ValleyGuy

I'm not sure if you are just new to Chief or new to the industry as well, either way Welcome. I'm suspecting that you are new to both from your post. If in fact you are new to the industry there are few things to consider when you evaluate your work that you will include in your drawings. One of the biggest questions to ask yourself is how deep into pandora's box are you willing to dive? The code book in my area is in excess of 1,500 pages, how much of it do you want to include and how much of it are you willing to take responsibility for? How many times are you going to double or triple your work load because you put some little disclaimer in your general notes stating 'any deviation from the plans must be approved by the designer'? How many site managers are going to complain about your plans being too sparse / overloaded with details? As you can see from the many posts already, details, details, details .... there will be millions of details. Some details will even change as materials change - maybe you don't need wall vapour barrier if the R21 is a closed cell spray insulation? I agree with HumbleChief, focus in on what you were hired to do and let other people do their jobs. Include the 'important' or 'necessary' details that need to be there but allow room for the residential family home to be flexible and change as they always do. This isn't a commercial type building and you aren't the lead engineer overriding the code book with strict tolerances. For example: your first two details R21 and 1/2" drywall. If you are going to treat this at an ultra high detail level, you would need to establish all the pro's & con's, budget impacts, better building practices, code requirements each option presents and then discuss with the owners to gain approval, as well as contact supply chains and contractor availability....just to be able to put '2lb spray foam 3-1/2" thick' with '1/2" thick moisture resistant drywall'. This is only the first two items..... of which not one person even commented on yet. You still need to go through the endless other components / systems throughout the house. R21 and 1/2" drywall are perfectly fine plan details. Letting the two or three bidding builders promote their style of building with their preferred materials and price points allows you to have closure and move onto your next client. R21 is in the code book, just like anchor bolts, as well as the nailing schedule for the studs to the plates. The insulation and anchor bolts seem to always make it into the plan but very rarely does anyone even mention the spikes. What is the sense of stating 1/2"x8" anchor bolts spaced 6' apart to a pressure treated 2x6 bottom plate if you don't care about nailing the studs down??? So why is there so much discussion about one code item and not another.... it is cultural acceptance. 'Floor system as per engineered floor provider' may be all that is required, fire retardant or not, special fastener or not, maybe all the needed details are included by the supplier just like the roof trusses. Find the balance in your area and apply as necessary. The builder should know the applicable governing code book and is taking responsibility to follow it.... including the spikes and the appropriate quantity to use. Why piss him off stating that he has to use full round headed spikes if he only owns a clipped head nailer? Help the contractor make money with clear plans and he will be your referral champion. Keep the governing inspecting bodies happy and they will make your life better. Make things easier for the material estimators and they will be a referral engine for you. Research other designer's plans in your area (your local building supplier will have a good selection to look at... get to know the estimator). Do your homework as you did right here, ask everyone for feedback then adapt and change your drawings as needed for your company to become successful. Remember, most clients want you to design a wonderful house....and 1,500 pages of the code book will never fit into you plans.

Yes, I had a feeling. No worries, thanks for letting me know Kelly.

Can I change the pop-up window for colour selection or am I stuck with only the one option because of my computer being a Mac? I would like to change to the more advanced option with all the extra controls (colour#2 picture). I have this. I would like this. I think this is telling me that I can't have it. Am I correct or is there a way to chose the other option?

