Alaskan_Son

Silly question maybe, but did you make sure they're actually turned on?

David, That's just how how those room dimensions work. They're called "Interior Dimensions".

Whether or not there is a fill is controlled by the text style...

Yep. That is exactly what I was talking about. I don't think it's a bug although it does bug me. It's annoying right?

Are you possibly dealing with an invisible wall?

Search "Cable Jack"

My $0.02... Do an ACTUAL union or reshape those objects so there is no overlap. Other than that, you are correct...it is a little hit and miss. If perfectly aligning the objects doesn't work and if you don't want to reshape the objects I think your next best bet is one or more of the following... Use one or more overlayed CAD patches or overlayed p-solids. Set one or more of the objects to use the invisible line style. This only works well for certain circumstances. In conjunction with using the invisible line style, add your own lines only where necessary. Depending on the view type this can either be done with actual CAD or with a thin 3D object. Remove the extraneous lines in layout using Edit Layout Lines. All workarounds I know, but at least its sumpthin'.

It definitely has something to do with the combined height of the top and bottom chord in relation to the heel height. Energy heels will properly generate for essentially ANY heel height as long as the combined height of the top and bottom chord in relation to the heel height is low enough...thus the reason the workaround I suggested above works.

...again, you're not reproducing the same situation I'm talking about. You have a rather large heel height there so you're not going to have the same problem. Try making that heel shorter or try using larger top and bottom chords. I'll say it again...Once the combined height of the top and bottom chord reach a certain percentage of the heel height, the energy heel will not generate properly. Try an 11-1/4" heel with 2x6 top and bottom chords. I'm actually not certain, maybe it has something to do with the height of the truss envelope at the tail or the intersection of the top and bottom chord. At any rate, I know I can't get some of our most common configurations to automatically generate properly. Just try to slowly decrease the heel height or increase the chord dimensions and you should be able to see what I'm talking about.

I'm away from my computer so I may not have the terminology quite right, but try going to your 3D View Defaults and checking Use Layer Settings.

Thanks Jared, I appreciate you taking the time to try and help us out, but your example is not quite the same. Try creating a much shorter energy heel or try using larger top and bottom chords. Energy heels work just fine down to a certain point. Where that point occurs I'm not exactly certain but once the combined height of the top and bottom chord reach a certain percentage of the heel height, the energy heel will no longer generate. Try getting an 11-1/4" heel with 2x6 top and bottom chords.

If I understand correctly what you're after then don't use the %page% macro. Chief has a built in method for dealing with this... Use the %layout.label% macro instead of or in conjunction with the %page% macro Click on Edit Page Information and in the Label field add your desired prefix followed by the # sign The # sign will automatically create a new series of page numbers based on the prefix For example, you could enter the following in the respective label fields: Page 1: CS Page 2: A# Page 3: A# Page 4: A# Page 5: S# Page 6: S# Page 7: P# The actual displayed label output from the %layout.label% macro would be as follows: Page 1: CS Page 2: A1 Page 3: A2 Page 4: A3 Page 5: S1 Page 6: S2 Page 7: P1 Let me know if that doesn't do what you're after. There are a few other tricks we can use as well.

Absolutely yes and positively no. It depends...can you be a little more specific about what you're trying to do.

As always you are very welcome. P.S. I just realized that your signature says X3-X8. You're not still using X8 are you? I assume you're not and that your signature just needs to be updated.

Sorry, I can't find any way to change that setting.

Are you talking about File>Export>Export Picture? Are you just trying to avoid manually entering your resolution in that dbx?

As many of you already know, energy heels do not automatically generate properly for some of the most standard truss configurations. Here's something I would definitely consider a workaround but its a lot quicker than what I think most of us have been doing... Build all your trusses as usual setting the appropriate trusses to be Energy Heels... Group select at least all the energy heel trusses, change top and bottom chords to a very small dimension (1" should probably do it), check Force Truss Rebuild, and click Okay... With the trusses still selected, open them right back up, check Lock Truss Envelope, change your top and bottom chord back to what they should be, and click Okay... Again, it would be nice if energy heels behaved properly on their own, but until they do, I think this is the best we can do. If anyone knows of a more effective solution I'd love to know it.

