Alaskan_Son

Set your room labels to Use Layer For Text Style... ...and then set the text style for your Room Labels layer differently in your different layer sets...

Thanks Richard. I actually do that all the time too. It wasn't the math I was actually having a hard time with though. For whatever reason I was drawing a blank with regard to exactly what numbers I was supposed to be calculating. I felt kinda silly when I realized all I needed to do was subtract bottom of sink height from the cabinet height. Just one of those mental blocks...I get them from time to time

The problem is that your "Walls, Foundation" layer is not set to be included in the material list... ...fix that by placing the little M in that box (checking Material List or just clicking in that box) and you should be good to go.

Not my cleanest or most organized work but hopefully this helps...

Truth is that you ARE using active defaults. In fact, EVERYBODY uses them. They just don't realize it. There are always a group of various defaults active whether you actually use the Active Defaults dialog to change them or not. There are just 2 ways to change those currently active defaults... 1. Piecemeal by using the Active Defaults dialog. 2. All at once using an Annotation Set. When you switch to a specific Annotation Set you are just changing all your active defaults (the group of CAD, dimension, text, callout, etc. defaults that are currently active).

I won't argue that this stuff could be made easier but part of the reason this stuff is so complex is because there is such much misinformation out there with regard to what Annotation Sets really do. I only have a few minutes so I'll make this quick... Annotation Sets do not control what layer your text, dimensions, CAD, etc. are placed on, its the Active Defaults that do that... ...More specifically: Your Current CAD layer is the layer any new CAD will be placed onto Your dimensions will be placed onto the layer set in your currently active Dimension Default... Your text will be placed onto the layer set in your currently active Text Default... Etc. etc. If you want to change what layer these things are automatically placed on, you either need to change the layer for the existing defaults for CAD, Rich Text, Text, etc. as shown above or you need to create new defaults for those items. You can set which one of those Defaults is currently active by simply switching the appropriate default in Active Defaults as shown above. All that Annotation Sets really do is activate a whole set of the aforementioned defaults. They can certainly increase productivity but in and of themselves, they don't actually do what so many people say they do. It's very similar to the faulty statement made in the first post of this thread... You don't send items to a Layer Set. You can change what is displayed by changing the layer set, but it's not the layer set that is controlling the display of those items...it's the settings for the layer itself. Switching the layer set simply switches to a layer set where the layer in question is set a little differently. Similarly, annotation sets don't control the display of anything. They're simply a quick way to change several Active Defaults at the same time. Again, the real key piece of information I'm trying to get across here is that its the Active Defaults that really control which layer all your annotations are placed onto and you don't even need to use Annotation Sets to take advantage of them. You can simply use Active Defaults. Annotation Sets just work better for a lot of people because you can use them to change all those Active Defaults along with the Layer Set all at once.

A few little tips re: dealing with those Hatch Wall fills...

How EXACTLY are you "adding a text item"?

I totally agree Johnny. Its been an annoyance of mine for a little while but I just never even thought to request that it be fixed. It really should be though. It may be the single most trial-and-error-prone operation in Chief.

As far as I know it has always been that way. Unfortunately, you have to close down the dialog box and then reopen it for any changes to the bounding box or stretch planes to properly register. We really should suggest that they fix that. If more people knew how to use those settings then I suspect Chief would probably be hearing a lot more complaints.

Create a circle, convert that circle to a polyline, and then either convert that polyline to a hole or use boolean operations (polyline subtraction) to cut the hole. You can also simply draw a square hole and then fillet the corners to make a circle. I'm away from my computer and I'm just rattling off some ideas from memory so there may be other ways but those are a couple that come to mind.

Thanks Ross, and that's funny... I wasn't sure if anyone would catch that or not. That was my youngest son. He didn't realize I was in the middle of making a video and I didn't feel like starting over so I just rolled with it.

Thanks guys!

Made this video at the request of another user. Just an easy way to cut an existing door symbol in half... NOTE: The video basically just goes over cutting a simple door in half but the same basic technique can be utilized to downsize and chop down symbols of all sorts. It just gets a little more complicated with more complex geometry and may require several extra steps if the symbol isn't a pretty simple rectangular shape. Maybe when I have a little more time I'll take it a little further for those more complex situations but for now, hopefully this helps some of you guys out and at least get you started. P.S. Thanks for the donation Ross. I appreciate the support : )

Steve, Is this what you're looking for? If so, I think your best bet is probably to set the wall to be a pony wall and only display the lower wall type in plan view. I only had a few extra minutes to look at it and I may hacve missed something, but I have attached the modified plan so you can take a look for yourself. I don't have time to get into all the details, but in short we're a bit limited with the display of railing walls and I've found that using a pony wall is sometimes the answer for those trickier situations. Hopefully this helps... Railing.plan

Ya, it may not work for all situations. You might need to just use the pad method and then mask the extra lines. Having said that, I'm pretty sure I've used the increased footing method adjacent to and even directly underneath garage door openings like you're talking about but I don't rightly recall the specifics. I'm away from my office now but if you post a quick example plan I might be able to take a look when I get back this afternoon.

Not arguing for one method over the other. It totally depends on your individual needs and preference but for what it's worth, you can create a deeper footing by just resizing the footing in elevation too... ...and then add a couple extra CAD lines to display however you want... The benefits being that you don't have to have the extra lines in plan view if you don't want them and that your vector views won't have any extraneous lines either.

I've never used the pad or pier tools for a wider footing section like that. If you think about it...in reality those are pretty much always poured with the footers and so it makes sense to draw them using the footer. I think Pads and Piers are for more isolated situations where the concrete is to be poured independent of the footer such as under a specific post or point load or when the Pad/Pier is otherwise completely separated from other concrete or poured under (although with) a slab.

Gotcha. And this is where I was going with that...

How are you making those Johnny?

Thanks for the credit Mark. I appreciate it. It always feels nice...especially knowing when one of my cockamamie schemes is being utilized by someone besides me. I'm sure you know the feeling. Thanks again

Didn't take much time to explore WHY the lines are behaving like they are, but those are Ceiling Break Lines. You're right though, they're related to that front curved wall somehow. If you replace that with a straight wall the lines go away, if you convert that straight wall to an arc they show right back up again. Very strange indeed. I think you should send it in to tech support so they can figure it out and get it fixed.

You're more than welcome : )

Cut/Paste Hold Position to a blank plan, use Edit Area to stretch, and then Cut/Paste Hold Position back into Detail. Edit Area is currently the best we can do in Chief but it doesn't always work all that well depending on the structure of your line work and it definitely leaves a bit to be desired but it does work for many situations.

I've had this happen in the past. It was an overheating problem just like Graham is suggesting. I opened up my machine and cleaned all the dust out and the problem went away. Ever since then I've made a habit of cleaning my machine out fairly regularly.