CJSpud

My guess is almost all Chief users have the check in the box and never pay attention to that selection option. I am with you Joe .... why is the option even there if it doesn't yield a true font height when the box is unchecked in Rich text? Sounds like Michael and Mick understand it ... but I don't.

I have always used it with the box checked. Think I will continue that way. I am getting to young to totally understand such things. Thanks. Speaking of Chief Blueprint, sure would be nice if they could square that font up in its text box ... I think it is still riding a little bit high (not in the middle). I've used that font too long to change.

Sounds like the question is .... Why is the height of a letter (or number) different depending on whether or not there's a check in the CAD Style selection box? Why is a six (6) height font 6" with the box selected and only 4.25" when it is not. I guess I am confused to and quite frankly, didn't even no the darn selection option was there. Why can't a size 6 be a size 6 and be done with it?

To me, this seems like the ideal situation to use "Saved Plan Views" for. For the basement plan, make sure the framed walls (upper pony wall) is the one displayed and save that view as something like: Basement Floor Plan - Framed Upper (or something shorter/sweeter to your liking). Send that view to layout and all you should see is the framed walls (unless your basement has a mix of pony walls (framed and concrete) and just concrete only. For your foundation plan, make the needed pony wall display option change in the wall spec dbx and then do a save as for this view and give it a name such as Foundation Plan - Concrete Lower (or whatever you like). If you wanted to show the upper (framed) pony wall position over layed onto the concrete foundation wall, Chief gives us the option to do that. Unfortunately, we do not have control over the line style if you wanted to used a dashed line rather than the default solid line (which can't be changed). I've just started using saved plan views and really loving them. Not sure why I didn't get started when they were introduced in X10. Hopefully I didn't miss what you were wanting to do.

I have done it the same way you show it in your PDF file. What Chop is saying is narrow the width of the column with the 3D window views by dragging the column handle with the schedule selected. This will change both the width and the height of the image .... thereby reducing the height of the rows in the schedule as well. You might be able to make your schedule all one piece by doing this saving all the hassle of having to stitch part of the schedule to the schedule title and column headings.

Without opening your plan, looks like you might have an extra (un-needed) roof plane in the porch area. Just select it and delete.

Glenn: Finally got it. Had to read your post a few times and then do some checking for things to sink in. I think I am really going to like the note schedules. Thank you Chief.

Glen: For the floor framing schedule I used "General Notes" as the note type. For the roof framing notes schedule, even if I change the type to "framing", and working in my roof framing saved plan view, when I try to add a note it still adds it to the bottom of my floor framing notes. It properly uses the different shape callout (square vs round), but it will not populate the new note schedule (roof framing notes). I must be missing something. By the way, you can add to the "Objects To Include" list other object types by using the "Note Type Management" tool in the Text drop down. That made me think that we should be able to make "numerous" note schedules beyond the default ones Chief provided. Maybe I am wrong about that but it seems odd that it wouldn't work that way since we can add to the list.

That row tool looks like it leads to the same dbx that I opened by just selecting one of the callouts where I made the wording changes to. I think I am needing some fresh air as this note schedule tool is giving me fits now. Along with the double numbering, all my callouts are no longer displaying in the plan. I am obviously not doing things right as I am now getting unusual "double numbering" in my schedule for the framing plan. This apparently is somehow due to my assumption that we could have many different note schedules for different "saved plan views", which is something else I am just now trying to use. So my question now is: Can we have more than one note schedule for use in our construction plans? I was under the assumption we could. For example, note schedules for: 1. floor framing; 2. roof framing; 3. cabinets; etc. Is this possible? If it is, I would sure like to know how to go about it. Tried calling TS twice today but got tired of waiting both times as no one was taking my call. Maybe I am not the only one having trouble with this. I've watched Jenna and the video on the note schedule several times now but haven't been able to learn much from that. Next step will be the manual I guess ... after I try TS one more time in the morning. Edit: Just figured out how to get rid of my single numbering schedule back and the callouts back on the plan .... grrhhh ... was in the wrong anno set/layer set. Somehow, with some Chief wizzardry, my manual number seven is back to the macro now. Still want to know if we can have different note schedules in one plan. Edit 2: Figured out how to start a new note schedule (using the note type management tool) for my roof framing plan but when I tried to start populating the roof framing notes schedule, the first item I typed in reported to the bottom of my floor framing notes schedule rather than starting to populate the new roof framing notes schedule. I did change the callout type to a square (I used circles for the floor framing notes) and a square with number 12 in it and my first roof framing note is now the last item in the floor framing notes schedule. Sure hope I am missing something and there is a way to have many different note schedules in one plan.

Joe: I didn't try that ... can you do that? What I did was delete all the of the no. 12 callouts but one. With that one I went in to the dbx and deleted the macro and just typed in #7 in the box. Then I copied the callout back to the positions where they belonged in the beginning and all is well now. To say I am just a little confused about how I created this mess is an understatement. The note schedule is OK now (I think) but when I get a little time, I am going to do some more monkeying around with the note schedule and see if I can recreate the dilemma I described.

I was just playing with this some more in a new plan and now everything works. Not sure what I can do with my framing notes. Maybe I will get it figured out.