I totally understand the feeling that you are trying to mean here, maybe we should talk about that elephant in the room. Personally, I try not to put too much weight on past customers for my future growth in this manner. Future growth must come from future customers. By definition, a business (profitable business) provides a service / product in exchange for $. The transaction is a sale and the person exchanging $ is called the customer (a little watered down, but you get the idea). The money is then used to operate the business. Anyone who has NOT exchanged $ in the last three years hardly qualifies as a customer. I'm sure that you would agree, after all do you still have the cash sitting in your business bank account from a client three years ago to pay up your SSA fee? Now, somewhere along the way that past customer has actually turned into a "past partner", "associate", whatever term you would like to use. The "relationship" started at or before the actual transaction date, however, it too has most likely transitioned. Possibly from a mutualism (both parties benefiting) to possibly a parasitic (I use your help, training videos, blog, community chat site... but never actually contribute any $ to the provider), or even to a non-existing relationship (purchased once and done - no need to communicate).There are all kinds of "relationships" and sometimes the provider is actually the beneficiary from a "person of influence" (where the past customer provides even more to the business than they take. ... the X9 person that has 6K posts- making suggestions, helping with new CA member questions, as well as a few confirmed referrals or maybe did Beta testing). Having said that, I would agree that CA is trying to balance the expense on the services that they currently provide as well as the future products / services they have yet to develop. CA needs "customers" to stay in business... and we are either "customers" or we aren't. We either have a giving "relationship", or a taking "relationship". Maybe CA should put out a survey to get a better idea of future "customers", leading to future revenue predictions, and then maybe then they would have a better idea of what the new SSA pricing levels may look like? Least of all, it may force each of us to take an honest look at how good of a "customer" we really are and what kind of a "relationship" actually exists. For all those at CA fostering ulcers and sprouting grey hair, I would like to encourage you to keep your heads up. It's hard to give your all and receive harsh criticism that you don't measure up, or to provide years of service support and product improvement only to have someone belittle your efforts because they never called for help or chose to upgrade their purchase. I don't get the feeling that you are out to price gouge me any more than I am toward my customers. I believe that you are still a company that has people behind it and not some corporate board only answering to the shareholders. Keep up the good work, and THANK YOU for helping me to be successful.

Hey Rene, sign me up. I have no interest in any other products but am super interested when you power users flex the strength of this program along with your incredible skills and years of experience. It definitely won't be a relaxed tutorial type video..... but I wouldn't watch a super car light 'em up to learn how to drive better either!

My biggest concern is the uncertainty of the SSA pricing going forward. I feel held captive to two options: 1) pay the SSA price they demand to upgrade, 2) face stalling at the current version (not keeping SSA current), with a sub-option of paying an outrageous penalty in the future to become current again. Option 1 is just a money issue that I will have to weigh out, just a business decision. However, option 2 leaves a little question of how long before CA pulls the plug on the older versions rendering them no longer useable. As a current licence owner and full time user (making my living using this tool), I feel that I'm in a much better place than most of the occasional users as well as anyone that 'leases' the program after the change date. Whether CA offers enough return on the investment required will definitely be a lot tougher on them. I feel for all of you in this position. Maybe I have a little different view point than some other full time users, but that may be because I am still fairly new to CA and not as 'emotionally' attached. I look at this program as a tool that I use to make a living. It isn't a nest egg investment that I'm going to use for 20 years then sell at 80% of the future retail price. The purchase price (licence) and yearly maintenance (SSA fee) for this tool is incredibly inexpensive. To be able to upgrade to get all the new bells and whistles to become more efficient and make more money is a huge bonus. Basically no moving parts to wear out and if something doesn't work properly - there is a company support team as well a very experienced community of users to provide assistance. Before anyone gets too judgemental, let me explain. I can't think of any tool I purchased over the past 30+ years that can measure up to the statements above. Yes some tools / pieces of equipment would carry value for a while, ....until my accountant depreciated them on my taxes. I never heard of a truck supplier that would let me upgrade to the latest model for a mere $600 USD. Can you imagine getting the latest, safety equipment, tech items, parking assist, stereo, horse power increase, rims, blah, blah, blah, in your current vehicle - AND making it a 2023 model for only $600/yr .....for the last maybe 20 years? My skid steer dealer never once said that they would install their new fuel efficient engine so I could save more money. Come to think of it, I think every other tool, including this computer will wear out, become obsolete, or become too inefficient in a shorter time than some people have been using CA since they originally purchased their licence so many years ago. Trucks won't make you a living as long as X9 has been making some people a living. Most tools are used to make retirement money, not be retirement money. No need to think of resale values if you aren't going to sell but instead continue making a living with it for many more years. Quite honestly, I can't think of too many in the construction world that can say they make $100k year after year with only a few thousand dollars of investment, definitely not anyone that needs a truck! If CA can make a firm statement as to the future SSA prices and a firm statement of the continuation intentions of the past (and current) versions longevity, that would remove a lot of the unknown scepticism. Businesses shift and change, those that don't, usually aren't around to offer any value of any kind, including re-sale value..... how much value is your old Blockbuster membership worth? Good thing it didn't cost anything eh? As for new members weighing CA's new approach vs the competitors, ...I think the latest member is making a bit of a statement with this handle.

