SNestor

A garage room is unique...more things can be specified. A deck, porch and balcony room type have some unique controls also. A general room type - like “Living Room” does not control floor or ceiling elevation.

It was just a quickie test plan...formality wasn’t a concern.

Here's a video...might help clear up some questions...or, possibly generate even more questions. I have to say...split levels creates a lot of issues. This doesn't seem to be an easy thing to accomplish in Chief...at least for me.

@robdyck - a specific “room” type isn’t required. The only thing a room spec would change is the flooring and molding. The room type doesn’t specify the ceiling height...that’s a floor default. And...since this is a split level...I have raised the floor 36” in the room...so the defaults are not relevant. Your post was helpful. I think “balloon” through for some of the walls is an important step. Thanks.

Room heights are certainly defined...I'm well aware of that requirement. Screen shot is directly from the test plan I attached...not sure what you are looking at.

Scott...thanks! You nailed it...(I'm not really surprised ) Now...why do we have to intervene manually to get this to work...or do we? Did I do something wrong creating this project? I guess I'm wondering why Chief doesn't create the required attic walls automatically.

Thanks David. I never want to "shape" walls if possible...so, it never crossed my mind. Is this really the only way? Chief won't create these attic walls automatically?

Attached is a test plan for a split level home. The left side of the floor plan...the floor elevation is "zero". On the right side is the split. The main room to the right is raised 36" and is to have a vaulted ceiling. There is a garage below this room. Between the entry and the raised room there will be a half wall (I've used a railing wall...). I've tried a lot of things...but, as you will see in the attached screen clips...because I'm using a railing wall to divide the elevated floor from the "entry" floor 36" below...the attic wall is not generating correctly. Have I drawn this split level plan correctly...or, is there a better way? I'm not expert on split levels (obviously). Any help or ideas would be appreciated. Thanks! Test Plan attached: Split Level Plan Test.plan Split Level Plan Test.plan

Yea...those moldings are not "moldings"...someone didn't do their job correctly. You can't right click and get the option to "place molding profile". I even copied to my user library to see if I'd get the option...nope.

I avoid the 3D molding polyline like a virus. As an alternative...I sometimes just use a molding polyline in plan view...adjusting as needed, then...turn it into a symbol where you can "stand it up" by rotating the molding on it's X-Axis. Yea...sometimes you have no choice but to use a 3D molding polyline...but this tool is a PIA. I wish Chief would improve it as there really are some places where it can be very useful.

45 years in wood frame construction...never saw a framer dimension to the center in my life. Must be a regional thing...

If you are trying to add text to a section view...then, after creating the section elevation...choose one of your already created layersets where text is defined at a different scale, such as 1/2" or 3/8"...as Joey suggested above. Or...maybe you just want to send to layout at a different scale? I've attached a quick layerset at 1/3" scale as an example...(you would switch to this layerset to add text to your section)

I was hoping so...a video is worth a 1,000 posts.

Mr. Cool... Go to Defaults>Camera Tools>Cross Section/Elevation>Layer...specify the layer you want to use each time you use the cross section/elevation camera. You can do this for each camera view.

I did a video...please someone tell me if I've missed something.

You are so helpful...thanks!

I believe your example shows exactly what I said above. You will only get a dimension to the centerline of an interior wall if the wall intersects with an exterior wall...as per your video example. Yes? No? OK...I stand corrected. You have to use the end-to-end dimension tool...and then it will dimension to the center of an interior wall. But - if you use the interior dimension tool...it doesn't. Weird...

Your post seems to suggest you do understand...how about enlightening us all?

Show us how...

Someone might know better...but, I don't believe manual dimensions will locate the center of an interior wall. However, Auto Exterior Dimension will located the center of interior walls that intersect perpendicular to an exterior wall. See attached;

Yes...and yes. I spent hours reviewing truss drawings for large multi-family projects. Hundreds of different trusses for a single building. I would always find errors...mostly because the architect we were using had made dimension errors...but, thats an entire new can of worms right there. But...review/markup...new drawings sent...approved. This process could take weeks. So...yes, builders don't have the patience and customers don't want to sign off...especially when they are spending a million dollars (that's 2.5 million in California) to construct a home. These customers just feel they should have the "right" to change their mind. It's costly...but, home builders allow this practice so it has become a standard.

Just to chime in on the trusses/stick built roof comments. Here in Indianapolis...just about every production built home uses trusses...and production built homes are probably 85% of all new homes built in my area. However, I'd say 85% of custom designed/built homes are stick framed. I recently talked to a field project manager for Arthur Rutenberg Homes. I asked him why they don't use trusses on their homes...which are huge and beautiful homes for the most part...he made a statement that made me stop in my tracks. He said to me..."most of our clients think that homes constructed with trusses are cheap". This statement just shows a perception that still exists...not only by the people in construction but also by customers who are purchasing large and expensive homes. I have no doubt this gentleman believed what he said...because all production homes are constructed with trusses (in my area)...and Arthur Rutenberg does not want their customers to associate Rutenberg custom homes with lower priced production homes. It's Marketing-101. As I walked through the Rutenberg home I took note of the roof construction and saw the typical issues that stick built framing can bring when it comes to big complex roof structures. Long rafters that were braced in some cases down to non-load bearing walls....sometimes supported by a doubled up 2x ceiling joist right in the middle of a span. Obviously...this project manager allowed the framer they hired to become the engineer. The plans were in the home I was touring...so, I reviewed them. No details on roof bracing were included. There were plenty of framing details...just none on how and where to brace the roof. Now...I'm sure the roof won't collapse or anything...but, in regards to the structural integrity of roof design, stick framed roof systems (typically...not all) are no comparison to an engineered truss roof system...especially if the framer is allowed to become the engineer on the project. Truss roof systems have problems also...I'm not saying they are a panacea. And I think for a large home with a complex roof system...roof trusses might be too expensive. And...sometimes lot conditions just don't allow room for a crane to help lift the trusses up to the roof. One other thing that has led some builders to stick framing is the availability of getting trusses versus picking up the phone and getting lumber dropped onto the site in a few days. After the 2008 housing crash a large number of Indianapolis lumber yards disappeared and so did a lot of truss manufacturing companies. This I believe has made obtaining trusses for large custom homes more of a challenge.

Why would we ever have to request specific layers for any component...I would think the software engineers at Chief would know by now that this is something we would always desire if it is possible.

I I recently was viewing a webinar being hosted by a software company that is probably slightly larger than CA...but a much younger company, probably not more than 6-8 years old. During their presentation - the webinar host displayed a page that they host that is open to all subscribers/users of their software. This page showed a long list of feature improvements that were in some stage of development...and where the feature was in the queue. Along the right side of the list was the "status" of each improvement. Some features were listed as "coming soon"...others were listed as "in development" and others were listed as "proposed". I think if Chief gave us something like this at least we would know what they think we want or need in the software. Maybe we could "vote" on things listed as "proposed". Not sure how to implement this idea...but, something would be better than nothing...which is what we have now. Also...Chief should just scrap the stair tool and start over. Just sayin'....

OK...so, I guess I didn't understand the new "stair stringer" feature Chief added to the stair tool in X12. It seems you cannot display the "stringers" only in the "3D framing" cameral layerset? If you turn the "stairs and landings" layer off...the stringers disappear. Also...if you don't use "open risers"...you don't see the stringers in the framing overview. Am I wrong about this? Am I missing something?