Richard_Morrison

You will be kicking yourself for not having used it sooner. It works exactly like the Material Painter, except that it paints Layers. I use it all the time for creating demo plans. You can create a demo layer with a dashed line type, and change every object (including walls/doors/windows) that will be demo'd to that layer.

You could put the few lines that you do use in a User Library folder.

If you want a traditional RCP, you might consider turning off doors & windows, setting the walls to be single line and grayed out, and then using the Room Polyline magic wand to get some heavy lines around the perimeter of each room. Turn on crown molding layer, soffit layer, lighting layer/electrical layers, add a few notes, and you're done! You can quickly add a ceiling height with a macro, and then copy the text (i.e. the macro) to each room.

So it sounds like you are searching for the best way to get objects on a discrete layer. Making friends with the Layer eyedropper/painter is probably the best. (Change the color of the new layer slightly to make sure that you have picked all the correct objects.)

Larry, I think you're making this harder than it really is. Anything that you want to show on a floor below (or above) needs to be on a separate layer with others of its kind. However, everything on that layer is going to be shown in the reference set. Say, you want to show holdowns and shear wall annotation from the first floor framing set on the foundation level below. You put all of the holdowns on the the "holdown" layer, and the shear wall annotations on its own layer. (Both could be on a single layer, though, if you wanted) You have a layer set called "Ref Set for Foundation," for example, with only those two layers selected. (Any layer set can be a reference set, BTW.) So, you just go to the foundation plan and turn on the "Ref Set for Foundation" layer set as a reference using the First Floor. You don't need to designate objects individually, other than to make sure they are on the correct layer to display as a reference. BTW, if you send to layout first, you can use the "Plan Tab" for the layout box DBX to designate the reference floor and layer set, so it's a little quicker, I think.

No way to change height of cut plane, but you can turn off the windows layer. I'm not sure how you're saving drafting time, though.

You are WAY over your head structurally. (2x6 rafter for up to 24' span? I don't think so. Sizing the ridge board to be one size larger than the rafters doesn't work without intermediate supports, which you don't have.) Collar ties are unnecessary if you have ceiling joists (nailed properly to rafters), and as Wendy says, don't do anything unless they are in the lower third of the rafter. If you are using them just to tie the rafters together to keep from separating at the ridge, then straps are easier. Consult a structural engineer, as Wendy suggests.

Display Line Length Format is set individually in CAD windows, not globally. Therefore, you can set the format to be different for a plot plan in a separate detail.

Another reason to have the Plot Plan in a separate CAD detail.

Alan, Not disagreeing with you on adding layer change to ALDO, but have you used the Layer Painter and Layer Eyedropper tools to their fullest? They are pretty fast, especially if set up with hotkeys.

I was having a very slow time with copying. It would take maybe 3 sec. to even select an object. I reduced the Max Undo to 3, and bumped up the Idle state to 1000 ms. (1 sec.) and the slowness disappeared. I'm not sure which did it, but the problem is gone.

Maybe a screen shot will show this better.

It is VERY obvious to me, and I can't believe others would miss this. Much easier to see if zoomed way out. I am using Adobe Reader X1 on this laptop. Maybe something in the Reader version? My guess is that if this occurs on every page, then it IS something on sheet 0, even if you can't select it. I would try a different layout sheet, same size, to see if the same thing is happening.

I once had a boss that told me a story from when he was young architect. He was doing an airport and accidentally wrote 1-1/2" R., rather than 1-1/2" D., for a standard handrail detail. The contractor just smiled and said "nice handrails, huh?" when my boss showed up for a site inspection and found 3" diameter handrails had been installed. The contractor knew perfectly well that it was mistake that a simple phone call could have corrected, but chose to have (an expensive) laugh on my boss. I wonder if that laugh was worth the future lost work and bad feelings that the contractor incurred. I agree with the majority here that questions ahead of time are welcome, and pointing out mistakes afterwards will just shoot you in the foot.

I wonder if she will also ask the framer if the time it takes to take a nail out of his bag is costing her money. Should she only be charged for "pounding time"?

Using a CAD detail will let you use the Plan Footprint. Personally, I find it's easier to do a 2D site plan, with the surveyor's DWG, in a separate window, and be able to easily drag the house around, rather than moving everything else to match the house.

It's already there. Open the mulled unit. Go to Label tab, and select "show component labels." The schedule will match.

Evernote works well, and you can add tags for the specific topics. And it's free.

Some areas have FAR, some just have lot coverage, some cities use both depending on what zoning district the subject property is actually in. The biggest issue is what is actually included in FAR or lot coverage. For example, some municipalities include stairs at both levels, some just at one. Some have "floor area equivalents," meaning if the space is very tall, you might get additional square footage assessed. Some include floor area or lot coverage for porches depending on how many sides are open, and some include decks only if above a certain height above grade. Certain architectural features like fireplaces or bay windows may or may not get counted. Paving often gets calculated differently if permeable vs. impermeable. Why do you ask?

dshall: Define "not behaving." It's hard to know what you are experiencing with terrains from your description.

I tried this for awhile and couldn't figure out what to do with the pen while typing text. Keep it clenched in my hand and type with just the other fingers? Put the pen in my mouth while I type? Use the little pen holder? What do you guys do?

If you are talking about elevation views, X7 now has a staggered section feature. You can break the section line and move in or out to wherever you need to.

I can see that a lot of you didn't like my fictitious detail that relied on the levitating gizmo. (Silly Earthlings...) Should have taken the time to do something more realistic, I guess, which I now have done. The "real" detail is going to be similar to the revised detail that is now in Post #1. Modeling problem is the same, though. I've decided that sometimes it's best to use the best tool for the job, and maybe sometimes it isn't Chief. Foundations are getting better at every release, but still need to be improved for remodeling conditions.

Thanks, all. Pretty much what I expected, and this may not be the right program to do this particular project in. I will play around a little more, but I'm ready to bail. (To mthd97, it's really a matter of doing a complex wall profile in "OtherCAD" (actually ArchiCAD, which will not be mentioned here), not the Profiler tool. After that, it works just like any other wall. Well, probably would be two walls for more flexibility.) This is, of course, not really the way the underpinning will be done. (Full height side foundation wall with footings extending underneath existing footings on 4' centers.) I just threw a sketch in here to get the concept across of a new foundation under an existing.

I am trying to figure out if modeling this condition is even possible in Chief so that live sections approximate reality, rather than drawing a CAD "whiteout" detail". I haven't come up with a good way to do this, yet, so I thought I'd toss this out there to see if anyone has any ideas. Basically, I'm trying to draw roughly the attached condition. A new foundation under an existing foundation, with split levels. Major problem is that two foundation walls are not happy occupying same space at same time.