HumbleChief

I've seen the videos and am attempting something very very simple but keep getting evaluation errors. http://www.screencast.com/t/rDB72cFD

Thanks Gerry. Can't believe I might be heading down that rabbit hole but am indeed curious about some pretty simple functions and of course what is and in isn't doable in Chief. I think the macros are not that hard to grasp and have been using them for many things. It's the Ruby thing and perhaps adding a calc or 2 to the macros that has me interested. I'll explore a little more and see what other question might arise and set something u if it works for both of us.

Really curious where did you even come up with owner.standard? Is that in an obscure Ruby only location? And it represents room area in some way? I'll explore some more. Thanks

Awesome Joe. I'm going to try that out right now. Not happening in any way. I get an evaluation error trying all 3 evaluation contexts. I'll do a little more research and see what I can come up with.

Good tip for such things. I think David P was using a similar technique but using a separate plan. I'll remember this one, thanks.

Nice job/ Looks perfect. And remember those numbers I chose were pretty arbitrary, if you want to raise/lower the terrain just add/subtract from the elevations.

Nice work Scott. Was wondering did you lock all the roof planes but the 2 affected planes, then used auto roof at 4:12?

Hope it helps Greg and oh man Ray, if you only knew the pain terrains have caused me. I really have no idea how that worked for that plan but doing the videos is a great way to learn stuff and just recently I had a plan that a fairly complicated actually came out OK and I've learned anything short of the elevation regions will make you (and the OP I'm thinkin') nuts as you probably know.

Pretty long and even includes a Chief crash but hope it helps. http://www.screencast.com/t/3Ek3wjToLptQ

Will Ruby create a simple division macro? For example I have different occupancy groups that have different occ. loads for each group. Let's say B Occ. and it has an occ. load of 1 person for every 15 SF. Example: a 750 SF room would have an occ. load of 50 people. Can Ruby create a simple division macro that looks like %room.area.standard%/50=

Ah never used that delete button before. Thanks Perry. Trust me when I say these walls came out of no where. I just checked the list one day and there was 50 extra wall def's. Thanks again for the help.

Thought this was pretty cool for those who import images and trace over them. http://www.screencast.com/t/fNsmOcxkIvCo

Couldn't get a simple screenshot because the dbx would disappear but there's a quick vid, Anyone else seen this? http://www.screencast.com/t/AmXms61R

I think you're probably missing something simple in the symbol creation process. See if this helps. You don't have to build door symbols in the vertical plane but it helps me keep it simple without rotating and stretching. http://www.screencast.com/t/MNa1kix7h

LOL

You can calibrate your monitor but that still won't get you that accurate because of the way light is reflected in real life and displayed on a monitor. http://www.rgbworld.com/color.html https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=color+calibrate+monitors

5 feet and 1 hour fire rated walls have been code here for a very long time but not always enforced by every planner in my experience.

Of course. Always a good practice BUT - we've had inspectors insist on a survey to confirm setbacks even when given some 'breathing room' to the set back. EDIT: Mostly because fence lines are almost never right on the PL and the inspector can use his judgement to make the call for a $1500 survey.

Perry, a kind and courteous "So what?" There's a city here in the San Diego area (Coronado) that insists that setbacks are measured from the finish as the attached note indicates. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just sayin' there's differences in different cities and peoples' experiences.

That's probably the easiest method I've seen Thanks for posting that.

I don't doubt that at all. But we each have a different experience of course. I haven't been able to do an as built by measuring to the studs but I guess one could estimate where the studs are and use that as a measurement. Like I say we each have a different experience and I'm sure yours is valid for your purposes but I actually have a city I do work for that includes the following as a required note. YARD SETBACKS ARE TO BE MEASURED FROM THE EXTERIOR WALL FINISH TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND NOT FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THE FOOTING (OR FACE OF STUDS). THE PLANS MUST BE DESIGNED WITH THE WALL FINISH THICKNESS(i.e. 7/8" STUCCO, ETC.) ADDED TO THE PLAN FOR THE SETBACK MEASUREMENT. THE FIELD INSPECTOR WILL ADD THE PLANNED WALL FINISH THICKNESS TO THE FOUNDATION SETBACK. IF THE WALL FINISH IS TO BE CHANGED AFTER THE PLAN APPROVAL, THE EFFECT ON MEETING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT MUST BE CONSIDERED TO GET THE CHANGE APPROVED BY CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

I now see how that works to the center of the wall, thanks Robert. But change the actual room def to garage instead of just writing the words and the result is much different but perhaps makes sense again as Chief will take SF from the garage by moving the measurement from the center of the wall to the garage side of the wall, increasing the room SF and decreasing the garage SF. Starting to make sense to my thick skull.

Michael, There's a bunch of videos out there dealing with this. I'll see if I can find a couple. Check this google search page -should keep you busy for a while. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=corner%20window%20chief%20architect ..and a small reminder when looking for Chief answers techniques etc. Use google instead of the forum search just add Chief Architect to any term and you'll fin much more relevant info than the forum search.

Probably the only way to really deal with the issue other than Scott's request above for closed poly lines with labels.

No real resolution in my mind and will have to deal with the tools as they exist but I'm not happy. Mostly I'm not happy with not being able to understand the basic concepts of Chief interpretation of SF. http://www.screencast.com/t/O66s4ysznd