Alaskan_Son

1. Create 5 side by side windows that are all the same height (height of the center unit). 
2. Group select the windows and block them.
3. Give the Mulled unit an Arch (Broken Arch)
4. Adjust as necessary.

7 minutes ago, JKEdmo said:

 

Thanks for explaining this.  I've had the case where two windows that were identical except for their muntin patterns were being scheduled as the same, which confused me.  As soon as I added the muntin / grid column to my window schedule they scheduled out as separate.

Yeah, on that note, unfortunately 3D view columns are the one area where Chief doesn't recognize unique attributes.  There has to be something different in the text.  I would recommend sending in a complaint/suggestion on this if you want to see this behavior changed.  

1 hour ago, JordanWeed said:

Thanks!  Now I wonder, is it possible to group specific items together, while leaving other items ungrouped?  Ex.  I want the base cabinets be separate, but I want the molding to be grouped together into one item/multiple qtys.  

In addition to the option @robdyck gave you, you can also leave Group Similar Objects checked and force the items onto individual rows by making something unique about them.  The thing to understand is that schedules group items that are identical based on what is being displayed in the schedule.  Here's a simple example:

Standard schedule with items grouped:

...and here's what happens if I remove the width column:

So, if you want to force certain items from not grouping together, make sure to include a column that is reporting some unique attribute for the desired object(s).  This may be a Room column, a Label column, a Description column, or, it can even be as simple as using the Comments column and adding a unique column.  In this example, all I did was add a single space to the Comment field for one of my 12" wide cabinets:

This should be moved to General Q&A, but all you need to do is toggle your "Patterns, 3D Views" layer in that specific layer set.  

20 minutes ago, JordanWeed said:

@Alaskan_SonI made a layer set TEST that only has Cabinet, Labels displayed w/ invisible line.  I inserted the TEST set above, label is still hidden by wall?  

3 Things:

1. You need to have both the object layer and the label layer turned on in your new layer set.  Turning the object off also turns off the label.  The label you're currently seeing is probably the label from the layer set below.  While we're on that subject...
2.  I failed to mention this in my first post, but you should probably turn off the cabinet labels in the layer set below.
3. Uncheck XOR in your new referenced floor.  

There's another option that can work quite well but that can be tedious to initially set up.  That is, use your Reference Display.  Here are the basic:

1. Decide which objects need their labels moved forward.
2. Create a new Layer Set that has only those objects and their labels turned on, and set the line style for all those objects to the Invisible line style.
3. Use the Reference Display settings for your current Plan View to add a new Reference Display to the TOP of the stack using that new Layer Set.  Set it to use the same floor you are already trying to display, and make sure both Details and XOR are toggled OFF.

This will place all your desired labels in the top drawing group without displaying any additional lines or fills for the related objects.  Here's a quick example where I have a header label obscured by joists above.  In this case, I couldn't relocate the label because I want to leave automatic framing turned on, and even if I could have, the direction of the joists above would still be obscuring it...

19 hours ago, Michael_Gia said:

If you do "extensive" work in text macro management then X17 will blow up and randomly delete and/or be unable to save. (see below, not that extensive, but obviously too much for X17)

 

Even with a file that I had worked on and saved multiple times in X17, it decided to flash the warning, "if you save this file in X17 then you will not be able to open the file in older versions"

 

When I saw that, I clicked continue only to get the message pop again and again.

 

I decided to quite since I had been saving multiple times as I went and I knew there couldn't be much info missing.

 

When I reopened the file all the text macros that I had used throughout the form I was working on vanished.

 

The Marco list was still in Text Macro Management, although with info from a much earlier version.

 

It even went into the archives for X17 and overwrote prior backups, it seems.  Because I tried to at least restore the Text Macro List from an earlier version that was more complete and it wasn't.

 

I'm ready to put my fist through the monitor.

 

Is this a bug in X17?

 

I've never used text macros extensively only a few here and there.

 

Have Text Macros always been wonky and you all have chosen to keep it a secret?