I created a note schedule for the floor framing plan for a project I am working on. There were 11 different notes in this schedule. In reviewing the schedule I noticed the wording I used for the no. 7 note needed some editing so I clicked on one of the no. 7 note callouts and opened the note dbx and edited the text as needed and clicked OK. Right after doing this I noticed Chief had taken my old no.7 note and created a new note with the original text showing. The original no. 7 text did get changed OK but I sure wasn't counting on keeping the old note with a new number. Now I cannot for the life of me figure out how to fix this. As near as I can tell, we have no ability to undo this sort of thing and I cannot figure out any other way to make edits to a note schedule without things getting all messed up. Am I missing something very obvious or did Chief not give us a good way to edit note schedules. HELP!!!

I'd bump out that short master bedroom wall into the screened porch are so you'll have something significant to have the screened porch roof framing to bear on. You should check your walls .... I think I saw some that were out of alignment. Also, I think the screened porch should have some sort of open truss on the outside that the cathedral ceiling material could but up against .... otherwise you'd need some really thick barge rafters to somehow receive the edge of the ceiling material (unless the intent is to have open rafters). Noticed your screened porch roof overhangs were different than the others ... not sure if that is right or not. The screened porch floor is down 8" .... ??? And there was a room off the master bath that didn't have the same ceiling elevation as the other rooms. And some walls (attic for one) were no locate/no room definition which I think need to be changed. Does the screened porch need valley rafters??? Is that how it would be built? I think I would align some of the railing walls with the house walls differently ... ML to ML ... and change the newel spacing unless that's where the screening is going to go ??? All considered, I think the roof "looks" pretty good from the outside as does the overall appearance of the house and garage itself. Don't have time to really did into it anymore than I have.

Yes ... hard to believe that we don't have that functionality. Should have been able to do that back in v7 when I started using Chief.

Mick: I did that on this project ... with 4 stringers ... but have to go to a more manual technique and not have the Chief generated center stringer showing along with the ones I made.

Thanks Eric. Wish there was a little better way to control what is shown in 3D views. I'll do a search and see what was discussed in the past. I took an extended sabbatical from ChiefTalk for awhile and I am sure I missed out on some good threads.

Thanks. Also, do we have any way to change the number of stringers for a stairs?

Hi: I am wondering what some of the layers for stairs & ramps are suppose to control: 1. Stairs & Ramps, Details ???? 2. Stairs & Ramps, Stringers ???? I have poked around with a plan I am working on trying to see what gets displayed and what doesn't for those two layers and haven't determined yet what they are suppose to control. At first I thought maybe they were layers I had created that have been carried from version to version but now I am thinking that these were layers created by Chief. Anybody know? Thanks.

I am wondering if it would make any sense to give Chief users the ability to populate each layer set with "only" the layers we want active (visible/displayed) within each Layer Set we are presently using. Maybe have it set up similar to how the schedules are set up where we select the layers for a particular layer set from the total (default) list. Any layers we don't want shown for a particular layer set would not be seen in the ALDO's dialog. The goal would be to not have to go through (scroll down) hundreds (±) of layers in Active Layer Display Options and pick the ones we want displayed. And more importantly, not have all the layers not used by a Layer Set displayed in ALDO's. If at some point in time we want to add new layers to a Layer Set, then we could just do that like we can now. Not sure my suggestion would/could work as easily as I am envisioning this. Layers and Layer Sets are, more or less, the heart and soul of Chief Architect so I suspect changing the way layer sets and layers are managed now would be like trying to put cruise ship engine in a VW ... lots of work. But maybe ???? I think Chief is set up in a manner that encourages us to keep things simple but nevertheless lets us do our customization's if we so choose. If someone has already made this suggestion or something similar to it in this thread, sorry, I have sort of been skimming quickly through the posts and may have missed it. Good thread on an important topic. Made me realize there are some things I should be using to make life easier ... such as using filters or reorganizing columns from time to time to quickly get to a layer.

I think that is what Larry is suggesting. That would work for me ... pretty much like it was in X10 and before.

Well said Larry ... that's sort of where I am at with this as well. Like you, I will see if my opinion changes with time as I use it more. But I love your suggestions. I too used a few of those "old" fill patterns, especially angled hatch fills but also angled cross hatch, all the time and it was quick and easy to put them in. Maybe Chief can do some maintenance work on this feature to make it work better for us.

Go to the foundation wall layer (in the Section View layer set) and change the wall's line style to dashed. Works for me.

When I referred to "gutting" your plan, all I meant was remove everything in the plan not related to your issue: 1. Do a save as and give the new copy of your plan a different name. 2. Go into the plan and take out all the 3D symbols, cabinets, fixtures, furniture, etc. that should not be needed for someone on the forum to trouble shoot your light (leakage) problems. All we may need to help you is your roof, custom ceilings, walls, floor, foundation, lighting, windows and doors at the most. 3. Then save that plan and close the plan. 4. Navigate to where your plan is saved on your computer and right click on it; choose "Send To"; and then choose "Compressed (Zipped) Folder". That should reduce your new plan file to an acceptable size for posting on ChiefTalk. 5. Post that new "gutted" plan in your next post so we can look at it.

Were you in the section view layer set when you tried to do that?

Glenn: Yes and I've used it a lot over the years. As you said, not as elegantly. But wouldn't it be great if we could just zoom in/out in the viewer pane like we do with symbols to look at some of those patterns that don't show up so well until you do other stuff?