Alaskan_Son

Since you haven't received any responses I'll take a quick stab at it. Without seeing the plan file it's impossible to tell but here are my 3 best guesses... You didn't actually import a DWG file, you imported a picture or a PDF and under Preferences you have "Display In Color Whenever Possible" checked. OR You sent to layout as "Current Screen As Image", you sent to layout while color was toggled ON in PLAN, under Preferences you have "Display In Color Whenever Possible" checked, and you tried to toggle color off AFTER you sent it. OR You simply need to toggle the color off in layout as well. Plan and layout have their own independent color toggles. If none of those fix the problem and it truly IS some kind of bug, either: A. Change the line color for all that line work to black. B. If you need to retain the line colors for some reason, use the Match Properties tool to group select one line color at a time, put them onto unique layers, set the line color for those objects to be controlled by layer, and assign different colors to those layers in the appropriate layer set(s) (all those layers set to black for the layer set you're sending to layout).

Just convert your CAD work to molding polylines and don't actually assign a molding.Bonus Tips: If desired you can even include arrows on those lines/polylines as long as you assign them BEFORE converting to a molding polyline. AND you can either display line length or add a custom macro to the label for that line or polyline to display its length in order to make a "dimension line" that can be included in an architectural block.

Amen. Here's that thread although there have been others... https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/index.php?/topic/10288-layer-sets-should-change-only-with-a-save-button/?hl=%2Blayer+%2Bcontrol#entry89703

This is done via the Windows, Labels layer text style setting. Here's a quick video I made the other night whilst I was in a video making binge...

A few...You can't simply use CAD work (those have to be built with 3D objects), you lose some iinstancing capabilities, and you can't select an insertion point...which brings us to your placement issue... The block will place/snap the insertion point wherever you click during the paste process. By default, the insertion point is the center of the CAD Block, but you can put that insertion point anywhere you want, even outside the block. Should solve your problem if I understand it correctly.

Try this...

This is a known bug and I have reported it (probably multiple times). You can click Undo followed by Redo (Cntrl+Z then Cntrl+Y) which is what I find the quickest...or click Rebuild 3D...or simply open and close one of the cabinet dbx's and it should fix itself. All 3 of the above options just prompt a 3D rebuild so they should all work equally well.

Here are a couple more solutions if you don't like the idea of switching your Current CAD Layer... 1. If you use a template plan or the save as method, place the block in a CAD Detail and simply copy/paste from the detail. The layer definition will stick this way. 2. Use a warehouse plan and copy/paste from that. If its something you're simply sending to layout and it doesn't need to show on the floor plan...there's no reason to even copy and paste, just send directly from the warehouse plan or the CAD Detail. Point is that as long as the block isn't being pulled from the library or CAD Block Management it will retain the layer setting.

Here's that video for anyone who can make use of it. It goes over not only how to deal with the issue in question but also includes a few tips on how to make and clean up an As-Built Mask in general... Also, one additional note that I didn't include in the video... When you're done getting your mask to exactly how you want it, simply select all, cut, and paste/hold position back into your main plan. Then you can turn that AS-Built layer and and off as you wish. Hopefully someone can take a little something from all that. Have a great rest of your weekend fellas : )

I went ahead and wrote up a report to tech support on this issue. I'm including a copy of that report here just so everyone knows what the issue is and because I wanted to make a quick As-Built CAD Mask video to address the problem. I just think that video might be a lot more helpful though if you first recognize what the problems are... Hi guys, We have some pretty strange issues with CAD Blocks that I'd appreciate of you looked into. 1. When we create a CAD Detail From View, Chief automatically creates copies of any CAD Blocks associated with that view. When it does that, the copies of those blocks are often times faulty (especially when there is any complex curvature). See first attached image. The problem becomes apparent when trying to change the line style or color without exploding and manually editing the block in in great detail. 2. If we try to replace those faulty instances by dropping the original version of the CAD Block into the plan and renaming it using the name of the faulty copy, what happens is that the original block is deleted entirely. This happens whether or not Automatically Purge CAD Blocks is checked. This leaves the original symbol to which that CAD Block was assigned orphaned (without a CAD Block). See second image. 3. The symbol will remain orphaned until a new CAD Block is created. It doesn't matter what that CAD Block is, where it is created, or when it is created. Fact is that the next CAD Block created will be assigned to that symbol. See third image. I've found a workaround for issue #1 as I mentioned above, but that brings up issue #2. I also found a solution to issue #2 and that is to drop an instance of the original CAD Block into the plan and then to explode and reblock it BEFORE renaming it. This leaves the original CAD block untouched. Its an extra couple steps though and only adds to the hassle of having to workaround another issue in the first place. Anyway, its not my greatest work but here's a quick video going over the issues so you can more clearly see what I'm talking about. I think I went over just about everything except that workaround that deals with the last 2 issues... https://youtu.be/gW75hvJMtGg I'd really appreciate if you looked into this. There's no telling when and where these problems might rise up and cause a problem with some other task too. Thanks as always for your time : ) I'll try to get around to making that next video in just a bit here.

...unless you use it in Room Mode...

Can you clarify what your problem is and maybe attach a quick sample plan? I don't have any problem changing decking material either through the DBX or with the material painter...both work equally well and without problem.

Without a plan file its all guesses, but I'm putting my money on your exterior wall definition. I'm guesses your Build Platform To Exterior Of Layer: is set to your siding layer. Either that or you don't have any exterior layers (they're all on your main layer) which would force that setting.

