plannedRITE

Michael gave you a simple way to fix the issue. It's better to adjust your way of thinking to how Chief wants you to think - "slab" being the floor under the room, not necessarily a concrete slab. The model has a handful of problems in this area but if you only want to fix the material & fill pattern shown just select the displayed slab at your carport (it's a terrain feature that you placed, 1" thick with a concrete material) and change that concrete material to the river rock that you were trying to use as gravel. Then adjust the bounds of that terrain feature however you'd like, in case it's extending out to the street or something. Then, on whatever plan view you are trying to show this on, make sure that your terrain feature layer is displayed. And the design being showed is something that you must have accidentally set so in that terrain feature's DBX, set the fill style to whatever it is you're looking for (you have decorative block shown, hence the pattern). Plan view shows the selected fill type. Most 3D views will show the material.

Chief sees faces of 3d objects so that's normal behavior. That's the reason that the foundation, walls, and slab are all empty too. I sure hope that Chief will allow us to slope floors sooner than later...this has been requested for many, many years. The new Poche tool in x16 beta would fix this beautifully if the floors could slope. (per what Kevin said below, if you only want to show the outline then make sure the layer is on)

I was able to replicate it perfectly when copying your screenshot, with all walls being 4". But when copying the OPs screenshot (with the 6" wall) it no longer works. I tinkered for a bit and couldn't find a solution. Try the 6" like they are showing, perhaps you'll have better luck than myself?

Not a perfect example, as it continues to the end walls, but I imagine that it would likely be similar. Though this builder is working on a different one of our projects, this isn't one of ours so I don't have details that I can share. https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cn4cUHorowQ/ I'm interested to see how you detail it out, share updates!

I can't share this one but, as a reference, here are the included framing categories. No rim joist, I checked older versions as well with the same result. (To be clear, I'm really not that concerned about this, custom categories are a quick workaround even though it's a bandaid. Just odd to me since Chief has rim joists as a Role and even an OOTB layer.)

The only way that I'm seeing to differentiate the two is to manually set one of them to report to a custom schedule category. The default framing categories do not include rim joists as a standalone option. Am I missing something?

Yeah, not sure why I'm trying to go about it a different way. This was a bit of a stupid question...I've worked on this template for too long

Not a great title but I'm not sure how to best summarize. Is there a way to create separate schedules for the same framing categories within the same view/plan? It almost works perfectly by using rooms but the rim joists are not contained within a room, darn it. Can I somehow create a schedule for the members in Module "A" and a separate one for Module "B"? I'm hoping to accomplish something similar to this: I also noticed that chief puts rim joists and floor joists both under the same category for schedules, even though they are specified under different "Roles". Not sure if much can be done about that one. I appreciate the input.

This is exactly how we do it. It's the way to go. I haven't tried adding them to Chief in a few versions but I know that it used to skyrocket the file size when done that way, never understood why.

Exactly. They are panelized walls for modular construction, per the company, but that's precisely what we are creating. And yes, at this point that is our process. Although, wouldn't it be neat if Chief acted on suggestions? This is low on the totem pole of things I've discussed with them so I'll just deal with it for now

It's for modular home construction so the wall details do have to be highly detailed. Yes, blocking for cabinets and whatnot are a part of the drawings. But due to the modular nature, the continuous bottom plate is needed for transporting the walls. Just trying to stick with their current process as closely as possible for a smooth transition to our work. As much as I'd prefer to not break the auto wall framing, I do believe that it has to happen due to this bottom plate situation as well as adding in the blocking...oh well. Fortunately, these aren't created until we have the rest of the plans finished so there *shouldn't* be changes that would cause a need to rebuild the wall framing.

Is there a setting that I may be overlooking to build the bottom plate at a door opening? (Yes, it is something we need) Since manually bringing across the bottom plate stops the auto wall framing, I really would like to avoid that option...as we are providing wall framing details for every wall. Thank you!

All good! It can be tricky but I've done a few like this lately so it just happens to be somewhat fresh in my brain.

You'll need to close the plan in Chief and then share the file or it won't share properly. It can't be opened.

Solver's suggestion does appear to work. I just added a casing (the size didn't seem to affect it but I wanted to check) to the lower windows and it cut the molding. It can be exterior or interior casing of any size. Mulling them back together keeps it cut. I'm not sure what causes that but, as Chris said, it cuts fine until it is 2" from the floor. If building 2" from the floor like your model shows, add the casing.

Can you share the .plan file?

Let us know what part is stumping you so that we can hopefully get you pointed in the right direction. There aren't to many steps to copy this. Here's a quick, ugly example but when I run into similar stairways I typically do a good portion of the work in an elevation view using some quick cad lines as a reference and to give snapping points to get the wall slope right. Make that stairwell it's own room with a room divider at the foot. Manually bring down one corner of the adjacent wall to slope it to match the stairs. It should be very similar to building out any stairwell inside of a home. Potentially easier is to break up the wall, make the sloped portion a solid railing, and set it to follow stairs. I have issues occasionally with this so I often revert to manually moving it.

What did you change exactly? Mine won't build like that but continues to build as I screenshot in my last comment.

Not at all, it works beautifully out of the box. Other than when I'm not in office and using Chief on a laptop or hooked up to a TV, I've only every used ultrawides with Chief. Prior to this one I used a typical 21:9 34" that I moved to my draftsman's desk. The extra space is wonderful to work with while not requiring me to move back and forth between monitors.

I sure can, that's part of the workaround. Change that height and manually drag the bottom of the wall on floor 1 up. But that's a big part of this overall issue, that the footing and stem isn't following the floor height of the room that it should (in theory) be assigned to.

Interesting, that's a breakthrough for me. I haven't seen that documented anywhere but that will probably fix a number of foundation issues I've brought on myself. That explains the first part of the issue I've had. As for the second issue of that stem wall/footing between the 2 pours, is there a chief recommended way (that you've seen) to have it built at the correct elevation? Instead of having it drop down like so:

Sure, here is a screenshot-

You're, of course, correct in that that is how it should behave (and almost always does). Unfortunately, that is not always the case. This situation is a good example of that, setting the exterior side in the correct orientation (or even reversing it as a test) does not change the wall/footing from grabbing properties from the patio (incorrect). Seeing that there is no chief recommended way (if anyone would like to show me otherwise I would be ecstatic!), the downvote is pretty darn unhelpful.

Man, you are missing out. Hop on the 21:10 curved ultrawide bandwagon and never look back!

Back to workarounds but I have it displaying correctly. Chief needs to allow us to choose what room a wall will pull its properties from, that would fix this issue and others that result in manual workarounds. All of the mono pour areas (rooms and footings) have to be set to the same pour number (though this is incorrect). Then the shared walls footing height has to be set 4" shorter. Then you have to manually drag the bottom of floor 1's wall up 4". The corner that stays down also has to be manually dragged up 4". This is an issue with lowered mono slabs across Chief.