 

 

 

Never seen anything like what you're describing.  The only thing that comes to mind is that it sounds like you may be inadvertently working with multiple plan files.  

2 minutes ago, tundra_dweller said:

Does anyone know where the framing display option for plan view (line vs. box) went in X17? The help file says the setting is in automatic framing defaults, but I can't find it there or anywhere else.

Its in the General Plan Defaults now

If you're using a closed polyline, then %length% will not be an option.  As @DBCooperalready stated though, you can use %perimeter%.  The problem though is that you're going to get the entire perimeter of the polyline and not necessarily the length of the pipe that the polyline is supposed to be representing.  Assuming though that your "pipe" is a specific width and that and that its a pretty consistent width closed on both ends, then you should be able to use something like the following:

%((perimeter.round-8.in)/2).to_s("\'-\"")%

...where the number 8 is just double the width of the "pipe"...

NOTE:  I rounded the perimeter value just to avoid a more complex fractional inch value macro but this should work for a basic length.  Just make sure to replace the number to reflect the actual width of your pipe.

If you need anything more complex or need things tweaked further, please feel feel to reach out.  I do offer consultation services for this exact type of thing.  

That behavior is controlled by the Text Style being used for your North Pointer's Layer.  Edit the Text Style so that it is set to Rotate with Plan.  If you need that setting unchecked for something else, then create a NEW Text Style and set it to Rotate with Plan.

25 minutes ago, SHCanada2 said:

....which is why I thought if we could actually write to the text based macros, with a macro, then it is one and done.

I agree.  This functionality would be awesome.  

I have my own systems for creating custom project information "fields".  Information is all entered in a single location in the plan or layout file, custom fields can be created on the fly, and I don't use globals anymore.  That being said, I'm a little curious why more people don't just use plain old non-evaluated text macros.  Its a very very easy way to create custom fields that can be exported/imported as well.

Control+Tab followed by Enter is a good alternative.  

1 hour ago, chiefjone9 said:

I totally get your frustration—I'm also using Home Designer Pro and often hit the same wall when features are only in Premier. I haven't found a way to reshape stair handrails in Pro either, just balusters and newels like you mentioned. I usually search with “Home Designer Pro only” plus the feature name on both YouTube and this forum. Would love to know if anyone else has a better search method!

honestly, the best method is to avoid using this forum unless absolutely necessary, and just stick to the Home Designer forum.

Use the HomeTalk forum instead…

https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com

12 minutes ago, OGDesigner said:

Alaskan_Son, This is brilliant and worked like a charm! Is there a reference to writing these operators?

 

Me!

Joking

Okay, Not joking ...

Its tricky because you have to use both Ruby (programming language) and Chief which are 2 entirely different and separate constructs.  You can use any number of online resources to learn how to program in Ruby including the actual Ruby documentation, the StackOverflow forum, and even ChatGPT...

...But then you also have to learn how to use the various tools that Chief has given us to work with.  This is where it gets tricky.  There is a lot of nuance and interplay between the 2.  We have certain information in Chief that we can access and parse, various ways to access and parse that information, and some (but not all) of those ways can optionally use Ruby.  Chief has quite a bit in its documentation about built in name:value pairs, special built in Classes and Methods, and other text macro stuff, but has very little about actual Ruby programming (and rightfully so).

If you're serious about custom macros and otherwise using Ruby to access and parse information in Chief, it is well worth the effort to pay for an hour or 3 of consultation/training time.  You'll save yourself many hours...days..even weeks of otherwise unnecessary experimentation. 

Use a simple Ternary Operator:

%height > width ? height : width%

...or put into an Array and use the max method:

%[height, width].max%

14 hours ago, Renerabbitt said:

not just objects. text size for instance, number height on dimensions, , basically many input you had in inches will be wrong, some do convert correclty..it really is a ton of work

Yeah,  I don't get it.  It seems like it would be an easy thing for Chief to just make the calculation conversion internally, but clearly its not that simple or I know they would have done it already. 

