PMMully

"There is no setting for this. The real issue is that Chief automatically stops roof planes at the wall exterior finish layer. This is not correct for most real world conditions. Typically, a roof plane and its cladding will stop at the wall sheathing layer, and the wall cladding would be above the roof cladding, usually with a gap for flashing, depending on the type of wall cladding and regional building codes." Perfect explanation of the situation versus the real world. Exactly what I was looking for, thank you very much. Sometimes I do not see the rendering do this, probably wall placement or some underlying condition. So, for those roof planes that are butting up to walls, you could uncheck 'Use Special Snapping' and drag the roof plane to the wall sheathing layer. Or, you could notch the roof plane around the wall while keeping Special Snapping checked. I have been doing the notch method to get around this, sometimes it actually looks better, others not. I will try the "drag" method later today.

See attached plan. I have the two problem areas outlined in red, on floor two, the raised room. I believe I checked all wall alignments, etc. I have now taken a step back and try to understand how CA works at the core. What is the setting to tell the rendering engine how to close these two gaps on the walls where the roof joins the walls? See elevation as well. @DavidJPotter @SNestor I have lots of mixed wall types in my remodel and addition jobs if you are wondering why I submit such plans. In FL, the mix of CBU/Frame is everywhere except the old stuff. ManualRoofGames.plan

An update,.... I woke up and said to myself, what happens in you make interior rooms to a condo unit? Well, if you make a new room within a unit, it still works as CA will pick up into the schedules rooms within a room. Even if those interior rooms within a room are of a different type. Notice the interior-4 walls on the left and right condo units. Condo on left has interior room for type closet, on right the room is still condo with a different label, so it works ok. So this cut the mustard? Updated plan is attached (I had the wall schedule on the left assigned to the wrong room in the prior upload as well). It seems to me you could design different elevations, room heights, all the standard stuff, and get what you want. I just did the middle unit as a different ceiling height and it works ok. CondoIdeas.plan

So your are doing one building with multiple units, or maybe separate units, or both, in the same plan. But it sounds like one structure, separated into units by party walls. I am assuming you want this for both marketing and unit costing information. I too, am always looking to get the most out of CA in these areas. If I understand the need, this can be done as required, just not automatically. You can tweak schedules to do rooms. You can also use macros on the plan and in the materials lists. I have included a sample plan that shows: Single structure broken into units via a custom room type called Condo, with different labels. The party walls are fire walls. In FL, many two story have to have parapet walls, regardless of a flat roof or not (sometimes you see the wall sticking out of the roof, but a fire rated demising wall in the attic). Separate structure of same type as #1. Example wall and window schedules, you can assign a schedule to a "unit". You can see the differences in the schedules. You can also add custom elements to objects and schedules. In my case I assign wind load "pressures". This is done in the multi-unit and standalone scenario. It also shows the use of macros within each unit that tells the room type, and sq footage. Macros, and the use of Ruby can be very powerful. This is also done in the multi-unit and standalone scenario. So the end game is assign each unit a room type of "condo" with a separate label, and then use room/floor specific schedules and macro placement. You can also then do "rollups" per floor of all units, etc. It is not perfect, but its usable. The only other way I can see is a separate plan per unit (not bad if not in a single building), and then combine that onto a layout for the whole project. It is not easy to learn where CA starts and stops. But over time you do, the key as I just learned (again this AM) is to understand the limitations and go from there. It is a great drafting tool overall. I used to get stuck on every plan, now its about 1 in 10, and the forum and trainers have never let me down. Great trainers on this forum, well worth the money to move fast. CondoIdeas.plan

I did not buy support this year as things looked uncertain, and I get most support from this forum anyway. I think you have to be on support to file a bug?

Thank you @DavidJPotterand @glennw Glen, I was able to reproduce your output on a clean plan. And you are right, a lot of screwy things. I think to David's point, I think I pushed CA too far and got it into a goofy state. I could not actually clear the old framing. David, "A large part of learning and knowing Chief are knowing its limitations and what it easily does and does not do"... is exactly why I create these crazy test plans :-). So I took your advice and started from scratch following the guidelines from floor to floor alignment and not playing any games: 1) Created a new plan from one of my other custom wall types. 2) Created a second floor, changed the wall type to the CA continuous siding, and made the cantilever portion Lipstick. The only issue I see is some bleed through on the framing, which I do not see in Glen's, or my other test plan that mimics Glen's. But again to your point, the cantilever aspect is probably meant for interior cantilevers. 3) Put a break on the one wall, pulled it in for the recessed corner, checked for alignment issues ....Automagically, all is well. I am also thinking building a plan that is as small as this in footprint may stress the math under the covers a bit for generation. In practice nobody would build something like this :-). MultistoryWallGamesTakeTwo.plan

When you set any wall to a railing, and you remove the top rail in a post2beam, the legend for the wall type goes blank in the wall schedule, and it says "railing", when it is a post2beam that looks and is nothing like a railing. So the schedule it confusing and basically useless. Yes, you can exclude the walls from the schedule, less confusing, but it appears you get nothing in the materials list. At least it shows up in decking railing so you can at least get a decent linear feet count. So I compromised and made my own legend overlay below. Its crude but it works, is fast, I get it in the material/schedule output, and a sub bidding the job can instantly see what the construction is. I have another wall type that represents a CMU header and posts as well, a masonry post2beam that is not a railing wall, shows in the schedule just fine. For a program as sophisticated at CA, I really should not have to use a wheel/counter to do take offs on plans anymore.

