HumbleChief

Sure I'm getting better at Chief every day but there are so many little things that X11 improved I am finding that creating a model is just smoother and faster than ever. Small improvements that save a click here or make a technique just a little easier. Just now I needed a custom railing for a deck and instead of creating an entire new plan for the symbol, I just drew in a railing design, in the plan, selected the objects and bang, new symbol. Brilliant time saver but that's not the only thing. X11 just has a different more capable feeling about it and really appreciate the changes.

+1 very nice....

Have no idea what Substance Painter might be and really nothing like saying CA will make you a great architect and designer, more like saying if Chief is going to post a fabulous render and design there should be no expectation that that render can be accomplished in Chief alone. Picky? Perhaps, but if I bought Chief thinking I could create that image with Chief I would not be happy. I happen to know Chief's capabilities and know when a render has been altered with other software but it wouldn't surprise me if most people simply expect there to be some kind of over hyped capabilities advertised and not have the product live up to those expectations, but I'm tired of it as I am bombarded with the same thing every day. Big deal? Nah, just another opinion.

VERY nice design, VERY nice rendering, but did Chief create the background image? The gray terrain shadows? Happy to be alone in my opinion that Chief should show what Chief can do, not what Chief and 'other' software can do unless stated clearly.

Nice video David, love the stepping stone idea....

Yup, many people are just fine with the marketing...and it assumes that everyone has the skills to create a gradient background in a free image editor, I for one wouldn't have a clue. Again, fine for many people, I'm just not a fan as my world is filled to the brim with stuff that just ain't quite as it seems, for others no big deal, much respect for other points of view....

Nice Robert, and clearly doable with added manipulation with 'other' software but the implication is still the same from a customer's point of view and to me that implication is, "Buy Chief, achieve this look for your plans." But can you simply buy Chief and achieve that look? I don't think so and I don't like the marketing technique...but maybe that's acceptable in today's world of over hype and over sell?

I found an image on their home page that was clearly photo-shopped and impossible to re-create in Chief alone, though it was implied that it was Chief that created the image. Not saying that's true here, but I e-mailed them asking them to be a little more truthful in their marketing and to show Chief's capabilities not Chief's and Photo Shop or other added software techniques. Just sayin' it's been done before...

The Xeons in my system have proven to be very fast at very few tasks, and very slow at many others. They are designed for heavy work loads over extended periods of time using multiple threads and cores like RayTracing can utilize but for everyday tasks they are just not a good choice. Plus they are now quite old. Where once they were termed a near super computer they are simply an old door stop technology today.

Good to know thanks for the follow up....

Honestly did not know there was an icon, can you go to View>Project Browser until you get it figured out?

Interesting to say the least. What makes that .plan such a beast? Or did I miss the explanation above?

No, my computer hangs for as little as 8 and as much as 17 seconds on a simple zoom via mouse wheel. 13 seconds to simply select the slab. 14 seconds to move an edge. I would say unusable with my system. ...and 12 seconds to simply close the file...That thing is evil and I've deleted it off my system just in case it will wake me in the middle of the night....

I'm out for now but nice work...and I found that problem with the formula but I'm seeing double about now so good night....

NICE!! Good night....

After reviewing that video I can see it does not work at all!! I was only looking at the bottom chord and not the top chord and where it meets the bottom chord. It seems each pitch needs a different roof structure to work consistently, which I guess by definition is pretty inconsistent..

Chop, I watched the formula fail with the roof structure as the pitches got lower. Near the end of the video. Everything seems to go OK then it failed and it looked like the roof structure size was effecting the result in an unpredictable way. Same simple plan as posted above. EDIT: After reviewing the video I can see it does not work at all!! I was only looking at the bottom chord and not the top chord and where it meets the bottom chord. Seems like the roof structure needs to change with each pitch, making Michael's point I think. truss formula 7.plan

Cannot get the formula to fail, just saying. Here's a plan file where it seems to work. Hope it helps. truss_formula_7.plan

...or these.

How about these settings.

I see attic walls when using the raise off plate setting, just sayin'. Help suggests it as a method for energy heels for trusses but that's pretty much all I know.

Same dbx - uncheck auto birds mouth and the raise off plate dbx is available. Can't find a difference when using either setting.

Interesting. I see you are using the 'raise/lower from ceiling height dbx and not the 'raise off plate' dbx.

Yes, this formula seems to work. Nice Chop... I didn't realize that Chief measured the roof overhang to the fascia and not the rafter end/framing. Or you can add the same 1 1/2" and 3/4" to the over hang dimension if you want the over hang to measure a true 24" to the rafter end/framing.

I wonder of you need to subtract the truss' top chord (3 1/2"?) from the result?