You just missed those 2 walls is all. For the record, you don't actually have to remove the sill either. Simply changing the structure settings should be all you need.

Yup. Better/true instancing abilities. Something some of us have been requesting. Hopefully we'll get it sooner than later.

If its a simple enough object you can also use a slab, a countertop, and/or a framing member and then you can make a CAD Block out of the object. Doing this will allow you to replace all instances of that block with the modified version. The 2 biggest problems we currently have with this method is that we have little to no control over the point around which the other instances are resized, and after modifying the CAD block you have to group select the others and manually change the size factors back to 1.00 and 1.00. I think its still a method worth looking into for some situations though.

Not sure how you're actually building this structure, but I'm guessing what you probably need to do is this... Change all your exterior walls to those settings and I think you should be good to go. I imagine that's how you will actually be building too but of course that's just a guess.

A couple notes that I'd like to add here… First of all, I appreciate the credit being thrown my way but it certainly wasn't all me. I think I've developed a few original ideas over the years and there have also been some ideas I thought were pretty groundbreaking where I ended up discovering some random threads from several years back where someone had already gone over the idea. Then there are ideas like this one that were a little of both. I think it was Joe who originally came up with the plant schedule idea and then like so many other ideas, one of us either rediscovered it or otherwise picked up on it and modified it or improved/expanded upon it. Anyway, I just wanted to give credit where credit was due. At least Joe and Perry were using the note schedule idea before I ever started using it. Secondly, please don't misunderstand me. I think the workaround is a little bit clunky myself and that we could badly use something much better. I just feel like it's the best alternative we currently have.

Here's a very quick example... Example.plan Example.layout NOTE: The callouts on the right could be further automated using macros but that would take a bit more work. I just wanted to show roughly how the idea would work.

That's a tough one. Without being more intimately involved with your drawing process I wouldn't be able to tell you for certain and even if this does work it would likely require some custom macros and a notable amount of set up time, but here's what I'm thinking MIGHT work and I'm pretty sure you're already aware of MOST of this... Use a 3D object and its corresponding schedule to create the notes. Assign a custom 2D block to that symbol and then use the 2D Symbol column in your schedule. This 2D block can be the callout for your first column. So far, these are all things I've gone over elsewhere before. Enter a new idea based on your query... Instead of creating a 2D block with a single callout, create a "multi-layer" 2D block with several callouts. Place each of those callouts on a different layer and set both the line style and text style to be controlled by layer. Doing this will allow you to display a different callout depending on your layer set. The callouts you do not want to display will get a text style with a text height of zero and the layer for that particular callout will get the invisible line style. It will take a minute to set up the layers and layer sets but once you do...switch the layer set and your callout changes. Send multiple iterations of your schedule to layout and line them up side by side. In your example, the far right columns would be 2 more schedules coming from different layer sets. The layout box would just be resized so that only the callout portion of the schedule is visible. NOTE: It may be helpful to look into adding a second (and maybe third, or fourth...) 2D Symbol column to the end of your schedule in order to help with the size difference of your columns. The additional column(s) can be sized differently than the 1st in order to help deal with the difference in callout size. I think if you decide to give my suggestion a college try that you'll probably see what I'm talking about. Anyway, this method would certainly not be super easy to set up, but if you can get it to work, you could likely re-use it over and over again after that with very little future futzing.

This problem really needs to be addressed. The angular dimensions get their settings from whatever Dimension Default is currently active and I think this behavior is silly. In order to stop it you have to do 2 things... 1. Select your dimension and delete the (D) from the number height field. Either that or manually enter a new value. 2. Change the arrow size to essentially uncheck Default. This one is a bit trickier. Simply unchecking default does not work and if you manually enter a dimension that is too close to the arrow size in the currently active dimension default, that won't work either...the values will revert to the default setting with any changes to the dimension default What I've found to be the best and easiest solution is this...switch to a different dimension default and manually change the arrow height to the size you want to use. Actually, its probably quickest and easiest to just switch to the the different dimension default and change both the number height and the arrow height at the same time. What's really irritating is that these things can only be done after placing the dimension. This is a real pain in the patootie and shouldn't be necessary.