glennw

If it doesn't have a frame, you can do it without creating a material by using Build>Image>Create Billboard Image.

I can confirm that even with all snaps turned off, Command does not stop the tape measure from locating objects. It appears as though it is not snapping because you don't see the snap indicators. But have a close look and you will see the dimension extension line appear when it is locating an object. When the tape measure is not locating an object, the end of the dimension is a cross, then, when it locates an object, the end of the dimension displays as an extension line identified as extension 2. Even so, there still seem to be some random locations that the tape measure wants to locate.

Thanks Chop

This is my first thought. Just be aware that in recording the movie you don't get to see the pop up box that asks if you want to delete the original polyline. This will display once the intersection operation has completed. Say yes to delete the original. I will have to check and see if I can get that window to appear while recording. Any ideas Chopsaw - OBS? 25-12-20 Corners.mp4

Dermot, I definitely did it in X12 while I was playing around - I used 300 so that things would be easy to track! And it wasn't 300 before I started mucking around.

That is the hard way Graeme. I have 2 layers I use. One called "Walls, Normal Interior" and "Walls, Normal Exterior". I then set my wall type and default layers for internal and external walls in the wall defaults to the appropriate layer - there are seperate defaults for internal and external walls. When I draw internal and external walls, they go to the appropriate layer - I don't have to think about it. I can then display internal and external walls independently.

Dermot, I have been mucking around with this on and off and lost my way because of interruptions. Can you explain how I got the 300 in the Edge Line defaults. I did not change it in the dbx - that is how it came into layout. I remember changing it somewhere else before sending the view to layout - but I lost track of where I changed it. Must be time for a nap! PS. After doing a Save As with the .plan and .layout, I checked the .ini file and it was set to 300, but I certainly didn't change the .ini file: Does that sound right?

I am not in front of Chief at the moment, so I am just winging it with this... No, those values are not hard coded, The Edge Line defaults and Pattern Line Defaults in the Layout Box Specification dbx populate from....somewhere in Chief - I can't remember off hand...I will have a look when I can open Chief. But, when you send the view to Layout, you need to have checked Use Edge Line Defaults BEFORE sending to layout

No. You need to change the Upper Pitch setting in the porch wall, not the house wall.

Yes, a waste of time in IMHO. Instead of having same height fascia/plates, same overhangs, etc, you will have to make compromises as some will be different and therefore making it more difficult to build - apart from the above, you will end up with bastard valleys and/or hips. Apart from all that, the roof as a whole will look better with the same pitch and different ridge heights. The only exceptions I would make would be to increase the pitch on a gable roof where it is a feature like over an entry way, patio, deck, cathedral ceiling, etc., but not to make the ridges the same height.

Another variation of the above is to start with a Box and reshape it in 3D - this is a lot easier to do than it looks. No boolean operations needed. If you want more than 1 material, you can explode it, change any colors and then Make Architectural Block (or Convert Selected To Symbol) to get it back to a single unit.

I agree with Chopsaw - there is way too much elevation data, and don't use Linear. I would trace over the survey contour lines (maybe leave some out) using Elevation Splines and using far less line sections.

I think I would rather keep things in the one plan to ensure consistency. You could create a Cad Detail From View of just the floor joists displaying (either single or double lines), copy into plan, turn off the framing display and then just use Cad detail to display one or both of the joist display types. You would probably only need 1 cad detail of the joists as an alternative to the dynamic display type (single or double lines - whichever one you prefer), controlled by layer display/saved plan view.

I wasn't suggesting that deleting the Joist Direction line is the solution, I was rather pointing out how screwy the framing is.

Delete the Joist Direction line to the left of the stars and see what happens:

Doug, The Joist Direction Lines are there for more than the framer, they tell Chief how to build the joists - direction and size. I was demonstrating that there is something wrong with your joist direction/bearing lines witnessed by the fact that the joist direction line to the left of the stairs is not doing anything and maybe causing problems. Sorry, I don't have the time to troubleshoot the exact problem. You need to go through the plan and try to find conflicts with the various floor platforms. Maybe use Bearing Walls instead of Bearing Lines. Check all your Bearing Walls, Joist Direction lines, Bearing Lines and framing defaults.

Am I missing something here? If you don't want studs to display, don't you just need to use a wall definition for the existing walls that doesn't have a framing layer?

You have some problems with your Bearing Beams and Joist Direction lines. I rotated the joist direction line on the right a little. Notice how it is controlling the joist direction for a bigger area than you intended.

When you insert a sink into a cabinet, the sink stays connected to the cabinet - even if you drag the sink away from the cabinet. Once the sink is dragged away from the cabinet, you can select the cabinet (by clicking on the cabinet or the sink) and then hit Tab to select the sink to delete (and leave the cabinet). It sounds like you may have deleted the cabinet and the sink?

Well, I did think long and hard before even mentioning Rotate Plan View.

Do a search of the forum for "z fighting"

I don't believe that drawing 2 plans is necessary. I hate to admit it, after all my negative comments about the Rotate Plan View tool over the years. This may be the only case that I can recommend using it - but it won't be foolproof and use it with caution. Be aware that the coordinate system will rotate with the plan view. ie, if you rotate the plan view by 45deg, zero deg will be northeast to the screen, not east, as is normal. When you use this tool, your view of the drawing will rotate and the crosshairs will remain ortho to the screen. It is probably just as easy to use Angle Snaps which default to 15deg increments OOB and you can also select 7.5deg or custom angles as well.

I am not sure that you can come to a complete stop, but you can get very close to it by decreasing the speed after a key frame and increasing the time for the next key frame.

You may be able to use an addition framing layer on the outside of your wall definition. Size and spacing can be defined by the material. Members can be edited in 3D, plan or in the wall detail. This is all done auto:

Scott, I think that in this particular case Chief is getting confused with those short horizontal walls on either side of the building. They do not line up with the internal horizontal wall on each side. You are drawing a straight Bearing Line - although, even if you shape the BL to follow the walls, it still isn't 100%. Lucky we have other alternatives like Bearing Walls. The fact that those short walls are external walls may also have something to do with the problem. The other thing that may be contributing to the problem is the overhanging floor.