Alaskan_Son

No problem. I'd really like to know where that other sort order is coming from though. I can't seem to tie it to anything. It does seem to be pretty consistently based on something though because if you test with a cabinet schedule, remove the top item from the plan, regenerate the order, and then replace the missing item and regenerate the order again, it will return to its original order. There seems to be some specific value tied to the objects in the plans and it seems unrelated to the object_id too. Anyone at Chief??

The normal sort order is alphanumerical based on the furthest variable column to the left however, here's something I've never noticed until just now.... If you uncheck Group Similar Objects, then the sort order seems to be based on something entirely different. Not sure what though.

What happens if you cut/paste hold position that schedule?

The reason I started using the empty text box is that its the only one that makes everything disappear. I used to use points and zero length lines but ultimately all those other methods I used showed up as dots in one view or another (which was really only a minor problem but an annoyance nonetheless). The text boxes are truly invisible.

Easiest solution is to simply define your small front porch correctly as a room. See if that gets you started down the right path.

No. Definitely not the same thing. I believe the original intent of the Reverse Plan tool was to flip the building on the lot because it will NOT reverse any terrain items. This is the most notable difference, but in addition, the Reverse Plan tool will flip elevation cameras while Edit Area will not and Edit Area gives you much more refined control over what gets flipped.

To add to and expand upon what Glenn and Chop have already said... -The “real data” (as Chop called it) is key. You need to actually provide useful information to Chief. Every bit of this initial responsibility is 100% on us...the designers. You will always struggle if you haven’t taken the proper steps to gather and wrap your head around the ACTUAL elevation data. If you don’t have it you can’t give it to Chief, and if you don’t understand it, you’ll never be able to troubleshoot it. -Keep it simple. You need to give Chief proper and accurate data to work with, and you need to provide enough data to get your desired end, but don’t input more than you really need. If you have a flat spot at the top of the lot that has a perfectly flat slope to a lower flat spot at the back of the lot, use 2 Elevation Regions (which by the way are essentially just closed elevation polylines with the optional ability to make the inside flat) and don’t place any additional elevation contours. The extra elevation lines would just be a waste of time and add extra data to deal with...as well as the related increased potential for problems. -I have to somewhat disagree with Glenn’s second to last statement. My advice would be to UNDERSTAND the difference between Elevation Data and the Terrain Modifiers. Always DEFINE your terrain FIRST with elevation data. If necessary you can then use Terrain Modifiers. Just remember the terrain modifiers will always do what they do based on the underlying terrain definition. They don’t define anything. They only tweak it. It’s like sending someone to make a flat spot for a 2ft. diameter area at some random spot on your lot without bringing in any fill, without taking any fill out, and without disturbing anything outside the immediate vicinity. The overall depth on one side, drop on the other, and vertical elevation will all depend ENTIRELY on the height and contours of the terrain on that specific area of the lot. -Don’t get hung up on the vertical location of your house as you’re tweaking the terrain. It’s easy to move the house/terrain up/down at any time. Instead, keep your focus on the overall contours of the land. You shape your terrain and you change the Subfloor Height as it relates to that terrain. Just don’t try to change your elevation data to fit to the house. You’ll just be chasing your tail. At the end of the day, what I ultimately found is that terrains are FAR easier than most people think. You just have to go at them calmly and methodically, making sure you think through what you are actually telling chief.

I personally think the stairs should be counted twice...by pretty much everyone. From a functional standpoint, the top side of the stairs is just as legitimate a living space as a hallway, and the underside is typically just as functional as many closets. From a cost standpoint, a set of stairs is a floor (treads) and ceiling (bottom side) just like any other floor area except that its notably more expensive to construct one set of stairs than it is to construct the same footprint of standard floor area. It still requires 2 layers of framing, 2 layers of ceilings, 2 layers of flooring, 2 layers of moldings, etc. etc. except that the work required to install those things is more difficult and time consuming in even the most basic house and can be astronomically more so in some houses. Staircases can very easily rival kitchens and bathrooms in the cost per sq. ft. category in some higher end homes. If it were up to me I'd say counting stairs at all levels should be the standard.

