4hotshoez

A full overlay door or any thing that is not an inset door is not shown in plan and will add the thickness of the door to the face of the cabinet. An inset door will be flush with the frame, but both will look the same in plan. Not sure if this is your situation.

I still struggle with how to make adjustments to foundation walls to work like I want them too. It should be simple, but when I make adjustments stuff moves the wrong way or cause the numbers in the DBX to change when I do not want them to. I could use a tutorial that explains how to successfully edit the foundation/room structure DBX to get the results I want. I have watched several videos and read from the knowledge base, but I am not getting the concepts or secret sequence of editing. Somewhere out there is the wisdom I need that is simple and works for all situations. All the videos I saw do not explain concepts, just "do this" I have a crawl space with a slab and porches with slabs 8" below the first floor and a garage floor 6" below the stem wall top, but all footings are at the same elevations and all top of stem walls are the same elevation. Chief wants to make them jump all over and I struggle to fix what should be simple. The problem I have had with a small past project is that changes to slab elevations also mess up windows and doors that were previously fine. Please show me the way. PostedPlan.plan

I figured that it was all part of the quirky experience I have been having with Chief all along. I am used to predictable behavior and consistent logical programming like Archicad and Sketchup. Unfortunately, the hardware and software is not mine, so I do not have the option of making change.

Justin, I have been had the same problem since I started Chief 8 months ago. Since I was new, I was too busy learning to complain, but it is very annoying and makes elevations a huge chore with lines evaporating or looking super thick randomly on zooms, just like your video. I hear that others have no trouble, which leads me to believe that it is my hardware and Chief don't get along that well.

...And Chief adds these annoying blue plus sign markers because it cannot "see" the proper point of reference for the dimension, which means that the dims will not update dynamically. So I continue to fight against the automation that thinks it is smarter than I. This should not be so hard to do basic CAD.

I know what I want my vertical heights to be and I set objects (lights, p-line solids, others) and when I place a dim for placement they are off by the thickness of the floor finish thickness as far as I can tell, but I have no way to override this and not all objects such as cabinets are not affected. Chief may be fast in placing objects and build a basic house, but I loose tons of time on tweaking stuff like this that should not be a problem. Then, for some reason unknown to me Chief chooses to reference some invisible object out in space. It is big fight that is wasting my time and I am about to abandon my investment in this quirky but mostly good program. The way to place some objects seems to be randomly inconsistent enough to frustrate.

It was set to 8", but setting it to 0" or 4" still changes dynamically, although not as much. I would like the option to make it freeze.

The feature of re-sizing the dim text while zooming in and out is great for most of the time. But right now I am trying to clean up the dimensions so they are readable and not piled upon each other. If I can lock the auto-re-sizing so I can see how it will look when I print, I could move the dim-text around to the right place for readability.

On layer groups, if the user is given the power to re-group any way that seems most useful to the user; consider layers for NEW and EXISTING, which could be two groups for organizing walls, doors, windows, cabinets, framing, etc. that are either new or existing. As well as just grouping all terrain and collapsing it to a group named with a "Z" in front to place it to the bottom of the list if you never intend to create terrain. Then creating a groups that shows only in 3D/2D or phases of construction. I realize this can currently be managed by layer sets, but this provides added control for different ways of working.

Excellent idea Christina, Photoshop uses layer groups that allow you to control the whole group visibility with a single click and collapse the group to take up less screen space. Otherwise, Joe's idea to have a toggle in the Layer DBX to not show unused layers is pretty good. However, it might frustrate a new user who cannot find a layer and has not yet discovered the check box yet. But it is a simple solution. The more I think about the layer groups as in the library the more I like it. It could create benefits that people have not yet realized and could change how Chief manages information for the better.

More layers are more to manage and search through when I am looking for one that is on or off that should not be. Now, with X7 the list is on the side screen for ease, but requires more scrolling with more layers.

