HumbleChief

Hi Jeet. It's not clear what you are trying to accomplish? Is that a raised flat area within the datum field? Chief has a very complex method of calculating such things and the task you've presented is above my pay grade. Hopefully others can help.

Kinda sorta have it figured out. When I build the foundation I have the 'curb width' set to 8" but when the foundation is built Chief sets that curb width to 16". I can manually change the curb width on each foundation wall back to the intended 8" and the problem goes away.

Seems to work OK on my template plan so....

2 minutes ago, DRAWZILLA said:

are all the walls aligned with the foundation? 

Hey P, the foundation is on auto build so that should align the walls, no?

1 minute ago, Alaskan_Son said:

Haven't explored WHY its happening, but what you're seeing is your Slab Footing Wall from your foundation level extending up from below.

Thanks Michael. Yes, that's what's happening but can't seem to figure out the why or a fix.

Can't figure out what's happening with the pony wall display. User error most likely but any help appreciated.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m9z7mzvjkaxnj23/PONY WALL DISPLAY.plan?dl=0

Not exactly sure what you are looking for but perhaps this will help.

TERRAIN PLAN.plan

15 hours ago, solver said:

 

VERY nice Eric. Thank You.

I Love this forum....

1 hour ago, Archnot-Boltz said:

I don't mind getting a downvote as everyone is entitled to an opinion. Only problem is you don't know if they are downvoting my entire post or a specific portion. A rebuttal  is a better response and accomplishes more.

This is a very important point in my opinion. A down vote doesn't let anyone know what your idea or opinion is and only serves as an  anonymous indictment of someone else's ideas and opinions. It's childish and serves no useful purpose. Let us know what you think instead and instead of down voting this post, what do think?

Bradley, I'm going to post something similar in the main forum as I think it's important. Thank You.

8 hours ago, Designer1 said:

SSA was never $199.  Back when it came out in X1 the "cheapest" it ever was $395. 

 

I have never heard so many colleagues and designers say such wonderful things about chief prior to this subscription change.  Now all of them, have moved on and started looking and working with other software.  In my opinion, chief got greedy and tried to force everyones hand with this new pricing model and in the end will loose more business.  The arrogance and lack of consideration for its users is unbelievable, we, the users, are the reason they stayed in business all these years.  

I haven't followed this thread that closely for a while and can understand the frustration with the pricing change but "all of them" have moved on? These are colleagues? How many? Current Chief users? How is this subjective assumption relevant?

And it may be true that Chief, with its new pricing model, "will lose more business" but it might be more accurate to suggest that Chief will lose some current customers or end users which with increased revenues may still drop a larger profit to the bottom line allowing more resources to be dedicated to making the program better for the remaining users.

I think the biggest challenge will be attracting new users. I think it is the hope of management that they have created a solid enough niche in the competitive market place to attract small home and remodelers as Chief currently is IMO the best option for that niche. Time will tell and I have less and less concern as I will happily pay the SSA fees going forward and factor in any increases to my business model. And as always best of luck to everyone no matter their choices. 

7 minutes ago, Doug_N said:

I know that some people's opinions are less liked by most but a downvote on an opinion that is reasonably spelled out?  Come on guys. children.

Fixed...

1 hour ago, Alaskan_Son said:

....but what does the share button do?

I think it's their version of 'sharing' to various platforms.

I downgraded to 2022 and all is well for now. No word on whether or not that feature will be reintroduced in the future.

Thanks Michael,

I'd love to be wrong about this but in version 2022, second pic below, there's a radio button "Copy To Clipboard" URL in which when the video was finished uploading the YouTube URL would be posted to the clip board, then pasted any time before anything else was pasted to the clip board.

In the first pic, version 2023, you can see the radio button is missing and instead there's a brief selection window that appears after the video is finished uploading and you have to be quick to select the 'get video' button before the selection window disappears. Again would love to missing something but have communicating with tech support for a while with no help.

Do you have 2022 or 2023?

Wanted to bump this thread as I just discovered that Snagit 2023 has removed a key feature for those wanting to upload to YouTube. It no longer has a 'Copy To Clipboard' radio button selection so videos when uploaded to YouTube, URL's have to be manually copied and pasted. 2022 still works but the feature was disabled in version 2023.

3 minutes ago, TeaTime said:

I am curious if you nudged your cameras after they were created, because all of mine were all parallel at that default 120° angle.

No but the model's perimeter was different enough to relocate each camera at its new 120 degree angle. Also it's easy enough to relocate the cameras by dragging them into place for easier zooming/panning. Was just curious about the default locations. Thank You.

10 minutes ago, TeaTime said:

There's some fancy math to determine the center and the overall size of the model, then the camera gets placed, facing the model at 120°, at an "appropriate distance" as to view the whole model. So it's totally dependent on how big your model is, where the model was drawn (around 0,0? A few miles off?), etc.

This looks to be true, that the distance is based on 'some fancy math' and in this case not considering 0,0 as the model is drawn close to 0,0. In the pic attached I change the model size 3 times, set the default cameras and their locations changed 3 times based on the size of model's floor plan. 0,0 (X) is pretty much in the middle of the pictured example.

4 minutes ago, TeaTime said:

That is absolutely correct. Use Input Point to place a point at 0,0, then create a Camera snapping to that point

Thank you and of course a camera can be manually located but why the default location? And as above the X, Y Michael is pointing out was the current location of the cursor when the screen shot was taken. I can move the camera closer and position it manually but again am curious about the default location.

24 minutes ago, Michael_Gia said:

I always thought that the x,y on the plan indicated the position of the camera on the plan. 
In the camera dbx it corresponds more or less to those coordinates. I think?

 

Thanks Michael but the X,Y you are pointing to is the current location of the cursor when the screen shot was taken, not sure how that could effect the default location of the camera? I opened the plan again and the cameras default to the same X, Y location. Not sure why?

I'm taking a standard 'Perspective Full Overview' and a 'Perspective Floor Overview' of a plan and the default X,Y coordinates are 961 7/16, -2438 13/16 as shown in the pic. Why? Is there a setting for such things?

Thanks

Not sure this is a good example of where a structural engineer might be helpful but a Simpson JBA hanger is intended for solid sawn lumber up against a ledger of sorts, not up against a concrete stem wall where the only attachment is on the top of the hanger. I think my engineer would suggest a ledger off the concrete wall and hang the joists from that but I don't know anything about the OP's experience or intent so very hard to say.

Or perhaps a Masonry hanger from Simpson? And again this is not a design I would impose upon my construction team without a S.E.'s approval and design.

https://www.strongtie.com/masonryhangers_masonryconnectors/category

I'm curious with a question to the OP. Are you a licensed architect or a 'designer' like myself?

The reason I ask is that I, as a designer, stay far away from details like this and have my structural engineer take care of such things. I review the details for anomalies or a misunderstanding of job site conditions but don't create the details as they tend to get in the way of actual best practice job site construction techniques. As an architect I 'might' create details of the structural engineering spec's but I have no experience as an architect so cannot speak to that issue.

When I was a general my brother ran our field work and he was an excellent field guy and he did not like too many details and preferred to build to code or beyond instead of trying to interpret detailed details that many times were either unbuildable or hard to interpret in the field in a way that actually made for a better constructed building. Not many of us are lucky enough to have a field supervisor that is super competent or knowledgeable and that's just one person's experience.

Try putting some break lines (3 key) in the wall and reshape it.

A pass through window seems to works as well...