Eric, I managed to find your video on 'searching' and how to narrow things down again. No need to send it again. Thanks

I cut my teeth on X12 and have really not had any additional lines to worry about other than when I have a wall intersection line showing on an elevation - sometimes the OSB or drywall shows a line on the siding. This is easily cleaned up by backing up the offending wall layer by using the 'Edit Wall Layer Intersections' button. Other than that, clean as a whistle.

Thanks Eric, I thought that I had to make a symbol. Can you point me to the "Best way to search" notes again?

Is this possible in Chief just by toggling something on?

Thanks Eric, I'll give it a whirl.

Thanks Alan, this is the idea I am looking for. I agree, hopefully there is an easier way. It's too bad that the slab didn't have an adjustment like the sash does in a window. The window frame stays put but you can adjust the glass panel placement by the inset of the sash.

Is there a way to place an in-swing exterior door in the proper position - near the exterior of the wall depth? The thickness of the wall (ie. ICF is about 12" thick, 2x6 plus OSB plus foam plus rain screen plus horizontal girt plus vertical boards plus battons .... you get the idea) will have a deep furring box and that will not allow the door to open more than about 90-92 degrees in the real world. I need to show that in the 2D and 3D and do not see where I can adjust it. I do not want to inset the jamb, I want to leave the jamb as you would install it physically: a 6 5/8" jamb to the outside of the wall with the hinges mid way through to the interior casing. The door build out spans the wall thickness and will then impede the door swing, the thicker the wall = the fewer degrees the slab will open. How do I adjust the placement of the slab in relation to the jamb? This probably isn't the first time this has been asked, is there a place that I can find this information, I'm coming up empty. X13 Premier

Scott I'm happy to do a zoom. I'm just confirming that I sent you a reply to your email above, not sure if it went through or you are just busy. You can email me if it didn't go through. pimm05@icloud.com

Hey Scott, I also have the iMac 27" like you have, but with the 5700XT and a bit more memory.. I'm not sure if the little extra memory and 5700 XT video card have a big difference, but I have noticed a little slow down since I bought it new last December. Apple has done an upgrade, CA X13 now instead of X12 and a much larger library all have contributed to a little slower pace. I'm not sure how much each of them play a part in this, but the slow down isn't very significant. Noticeable, but not significant enough to complain. I just started with CA when I bought the computer so I have no previous system for comparison. However, having said that, I have watched an enormous amount of videos on CA and even some on YouTube - I have noticed that my computer's lag time is very similar, if not better than most of the computers in the videos for most functions. Side Note, I ordered the Nano Screen option and I am so glad that I paid the price for it. No screen glare from lights or windows at all. Well worth the price. The factory mouse didn't measure up and I bought Memory on line as it was a better buy than from Apple. I have to live with out Ray Tracing, but over all I'm glad that I spent the small fortune on this iMac.

Is there a way to make general framing members (manually added in the plan) that are longer than the longest item listed on the framing member reporting schedule to consolidate into a Qty of items on the list? Example: if I had a row of strapping 23'6" long, how can I get the Materials List to report as a count of 2 pcs 3/4" x 3-1/2" x 12' instead of the length count of 24'? It seems that CA Premier X13 wants to only report the "Buy Option For Long Board Runs" in Actual or Linear length (LFT) and not a Count of items on the list. I was successful with making some items use the Material Data Size to change the sq ft to a Pc Count in the formulas. This was with items like soffit that are not able to stand alone in the plan like a framing member. The best solution to a stand alone item that follows a Material_Data_Size to report a pc count (instead of =Length) in the formula, is a polyline solid. I'm hoping that there is an easier way (toggle option maybe) so I can use the general framing tool. Sample - Material List Issue.plan

I bought a new iMac 27" last Christmas with all the bells and whistles (unless you work solely in a non-window environment, the upgraded screen is well worth the investment). I also love the all in one portability. As for CA X13, one thing for sure is that if I didn't start out on the X12, and started out on X13 instead, well... I probably would be using different software. X13 has renderings that are, as one client put it "... rival my kids colouring book!" No crisp clean lines, textures or shadows as in X12, even the non-adjustable pictures are somewhat blurry (the pictures of library items, or the thumbnail pics when I open objects - even the words 'Interior' and 'Exterior'!). Crashes are a far too often occurrence. As for the Radeon Pro 5700XT, it does not support ray trace. It handles the regular 3D with ease. The SSD helps the fan to run at a non-existent level with fan noise only at a minimum under heavy 3D usage. The 27" screen has pretty good real estate for screen splitting with the library open as well. Apple's mouse should stay in the box. The glass top mouse isn't user friendly for this kind of program. I bought a thumb roller type from Logitech that has multiple programmable button, I like it a lot. The latest CA update hasn't done anything as far as I can tell to improve the graphics. Customer support doesn't give a timeline when this will be fixed. However, they offered suggestions how to "help" with the renderings in the interim. Bottom line, I love the computer but if you can hold out for a bit to get the new OS, I agree with Steve, I would wait.

