WesternDesign

6 hours ago, Doug_N said:

Rene, Yeah me too.  I would love to see this.  I have done an entire house and permit application in one day, so I know it can be done, The hard part is not so much the building model, it is the construction drawings and specifications.  That is where elbow grease is required. Please keep us posted.  

6 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

Revit Comparisons..
For those of you that compare this product to revit(aside from their other professional tools), I will be doing a live stream in the next few months in attempt to hit an 8 hour design and condoc with editorial grade renderings...yes, within 8 hours.
Revit is a joke for blue-collar residential, if you are comparing the two, then you are likely unaware of the various power users here and their associate youtube channels

Rene,

I really want to see how you do that and what the finish results look like.

I have no doubt you can do it.  When I grow up I want to be you. :-)

What if any discounts for additional seats.  If I understand the Autodesk model, there is no discount on additional seats. 

3 hours ago, BenPalmer said:

 

Totally agree the pricing now is reasonable...as long as they keep it in the $600 range we currently pay and continue to receive the discounts we receive on additional licenses we have.

 

However, if I'm reading it correctly, if I were to buy my 3 licenses on or after January 10th, the cost would be:  (1995+1295+1295) $4585   That's over a 350% increase from my current annual fee!!  That is a MASSIVE price increase!!

 

I don't see anything that says legacy will be the same price ($595) on Jan 10.  Chief needs to let us know what the legacy pricing is going to be on January 10th.   They seem to 'imply' it will remain the same price structure, but they certainly don't tell us.

 

On a side note, I do think they are doing the right thing by keeping the license perpetual.  However, that's only for legacy folks.  New licenses don't have the same luxury.

With the massive price increase for new licenses and lack of ownership, I'm not seeing Chief as an attractive option for new folks.

 

Please feel free to correct or clarify any of my comments.

I am planning on adding a 4th seat but I need to know that that seat will have the same SSA option and what the expected cost of maintaining the 4 seats will be over the next few years.  What do they plan for fee increases each year?  I need to make a decision soon.

1 hour ago, solver said:

Looks like a collection of icons and Style Pallets, not so much a set of "tools".

 

I'd probably be disappointed to purchase and then find out that was the case, so I'd want to know, and would expect you to say if that's what is included. And of course, it's important to include what versions of Chief/Home Designer this works with. Not everyone is running X14.

 

You might consider an install program to automate the manual editing of files shown in your 2nd video. People that cannot figure out how to do this on their own (icons and Style Pallets) probably won't be comfortable editing files.

Might also look at the included library items included and organized to make this work flow work.  I can't imagine how much time went into this.

I love this tool pack!

The instructions were easy enough to follow with one minor step (at least for me)

I needed to click on each icon then press enter or OK to accept the new icon which took a few seconds.

Thanks again for this great tool.

https://www.graphicstandards.com/gs/landing.html#searchQuery?searchQueryString=turning

I have had a similar problem. (User Library)

For me, the program could not find all my materials, some but not all.  At some point, materials were located on a different drive or location. (new server meant new paths)  The system would hang for each wrong path but it did not tell me there was a problem. every time I tried to open a library or search the system would hang for a couple minutes.  I didn't know what the issue was until I tried to backup the user library, then the system reported the missing materials.  I relocated the materials, changed the search file locations and if that didn't fix everything I just defaulted to using basic white.  I can repair the library items if I run across the blocks that are missing the files.

https://majicstairsinc.com/

Contact me.  I would like to get on the full "Rene Rabbit" system. 

And this will work in X14 as well?

I am going to purchase the pro version.

On a separate note, do you have a list of the mouse and space mouse defaults you use?  Can they be downloaded or do we need to set them up ourselves?

Thanks!

Great content.  Thanks.

I change the glass material.  In rendering view the glass is clear, but on other views it is hatched.

We got our policy with Lloyd's of London.  pretty reasonable rates.

6 minutes ago, Dermot said:

Yes.  Don't select "Use Edge Line Defaults" and use the layers in your elevation view to control the display of edge lines.  Don't select "Use Pattern Line Defaults" and you can control the line weight for the patterns in the Define Material dialog.

 

 

 Are there any video tutorials on this process?  I guess I have always just used the "line defaults".

