Alaskan_Son

Definitely an X11 bug Larry. Please make sure to report it ASAP.

I pretty positive you just found a bug in X11 Larry. It looks like the model is building correctly, but Chief is adding the foundation ceiling height to the first floor ceiling height (essentially doubling the number when floor is supplied by foundation room below since they both have the same value) when a second floor is present. Please make sure to report it.

Yes. Light fixtures will still work like you want and the soffits won't get cut by the half wall, but molding won't work. Or how bout try this instead... Rotate that soffit that covers your half wall so that the face is parallel with instead of perpendicular to your half wall. You'll have to reshape of course to flipflop the width and depth.

Try blocking those soffits together and I think you'l find that they behave a little better.

You'll have to add those shelves as library items in the Cabinet Shelf Specification dialog OR manually add as a new accessory to your Components list.

I definitely don't think moldings are the right tool for this job. Here's a quick video showing how to make pretty quick work of it using ceiling planes.

Where are you guys getting your information? What makes you think Chief isn't paying attention to what people are struggling with? I can guarantee you that they are. When your technical support team and training staff are being inundated with questions about a specific issue, you can bet someone is paying attention. I know this from experience on multiple levels in this area too so I'm not just speaking out of my @$$. Anyway, here's a little food for thought. If you're basing your thoughts on the matter on your experience here in the forum, then you're really missing a lot of information. There are a HUGE number of users that basically never even come here. In fact, many don't even know this place exists. You're really not seeing a very good cross section of users here in my opinion.

First off, why would you think ANY of those numbers would make sense? Second of all, what you describe is exactly why some have such a hard time learning Chief...we don't take the proper time or invest the proper effort in learning how and why. The very fact you we're just guessing and messing around with numbers points to a general practice that I see all the time. We keep fighting the software till we get the desired results and then the do the same thing the next time until we get the desired results...It's a very inefficient way of "learning". The alternative of course is to stop and figure the thing out so you can cross it off your list of things you have to fight with. Take this angle thing for example. It's one of the single most fundamental concepts that we should know if we're going to be using them... I tell it like this all the time (and it's true of any and all software by the way): These various settings are either your enemy or your ally. The sooner you can make them an ally (taking the time to study and learn exactly how they are intended to work), the better. Now I won't pretend that I don't struggle with things myself, because I do sometimes, but I have learned that stopping what I'm doing and figuring the individual settings out, makes all the difference in the world.

Ceiling planes, roof planes, or solids are what I would probably use. Ceiling planes might by the easiest and most appropriate though.

1. I used a customized note schedule. 2. I used Custom Object Fields. 3. It’s 6 degrees F right now and we have about 8 inches of snow out on the driveway that needs to be cleared. Not sure what it is where you are, but if that’s Florida to you then I’m sorry to hear that, you guys must be having it rough right now.

There's a big polyline solid down on floor zero on the "CAD, Patio" layer that your camera is cutting through.

Nope. Chief is not backward compatible. This is true of almost all 3D architectural design software. My recommendations are to either get her to upgrade, have you do your work in X9 for this one, or redraw as necessary...and in that order.

I had a little spare time before I need to head out, so I decided to make you a video with my quick thoughts on the subject... https://youtu.be/4xFdGgjhGtA Those split levels definitely ARE a pain though. There's a chance I changed something you won't quite like since its really not my plan and I'm not sure why you did various things. Regardless, hopefully there are some tips in there that will help you out. It's definitely easier to deal with when you're the one the drew the plan though, because you know what is what, what is supposed to be where, and why its supposed to be where it is : )

Sorry Doug, it sounds like maybe I was answering a different question altogether. I was assuming the problem you were trying to solve was with regard to how to place a room below the garage when the floor for the garage is being supplied by the foundation room below (something that needs either a manual floor structure or a super special stacked floor structure in the one room definition). For the slab itself, it depends on the project, but for the average residential application, I would likely just increase the thickness of the appropriate floor/slab and then detail the rest in section view using CAD.

I'm not sure about others and I've only run into this with one plan, but what I've done is just draw a slab manually for the floor below and then locate any windows or doors by either using absolute elevations or with reference to the garage floor. For interior partitions, I've just resized the top and bottom of those to work in elevation view. Might be a better way, but that's what I've done.

Looks like that symbol got a little corrupted somehow. Drop into a blank plan and convert to symbol again.

Post a quick example eh.

Open Symbol and change the origin offsets to zero.

For sure. That one was already possible. It just got easier to display the information HOW we want it and WHERE we want it.

Sounds like a case where you might just skip using the Space Planning Blocks. As with all automated features. They can only take you so far and they only work in so many situations.

Up till now, many of our custom macro solutions required using the default room label and/or the room name field in order to access room attributes. This made various formatting exceedingly cumbersome and often required some super convoluted processes to achieve what we wanted. It is now very easy to access room attributes for all sorts of purposes. Here are just a couple simple examples that I've had people request many times...The ability to display ceiling height in feet and inches in a Rich Text room label and the ability to assign custom schedule numbers and use callouts for those schedule numbers independent of the room label. The only thing in this screenshot that requires anything more than copying the text box or callout to another room is getting the vaulted ceilng height to report correctly. That one requires a special extra step...

I'm not sure what there really is to show. Drop a note in the plan and it gets added to the schedule. Create multiple note types and multiple note defaults if you want. Its really just up to you how you use them. I could be wrong on this point, but I suspect if you're having a very difficult time figuring out how to use them then you just might not need them. On a side note, I would personally ignore the ability to display in 3D (at least at first) and just turn that layer off in 3D. That one detail just adds a little confusion to the mix and its just weird IMO.

For the rest, I don't have a lot of time to look into it, but try temporarily changing the display of your pony walls to the lower wall and have a play with the Edit Wall Layer Intersection tool.

Wall Structure Tab for the foundation walls>Subfloor To Wall Interior.

Bear in mind that notes are also just like all the other Active Defaults so you can create and use additional Note Defaults too.