Put a short video up.... a couple of questions for the experts... to see if am missing anything.... two things in the details in the video. As always, thanks in advance... Roof Bugger: I seem to get some odd roof generation from time to time, wondering if I am missing a setting. I forgot to show it in the video, but the roof generation issue extends to the wall. I have gotten around this before by modifying the roof plane to have a small return on the soffit/facia (wrap the wall a bit). Closing cantilever floors up: I could not find a setting to auto-build a soffit on a cantilevered floor above to close in the bottom of the floor joists. MultistoryWallGames.plan

@glennw I see if you set that top rail on all of the walls of the specific wall type (my FL Post2Beam) it shows up in the schedule.... but it you only set one wall, it does not. But then it also show up in the 3D with the top rail... , which defeats the overall purpose of a true non-railing-Post2Beam build. The real fix is for a post2beam wall to just be a attribute on a wall type, outside of the railing class all together. Tying to to a railing type wall feels a bit hokey. However, all is not lost... 99% of my usage of this wall type is on recessed porches, in which case it boxes it in and shows the posts which is at least something that is correct on 2D and maintains the correct 3D (but keep in mind when not recessed, you lose the outside box and you just get the posts) I just made my own 2D legend that looks like the CA depiction on the plan, and just paste it over the blank on the CA created wall schedule. I put it on the plan at the end anyway so it will likely never move, and you can block the schedule so it all stays together. In a few plans I actually did the same on the wall itself, but its a pain is things move. The materials list is ok, it comes out in the decks/walks category so you can get decent measurements for take-offs. Unless someone has a better idea I think we can consider this one closed.

Good to know not hallucinating

WallScheduleGames.plan

@Renerabbitt I guess I trashed the other video. @Kbird1 understood. The core issue is any wall type that gets assigned to a railing/post2beam seems to have the same problem. I hope the video shows the detail.

Is there a way to control the 2D symbol for any custom wall type, stock wall type, stock railing or deck railing, that is set to have a railing (post2beam, etc.) so that it will show up in the wall schedule with a 2D symbol versus a blank 2D symbol? I created a custom wall type where I set a hatch pattern to a main layer, but it no longer works for some reason.

@solver I did try to make the front and rear walls act the same way. To some extent it did, meaning I could check the box, assign a pony wall type, and upper wall. But when I assigned the top to Stucco-4, it reassigned the rest of the entire wall on either side of the porches (non-raised room areas). When you click the top wall, it auto selects the other sections, from there it seems to get more confused as you try and reassign the pony and top section, it just refreshes with no change. So I guess the moral is the raised room method is great if you are willing to accept the any of the exterior walls to be of the same type (in this case CBS in the front and back). @SNestor FYI

@solver Eric, thanks once again for the informative video. The trick was the checkbox on the butting roof. For this model, using this method is by far easier than the 2-story method, at least for concept. I see chief extended the front and rear walls up (CBS in this case), which is certainly fair. In practice however, we would likely build the front and rear walls upper walls as the same wall type for simplicity and cost (no second block-up and tie-beam pour, one crew, etc.). Given this, I will check to see if I can use the same checkbox method on that front wall. If not I suspect I will be forced to used the "second- story-open-below" method, or maybe make the front/rear walls have a pony wall of CBS below and matching frame wall above. Open to suggestions on other or better methods. P.S. I will try and remove the grid in any future plan posts :-)

