Alaskan_Son

I think another problem lies when the library is NOT open in Chief (i.e. will Dropbox "lock" the library when you need to open it) and if Chief can somehow override that...due to its size (especially with slower connections) can you really be sure the library ever gets synced. Also, just to clarify, I believe the location you and Eric are referring to is nothing more than your user catalog (i.e. it does not include the core catalogs, the bonus catalogs, or any of the manufacturer catalogs. For the vast majority of users I believe the user catalog is a mere fraction of the size of the rest of the library. I believe the rest of those catalogs are hidden somewhere here... Maybe in the actual application itself? I'm really not sure. What I do know is this...if you move your entire user catalog (not including core catalogs, bonus catalogs, or manufacturer catalogs) to the trash, the size of the User_Library in that other location becomes extremely small and the Trash file in that same location changes accordingly. As I said, I also believe if you double click on the User_Library you will end up duplicating everything in your user catalog (but not in any of the others). I seem to recall making that mistake when I first started using Chief. EDIT: One more quick detail. Consider this...My User_Library file is a mere 40,000 KB. The Viking catalog alone is over 192,000 KB. Those additional catalogs must be hidden somewhere else...I don't know, maybe they're in one of the other hidden folders elsewhere...its a bit of a mystery to me but they've got to be somewhere...

That's just your user library. Click on your C drive and check you Program Files for a lot more stuff. Be careful though...don't mess with any of it unless you know what you're doing. Even clicking on that user library...which will result in duplicate files in your user library inside Chief.

Away from my computer right now but check your C Drive Program Files folder.

I was editing my post at the same time you were posting this. As I noted above, it's the syncing and file access issue that I would most suspect as a potential problem. Maybe you should go ahead and try it out and let the rest of us know how it goes :-)

Ya, I understand how it works fairly well and have used it myself in the past both manually and the automated folder system. You could be right and I may very well be wrong, it might not cause any lag, but for a file structure as large and complex as the library it seems likely that there would be issues...syncing such a large file and file access during that sync is one of the main things that comes to mind.

Yikes! That sounds crazy. Seems like you'd be asking for problems with slowness. One of the best things I think I ever did with my system was put everything onto an SSD. By putting everything into DB it seems like you would be going in the opposite direction.

Not sure this will be helpful to your cause Chopsaw, but I haven't been having the problem for some time now. I actually spent nearly half an hour recently with the reply window open and my post went through with no problem at all. FWIW, that was in the middle of the night (couldn't sleep so I got up and played around on the computer). I'm using Firefox. I still suspect some of the problems may be connectivity related.

Edit>Preferences>Reset Options>Reset Side Windows and then close and reopen Chief. I'm guessing you accidentally dragged the browser off to the edge of your screen somewhere.

You would have guessed that the OP was using holes in the floor platform? Impressive...Most Impressive. : )

Thanks for posting the plan. Your problem is in the method you're using to create the open to above/below situation. The way I would typically recommend handling that situation in Chief would not be with holes through the floor but rather with a room definition. Build walls on the second floor (either invisible or visible as necessary) to enclose a "room" above the area you would like open and then use the room type "Open Below". It may help to have your reference display turned on and you may also find it helpful to use the Align With Wall Below tool to get your walls properly positioned...either that or just Copy the appropriate walls from 1st floor and Paste/Hold Position to second floor and resize/change to invisible as necessary. I'm really glad you attached the plan. I don't think any of us would have ever guessed that one.

I think you would really be best served if you were to post the plan. There are simply too many variables to give you anything other than guesses otherwise. And at the very least you should usually post a screenshot of your problem just so we can see what you're talking about.

Gotcha. That means a person could copy and paste lines to a Plan Footprint CAD detail to get different settings on the same floor plan if they wanted. Thanks Glenn, I'm gonna have to test that out tomorrow. To answer your question Scott, It's not a feature I personally recall using but one never knows when a tool might come in handy so I figure it can't hurt to know how to use one more of those tools in the toolbox for when such a circumstance might arise. I imagine if I had to draw up more plot plans I might make pretty heavy use of it. Not something I've had to do very often though.

Interesting. I've never noticed this behavior before. I'll have to test when I get back to my computer but if what you're saying is true, I wonder...could the settings also be set differently for each CAD detail?

Yep. Text style is defined by layer settings. And I believe you are correct. There is no way to define the dimension format for individual lines or groups of lines. Any change to the dimension style affects ALL displayed lengths and angles throughout the plan.

