Ed_Downunder

I'm with you Joe. I want my plans to get a building licence. To get a building licence my plans need documentation. Labels, macros & ruby will take us to document heaven ( well maybe not document heaven -- but to a nice place!!!!)

Good point Doug and an interesting perspective. Chief's appeal is broad. My interest is narrow. What I need is good documentation to get a building licence. (Our rent is paid by building not drawing) I like the other features and I use then. At the end of the day I need to get a building licence. Sometimes if not more times the other features are what get sales over the line. So therein lies the complication. So just get on with it. 'Oh'. And don't get it wrong. (smile)

Maybe new users are just making contact: Be nice.

I hope this is an invitation. I had a meltdown and re-installed Win 8.1 I installed my printer Hp T120. Not sure what is going on but it is strange. The issue with Chief is: It is slow.... So I will leave it at that. Photoshop shows the printer driver quite quickly. Chief does not. I don't know how to report this because it relates to my computer. Any comments are welcome.

Vote 1 for downunder

I agree with every one that we should choose. I would choose with Glen. This is how our framing timber charts read. This is a multinational product and should cater for different convention for different countries. Using macros in labels does allow that to a degree. On the question of submitting requests- it would be convenient to have a button that would elevate the topic to a feature request. Perhaps the owner of the topic is the one to elevate it to a feature request and it show on the post that this topic has been elevated. So we could have our conversation and not have to take the conversation to a new forum.

Hi Dan, Would like to have seen your reply. The post have been mainly educated speculation. What we need is some feedback so we can make sense of this conversation.

Same here (pc)....Calculate room does not report to materials list. The above materials list was calculated from 'Calculate from area. Probably should be reported as a bug. I can't check with X6 at the moment. New tool icon is a good idea.

Do you want to show painted brick with the brick coursing showing then the above is a good solution. If the wall is rendered and painted add another layer to your wall type.

I like this feature. It does need tweaking. A roof with rafters and hips will show the label centred on the rafter. I use a macro for length. All labels have to be moved manually to just outside the gutter. Would be nice to have a default offset position for this. This feature labels Ridge, Hips, Valley and by using roof blocking I can place under-purlins and tile battens. All labels show name and length. good for the take off. Chief is making steady progress. Pleas hurry with the tweaks.

Preferences>Master list- select only Interior trim. Select each wall from elevation>select wall>wall specification>wall covering>add new Plan view>materials list>calculate from area. Drag to select bedroom with materials list 'label' = materials list Note: I place info in manufacturer column. This is done when the wall is selected in elevation....Components> The materials list has been saved to project Browser>Materials List Room Materials List.plan

Almost perfect. If you add a 250 mm air gap @ 100 mm to the brick ledge. Cant remove the cross section line. Footings X6.plan

This is a good post. What we currently think of our own skill level is probably forcing some modesty, not such a bad thing. Not being satisfied with our skill level can be a powerful driver, that is a good thing. To make real progress requires understanding the correct use of tools. A work around is OK when the deadline demands a result. A power user will make time when the heat of the moment is passed and study for a solution with the right tools and not rely on a work around. Not all problems have good solutions in Chief. Problems and work around's are only one area for a reason to study. Developing ones own style, speed and efficiency are also good reasons to dig deep.

Agree! In my view a power user knows the limitations of the tools being used and proceeds to press the boundary's looking for solutions to achieve an outcome. "the deciding factor is an intention to know" sorry about shouting but I think this nails it.

Elevations are always live. It's the layout elevations that need updating. This is no small thing. I recently had a layout for 3 town houses that was 30 pages of A2. Were all my exterior and room elevations current? After a few mods to a bathroom on one unit and electrical on another unit change a window style from sliding to awning - you get the idea. Can I trust my plan? The only way to trust that every thing is up to date and current is to manually open and close every elevation in the layout. More recently I removed a chimney from an as built. It was removed in plan I made comment on the elevation 'perfect' moved on to other items that needed attention and when I opened my layout to send as a pdf (this is the midnight hour) I overlooked the manual update for layout elevations. When the phone rang the next day I was asked to remove the chimney. It's not even possible to group select and update a page of elevations. In a perfect world we could send to layout and be done with it. But if the layout goes out to the client for approval and there are changes at any stage of the design process the world is no longer perfect. Even after a building license is issued there can be changes to the plan. The local authority demands that all elevations in the layout are correct and current. It is not possible that this is a burden I bring upon myself. If anyone has a solution that does not require the opening and closing of every elevation in layout I would be very pleased to adopt it. I checked the old forum. If you have a link that I could follow to solve this issue I will be grateful. Here is a reference to the old forum. http://www.chieftalk.com/showthread.php?43283-When-to-send-to-plan-to-layout&highlight=update+elevations+layout it's dated 2009. Nothing has changed.

I don't have a qualification that allows me to make a comment about the complexity of writing code or even if 'live updates' would be to much demand on the average computers used by CA users. But I would think that even a mediocre software engineer would have the skills required to writ a script activated by an icon that would run on layouts and update on demand. Live updates is only the language used to explain the problem. What is required is 'auto update'. Preferably with a choice to run automatically when a layout is opened and if it takes to long to run that cycle each time layouts are opened then let the user activated (manual) update. No new features here. No re- writing the program just enhance the current process of open, close and save the elevation. If CA allowed this to be a ruby script it would already be done by someone. This is core functionality and speaks directly to productivity.

