HumbleChief

Interesting idea with the 2 Layouts. May try something similar except in my work flow I use very few details other than the details supplied by my structural engineer. Seems as though others use many many different details. I also use very few that don't need some sort of change for each specific plan. Bill, will that Details.plan and Details.layout constantly change and be updated? To Michael's point above about them then changing wherever they are used, do you see that as an issue? And...different strokes for different folks of course. First thing I learned in the field was to never scale a detail and have never found a need to send details at any specific scale other than to make sure they are readable.

Tech support says that the "Clip Plane Indicator Length" in wall elevations is only intended to show that data on the plan and not be reflected in the 2D elevation camera's output. Any wall elevation is intended to take a snap shot of that 'room' and that room alone. I guess one could create a quick room if it seemed faster. Consistency is an important part of any software program in my mind and in this case the 2 modes don't behave consistently but I, as are most readers of this thread, am over it...

Here's a much shorter vid illustrating the inconsistency. I sent it to tech support as I do not think they intended the Clip Plane Indicator Length setting to have no effect when using 'both sides' for the wall elevation view.

Did a little more exploration and I think there's an inconsistency that should be resolved. As shown in the vid the back clipped cross section view has the same setting as the wall elevation tool but they do not do the same thing. Of course we can create CAD masks and other methods but why do the 2 tools behave differently? Why doesn't the Clip Plane Indicator Length setting in the wall elevation tool create a clip plane length like it does in the back clipped cross section? Seems inconsistent to me or just plain non-functional.

Great idea Mark but it only works if you create a 'room' with those temp walls. Not a huge burden but wonder why the settings in the 'wall elevation' dbx do not behave the same as the back clipped cross section dbx?

Sometimes it seems like we all have a gripe about a feature or a feature limit that seems so petty but small changes can make such a huge difference in work flow and the ability to move through a plan just that little bit faster. A (again) small example is the ability to turn off a back splash with a check box instead of changing the value to zero - small, but huge regarding work flow. Just now I went to edit a plan view and instead of the old 'Open Object' option (which is so software engineer speak) it now says Edit View. Seems really small again but it makes a difference and all of the small changes just speed work flow that much more. Appreciated Chief guys! Any others you've noticed?

Hey, thanks for the help and comments. I hardly ever use wall elevations, and have never exported them, and was simply curious if there was a setting in the dbx I might be missing. Familiar with CAD masks but again was curious about a setting I might be missing to make the process a bit easier. Again, thanks for all the help.

Thanks Michael but not really the best option in this case or at least in this case with my expertise. I'm exporting in DWG not sending to Layout but will remember CAD masks if needed in the future and hopefully I don't waste others' time in creating threads in the future. Apologies to those who took their time to respond but appreciate the help.

Thanks again but I think the back clip setting solves it.

I think I figured it out using the 'back clip' setting that limits the wall elevations in a way that works OK. I was previously getting all the walls beyond that back clip and was looking for the 'clip to sides' feature that was not there. Very seldom use wall elevations hence my confusion. THANKS

Thanks Mark, I am exporting the elevations and not sending to Layout. I need to 'clip' them to include only specific sections of a 'wall' instead of entire walls as Chief defines them. I've been able to 'back clip' to get close and am assuming this same feature as in back clipped cross sections does not exist in wall elevations? Or am I missing it? Thanks again.

..or a way to get the same effect if it's not there?

NICE....

Curious if anyone has tried the new glass panel garage door feature? I am seeing only one panel of glass and am wondering if I have a setting wrong or if this is a bug? Thanks glass_panel_garage.plan

VERY VERY stable and any Beta user is free to discuss any and all features etc. (from the e-mail I received this morning) "Hello, The Beta is now available to the public for all users whose SSA is current. You are now free to discuss the new features in public forums. Limit the discussion to the new features though, discussion of issues that have been reported and fixed during the beta process should not be discussed. Thanks again for all of your help. If you have any other questions let me know."

Just sayin'...

Yeah a railing offset setting would be awesome.

I've had plan checkers insist on both building orientation (i.e. Front) and compass orientation (i.e. 'North'). So I now put both as a default. Haven't run in to a SSW Front Elevation yet but it's coming

Mine are just a bad dream but have learned methods that make it not so crazy on a per plan basis.

To answer your question more directly, no, there is no way to send a single detail from a 'warehouse' plan file. This is the method I use which I started many years ago. It works but it's awkward at best. You can use a plan view and send current screen but again pretty awkward. Just never changed my methods as most of my details are provided by my structural engineer. In X12 there's the ability now to open more than one Layout (which was always there with a work around) Details can be 'warehoused' on that layout and sent as a CAD detail per plan. Never tried it and the smart guys will be able to describe the process. Might be a decent alternative?

I get a single blank detail named Basement Bearing Wall so I think the answer to your question is yes.

As genuinely helpful as Mark's suggestion is, it is very common to get a similar response to conditions in Chief that are simply not right - "Here's the workaround." In very few real world cases will a stair rail be built as Chief builds it by default as in the first pic, and the second picture, if not accurate in every case, is accurate in enough to have the option at least built in to Chief's stair tool IMHO.

Yeah that's what I usually do but I'm not able to reference a floor that does not exist, can you? I'll ref a floor like the attic but sometimes it will show a couple of stray items and will need altering - again. It's not the worst work around but still clunky and the feature could be so much better but fear it never will be as is, again, Chief's usual MO. Wouldn't it be cool to have a "Display" check box next to the XOR box that you could turn the ref set on or off? Just sayin' and hoping things are well with you... EDIT: I created a new REF OFF set and put it on the top of the layer set list and will list all ref sets there on the top. Think it should work fine for the future. Thanks for sparking my brain a bit this morning...

I agree they are great and I use them in every plan but they could be so much better and know that Chief will most likely never improve them as is their typical MO which was the point of my post. I use multi ref sets for almost every plan and depend on them but find them just a bit crippled for my work flow. For example, sometimes I need a ref set to only see the first floor walls to develop the second floor plan but then really don't need that ref set anymore. That ref set, which is no longer needed, then has be deleted or altered as there's no easy or intuitive way to control its display, (I am aware of a couple work arounds that sometimes work.) If it's needed again it has to be recreated. I think each ref set should have a simple on/off toggle to display or not. An on/off toggle would allow much more flexibility and improve the usability, again for my work flow, immensely. If they're working great for you then bravo but I find the execution a bit clunky. Curious, do you use the ref set glass house feature? I went through a couple threads here on the forum trying to figure them out and found them truly useless. So much unrealized potential and was hoping they might be improved but again, the point of my post, Chief very seldom goes back to improve a feature like ref sets once they think it's complete. And yes I suggested changes and am mostly worn out doing same. Again glad they are working for you but again find the execution lacking.

Cliff, Did you call the sales team with your question? They might not be as rigid as the Beta NDA requires of the current users and may answer your question especially if it results in a new sale for the company.