Here is a sample plan that works well, that I raised a center room ceiling, and it looks great except for: The generated attic walls can not be set via a color when the second porch is added on. I went in, changed the type to standard exterior siding, clicked off attic wall, but I can not change the exterior color. Then I changed it back to attic, but can not change the exterior, but the interior changes. I understand CA can generate attic walls, and I guess because the exterior of those generated walls is not under roof due to the lower ceiling heights of the two adjoining rooms, it is not possible? I thought I had it when I assigned the attic walls a real wall type. I saw one video from CA Version 8, and the author was very additament that raising ceilings and dropping floors is not the way, using multiple floors is with open below room type to do this type of thing, Truth? The one CA video of dropping a floor and raising a ceiling is not like this plan, but that is where I got the idea so I wanted to try it again. I have had success with the second story open-below approach. Much of that is CBS on the bottom and frame up top, and I just seem to have to fight the corner layers and stuff like that often, sometimes its easy, sometimes its not. I can not seem to put my finger on what I am doing wrong. It almost seems that CA likes certain layouts and pukes on others. I also saw a CA video when this exact multi-dimensional thing happened, and the trick was to pull the wall up through the attic wall, and that seemed to work. I left it odd colors to see it. UPDATE: However, I can not set the bottom portion of the wall to drywall using the material painter, the whole wall changes all the way up to the roof. Regardless, changing the type of attic wall seemed to have no effect on the outcome, the only thing that worked was number 2. I did not check what the effect on the wall schedules will be yet. What is the best way to drop an exterior porch 4" but with no curb like a garage? I have been wrestling with the mono slab settings but to no avail, the foundation generation just keeps producing the same output. I tied railing walls, exterior wall types, same thing. I have gotten it to work, but sometimes its like it just ignores it. So the best practice is what it the best way to do a plan like the attached? This one is simple, the real ones have lots of dimension to them. Go two story with open below, or just like I did in this one? RaisedRoofPorchGames.plan

Paste-Hold-Position = ctrl-alt-v in my windows world. I use it all the time when I update multiple plan versions where something a client likes in one version should go to the other remaining versions until they make a decision, or top copy cool configurations from one plan to another if I did not make them a block or whatever. The operation is useful, but loses context between floors if things change between the floors. I think my OP using the markers was misleading, it could be any object, and I do not think my intent was clear enough. I see how the mid-point snaps and the point to point center can work in a similar manner. My question was originally focused on the use of reference display by design. I want to retain the positioned item as a reference until I am done with layout overall through multiple floors. There are many posts on here that show where a shower recess or sanitary trap should be placed in a slab for the plumber, and it works slick on construction docs. So I decided to take that same concept up in floors. The item in this case would be something like an electrical chase, plumbing supply/vent, laundry chute, etc. It is a super nice feature to be able to set the reference floor, and have the items carry through that can be used for placement as you go up. ctrl-alv-v gets the copy done, but the reference is gone unless you set it up. I appreciate all the inputs as I learn from them all!

Ok, looks like I have some more learning to do. Just so I am clear, the methods you are suggesting @rgardner and @glennw are working with multi-floor and the reference display?

I did try the center modes alone and I could not get the center tool to focus correctly without me modifying what was accessible in the reference display, meaning I could not get the center tool to focus on what was actually in the floor below. That is what caused me to look further. Still not right?

I put together this test plan to find out the best way to center an object, or more specifically a room on a second floor over a point on a floor below. Sometimes that point may be in the center, others over a place on the floor below. I did some extensive research on this forum, google, and the reference guide, and I am looking to see if I am missing anything. What I found so far us by using the reference display and the control of it, I can use reference markers/points and construction lines on the floor below, which and allowed them to display to the floor above via the reference display control. All of it works fine which the exception of the construction lines that appear to be mutable on any layer, so they can be moved if you are not careful, yes, you can lock them, put them on a layer, whatever. But I also found if I allow walls-normal to show through the reference set, you can center on the room without the markers, so that is nice because you do not need the markers in that use case. But I consider the reference markers/points to be the most versatile and effective as they serve well to place points of interest anywhere that can be used to center objects on from the floors above. Plan it attached.ReferenceLayerLocationAnchors.plan Am I missing any better techniques? Thanks in advance. ReferenceLayerLocationAnchors.plan

Wow, two things solved at once! The window and the walls, and the magic attic walls. Thank you very much for the effort Eric. I had the same results as you did following your video. The little gaps are easily concealed by a small amount of cheating and will not affect the elevations. As a side note, I centered the clerestory. When I did that the roof planes matched up nicely but I still had to tweak them manually as you showed. I find these in practice/observation to be centered, probably for the same reasons. I have never built one yet, should be fun.

Hi All, I am trying to build a "coastal" raised center on a normal roof, I am not exactly what the technical name of this style is, but for lack of a better word, and enclosed widow peak that is open below. Looking for best way to do this... so far I have tried: 1) Second story with open below 2) Single story with a room created by room divider wall types, with a raised ceiling. Both of these work with a flat ceiling in the main room, but if I want it to join on a vaulted ceiling in the main room, that is where I can not get it all to match up. I was under the impression that it is bad form to manually move walls in rooms as it can cause CA issues downstream. I imagine I can do custom roof planes as well. But best to ask here first for the best advice! Thanks in advance. TraversRoof.plan

I keep trying to get an account and the creation fails with no explanation other than "sorry, try again later". Will this be available on other mediums?

Figured as much, thanks everyone. I have learned over time how much power is contained in this forum, which is why I always double-check my thoughts with yall.

@GeneDavis Later sets of plan files, or layer sets?