I think you are incorrect in your assumptions about how Chief is calculating living space. They DO include area covered by walls. The option under General Plan Defaults simply toggles whether or not the FINISH layers of EXTERIOR walls are included or not. If you want to see what exactly Chief is including, select your Exterior Room (click just outside the building and hit tab one or more times as necessary) and then click on the Make Living Area Polyline tool. The one thing that Chief excludes that I commonly include for various purposes is the stairwell area (along with other Open To Below areas). Anyway, a lot of us use polylines with or without macros to get this information more to our liking. If you don't want to mess around with macros, one of the easiest things you can do is simply create a polyline using the aforementioned Make Living Area Polyline tool or using the Make Room Polyline tool or just drawing one manually and then simply copying the area value and pasting where desired...

You'll only find the height there. To adjust the width we have to jump through some hoops. There are a few ways to go about it, but the short answer is that you have to either: Group select and change after the fact Leverage the new Framing Groups and Retain Framing setting. This way you can change the default width and frame various areas individually. Probably other ways I'm not thinking of right now, but Chief sure doesn't make this one very easy. Please send in a suggestion or add your support to one that others of us have made. I just wish Chief would respect the Material setting for joists like they do for wall framing.

You bet. I went over some of this in the video, but in addition to the crisp line work, you also get... -Increased control over line display on an object by object basis -Increased control over those Pattern Lines -Snap points in layout -Editable Layout Lines -Real time feedback as to what your drawings are actually going to look like when printed

Okay, now we're getting somewhere. No. Currently Chief hasn't given us a way to add partitions to Style Palettes. You might consider building those out of actual cabinets though which would open up the possibilities a bit more.

Still not sure what you're doing. Are you adding the panels to the cabinet itself using the Accessories tab? And are you using the Default, Slab, Framed, picking from Library? Or are you using a Partition from the cabinet tools dropdown?

How are your "panels" constructed?

Not sure what you're missing. Sometimes I feel like I must be speaking a different language than the rest of the world. See if this helps though.

I'm still half asleep, but see if this helps...

You need to uncheck this new setting...

Just thought I'd better mention that this method doesn't work so good if you're using color or shadows, but instead of cropping the layout box you can also just apply a CAD mask to cover the roof in you elevation.

No. Not suggesting you try it again. Resize as desired and then convert that updated size to a new symbol. The NEW geometry will generate a new (and accurate) 2D block that will be correct. This is what I used to do when I needed an accurate 2D Block back before Chief gave us the Auto Generate option (which apparently still has some issues). And P.S. This is what I still do when I actually need to use that block and it's related line work.

These are the apparent OOB settings... unit = Not set show_unit = true show_leading_zero = true show_trailing_zeros = false use_fractions = false decimal_places = 6 denominator = 16 thousands_separator = , show_denominator = true reduce_fractions = gcd (greatest common divisor)

There are a couple other options in addition to what Robert suggested... Consider not turning the lines off completely but rather reducing them to a smaller line weight and lighter color. I personally do this by sending to Layout using Pattern Line Defaults and then setting the Pattern lines to a line weight of zero and a gray color. The pattern lines don't jumble the view that way but they still communicate some information about what you're looking at. You can turn ALL the patterns off for a specific view by using a specific Layer Set for that view and then toggling off the "Pattern, 3D Views" layer for just that layer set. Dermot mentioned this, but I spelled it out in a little more detail to underline the importance of using a different layer set. Also, don't confuse this method with using with the Toggle Patterns tool which will Toggle Patterns for ALL views.

Yup. Definitely some weird behavior. To fix issues like this you can always select the object and Convert Selected To Symbol to get a new symbol and a new 2D Block.

There are ways to even further speed the process up too. Most notably you can increase the Smoothing Angle for your symbols to greatly speed up surface deletion for some cases.

Ya, I know how to use it and I currently have a base macro set up that I can modify and simply copy as necessary for various formatting. I was just thinking aloud and wondering whether we could access the settings for the class itself or not. Not a big deal at all. I might search the program files to see if it’s hidden in there somewhere. It’s just a personal curiosity really and not too important.

I’m curious if there’s a way to access and modify the initial settings in the NumberFormatter class.