jorgearaya

Great comments as usual, I realized after posting the question all of the variables involved in it, however, if you read the post I was specific when I stated that for production work was not the way to go. I completely understand that some jurisdictions don't require the sort of engineering we have to do here in California, but, even so a truss is a truss regardless of where one lives and the UBC, IRC plus other safety regulations will apply when taking on the design of any habitable structure. Mind that I am not referring to what we call here "stick framing" which in a sense is a truss but hand framed (which still requires good designing) Great! It is good to see some of you using the truss tool. The liability is so high that most truss design software is limited to distributors and manufacturers and even if we were to obtain it, no one would dare to fabricate them. BC Framer allows the design of roof systems but, not necessarily trusses. Thank you!

What is the advantage of trying to design roof trusses in Chief? Typically roof trusses are designed by specific software packages that take into consideration the necessary load values for your area. The webbing chords are designed to resist the loads presented at each individual location Girder trusses to hold long spans Drag loads at certain locations Coordinating with your structural engineer to develop a good system and diaphragm Then that design also serves the manufacturing of such members. Unless you are a registered design professional that can sign responsibility over a truss design, and have the time to do so, and be economically feasible, I would take it on, otherwise I see no reason for production work. I don't know of any manufacturer that would take on any one's truss design and actually build trusses, even if you're an engineer! Thank you.

It's probably late, but, for the future, for those under PG&E look up the Greenbook under "prohibited locations" it specifies where not to put an electrical panel.

Hello all, I just sent this note out to support for review. Version 20. Exporting to .dwg with default "units" as "in" for inches is sending plans to decimal inches and not architectural inches. That was not the case in version 19 Version 19. After upgrading to version 20 exporting to .dwg with default "units" as "in" for inches is sending plans to decimal inches and not architectural inches. I am having to open exported files in AutoCAD and changing the dimension style to architectural for each exported file before sharing with my consultants.

Update: Thanks to those who have sent me a PM. We are located in the California Central Valley (Fresno) Designs have to be appropriate for the area (look up the area's home builders) Not looking for fancy designs or "detailed" down to the towel. Looking for Layout options where the Draftsperson can go to the Master Plan and Copy the desired configuration to drop into the working plan. I will provide the specifications for plumbing fixtures and casework.

Hello all, Looking for someone who can create a library of Bathroom and Kitchen layouts in Chief. We are a "Custom Home" Builder and have pre defined cabinetry, bathroom fixtures to go with the houses. Please PM me so we can exchange contact info. I am available 8am to 5pm Pacific Time. M, T, T F and 11am to 4pm on W due to meetings. Gracias.

To me this has been a great post to follow, watching all the attempts to make it work, how some have come up with ways to work around it, how some are now experimenting, what we did so many years ago, the best we could do was to keep making suggestions on the subject, knowing we would encounter some users that see the suggestions in a negative way. its been a good year for Chief, considering they get all of our fair and valid effort, to better the software at no cost. Importing formatted tables and comma separated values works great to a point, once the tables are in, there's no way to delete rows or columns, to re-organize them, to insert in between, and so on. I must praise Chief here, many other big boys out there can't i.e. ArchiCAD. (However it excels in .pdf) Chief knows the limitations, they also know that .pdf files don't update as they should, that saving them in plan does, but loses quality (virtually unreadable). The text in Chief is great for small tagging only, and it is widely used for that. When it comes to legends, key notes, general notes, etc then the current text does not work in a production setup.

Unfortunately to get good results and fit text around is best to import .pdf The downside is the way Chief "Caches" the external files, I hope to see this improved sooner than later...

Not sure what you're looking for here, I read the post and I'm still confused... Look up your yellow pages for a local structural engineer that can look at your project (paper plans) and produce a proper structural analysis and documents. Then review the provided analysis for proper design, upgrade or downgrade as needed (typically downgrade). Re run the analysis, produce docs, get stamps.

This is an old one but, very good source of information. http://sweets.construction.com

Use rich text and tabs Then again nothing close to using a text editor for best control and formatting.

