Chloe1Casey

I am sure it is really simple but I can't figure out how to change the layer for an appliance that I have inserted in the top or the face of a cabinet.  I can change the layer of the item in the library but when I insert it into the cabinet the layer changes to "CAD, Default" and the items only appear if "Fixture, Interior" is active.  I select the appliance and open it up for modification, but "Layer" is not one of the options.  By the way, I can't do this in X12 but I am trying it in X13 as well and I don't see an option.  I thought I remember them saying something about it in the X13 Live Demo the other day.  Thanks!

Thanks kylejmarsh for your response.  I actually figured out my problem yesterday.  I was playing with the elevation view settings and I checkmarked the "Clip to Sides" under Options. The elevation view then clipped narrower than the view I was showing in the layout page. I went to the plan view and pulled out that particular elevation view's lines to go further out so that the entire view on the layout page would show in the "clipped" elevation view. And drumroll...when I printed, no shifting!  I don't think this will solve your issue though since your shifting seems to be up and down rather than left and right.

Has this issue ever been solved?  I am having this exact same issue with dimension lines and labels when printing to .PDF with live views on the layout page.  The strange thing is I have multiple live views on the same layout page from the same plan file and some are fine and others are not.   I have tried multiple .pdf printing programs but it doesn't seem to make a difference.  I tried printing at 144dpi and that fixed one of the live views but not the others.

4 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

under the framing tab in your window .dbx add a 1/2 inch for rough opening

Thanks!  I knew it was simple. I have all the rough opening on the top rather than bottom and top.

I am sure it is something very simple, but I am trying to do modern windows with sheetrock returns on all sides. On the frame options in the Window DBX I unchecked "Fit Frame to Wall" and gave it a depth of 4.5". The top and sides look great but the bottom "sheetrock" has material "bleed through". I verified that I don't have any framing turned on in the view but it is still there. What am I missing?

1 minute ago, solver said:

Use a door or drawer head from the library -- you can apply a different material to it.

 

 

 

Brilliant! Thanks Eric!  I knew there was a simple solution but my brain is mush today.

1 hour ago, solver said:

This is a Full Height cab on the left, and a base cab on the right.

 

 

Your picture illustrates my issue exactly. Notice the grain for the drawers is vertical and the doors are horizontal. I want it all to be horizontal. I know that I can do a work around by doing the full height as two separate cabinets and changing the direction of the material grain for one of the cabinets so that all the grain is vertical. I was hoping that I was missing some "default/preference" that allows me to pick a different material for the doors than the drawers so that all my graining would be vertical.

This is the first time I am actually using Chief Architect for cabinets with a pronounced directional grain. CA seems to turn the grain for the drawers at a 90 degree angle from the actual direction of the grain. I was able to solve the problem by just creating a second material that is turned at a 90 angle which I applied to the door/drawer/panel material for cabinets with drawers. The issue is with my full size cabinets - how do I show the grain all vertical for both drawers and doors? Do I have to "stack" cabinets on top of each other with one cabinet having the drawers and the other the doors?

On 3/14/2019 at 9:34 AM, Dermot said:

I am going to assume that you are still using X7 because that is what your signature says.  X7, which was released back in 2015, can't read any files written in the new Autocad 2019 format because this format did not exist when X7 was written.  Even X10 can't read any 2019 files because this format was not available when X10 was released.

 

The good news is that X11 should be able to read Autocad 2019 files.  If a newer file format is released sometime in the future, X11 will not be able to read it.

 

The bottom line is that you should always make sure the files you are trying to import are in a format that your program version supports.

I am using X11 (I did a search in the forum which brought me to this thread) and I am getting the same error.

If you zoom in (on either the plan or the layout) the resolution gets finer and finer so obviously the data for high resolution is there.

Yes it has. It is weird that it is low res in the plan file while the text box in that same view is not.

