Michael_Gia

I agree with changing anno sets as well. The idea of leaving the saved plan view to “using active defaults” for anno set is setting yourself up for potential mayhem.

...so, create a unique layer set and anno set for each saved plan view? now why didn’t I think of that? anyone else use this approach?

I kind of wish “saved plan views” worked the way OP thought they did. That is, whatever changes you make to a default or annotation, changes only in said saved plan view without affecting other saved plan views which share the same default, layer set or anno set. This way you actually have a wysiwyg version of the view that you will send to layout. Also wish you could set the layout page number in the stettings dialogue box of that view in advance.

Huh? I don’t quite get that. If you move your kitchen from one wall to another then your camera is looking at a blank wall. Isn’t it? I do wish we could rotate the cameras at least and reposition them for each new plan. That way we can at least keep the Camera View Name ans all we would have to do is re-dimension the elevation

Thank you! I’ll check that link out.

I still don’t get the hubbub about plan views. Other than when a specific reference floor is necessary I just use anno sets and send to layout. Am I missing something else?

As in other programs such as Archicad. You define your “levels” in the beginning. Every floor is a level. Each level is the “0” or default level for any room on that floor. Then each room’s level can be defined with respect to the floor level it is contained in.

+1 Richard The lure of Chief is its efficiency in how fast you can go from your client’s floorplan idea scribbled on a napkin to a Camera View complete with floor finish and mouldings, right in front of his eyes. Also cabinetry and how quick you can whip up a kitchen, live is another big advantage of Chief over Archicad. PBR or even the Standard View in Chief is just good enough to make using Archicad’s rendering pointless in as far as it would take to get a similar render. I also have to include Archicad’s insane inability to select a wall and then click on a dimension to change the wall’s position. With all of its power and seemingly limitless capabilities it still doesn’t have editable temporary dimensions! wtfffff..... These features are the “crack” that Chief offers, that keep us coming back. X11 has some great improvements. ...in my opinion.

While I love a lot of the new enhancements there just seems to be too many looooooong over due simple improvements that are sitting in the long-in-the-tooth suggestions forum. My SSA subscription is the only accolade I’ll give Chief for now.

You most probably have some room definitions with varying floor structure. Example, living room has 11-7:8” truss-joists with 5/8” plywood and then maybe your bathroom has 14” I-joists with 3/4” plywood. (Floor finish thickness doesn’t matter). So even if you diligently went through floor defaults per floor, when you change room type and the floor strcuctue of the room is different than the overall floor default then you have a real bad day.

Very nice. The title says “custom room schedule” but when I open it, the title is “note schedule specification” Also how do you get your macro for volume and name to magically appear in the “available columns” list in the Note Schedule? ...and why do you guys have Florida weather compared to us here in Montreal?

You were right sir. I was working on an X10 plan in X11. When I created a new plan in X11, all behaved properly. I think this gives weight to the idea that for each new version of Chief we need to create a new template or plan from scratch in that new version as opposed to using an older plan or template from previous versions. ....which sucks

Here’s the plan... https://www.dropbox.com/s/71yu4s7alqwoa81/X10 TEST.plan?dl=0

It is at zero. When I enter values in the origin offset it simply moves the symbol around in 3D but the bounding box remains where it is.

Hi there, I usually create a sloped driveway by placing a driveway on a sloped terrain and then creating a symbol for that driveway. Then I can position it on my terrain at the height I want and at the slope I want independent of my terrain’s slope. (stole that from one of Scott Hall’s sloped deck video) The problem is always with the blinding box not being aligned with the symbol in 2D. See photo. How can I line up the bounding box with the symbol in 2D?

Chief does not deduct windows or doors from the calculation as far as I can tell. Windows can be installed from floor to ceiling and chief will return the same number of sheets with or without the window, which is the right way to calculate. As you said, installers go right over the window, cut out the window and throw that piece into a container. As Kbird1, recommended, I switched my calculation method to area instead of sheet for the quantity. This allows me to calculate the waste myself rather than have Chief round out the number of sheets. Material list is still ill not reliable or obvious for these sorts of calculations. I still double check with Plines. The one and only thing I miss from my days with SoftPlan is there material list module, SoftList. That was incredible. So straight forward and precise. Too bad everything else was so constrained and restricted when compared to Chief. Can’t have it all, I guess.

Chief is the best resource for how to videos. For Home pro check out this wonderful dude’s YouTube channel... https://www.youtube.com/user/c16467 hes on the forum so you can contact him.

Yes, I’m on X11. Need to update my profile. I’ll try setting material to report “area”, thanks for the tip.

I suppose you’re right. So is there a way to calculate exact surface area that’s a little more elegant and efficient than my crude polyline labels? I’d rather be the one calculating waste. Also walk in showers are usually calculated separately so I can order Denshield backer board separately.

So Chief is adding an extra 1-1/2 sheets of 4x8?

I just tried it with a 12’x12’ room including an 8ft ceiling and the material list yielded 18 sheets of 4x8 = 576sq.ft. If you do do the math it should be 528sq.ft. assuming no waste. Unless Chief calculates for those guys who like to measure once and cut twice? lol

If it is indeed waste I would much rather have the exact surface area and let me calculate waste. Has anyone tried this experiment? Just start a plan with one room 10’ x 10’ interior measurements. Take a material list for drywall.

10’x10’ room with 9’ ceiling, you agree should be 460sq.ft. Material list for the entire floor ofwich there is only this one room, yields 16 sheets of 4’x8’ drywall = 512sq.ft. So where does the difference come from? (Also it still boggles the mind that a material list for the room only yields just the ceiling as a calculation for drywall on the room. Why?)

I’ve tried this with a 10’ x 10’ room and did not get accurate results. Have you tried this and compared with actually calculating materials manually? I must be doing something wrong because I’ve never been able to get drywall calculated accurately with the materials list.

Material list polyline stretched past the midpoint of the walls I want to include is the closest (but no cigar) method out of the box as far as I can tell. I double check this with room polylines for every room and closet that includes a label for which I have a crude macro in the form of: “perimeter.round/12*9 + area.round” that formula returns square feet for 9 foot ceiling of which I have a similar formula for 8 and 10 foot ceilings. Only because I’m not smart enough to include the “ceiling height” calculation. I realize that the ruby gurus are probably laughing, and I don’t blame them but shouldn’t Chief have a more straight forward way to calculate drywall? It’s probably the most basic metric upon which nearly all contractors use to quote on a job.