I took a few minutes to revisit this and just like I have thought, and requested in suggestions before, the selective tool does not fully work yet. Select the 110v from the electrical toolset, shift drag a marquee, see what you get!! It would be nice to just Ctrl+A after selecting the desired tool to multiple select all items at once.

It would be nice if Chief would show the billing for people that are buying the Software via RTO in the My Account section. Also for those who purchased during the 15 payments to clearly show that as it got bumped to 16 payments and it is unclear if they just rolled over people who signed up before that went into effect. It is true on can look at the CC statement for payments, having actual billing from Chief so people can print when needed would be great. More of an accounting thing but, needed though. Thanks.

I saw that comment coming That is why I added "if not then you must provide the rest of the requirements to allow escape" Look it up.

Assuming you read the code sections in both the CBC and CRC pertaining to means of egress, the required fire escape exit is probably what is most confusing, some R groups and types of construction are exempt from the requirements when you have fire sprinklers. Typically for SFD there's only one required egress exit, with unobstructed path of travel and length limits, these limits and the limits in stair travel are two different things so, one has to figure out what works. The emergency escape is still required in sleeping areas, and it needs to meet the typical dimensions, if not then you must provide the rest of the requirements to allow escape. (In reality these are there not necessarily for a person to "jump" out of a window and escape, that would only work for able bodies, a person that is not able to negotiate the jump or escape can not benefit from that, so, the requirement is really more for the "rescuer's use")

I suggested the definition first, because of the exception in it, from there, you find the group, the group then takes you to amount of occupants, from there one can have a place to look for the rule in the code, however, before looking at what the code says, the next step is to find the applicable zoning code for that group and area where the building is located at, and delve into the exceptions and fire escape requirements for that jurisdiction and type of construction. What has applied to my projects in the past may not necessarily be what applies to his condition.

You need to make sure it is in fact a carriage unit first, look up the "definition" first.

http://stonecad.com/

All kinds of "Workarounds" here, however, add your support for this suggestion, very much needed, as you can tell by the way everyone is trying to get to the same place.

I use the door header layer when working on con docs, lateral plans, I turn off the door, but, leave the "lines" header layer on, this way I show the "dashed" in a heavy line representing the headers, add the proper "text macro" to show what it is by default, or I add a callout to specify what the calcs require. Framers expect to see the "line" besides, it is common practice to show it. The second part of these lines is that they do not change with the default settings, you can have a thinner header, but, the lines will just be the same width of the wall, not reading the dbx settings. I keep throwing the stuff out here, I should be writing to Chief directly about all these "bugs" (which I keep documenting in my Google Docs). Still I think windows should have them too. Nonetheless, the "inconsistency" within Chief... get it? I developed systems in Chief to keep the plans "Consistent" from one to the next, so all of my jobs look the same all around, people working out of my plans know where things are and what they represent. They recognize my plans by just looking at the cover sheet. Whenever I run into the inconsistencies in Chief, then, my system "logs" a fault and I have to find a "workaround" for it to fill the gap left. The reason for my suggestions... (and this one is another one).

Did I miss it? The door dhx has it, but not the window... just checking

Hello all, I am still looking for an "in house" draftsperson, if you know anyone with some Chief experience in my area please send me their info. Unfortunately not looking for "online" help at this time. This is a full time drafting position in an office setup. Chief experience is desired but, not required, as we use several tools (drafting platforms) to get the job done.

I just realized that the "Solid Wall Railing" specified as 36" height, does not meet code! CRCR312.1.2 Exception 2 says: Where the top of the guard serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, ... shall be not less than 34 inches and not more than 38 inches as measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads. I took a section of my stairs and oh my!! the rail specified at 36 inches is only 29 inches to the top of the handrail. Does this have to do with selecting "Follow Stairs"? And it is measuring from the bottom of the stringer up at a right angle from it.

https://www.chiefarchitect.com/support/downloads.html

We should come up with a system, since many users like the HK's, someone should set up a Google Docs or Office Live doc, share it with all of us and we can pitch it on how to make one set of HK's for all. If anyone here is familiar with Xactimate, they also have the same principle for categories and items, since there are a zillion of them, nonetheless the way it's set up, it's easy to remember the codes, many estimators I know can fly through an estimate using mostly "remembered" codes.