Why is the Chief Blueprint font in all my schedules look so pixelated/low resolution while those in text box looks fine? Schedule is default 6" Chief Blueprint while text below is 5" Chief Blueprint.

1 hour ago, MarkMc said:

Actually IF I had to I would make only one schedule IN a CAD detail, send it to layout multiple times and crop each one-include the room number in a column for simplicity. Hardest part is making a couple extra headers for each schedule but that could be the layout box label.

Actually there seems to be some really weird stuff between fixtures and schedules. I went ahead and changed the outdoor kitchen items (the ones at the bottom) to have a "X" prefix, so they changed labels to X01 and X02. I then realized that I needed a strainer/flange for the outdoor sink, so I copied and pasted the strainer from the indoor sink (labeled F02) to the outdoor sink. The pasted outdoor strainer then had the label F02/X03. I then changed a bunch of stuff in the Object DBX as well as the name in the Symbol DBX (so that it in no way continued to resemble the interior strainer) but the outside strainer still said F02/X03. I then changed the interior flange from F02 to F03 but the outside still showed F02/X03. The only way I was able to get rid of the F02 part from the outside strainer was to deselect "include in schedule" from the Object DBX and select ok, go back in and reselect 'include in schedule", and select ok. Then the exterior strainer only said X03.

3 minutes ago, MarkMc said:

That works by room, only one at a time. What the OP wants is the numbers to increase.

Personally I just use different letter prefix for each schedule. I've done a lot of quirky things to finnegle schedules-buried stuff in the floor even. If you keep schedules in a CAD detail you could place a number of dummy items (say 1 x 1 x 1.2 ) in the floor to add up to the difference then crop the view in layout.

Well if you must - There are a few options-in X11 you may be able to force the issue with referenced plans (new feature) there may be a way to use the room attribute in Ruby (also new and not something I can help with.
This can be made to work. here is a simple macro

simple_schedule_number.to_i + 12

Where "12" is how much you want to increase the start of number by. IOW it adds 12 to the schedule number. THIS will NOT show up in the Number column of the schedule though.

I"m attaching a zip with two macros in it. (there is a way to make it work as a single macro for either but I don't remember how and can't find it right now-one of the Rubymeisters may helps with that or something better than this)

 

Back to these macros- one evaluated is as referenced the other is evaluated as owner.

 (forgot what I named em) you can rename them once imported.

Unzip, then in chief-CAD, text, text macro management. When that opens import and find each file (one at a time)

Change the numbering to suit your needs.

Place the owner macro in an OIP field in each object. If  you don't already have one make one up to suit-you will place that in your schedule. You will use that field in the schedule to replace the number field. You can rename it Number_ or something so you know it's yours and not the default Number.
For the callouts you place one a callout with a text arrow for each object you want. The arrow MUST connect to the object AND the callout. You will be able to tell if it actually reads something besides evaluation error (my nickname You can however make the arrow invisible once it is connected. Then you can copy and paste the callouts around as needed.

 

In case any Ruby folks are following along-first apologies for simple approach but more imporantly WHY does the macro evaluate to one thing in the TMM (54 in this case) but something else in the schedule?

Ref num.zip

Thanks Mark!  I will try it.  I think that maybe just giving a different letter prefix as you suggested is probably the best workaround in the short term for me.

The weird thing about all this is the fact that my workaround works perfectly well with the Electrical schedule but not the Fixture schedule.

26 minutes ago, DRAWZILLA said:

Can't you use the include or not include each room in the schedule DBX.for each room, I do it for room additions b/c I don't want the existing house in the schedule.

 

Unfortunately, I have two totally separate remodels (kitchen/outdoor kitchen and master bath) and a separate furniture design (entire house) which all have different plansets for very specific reasons. I really don't want to try to keep track of 3 separate, different plans for the same house. The kitchen and master bath both have fixtures which are on different layers but as far as the schedules go, it sees them as the same. I therefore can't just choose "all" for the schedule and I can't choose "do not include" in the DBX for the room because it won't then show on its corresponding planset (layout).  Does that make sense?