38 minutes ago, Chrisb222 said:

 

Thanks Steve. I was just going to not respond to that since I like to keep positive energy here, and couldn't tell if it was sarcasm, humor, or a serious question. It seemed obvious to me that I was showing the Chat image simply to illustrate a desired aesthetic - I even indicated it was altered architecture... who would want that?? I guess I have a blind eye and lack human intelligence.

 

At any rate, it was really surprising people would think I was actually willing to sacrifice model accuracy for a pleasing rendering. Whatever, but thanks for the support. 

It was a totally serious question and you seemed to acknowledge its legitimacy in your last post where you seemingly admit that its a problem.  Just like me, I'm sure you have seen countless examples of AI changing crucial details (not only in renderings but also in simple text).  People gush about how great the results are and many times don't even realize the extent to which the end result has been changed.  

And when you mentioned "(altered architecture)" it was proceeding "heavy demand time" so I assumed it was a catchall phrase for the level of service you were using and could include material changes, landscape changes, trim details, and so on.  

Again, I really and truly was just curious if you care that AI changes things because you stated...

On 5/22/2025 at 12:01 PM, Chrisb222 said:

THAT ^ kind of rendering enhancement I would welcome.

It's a hard pass for me though.  It's 90% cool, but that remaining 10% is a deal breaker.  It's not a useful rendering in my opinion unless its accurate and in just about every single example I've seen to date AI does something either structurally or with lighting that I think would be a disservice to my clients no matter how pretty it looks. 

11 minutes ago, Renerabbitt said:

Pretty sure the unit conversions make 4" into 4mm upon import. It's a nightmare truly. I've tried many times to create my templates in imperial with every workaround I can think of. It's a ton of work

Yes. That is what happens if you bring objects over from imperial plans into metric plans.  Feels like it shouldn’t be necessary.  

...or just open up the camera and uncheck Clip to Room.  

If you set up the camera as a Wall Elevation, it will automatically clip the sides, bottom, top for you (Clip Plane) and it will Clip to Room which cuts off the view of anything beyond the defined room.  You can take advantage of the automatic Clip Plane behavior and just forgo the one Room clipping behavior though by unchecking the aforementioned setting.

Not sure man.  I think you might just have to turn on all your layers in a 3D view and start group selecting anything that didn't move with the room.

49 minutes ago, sea_lyons said:

Maybe I didn't do this properly. Opened a new Metric template. File>Import>Import Default Settings

 

This is what I get

 

 

I guess maybe I've never personally had to import settings between plans with different units.  I just assumed it would work like any other plan.  You're right though, Default Settings don't seem to carry over.  Now that I think about though, I guess it makes sense that Importing Defaults from a plan with different Units may be problematic (although I feel like Chief should be able to make conversions internally so that this type of thing is possible).  That being said, you can still Import:

• Saved Plan Views
• Layer Sets
• Default Sets (at least anything not store with Imperial Units)
• Wall Types
• Note Types

I tested in X17 and it appears to let you Import EVERYTHING but in doing some quick additional tests just now it does look like the Default settings (at least any that I noticed) don't actually carry over.  There's no message to say that they don't, but they don't.  I guess maybe just Import what you can, and adjust the rest.

9 minutes ago, Chrisb222 said:

 

Wholeheartedly agree. If Chief could produce a render as nice and fast as AI (on a Mac, tyvm), I would welcome a rendering upgrade. Otherwise, yes please just focus on fixing the lacking parametric objects, and giving us better tools for drawing plans and construction docs.

 

CA Standard Render, 1s:

 

CA CPU Ray Trace, 15 passes, 2:09m:

(I prefer CPU RT because it shows nice shadows of 2D plants)

CA GPU RT Ray Trace, 100 samples, 46s:

 

ChatGPT Enhancement, 2:41m during heavy demand time (altered architecture):


THAT ^ kind of rendering enhancement I would welcome. Otherwise, more meat and potatoes, please.

Do you not care that Chat GPT completely changed your house?