Hey Gene, I'm not sure if you've already found a solution or not yet. I was struggling with this as I needed an ADA ramp for a nursing home. I ran into a few issues as well, newels can be off set but the top rail doesn't follow suit, once the newels are off set they can't be extended down. Here is what I did: -make a symbol for a panel - mine was 5'8" long (max recommended ADA rail brkt spacing with newel posts). I used two vertical 2x4's for the top and bottom of a 42" angle cut baluster and then put the 2x6 cap on the top. Choose a material that you can also use for the newels as the newels will show through the 2x6 cap. Also included in the panel sandwich is a 6" space of 'no material'. This helped to centre the 1.5" baluster and 1.5" vertical 2x4's (3" thick) on the 3.5"newel post. Note: when you make this into a symbol put the no material on the bottom layer of plan view, then the 2x4's, then the balusters with the cap centred between the 2x4 and balusters. Do it the other way around and you will have your panel all messed up when you build the complete unit on the ramp. - Make the ramp, I used the ramp tool (as a ramp and as a flat catwalk - just uncheck the automatic height in the ramp specification and set the Slope rise to 0" for a flat runway) - Open up the ramp section. Under Railing; set the height (I used 45 inches to accommodate everything), check off Panels, uncheck top and bottom rails, raise the bottom up 1-1/2". Under Newels / Balusters; Square newels, 3-1/2", offset is negative 2.5", and spacing to 6', go to the library for your new panel symbol (mine is Millwork 28 .... yes it took me at least that may times to figure it out lol), don't worry about the panel thickness. Change the material of the newels to match your top 2x6 cap, and let it fly. - As for the downward extensions of the newel posts, I just made another symbol and strategically placed them in for the photo shoot. I must say that it was a pain every time I had to move the ramp a little bit, so I suggest waiting until last to insert those. It would be really nice if CA would be able to have the top rail off set with the newel posts and save some of this grief. It would also be nice if the deck framing would show up and could be manipulated like regular deck framing.Other than that, the ramp tool works pretty good.

Glenn you nailed it! Thank you. They had me doing all kinds of stuff, but looking back through the thread, we never did try this.

I am getting a black ROW and Column on my materials list. It was there with X12 where both the row and column were completely blacked out. And now X13 there is at least the dividing lines showing in a contrasting colour. The CA tech guys have had me change every colour option on my computer with nothing working yet. I sent a zippered file to the tech department and they could open it up fine in proper working order. As far as I can tell, it happens on every plan, even the pre-set CA right out of the box. I don't seem to be having any other issues with the screen / computer / program. Does anyone know what might be the cause? As you can see from the picture, it makes it tough to see what the columns are. I have an iMac 27", new last December when I signed on with CA and am running X13 Premier.

