Richard_Morrison

That's actually what I did the first time, but I did it in a plan view. Maybe it works differently in a 3D view.

Thanks, Eric! That fixed it, and I doubt I would have stumbled onto this solution on my own.

This is a second floor addition to an existing house. I am struggling to find why the roof isn't cutting off the portion of the attic wall above the walkway. If I select the attic wall, the highlighted area shows the correct triangular gable, but there is still a portion protruding above the roof. Any suggestions? Attic wall problem.zip

Probably because with posts 5' or so apart, even a 2x4 flat railing with intermediate balusters is going to calc out easily as a guard.

While this requirement may be in there to prevent racking, a Simpson Strong-wall or Hardy Panel is a much better alternative, IMO.

A few cities in the Bay Area have these requirements and they call the areas 2nd or 3rd floor "equivalents." They are just trying to make the house footprint sizes smaller for a specific lot, I think.

Got it! Thanks. No, there is no short horizontal wall there. It's just a weird house.

Thanks, Glenn! Not too late. I'm still playing around with it. Your method seems to be the "cleanest," although I'm not totally clear on how you calculated the correct length of the short wall.

Michael, Thanks so much!!!! Exactly what I needed. (You are a Chief rock star!)

I am drawing an existing roof condition that has a small fill-in triangular plane that does not have a predictable slope or baseline angle. I can spend a large amount of time fiddling around with guessing to get close, but before I do -- or use another program -- does anyone have a reasonable way to approach solving this in Chief?

Your problems were more likely due to not having "Use layout line scaling" checked than the "merge lines" not being checked. In general, you ALWAYS want to have "Use layout line scaling" checked or you will end up with blobby lines producing the all black effect.

Between different design programs, there is a gradient of how much information the building elements can reasonably store. At the top end, you have programs like Revit and ArchiCAD (which I use) that can hold vast amounts of information on each element. Chief has been getting better and better at each release at how much data the elements store. The latest release (X10) can store information like U-factors of the envelope (along with quantities), and the Object Information Panel is now customizable with user-defined data, which can be extracted (but not imported) and manipulated. So, I would say it is fairly far along, but not at the top end. Then again, for single-family residential, probably more BIM than most people need or use. While the model lacks interoperability with other programs as 3D entities, you are able to export tables of data that you could use in Excel, for example. HTH.

Per CMC Sec. 504.4.2, the maximum is 14', not 15'. If the AHJ doesn't approve an extension, I don't see any exceptions.

Please add your Chief version to your signature. I'd check "Locate Objects" for CAD under the Dimension Defaults.

Yes, it was changed in X10. In dimensioning to an object, a point is no longer placed.

Here are some of the elements of the Craftsman style. https://thebungalowcompany.com/craftsman-style-house-plans-anatomy-exterior-elements/ I encourage you to check out the Field Guide to American Houses, by Virgina McAlester (https://www.amazon.com/s?field-keywords=field+guide+to+american+houses) for some deeper information so that it looks like you know what you are doing.

Or use Tools>Reverse Plan

While you don't want to drive moisture-laden air into walls in very cold climates, of course, usually up to about 3 pascals of pressure isn't an issue, and introducing pressure-relief is pretty easy, in any case. Negative house pressure seems to be a significant issue related to radon in many parts of Alaska. http://www.epi.alaska.gov/bulletins/docs/b2015_25.pdf Ideally, you want a zero-pressure house with adequate fresh air exchanges.

In Southern California, it's not usually dangerous, because windows are frequently open, and negative pressure from exhaust fans is neutralized. A bath fan running at 80 cfm is probably counteracted by modest house infiltration. A professional-style kitchen exhaust hood running for awhile at 1000 cfm is an issue in a tightly sealed house. However, baldly stating that the "State of California allows it" does not make it so. If you've got a Code section that allows it, cite it. I've cited the section that requires makeup air, and this is not my opinion. Bad health effects from negative air pressure are not my opinion, either. So, either produce an authority that says negative air pressure is no big deal, or stop trying to convince everyone that a very bad construction practice is okay.

Okay, then here's a general information site, with nothing specific to sell: http://www.chimneys.com/articles/negative-house-pressure-can-cause-multiple-problems A negative air pressure in a home with fuel-based appliances can kill you. That's the reason that carbon monoxide detectors are now mandated in homes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/marijkevroomendurning/2013/08/20/carbon-monoxide-a-silent-killer-are-you-safe/ https://www.abe.iastate.edu/extension-and-outreach/carbon-monoxide-poisoning-downdrafting-aen-165/ Your attitude that a negative air pressure in a home is somehow a good thing violates the Mechanical Code, and is extremely dangerous thinking. It does not take a large negative pressure to move carbon monoxide the wrong direction. Even a slight negative pressure will do it.

Except maybe for the requirement of makeup air in the California Mechanical Code, Sec. 505.5. EDIT: Here's a discussion of negative air pressure: http://www.cwsuter.com/negative-air-pressure-symptoms-dangers-solutions/

There is some misinformation here that should be corrected. OF COURSE, we all need fresh air in our houses. The problem is that during extremes of heat or cold, when we WANT the windows shut to save on heating or cooling costs, just opening a window or having a leaky house causes us to spend FAR more to get that fresh air in energy costs. We pay a huge premium for fresh air in temperature extremes by using the "open window" method. By using an HRV or ERV system, we can get the same fresh air for much reduced energy cost, as well as giving us more control over the humidity. Hot fresh air or cold fresh air is not cheap. In general, we want neutral or slightly positive pressure in our houses. Negative air pressure causes backdrafts and problems with gas appliance starvation. Hence the need for adequate makeup air. Negative air pressure (even slight) is unhealthy, and may even kill us in some circumstances.

Gutters rebuilding automatically when the roof DBX is opened is very annoying, isn't it. (I get annoyed when doing California framed roofs, which is very common for me.) I've complained before, but please send it in to tech support. More people reporting this increases the likelihood that we won't have to resort to workarounds like a separate molding polyline.

Well, Michael, I like your answer better. This is something I never knew, so you CAN teach an old dog new tricks!

The short answer is "No."