HumbleChief

Yeah, because of this not sure what I would buy tomorrow, but would probably go for as much tech as I could afford and stay away from the Xeons that I currently have.

Very important point in my opinion. You may have the latest and greatest but is it actually faster real world Chief? And it is worth $700 for a system you may not be able to tell the difference in speed using Chief? Not the easiest choice....

Play around for a few minutes Damon and see what happens with each move. Pull the roof away, pull it close, cross over, see what happens...

The first rule of Chief's roofs is they cut walls...and ChopSaw above knew the fix but may not have understood the question...

With the '3' key or the break roof plane tool, place a break in the roof plane at the wall and drag the roof up along the wall.

All right - so far so good

Thanks Rene, I think that if we raise the existing floor (ceiling height I'm assuming) that will create a floor for the second floor above and the small pony wall can be detailed in. The dummy second floor, which in reality isn't really a dummy at all the more I think about it. It's not living space but it could be considered a genuine second floor. The roof has to go because nothing will build/frame on top of a 'Chief roof' so a ceiling plane with manual framing may be in order no matter the decision. It's a small second floor so no big to manually frame. Still thinking but leaning again towards the dummy second floor. Done this (air space between floors) numerous times over older structures and it saves a TON of work if you want to preserve electrical plumbing HVAC in an an older ceiling cavity but never tried it with a sloped roof that we want to keep.

We have a 21 ft. span and it looks like we can get a 14" TJI to play at that distance, then about 12 ft from the outside wall we'll change joist direction so we can cantilever out for a 6 ft. deep deck. There's a stairway as well so a series of beams will most likely be employed as well, determined by the structural engineer. Hope that answers?

We are adding a second floor to a mid century modern home and the builder wants to preserve the existing roof framing and interior finishes and place the second floor entirely above the existing roof structure. The building process is quite easy by building pony walls on the exterior walls and interior beams etc. raising the second floor structure above the first floor roof. The question is, "How would you proceed with Chief to create that dead space between the first floor roof and the second floor floor?" In the past I've used an air gap under the second floor framing and/or a dummy second floor (which is where I'm leaning) to create the space between structures and was wondering if there's another technique out there I might try? The roof will be tricky because of what Chief does with roof but a ceiling plane may work there. Any ideas? Thanks SECOND_FLOOR_FRAMING_QUESTION.plan

You can get that to happen by either defining your room height lower than your roof's baseline height. or raising the roof above your room heights. Is the room height correct? Do you have auto rebuild wall framing on?

Just started watching but expect to learn something new...

Perhaps a custom lintel as a symbol in your library?

THANK YOU GLENN, MICHAEL!! Roof is a very shallow pitched gable and yeah lots of problems as you said Michael but this will move me along. Thanks for taking the time to look at the plan.

Every wall a roof plane traverses, disappears. Weird...

Took over a project from another Chief user and am having a tough time with many things, mainly from just another approach and some from just not knowing Chief well enough to build the structure instead of CAD, Default for every component. Plan is a complete mess but am gradually repairing it . Anyway I can't seem to solve this dilemma. Second floor, build roof, exterior walls disappear. Help please and thank you. https://www.dropbox.com/s/kb9ysi0iewbo9gm/WALL DISAPPEARS 1_2019_04_16_14.plan?dl=0

Aha - see if you can post 3 duplicate posts...

Impressive Bryce, nice to see Chief stretched beyond expectations...

Impressive Bryce, nice to see Chief stretched beyond expectations...

Impressive Bryce, nice to see Chief stretched beyond expectations...

Love the idea at first blush and this might be feasible if this forum represented the user base but alas it's only a small fraction and any top 10 list here would not represent a realistic top 10 and then Chief has to make business decisions based on everything BUT those top 10 lists and pretty much everyone is disappointed. Still love the idea but don't think it's really practical...

I wonder if Chief risks a similar fate as many here have warned over the years? I personally don't think so as they are really good at staying focused on what they do best but time's an unforgiving master and the future is always full of surprises.

Great thread, great tip Eric. Thanks

I usually go back to the proposition that the good people at Chief are making business decisions that sometimes look like lazy programming or the lack of desire to "clean things up." Each user has a personal issue with some aspect of Chief, either the interface, in my case, or the lack of a specific feature for a specific task, or even some lack of functionality that seems like an obvious problem that should be fixed yesterday. But, I'll ask again, why would they fix such things? I think the structure dbx blows but why would they 'fix' or change it? That change most likely represents many 10's of thousands of dollars, likely low to mid six figures, and where's the impetus and/or the ROI to do so? They will sell exactly zero more copies of Chief to new users, will distract from new features that many users may not even use but WILL sell copies of Chief to new users, and satisfy a very few current users who aren't going to change software any way. So why change it? Why change or complete anything? The software has to function of course but it's the shiny new features that sell new users, not the silly unfinished features that cause current users to flee. Causes us to complain but won't cause us to leave, so there's no real motivation to make changes and "clean things up." If I'm correct about the motivation then it might be reasonable to assume Chief is making good, sound, business decisions, at the cost of creating great software (great in whose eye of course) by "cleaning things up" the little things. I wish they would, and your point above Graham, is well taken but I just don't see it, again strictly from a business standpoint. X11 was an amazing upgrade but a couple of improvements were worse (in my eyes) and a couple of things seemed unfinished as new features. Will Chief suddenly become a software company that responds to all the little things that need to be cleaned up? Or will they remain focused on new features that sell new seats, keeps them in business, and allows us to keep our selves in business?

My post was only meant to imply that Chief is aimed at the residential market, and being residentially focused, not that they did a good or bad job with that focus. I've been arguing the points you are making for at least 15 years and think there is simply no good business reason for Chief to become the program we think it should become. "The list goes on and on." Where's the motivation? Where's the ROI? A few users (among thousands that we can't know or perceive of their needs and expertise) moaning on a forum? I TOTALLY get it, don't exactly like it but totally get it. Am still happy they do not seem susceptible to some of the older hews and cries for them to expand in to more commercial building types and that was the intent and reason for the original post.

Kinda curious about the first video example. Would it really be that easy to replicate that exact garage condition in Chief? Zero experience in AC or Revit so hard to knock them but for residential homes it seems Chief is aimed squarely at that market and thankfully remain focused on same.