor. So...when Chief auto builds this "virtual slab", it is really just building a mono slab under the room without a foundation floor (level 0) below. It is not really a "virtual slab" - it is a real mono slab under a room - it's not a Floor Supplied by the Foundation Room Below slab. You can't have a Walls with Footings foundation without a foundation floor level (level 0) - you can only have a slab, so...if you don't have a foundation floor, Chief can only build a mono slab - or a slab without footings. The upshot is, it isn't a "virtual slab" - it is a real mono slab on level 1. I very often build a house with a mono slab where the mono slab is built on level 1 (the main floor level) without a foundation level (level 0) or without a foundation floor. Chief is just building a Floor Under This Room as a Monolithic Slab Foundation, without Floor Supplied by the Foundation Room Below. Clear as.....

It even gets a bit weirder. Have a look at the attached pic. The red line in the plan view on the right has been rotated -20deg using Rotate Plan View. It was then sent to the layout and the layout box was rotated 20 deg so that the line is vertical. Notice that the text in the line still changes at any angle greater than 90deg (12 o'clock). ie, the text is still changing in relation to the monitor and not the drawing page, layout sheet or layout box. No big deal in the scheme of things, but still interesting.

Mick, Doesn't matter wether they are Chief provided or custom linestyles. Both types will behave that way. I don't have a clue about importing from another cad program. Text in linestyles actually behave a little bit oddly in that they change when they are at a greater angle than 90deg (12 o'clock), BUT, if you use Rotate Plan View, they behave exactly the same. ie, the reference is the screen (12 o'clock) and not the drawing sheet. I would have thought that the change angle (where the text flips) was relative to the drawing sheet and not the screen.

I am not sure that you can do anything to change that. Chief automatically rotates them so that they read correctly from the bottom and right hand sides of the drawing sheet. This happens for lines drawn at an angle greater than 90d. Those lines are drawn at an angle greater that 90d - is that the angle they are meant to be drawn at?

Ross, No, it is a lot more than a polyline solid. If you only have thin finish layers on a wall, you won't see much difference with cut Finish layers on or off. You only have a 10mm finish layer on your colorbond wall, so you won't see the full effect when you use a WMR with Cut Layers checked. Increase the colorbond layer to something like 100mm and you will see what happens. The WMR replaces the finish layers of the wall with its own layers, into the depth of the wall's main layer. This allows you to do things like recess the colorbond panel into the wall. And by using various layers (and invisible layers) in the WMR, you can cover various scenarios.

Ross, I'm glad it's sorted. I just amended my last post with a suggestion regarding the Wall Material Region.

Ross, Have you changed the wall material in the Materials panel of the wall dbx or painted the wall material? Select the wall over the door and open it's dbx. Go to the Material panel. Select Exterior Wall Surface...Select Material...Plan Materials. Scroll up to the top of the list and select Use Default...OK...OK. That should do it. Just a tip if you only want the Colorbond over the door itself. Leave it how it was and use a Wall Material Region to place the colorbond over just the door. Use a single colorbond material and Cut Finish Layers options.

Mick, You said what I said, but you beat me to it. My post was superfluous, so I deleted it.

Bill, From the help file:

Here you go Mick. Because it is a railing wall, it can contain all sorts of information like spacing, beam size, height, setback, roof pitch, roof o/hang, column size, materials, etc. All these can be saved as the default settings with the wall or edited in the wall dbx after placement, Porch Rail.plan

Scott, You said exactly what I was going to say. If you want to drop the wall height and leave the above ceiling/floor alone, use a railing wall. If you drop the ceiling and expect the floor above to stay put, then you need to "fill in" the space above the new dropped ceiling. You could do this with a thicker ceiling/floor structure, or some other way, BUT, you have to make up for the height that you just dropped the ceiling by.

Steve, This is really easy to do with a predefined wall type that you can save to your library, or place on a tool button. Select the wall from the tool bar and draw - couldn't be easier. Johnny, I don't understand, why would I want a more non-automated way to do this? Why would I want to make it more complicated and take longer? http://screencast.com/t/GrLixLW2i4ip

Larry, I have come in late to this thread and I am trying to catch up. I think the original problems were caused by the foundation room settings, as the floors on level 1 are supplied by the foundation rooms - thus, the floor heights were actually being set by the foundation rooms and not the level 1 rooms which is where you were trying to change them. Quite often, with mono slabs, you don't have to have the foundation level supplying the floor for the room above. You can just have the level 1 room supply it's own mono slab. The trick is that you can't do that if you have foundation rooms on level zero. You can delete the foundation rooms on level zero and then have the level 1 room supply its own mono slab. In the pics below, why do you have a lot of ceiling framing (Ceiling Joists) that is higher than the roof framing (Rafters and roofing)? Why do you have polyline ceilings in the hallway and the laundry? I think some of your problems are caused because you are trying to do some things manually instead of letting Chief do them automatically (and vice versa).

Go Preferences...Reset Options...Reset Side Windows.