It really just depends on the fireplace. Sometimes you can use the actual window or door panels (frame, glass, hinges, handles, and all) to create your actual fireplace unit and not just as a hole to put a freestanding unit into. In the example I posted I was simply trying to recreate an actual site built fireplace that truly did have bifold doors. I haven't done this but a person could even using window coverings (curtains) to recreate that mesh stuff that used to be so popular. A lot of possibilities.

OR bifold doors...

I don't think the 32 inch and 36 inch requirements are actually in conflict. It pretty much takes a 36" door to get a 32 inch clear opening with the door at 90° once you account for the thickness of the door, any hinge offset, the doorstop on the latch side, and maybe any stop mounted weatherstripping. One thing that is kinda interesting to me though is that they only require one door to meet the requirement. This is a lot different then a bedroom egress window situation because a person can relatively quickly find the largest opening window in a room but knowing which one of the six exterior doors in the house will allow your wheelchair to fit through in case of an emergency AND being able to quickly reach that door from any given location in the house is a very different situation.

I absolutely agree with this is well. I don't think the layout method is slow, but it's much less flexible and versatile than what we would have with plan view cameras or at least ref sets being tied to layer sets.

Absolutely agree with Joe. If you've named your pages in such a way that you know what they are, you can essentially do the whole thing right in the plan as long as the layout is actually open by using your project browser. Double click on the layout page in the project browser and then double click on the view in layout. You're only in layout for a split second. Honestly don't see how it could get much quicker than that. You can also even add a bunch of temporary/throwaway pages at the end of your layout for the sole purpose of creating an index of sorts during the rough design phase. Actually, you could even put a whole bunch on one single page by just downsizing the layout box and using the label as your guide. Definitely quite a few possibilities though.

The following is a quote from some IRC commentaries I recently read... "The code now specifies that the required net clear opening dimensions & the method for measuring when the door is opened to the 90 degree position. The minimum net opening dimensions are now consistent with the door requirements for means of egress & accessibility for persons with disabilities in the IBC." If the intent of the code is indeed to fall more in line with accessibility requirements, which I believe it probably is just based off the following 2 lines... "The means of egress shall provide a continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and horizontal egress travel from all portions of the dwelling..." and "Egress doors shall be readily openable from inside the dwelling without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort" ...than I can very easily see how a double door with an astrigal would not meet that requirement. Does the device require special knowledge? Maybe and maybe not, but is it a bit of an obstruction and does it require a least a little special knowledge and definitely some effort (especially if you're elderly or in a wheelchair)? I think the answer is YES. I can see that its a bit of a gray area but if I'm an inspector, I imagine I might not let a 5ft. double door fly.

Ya. This should really be reported to tech support. I don't think it should behave this way. And just in case you were wondering... I'm quite sober. I was just being silly : )

Might anudda way, but me thinks you hafsta tricking Chief... 1. Checks this box... 2. Change your layer color. 3. Go back in and unchecking that box 4. Change your layer color back. Last 2 steps are really optional. Might take a bit longer in some circumstances but could be a lot faster in others.

Glenn pretty much hit on the most important points, and good advice about spacing the top and bottom evenly. I'm usually pretty good about figuring out stuff like this. That one definitely never occurred to me though. Kudos Glenn! The one thing I would add to Glenn's list of truss editing tips though would be this... You can get pretty much ANY truss configuration you want manually by using these tools... -Trim Object(s) -Extend Object(s) ...Both of which work for truss framing members just like they do with CAD objects -Join and Lap Ends -Join and Mitre Ends Anyway, just wanted to throw those additional ideas out there before I check out for the night.

Jacquilla, I won't get into the rest of the plan, just want to help you deal with the dilemma at hand. Your main problem is right here... All your layers are main layers which means you can only dimension to the one side of your dimension layer, the center of the wall, and the outside edges of the wall. What your wall definition should probably look like is this... Now you can dimension to both sides of the main layer as well as the center and outside edges.

I know you do Scott, and I appreciate you as well good sir. The points are a fairly minor detail although they do give a certain sense of satisfaction for an oftentimes thankless and underpaying job. My real point was that AT LEAST 3 people (judging by how rarely people distribute points I'd venture to guess the real number was much higher) either didn't take the time to read or comprehend my post (which wasn't all that complicated by the way) or they just chose to ignore it (pretty inconsiderate in a forum situation if you ask me). The points are just evidence to suggest the time I took writing it up may have been a waste of time is all. It's really no wonder so many people have such a problem attaining any sort of mastery of this program. If a person can't read and comprehend the forum, the manual, or the help files then they're stuck learning from videos. It would take countless hours, days, and weeks of watching videos to gain what you could learn in a few hours reading and taking time to comprehend what it is you're reading. I've noticed over the years that people seem to "understand" better when watching videos but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that they never really grasp the concept though unless they've trudged through and figured it out through hard earned first hand experience getting it done or by reading to comprehend. When a person reads something and puts forth the effort to really comprehend what the writer is saying, they're making a conscious decision to invest in learning something. They are very purposefully learning and it's more likely to stick. A video is very passive...you can much more easily fade in and out of consciousness watching and you don't have to put any real effort into learning. I've noticed that many people who require videos are some of the first to forget how to do it. They can't explain how it's done without pointing somebody else to another video and they're constantly re-watching videos because they don't remember how. I'm starting to ramble so I'll be done. It's just kind of frustrating to go out of your way to help and then realize people aren't even reading it.

Yep. That's exactly why I spelled it out in the post just before yours. It's funny, you got 2 points for making a video that just repeated exactly what I had just finished saying but I got nuthin'. I'm very seriously starting to question people's ability to read and comprehend anymore. If there's no video people just can't seem to understand. Not too encouraging...I probably shouldn't have wasted my time. But yes...great idea Perry, thanks for bringing it up.