Here are some other hazardous locations.

Hope this helps.

Maybe this will help.  One of my standard details here in Oregon.

The detail in the lower right is for "Wet" locations (inside or out).  At dry locations the height may be 36" or a rail is installed 34 to 38
inches above the walking surface.

You could also use a 3m film on the inside surface that provides a safety rating. EXAMPLE: 3M™ Scotchshield™ Ultra Safety & Security Window Film.

It looks like this would apply to the lower sash, not the entire window.

On 5/24/2021 at 2:37 PM, CADustin said:

^ Pretty much that ^

We update as often as possible and usually manufacturers reach out to us with product updates to be implemented but if we haven't heard from a brand in a while, we'll reach out to them to check for updates. 

 

-For brands that seem to have gone stale, feel free to reach out to both us here at Chief Content and your specific brand.  Usually, that's enough to jumpstart a conversation on what needs to be updated.

 

-For brands that are updating at a good clip but you see things that are missing, let us know what you need and we can either find it and add it or have an explanation why something might not be supported yet.

 

Cambria did indeed update recently, but won't be launched till the 2nd to coincide with the updated products launch.  After June 2nd, take a look and get back to me with stuff that might be missing that you need and I'll get the ball rolling.    

 

Reaching out for Simpson Strong Tie.  

Thanks!

23 hours ago, Alaskan_Son said:

Per the IRC (and most all the derivative codes), the clear headroom must be 6'-8" "....in all parts of the stairway".  Does not meet code in my opinion. 

I agree with this, but there is room for interpretation on the landings. 

As a plans examiner, I am looking for "minimums" since that is what the code is, (the minimum you can get away with under the law).  As a designer I can, and do, ask for more. :-)

With this in mind, I look at what minimum landing requirements are  (usually 36" in the direction of travel and no less than the with of the stair provided, but it may be more in some cases)  

This makes sense if you have a 6' deep landing with a sloped ceiling.  Do I have to maintain 6'-8" clear to the back of the 6'?  What if there was a desk, bench or furniture placed there and I still have a legal landing even with furniture of built-ins there?

The way I interpret the code is that you must maintain the 6'-8" clearance in the "walkable" area of the stair and out from the nosing of the stair (in the direction of travel) to the required landing depth.

If my headroom area issue is in the stair itself, then I may (if possible) narrow the width of the stair so that all of the walkable area meets the required width and height.  This may create a "shelf" along the stair to keep you out of the low headroom portion of the stair.

The last issue is the headroom as you leave the landing and enter a room or hall.  The minimum headroom may be increased and you have to look for beams, ducts etc that may encroach into that space.  I like to add a dashed "clear floor" line to my plans just to make sure I have reviewed those problem areas.

In my opinion, the design would not meet code, would feel uncomfortable, and more importantly, may be unsafe.

In the end, the building official is the final authority in each jurisdiction.

Attached is on of my standard "draft" details.

Well, it is a macro, but I m not sure where I got it.  I have purchased from Alaskan Son (great stuff) so maybe I got it from him.

I have not had the time to learn how to create my own, but it is on my "to-do" list.

If inches is okay then use the basic %width%x%height%

Also, if the full name takes up too much space then use %type_code% instead of %type_name% for an abbreviated version. I don't know if this is also a purchased macro or if it comes with Chief.

This is our setup (right or wrong).  Same label but different options picked will show up differently.

1 hour ago, Alaskan_Son said:

 

He was referring to the concrete steps at the bottom.  They appear too shallow to be landings, therefore they're technically still considered part of the same run of stairs.  That means you have a massive variance from one tread depth to the next right there. 

AND because this is still the same flight of stairs, the guard and handrails need to continue to the bottom.  The biggest issue is indeed the inconsistency in the rise and run within a single flight of stairs.

Will do.  Thanks.

1 minute ago, ShaneK said:

I have 30 hrs into this project, design and layout. Permits pulled and foundation starts in 3 weeks. I do not do 3d plot plans, only 2d site plan for City.

Would you feel comfortable sharing the submital drawings?  I am getting hundreds of hours wrapped up in our CDs.  Thanks.

We have also used a ceiling plane.

Chief really needs to address this.