Nicinus

I think I may be so thick that I need instructions three times in order for it to sink in.

After doodling with this a little more I would like to correct myself, and it now makes sense to me. I think I failed to consider the width of the base gable fascia.

Ok, I figured it out. The crucial step was to set the height in that initial dbx. Following the Chief article I was of the impression that was related to the height of the belly band. That setting then adjusted the height in the general tab. Thanks, Joe. PS. That Chief article is clearly not updated, I'm starting to get frustrated that 90% of my SSA videos seems to relate to older versions.

Erased it and re-did it and still doesn't work. My steps are: 1. Select exterior room. 2. Create a modling polyline 3. Open it and select height and the molding, uncheck 'Extrude inside polyline' Are you starting with a regular poly and converting to molding or something?

Thanks, that is very encouraging. I'm noticing something odd in my 3D view, my selected polyline is at floor level but the actual molding is where I want it so it seems I'm using an offset somewhere instead of actually lifting up the polyline. Edit: I'm now using the absolut height in the general tab, and set the vertical offset to 0. It did however not make a difference other that my line now is in the expected location. The molding still goes through the windows though.

Believe me I've tried. Do you get it to work? I did find a note in the Chief articel section though but it may be for an older version if it works for you. http://www.chiefarchitect.com/support/article/KB-00070/48/Chief-Architect/Moldings-Millwork/Adding-a-Belly-Band-to-a-Structure.html It basically says what I've been doing so far... If your belly band molding goes through a door, or window, return to floor plan view. In floor plan, select the Molding, then use the Break Line edit tool to place a break on either side of the door, or window, opening. Select the segment and click on the Open Object edit tool to display the Molding Polyline Specification dialog again. On the General panel, check No Molding on Selected Edge and click OK. Repeat the process for any remaining openings that the belly band intersects.

Hmm, can not get that to work. I have created an exterior room molding polyline, but it goes straight over all windows?

I couldn't do that either, a negative value just seems to change the relation between them.

This is the way it seems to work for me. If your shadow board is 2" thick and you set hor. offset to 0" it will then make room for the 2" inwards. Roof plane is the same size. If you add a second 1/2" board at 0 offset it will overlap at the inner edge. If you instead give the new board an offset of 2", it will leapfrog that first board and push it in by 1/2" now making the stacked set 2 1/2". Makes sense? I should have made a video.

I'm doing a belly band that is at the height of windows, and was wondering if anyone has a suggestion for a speedier workflow than cutting the line on a one by one basis? I have about 25 windows and this is turning out to be quite tedious.

It behaves a bit odd to me. I looked at the little bay window on one of the short sides, and changed one of the shadow boards to being 3" wide and the other to a 1/4" just to easily separate them and see what was going on. They certainly didn't move the way I expected when I changed the offset. Is there a way to upload an image without having to go through the whole mymedia exercise? It doesn't seem to work with copy/paste.

Please disregard this thread, user error. I had somehow created a third level where these corbels decided to hide.

Just wanted to check if anyone else has had similar issues before I send it in (file is approaching 60MB), as it could be a user error on my part. I have a symbol of a corbel that shows in 3D views and elevations but not in plan. I have checked all floor levels and the All On Set layer set, but it does not show up. I have the symbol on layer 'Millwork', which is visible.

I run it on a SP3 and am very happy, works great.

I'm a pretty new user and won't even pretend to understand the software the way some of you guys do, but I sometimes feel Chief seems to have a bit of an 'identity crisis' or growing up pains. The room concept, as opposed to basing levels on platforms like most other cad tools, seems based on an initial ambition of just creating interiors or very limited designs that then has been expanded to cope with all sorts of situations. The discussion on whether to start with footings or top down also seems very dependent on whether your history is that of a builder, architect or drafter. Some people think and design the way you physically construct a house, and others how the different spaces interact with each other and prefers to have a much looser design sequence. Chief, which to me is a very particular tool just like perhaps Sketchup, seems to be driven by a few individuals' vision and I'm personally still trying to figure out what that vision is, as once you understand that you will also have a good pointer on where it will be in the future. I'm sure that just like the rest of us they develop and change their view on things, and I'm also sure they, just like we wonder about things, are now scratching their heads on how to implement some functionality that wasn't even on the radar when the skeleton of Chief was created. I don't know the history of Chief, and I don't know who's the driving force behind it, but many software tools need a reboot every decade or so, mostly because programming or gui paradigms change and the code just is too old to adapt or too inefficient to cope with new graphics advances, etc. A sign of this is probably when the software starts to become slow due to all stacked implementations of things. Perhaps a great stair tools implementation and some other loose ends the next two years, and then a massive rehaul/optimization for X10?

Not good if that is the case. Must be a bug, why would they add something that rasterizes the plan?

I must say I'm a bit perplexed by this, and that no one seems to agree that this is a bit confusing. Imagine being a new user and you want to change the visible layers. You then alter the layer set and it immediately updates the plan. Now imagine you want to change all your annotations from one set to another, you then change the anno-set but nothing happens?

If I set the annoset dbx for my anno style in the default settings to 'Use Active Layer Set', doesn't that in effect make the layer set king?

I'll watch the video, but when I look in the annoset dbx for my chosen annoset it says to use the active layer set, which to me would indicate that I could just swap annosets while still using the same active layer set, and the only thing that is changing should be what is affected by the annoset. In a way it works like this, but like Robert said it only affects what is created going forward and not the existing dimensions. This to me doesn't indicate a live setting and seems illogical.

I must say I'm also a bit frustrated I can't seem to change the name of an existing layer set. I would like to name some of my layer sets with the prefix CD (for condocs) so that I know these layer sets affect views in layout, without havingto create copies first of all of them.

Can you guys elaborate on this? I can't change the anno set for a layer set? How is the anno set connected to the layer set then?

In my view that is very illogical, annosets gives the impression that they are a live setting but if this is the case they are really more of a template?

Yes, I get that, but I thought the whole point with anno sets was to control all my annotations with a global setting?