14 minutes ago, MarkMc said:

I checked, same here in X10 and still in X11. I never noticed since I renumber by dragging the row in the schedule with a plan view open on the side-faster that way.

Yes, I downloaded X11 to see if the problem went away, but unfortunately it did not. Unfortunately dragging doesn't work since they are two separate schedules and I am trying to make the schedule number greater than the number of items in the schedule.  :-(

Sometimes I have a need for a schedule with 2 or more rooms but not all rooms in the plan. I fake this by creating the schedule for the first room with the title and column headings and then create the schedule for the 2nd room and strip off the title and column headings. I then move the second schedule right up to the bottom of the first schedule so that it looks like one schedule (see attached picture).

I then renumber the items in the second schedule to numbers greater than the first schedule. For example, in the enclosed picture, the bottom item in the appliance schedule - the outdoor refrigerator - would be renumbered from A01 to A08 and the two bottom items in the fixture schedule would be renumber from F01 and F02 to F15 and F16 respectively.

I was able to do this with my electrical schedule but not with the appliance and fixture schedules. When I select an electrical item, the icons for renumbering up and down appear at the bottom of the screen (and on the menu when left clicking). When I select an appliance or other fixture, the icon (ability) does not appear. Does anyone know why?

9 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

You're welcome Michael,  if you haven't already however, I would still definitely recommend you send it in to tech support just to make sure they're aware of it. 

 

By the way, I sent you a PM offering a little one-on-one time on-the house to see if I could help you figure it out, but since you posted the plan I just spent that time scouring over your plan on my own instead.  It actually took a fair amount longer than I would have thought to fish that one down.  Glad we at least found something though : )

Yes, I am usually pretty savvy with CA and will just spend the necessary amount of time trying to figure the problem out on my own (as well as search for previous forum entries). This one had me totally perplexed and I had never experienced anything like it before.

I submitted it to tech support on Friday along with the discovered "problem/solution" so that hopefully they can fix it for X11 and I can get my ledger board back.  ;-)

31 minutes ago, solver said:

This bug is fixed in X11.

Eric, can you read the last few entries? Is the issue with the "hang platform" on the one wall changing all the light elevations that I am experiencing fixed in X11?

5 minutes ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

 

Michael is correct, it's actually the "Hang Floor Platform Above on Wall" that is the Culprit.

 

The problem is that when I do that, then I lose the ledgerboard for the flat ceiling half bath that hangs off it to the south. Obviously proper light fixture positioning in my entire plan is more important than one ledgerboard.  ;-)

2 minutes ago, Alaskan_Son said:

Open this wall and uncheck Hang Floor Platform Above On Wall...

 

Michael, you are right! Changing that one wall fixes it in the whole plan.  :-) That is definitely a bug. I could see it affecting the adjacent areas of the plan but not the entire thing.  That is my problem wall as it has an interior lower half, an exterior upper half, a sloped roof/ceiling on one side, and a flat ceiling on the other side. I cannot get it to frame how I want or to show the right materials in the right areas (automatically that is, without making manual adjustments to the material areas). Hopefully 11 will fix this.  :-)  Thanks.

3 minutes ago, solver said:

This bug is fixed in X11.

Thanks Eric!  I will wait.  :- )  Glad to know I wasn't the one with the bug in my head.  ;-)

Thanks Graham!

Is this how the program should work? Am I doing ballooned walls correctly? I am trying to make the framing correct and I want the framing to balloon where I have indicated with a ledgerboard to hold the ceiling rafters.  This has been a VERY complex roof, wall, ceiling design for me to figure out since I have that very complex wall, ceilings, roof in the long main hallway on the bedroom wing.

Graham, I have the same problem in the wing where the wall height is the same as the ceiling. The reason all the lights on the right two thirds of the picture look correct is only because they are all set to 5.5" ceiling offset.