HumbleChief

Firs off thanks again for the video. I think I solved this a while back but am learning still. Scott I have a MAC question (sorry for the highjack). Do you not have a zoom wheel on your mouse or must you use the + and - buttons to zoom and pan as your video shows? Always remember Mac mices not having the same options as Windows mices but was just curious.

If you want static models you can't change use symbols. If you want editable floor plans use the Edit Area tool and copy/paste into the terrain.

Rich, I'm not an engineer and this assumes you've calc'd the new I-Beam to carry the loads you'll be carrying, given that, we work with steel quite often and your design should work fine but it's a bit overkill based on the engineered designs I've used in the past. Overkill is typically a good thing (versus underkill - is that word?) but you can get away with a lot less and still be very safe structurally as the 4 X 6 post should provide very strong support. If your 4th picture is accurate you really just need to trap the I-Beams between 2 king posts just like you would with any other beam. Maybe turn the side supports into those king studs and and replace the bottom through bolt with a series of 16d nails, the upper through bolt eliminated and the angle brackets replaced with A-35's. Maybe add a strap across the 2 x 6's. This all depends on the actual loads and structural stresses which can't really be discerned from your post or pics but we use steel all the time and unless it's a moment frame or absorbing any particular shear stresses the construction techniques are really pretty simple. We will often fill the web with wood using tack welded studs to attach the wood fillers, then hang joists from the filler but that doesn't look like your case here. Be ready for the chorus of don't do anyhting without and an engineer's blessing and this is always good advice but if you have the loads/spans figured out (which almost always takes an engineer) you should be fine. EDIT: Just read again and I see you're replacing load bearing walls. Do those walls contribute to the shear loads of the structure? That needs to replaced somehow if that's the case. Your design will most likely not serve that purpose. Que chorus singing, "Make sure it's engineered properly."

Best 'gaming' laptop is the usual call. I have a working partner who has a projector he uses with his Lap Top for 3D presentations. Not sure which Lap Top he got but it wasn't too bad expense wise. Here's a crazy link I found by searching for "best gaming laptop" http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2020688,00.asp

You can 'snip' them (in Windows it's the snipping tool) in your PDF viewer and get them cropped tight to the edges, then import into Chief - works pretty well. Might even start doing that myself as the png's behave so much better than the PDF's. Still can get only 3 landscape images across on a Layout page so don't really see the point.

Feel your pain and the new landscape layout makes it even worse. Even with the blank spaces eliminated still can't fit more pages no a Layout can you? I often take the default 8.5 x 11 inch size and change it to 8 x (aspect ratio maintained) in the properties dbx. Makes them a little easier to fit.

It seems like I had those same settings and crashed bad last week and had corrupted Archives as well - had to go to Carbonite to get usable file. Can't say I understand the archive function very well. Very interested in what tech support tells you.

Can't you just pull the offending roof lines back so they don't intrude? I pull them back all the time then join roofs to create a valley at the correct height. You'd have to turn off auto roof but that's a small price to pay and a very quick fix..

Set it once per plan file or template and use that plan/template for future projects. I think Chief comes with that box checked as default.

OK cool, I was working on the problem he posted about but there's always more areas to repair if I've got anything to do with a plan. See if you can fix this anomaly after the walls are redefined. Oh Yeah same corner the OP posted about

After adjusting the walls (and it's not for sure i got them right) it LOOKS like the line is gone. Didn't mess with the parapet wall. But when looking closely there's another, smaller double line that someone else might need to fix.

The line that the OP was referring to is still there after you remove that CAD block - see attached vector view of the plan you attached.

ACAD (sorry don't know your name) you also have many many Layer sets that renamed each time you send a plan to Layout. Very few use this 'feature'. If you uncheck the box below you'll be able to mange your Layer Sets much better.

Can't find that CAD block Raymond and I think you're right that it might fix the line but the walls are not defined correctly to give consistent results - unless I'm missing something. OK I see custom counter tops on top of the wall? Still think the structure need to be right to get consistent results.

Once you have your default walls defined correctly double click on the exterior wall icon and select that newly defined wall as your default exterior wall, then anytime you draw an exterior wall your exterior and interior layers will be in the right places.

Don't know your name but check this plan I attached. Look at the wall definitions and compare to what you had. The walls are more accurately defined as real world as built walls with CMU block, stucco exterior and drywall interior with the exterior CMU wall as the main layer. Then I reversed the layers which you shouldn't have had to do but it got a single line instead of the 2 you had. I'm not sure what you want to do with the parapet wall definition so I left it alone but maybe the new definitions will help you define the parapet the way you want it. Defining your walls correctly is a very important first step when starting a plan as well as defining your default floor structures. Walls are usually defined from the top (exterior surface) to the bottom (interior finish) with pretty much any material in between. You had all 3 layers defined as the main layers, with the top (exterior layer) as 7 5/8" stucco the middle layer as 3/4" air gap and the bottom (interior layer) as drywall. Here's another way to define the wall that works better. See if that helps Wall Test NEW WALLS.zip

Gilles, Trusses will follow the ceiling planes and must be placed after the ceiling planes are defined. Also ceiling planes' pitches are almost always less than the roof pitch so getting what you're showing is hard with trusses, but possible. I attached a plan that has 4:12 roof pitch, and 2:12 ceiling pitch, then the trusses are drawn. It's not a very good representation of real world truss framing but might help you figure it out. Oh yeah to get the attic condition just add a second floor and apply the same truss/ceiling plane settings. truss plan 1.plan

X6 will still miss a Layout update now and again and I almost never catch it until it's been printed wrong. Elevations, as mentioned need to be opened and closed and updated and if you have a stubborn plan view that hasn't updated click on the Layout Box Layers dbx and cancel out - it will update the view.

Way to go Chris. Nice job.

Better Dennis, I never have the patience to adjust all the RT stuff. It sure pays off when you do.

Yeah I know Chris - just ribbing you and I certainly wouldn't upgrade a computer till I was ready. anyway 5 passes 1:41 Don't have all the texture either.

That looks much better but 27 minutes? You could buy a new computer for the time it would save you.

7 passes 1:28. Not great but you should be getting better results than what you're showing. BTW I brightened it up using the Image Properties Slider

Nice work Robert - love this forum.

Val, I'm no ACAD expert but I tried to open the file in Draftsight (an ACAD clone) and I got nothing. Same when importing into Chief - nothing I can see. No white lines, no nothing. There are settings and line weights in ACAD that can alter behaviors but I'm not familiar with them. Can you view the file in any other program?