Not sure what version you're using...might be a good idea to post that, but there are at least three things you can do that immediately come to mind... 1. You can use the Adjust Material Definition tool (little rainbow icon) and just delete the texture file from the material definition (under the Texture tab). This way you can simply paint the door whatever color you want either with the spray can or by simply changing the color on the General tab. 2. You can set the material painter to Blend Colors With Materials which will keep the material definition but change the color. It will also almost always leave some sort of remnant of the texture though which is not always welcome...depends on the look you're going for. You can also achieve the same result by using the Adjust Material Definition tool and checking Blend With Texture and selecting a new color. 3. Click on the Material Painter>Plan Material>New (or Copy if you prefer as alluded to in Option #1) and just make your own material.

...also check your Offset From Ceiling setting (although it seems you would know if you had messed with that). If none of the above helps it would probably be a good idea for you to post the plan. It would alleviate a lot of guesswork.

I made this video a while back and realized afterward that I could have used a quicker method by group selecting the polyline solids and completing the polyline subtraction for each window and door in a single step, but it might help some of you. I personally still like the added panels to the surface method. Doesn't seem all that difficult or time consuming to me. It just requires a little more cleanup than the material region method does if you decided to make any changes to the walls, doors, windows, etc...

Thank you Alan, that is very kind of you.

One additional idea to add to this: You can also consider using multiple walls side by side in order to avoid cutting through the substrate layers. Something like this... -Wall #1 might have interior finish layers, framing layer, exterior sheathing, and building wrap -Wall #2 might have a black or exterior finish colored "shadow line" material for the main layer followed by your exterior finish layer(s). -Your material region "grooves" would be applied to Wall #2 and again...the material regions would go onto their own layer and simply be turned off. This way your details and model will be a lot more accurate. Quick sample plan just to give you a very rough idea... Groove 2.plan

Sorry Johnny...I have no answer for you.. Please make sure that gets reported though. I would just keep trying different settings to maybe narrow it down a bit. Maybe try not saving image to file?

Its working fine Johnny, its just that your upper walls have a much thinner group of exterior layers. Make the material region thinner for the upper floor walls and you should be good to go.

Okay, so I played with this a bit for you. First things first...A couple quick notes: 1. You need to use a wall material region, it must be drawn on the wall in an elevation view, and it must be set to Cut Finish Layers Of Parent Object. Looks like maybe you're using a floor material region (drawn in plan view). 2. Forget what i said about using Opening (no material). Not sure what I was thinking, there's really no benefit to that option. I would usually just use panels applied to the surface for this sort of thing so I hadn't really explored the methods I mentioned above until now. It actually works pretty well except for a few things... A. There seems to be a handful of bugs associated with material regions that make converting the polyline grid work less than efficient and so its a little more time consuming than what I thought it would be. There also seem to be a handful of small bugs associated with material regions in general that make the method pretty tedious. Because of that I'm thinking panels applied to the surface might be just as fast. B. Glenn is correct that the corners are somewhat of an issue. I didn't think they would be because all we're doing is cutting the finish away however I hadn't accounted for the layers we're using to actually cut those finish layers. C. The material region will cut through ALL your finish layers (some of which we would want to leave in place in the real world). So, here are my conclusions... The method I described should really only be used for show and will not be entirely accurate. If you want accuracy you can set the material region to account for the finish layers that will be remaining but then you have the issues at the corners. So, if you don't want to apply panels to the surface I would personally just apply the material regions (any materials at all actually) and use the last of those 3 methods I mentioned above...put them on a unique layer and just turn the layer off. If you go this route you'll probably want to add a zero (or very thin) thickness color to your walls main layers so your framing isn't exposed. Here's a very quick sample plan... Groove plan.plan

Actually, after giving it a little thought, I think the method I mentioned above is actually quite a bit faster than creating panels. You could very easily create a grid work out of standard strip shaped polylines, group select them, polyline union, and convert to material region. A lot of possibility.

Not sure whether its faster than just creating panels on the surface or not, but you can use a material region, set it to cut surface and (depending on the situation) either: A. Make it thinner than the wall finish and use a dark color to create a shadow line B. Use Opening (no material) for the material. C. Put it on a unique layer and turn the layer off Hopefully that helps get you headed in the right direction.

Hey Sean, I would probably draw an extra little section of perpendicular wall at that location. Here's another quick crappy video for you...the second in my Quick Crappy Videos For Sean series : )