My wish is that this post called for things to be fixed only and not features added. I get the attempt at a broad question to get some engagement. So staying on topic. My one item is fix layout elevation auto update. This is more than an irritation. If you get caught late in the design process this failure has the potential to make you look silly at best or incompetent at worst. Speaking from experience it caused embarrassment. It could of had liability issues. In my opinion Chief architect is paying lip service to listening whilst foundation issues go unresolved. Statement have been made about the development resources going to areas that address our productivity. Why spend resources on new interesting features when the big serious issues are ignored. In my view it seems that the marketing department is driving this boat. We are just passengers paying our SSA in the hope that things will get better with the next version. Why can't a simple thing like a door be placed in a plan properly. Whilst improved in X6 with a door jamb it will still not display correctly. Door will only hang on hinges not float in in the air having an alignment with a wall! Small point maybe but it is just one of a long list of things that are just wrong. This post has opened up for a lot of comment. Not much is new. Most is old and rehashed. Question is will X8 - X9 be having the same conversation?

Auto update elevations. The disconnected elevations has no logic to it. A layout should reflect the plan without having to select each and every elevation on a page to update. Can't even group select. This is particularly difficult if late in plan development the client changes or even just tweaks a few thing. Update elevations is not a feature it goes to the core of practicality.

Not sure what I did. I viewed on my laptop earlier. Failed. Just had another look on my desktop and it is all there. Looks good and promises more. Taking the model out of Chief to create a u3d file is difficult cumbersome. It seems to me that that this could be handled inside chief as an export file. If that is the case then the logic will be that Chief can print to pdf. I don't know what is involved from a coding point of view but I favour the 3d pdf over the Chief viewer for file security and ease of use.

The file opened without a view. do I need a viewer. Am interested in pdf 3d view. Have spent a little time on this without any result.

This is a really good point.I find that reading the help is sometimes quite confusing. A good example is foundations. Foundations are on to many dbx's. As Donald said you don't know what you don't know! I have recently printed the manual (all 1300 + pages) with the hope of unravelling the mysteries of why my plan works and looks right and then with a change in a dbx things change for the worse. I have a current project garage to a lower level, house with timber floors and additional rooms on slab. The mystery was revealed in rooms defaults. Garages have their own rules. I know some of my problems is my understanding of the program --- but it's not all me. Hopefully x7 will address some of my issues.

Thank Rod, I need to investigate the difference between solid modelling and parametric models. A lot of language and acronyms get used that for me are not well understood. I get your point that other high end programs can do some things better. Stairs are your example. Out of frustration I have looked for a roof framing program but stop looking because Chief is almost there for my needs. I also stopped because it would be me that has to use the roof framing program. More learning curve. Would I send my plan to a roofing contractor. No. I have no objection or philosophical opposition to a clean file exchange. There are file formats in Chief that I have not used yet. Nice to know that if the need arises they are there. I pinned hope on X6 to fix my little list of issues- that got to be the year of apple. X7 is comming up for beta. Hope to be part of that and will of course look at my specific issues. Without splitting hairs or being argumentative Chief in my view and according to their published description of the program is BIM. Can a BIM program operate as an 'island in isolation'? If Chief does not offer inter-operability is it still BIM? If chief gave up on the materials list as an internal process and no longer supported it but allowed 'an efficient file exchange' between excel and chief. That to me would be a very valuable function. So inter-operability would get a tick from me. The dilemma for me still exists. The model needs to be accurate and while Chief is using and promoting a materials list and claims the list is based on an accurate model Chief should be able to draw an accurate model and report an accurate list. There is the fundamental principle of BIM. I guess this is the limiting concept for Chief to ponder. Can it manage the expectation of users internally or is it time to reach out to the Chief community for added value. There is no doubt like many I am limping along and looking for easier process and more function.

This includes all video tutorials and with the release of x7 videos of new features & updated features. It is more than a help desk.

Ok Good start (or is it a restart) The ability to create an accurate model. For example I would like to place a top plate (chief refers to this as a sill plate) on a masonry wall. The wall maybe the interior of the cavity or exterior of the cavity depends on the eaves. Auto mud sills is not a suitable solution, This would make a great companion for the brick dbx with the brick ledge and a choice to have a top plate on the wall of my choosing. My life will return to normal. Foundations or confusion. It twist's my brain. Stem wall and multiple ways for settings. I think I have the animal trained only to watch it collapse in elevations. It's like wrestling with an octopus or playing a fairground amusement where you hit a small creature on the head to push it down the hole only to see more creatures popping up different places.There is something very unintuitive about foundations. It could be because I am trying to get a top plate with a work around. What ever the problem is - it's a time waster and doesn't go towards paying my bills. Would like more flexibility with foundations for example we don't always pour a monolithic slab. I would like to be able to place a strip footing and have a thickened slab sit on top, the brick ledge is controlled by the brick dbx the result will be a concrete footing material and a concrete slab material in the material list. Auto roof framing. That is a fantastic start. Would love some framing members that could be used manually if we can't have them auto framing for example under purlins and strutting beams. Ability to rename framing members so that the materials list will report our names. For example separate ridge board, hip rafter, valley rafter, valley board and choose battens or sheathing layer for a framing material. Ceiling framing. Would like to have a hanging beam and it report accurately to the materials list This is not a hijack. These issues speak directly to what BIM is. Building Information Modelling = accurate model. The answers to what is Residential BIM are inside the program. Broad and varied definitions of BIM is a totally irrelevant comment. Chief has made some very nice improvements over the years and has tried to deny its BIM heritage when really you should be embracing it. The way forward is an accurate model. Does that mean every screw needs to be modelled.. Lets be real. Does it mean it has to interact with other programs? Not in my view. Does it mean an accurate model and accurate flexible reporting? That is the big YES. When Chief develops the X6 into an accurate modelling platform it will have come of age and get much applause.

inside Chief is fine but Chief also needs inter-operability with other BIM apps This seems to be part of the problem discussing BIM. What do I need from other BIM app and what are they? I can be specific about what I would like but I can't visualise the application of inter-operability with other apps. For Chief to be able to respond they would need a specific use to respond to.