My computer is too slow to experiment by adding framing to my current huge project, but if I create a cross section and have all the framing complete does the framing show in the cut walls (ie. plates show with "x")? This could be a benefit if this works. How much does the framing slow a plan down?

Out of 175 layers, some I have created, 74 have nothing on them, which is 42%. I would like to delete them but Chief will not allow it. And watching a video on creating a wall legend, it suggest that I create 3 more to control the legend's visibility for the small amount parts in it. There are too many layers now that are not being used now that require management. There must be a better way. Because every time I create a new layer, it needs to be updated in every layer set for what ever settings may or may not be needed for that layer set and added layer. I am leading up to a suggestion, but I want the users to have the chance to chime in here and set me straight. It would be cool if Chief would only add pre-coded layers when an entity is added to the plan. So if I never create a framing plan, no framing layers should show. AND if some layers end up with nothing on them, hard wired or not, could be perged until Chief added them back in as needed. Although, this might create problems with Layer sets.

Scott, our framer is not a sub, but an employee and has a very good visual understanding in 3D when he looks at the 2D. He says that the 3D views are helpful, but the 3D framing is wrong in the areas that count. Anybody can frame a wall, but it is the odd spots that even Chief has a hard time with that matter for viewing. He is a rare guy that can see potential conflict before the first stick goes into place. He is a grumpy old guy that knows his work well.

I ask the question to learn not to be critical. It is a cool feature to me, but not to my framers. The obvious is that it shows how the building is framed, but I have several very experienced framers working for us and they have NO use for such technology. So how can this feature in Chief help me in other ways? Also, our estimator has his ways without counting studs or having a computer telling him how many to buy. Such a feature is regarded as a waist of time and is viewed as a gimmick to sell the software. What are your thoughts?

So some people use the ML, but most never touch it. My recommendation to CA is that this is one of many areas that Chief could be simplified by removing the ML and associated commands and then create a separate add-on module that could be better and more comprehensive and customization for any users preferences. There could be a strong link between the plan and ML add-on, but it aught to be developed separately rather than just a half -baked sales feature. Some have found how to make it work for 30+ simple homes a year, but for those of us who do 3 custom homes a year, which test the limits of Chief and require multiple work-arounds, the ML is rather amateurish in comparison to other useful features Chief is good at. CA, please focus on developing an app that helps us build an accurate model, clean and simple. Let someone else develop the ML for Chief. Don't try to be everything to all users.

When I first started in Chief, I used Sketchup to model a complex fireplace. It is nice that Chief will import Sketchup models. My most recent complex FP was done using a combination of a low wall with an arched window and several cabinets (base, wall) to step back with panels. However the plan graphic looks like a mess since it was for 3D designing. Sorry, no picture to post from this computer.

Yes, frustrating to not see lines drawn. Also, I see many "bleeds" in 3D views. Objects that have surfaces close but not touching to other surfaces tend to bleed through both surfaces. Then there are other problems like cutting sections or making wall elevations and some lines are not there at any zoom level. I assume this last one is not a video problem.

Yes. and #6 is a good option too, which keeps a "live" connection to model changes. Although they still need updating just as creating a static CAD detail. Thanks.

I am doing an 11x17 portrait sheet for this project because the plan orientation works best, but not so well for the elevation. I have tried rotating from the DBX, but did not do what I need. Is there a way to rotate it?

Yeah, the automatic stair was not helping me at all. I was missing a dimension, but got it now. (Chief stairs are so temperamental)

It is ok, Johnny is just trying to compare methods for personal understanding. I get it.

I have been searching help to see what I am doing wrong, but I am not seeing it yet. Here is a screen shot of the dbx. The second run is on the floor rather than connecting to the landing. Isn't this a quick fix?

I used a Polyline Solid (rectangle) and converted two parallel sides to a curve and then kept making adjustments until I got what I wanted. It was fairly easy.

Thanks