Here is the update so far... It's not clean and easy thats for sure. There should be an easier way to attach insulation (and vapour barrier!) to a monolithic slab. I'm sure that it must be code most everywhere to have at least a vapour barrier under a monolithic slab. It's too bad that CA doesn't allow editing to the slab structure without losing the curbs or footings. Of course this causes the accuracy of the materials list to suffer a few holes in it as well (like missing slab vapour barrier). If anyone is interested, here are some things that I did. Some things introduced a few issues as more items like O.H. doors were added. Curb / Footing: - I used a 2"x16" Brick ledge, the width of the vertical foam (1-1/2") plus cement board (1/2"), the depth of the curb (4") floor (4") and footing (8") - I put a 1/16" pony wall on the bottom of the 1st floor walls with just the 1-1/2" foam - because more than one layer (foam & cement board) would not show on the brick ledge, only the outer most layer does. - So a poly line molding was used for the cement board, actually two were needed for the cement board. When I added the OH door the cement board was the curb height and therefore too tall for the doorway, so I had to make a shorter molding. Also when the door was added, the bottom part of the pony wall was lost and so the vertical insulation went with it. I made another poly line molding for the insulation under the door. I suspect the same issues will happen with any other doors that need to be added. Monolithic Slab: -as stated earlier, I couldn't edit any of the floor structure successfully. Maybe someone else could give it a try and let me know if you can get vapour barrier and some insulation added without losing the curbs and footings. -I used a poly line solid for the outer insulation part, put a hole in it at the start of the slope. Another solid for the inner most insulation part. And a molding on an angle for the sloped section of insulation. Material List: -Everything somewhat came out fairly well on the materials list. I did quite a bit of ID changes to get the moldings and poly lines to stay with the foundation section. A little adjustment here and there regarding sizes (under slab foam here is usually 2'wide, not 4') and changed some descriptions to explain it's location a little clearer (Rigid insulation became Rigid insulation - under doorway, vertical) -Having said that, the anchor bolts went from 12 pcs to 3 when I added the 8' OH door. Not real world numbers. This lead me to dig into the Ruby Scrip to see about formula adjustments, to which I couldn't find much information. Anyone able to point me in a good direction beyond adding in a fudge factor? It would be nice to adjust the 'Count' column formula and see how it came up with 3 anchor bolts. -I did this trial on just a 10'x10' building with one OH door (just walls, no roof) to see how accurate the materials list was. Most everything was right there as for the numbers. I recommend adding in the "fudge factor" as nobody will be able to use 100% of every pc of material, or you may need to adjust for 'coverage' being less than actual size (rebar has an overlap allowance, but wire mesh does not). Anyone that may have some ideas to help alleviate any of these issues, please jump in. There seems to be way too many adjustments required to use the monolithic slab option with insulation or vapour barrier. As well, too many places are needed to double check the materials list to be confident enough to even call it a 'reliable' tool in hopes of selling it as an added bonus to a client.

Thanks Ryan, I’ve tried to add the foam to the bottom of the floor and can get to exactly where your picture is in the floor structure panel, but as soon as I press enter my curbs and footings disappear. It seems like it’s either a mono slab or a slab with the foam underneath. I’ve tried changing all kinds of things and can’t get it to work. Can you please explain a bit more on the partition wall around the footing? I’ve never used the partition wall yet and there really isn’t much info on it. I did get Gene’s idea of a curb to relief the footing but still needed to manually add in the foam and board from a 1/16” pony wall above. I didn’t check yet if it had any effect on the materials or the measurements. I would say that about 25% of the smaller out buildings are on engineered slabs. Attached are still on 4’ frost walls. I’ve seen more small houses being built on slabs lately.

In my area, we build quite a few garages, as well as the odd home, on engineered monolithic slabs. Engineering drawings are shown like the "this is what I need for permits" picture. We need the horizontal insulation for frost protection and vertical if the building is heated. I would like to not only show this in my plans, but have an accurate materials list. So manually drawing on the cross section won't add it to the materials list. 1) I'm looking to continue the vertical insulation and cement board to cover the footing portion of my mono slab 2) And to have horizontal insulation under the slab. I can handle the 2ft perimeter horizontal foam easily enough. In fact, I used a polyline solid for the entire horizontal foam and it showed nicely in the materials list, however I can't make it form to the footings (on all four walls) for the cross sections. 3) Adding in the stone would be a bonus, and I may need to just use a poly line solid manually. This isn't a deal breaker. My main goal is to minimize the manual manipulation as well as include in the materials list with reasonable accuracy. Is there a thread or a video that anyone can direct me to, or does anyone have a solution for even a part of it?

Sorry guys, I was doing a little house keeping with the signature thing. Thank you Eric for the set up package. And I agree, an FAQ on this would be a great help. I did find one of your earlier thread replies showing how to wrap a thick brick wall that was an exterior wall that came inside and you reversed the layers to get the job done. I was hopeful, but that wasn't the answer this time. You were 100% on with the 0" layer of paint. I gave it a 1/32" layer of paint and it worked perfectly. Thank you. Michael, I haven't run across an invisible wall intersection yet, but thanks for the tip. I'm sure it won't be long before I will need to use that.

I can not seem to get the drywall to wrap the open ended interior walls, like the short wall at the end of a tub. The baseboard wraps, but not the drywall, thus leaving the bare stud exposed. I have searched a lot and have came close to finding the answer twice, but I am still unsuccessful. Is there a setting box somewhere that I need to check that wouldn't have be checked right out of the box? I mean I've only had the program four months, surely I couldn't have messed this thing up that bad....yet.