Alaskan_Son

I would welcome a feature like that as well, but I think its a whole lot easier said than done. Because of Chief's room based modelling approach and because of the way walls, floors, and roofs make automatic connections, I'm thinking multiple walls would be next to impossible...which is probably the reason we're currently limited to having only 2 walls occupy the same space (1 normal and 1 no room definition)...even with just those 2 we run into connection issues. Any more than that and how is Chief supposed to know how to make any of those connections? Like anything there would also be unexpected costs and consequences . We would either have to start manually setting each and every wall, floor, and roof connection parameter, or the program would become slower and more complicated, or it would get more expensive, or likely a bit of all 3...before you know it we have Revit. If that's what you want, go buy Revit. Would the feature be cool? Maybe. Would it be worth it? Probably not. Just my opinion.

Two things I'd like to say here. Number one, just because we hear a request often doesn't make it realistically feasible. Chief's room based system works differently than many other design programs. I think it may simultaneously be one if its biggest strengths and its biggest weaknesses. I believe most everything and everybody that is really good at anything is going to have this same problem. Number two, just because you see another program do something doesn't make what we're doing in Chief a "workaround". That's simply ridiculous.

Yep. That's what I was talking about.

Turning off ceiling break lines didn't actually fix anything. It just hid your problem so you can no longer see it in plan view. I only took a quick look, but truth is that I don't see any "glitches". As Johnny suggested you just don't have a super clean model is all. I'm not sure where to start as I'm obviously not very familiar with your project, but you have some discrepancies between your roof heights, your ceiling heights, your roof structure settings, your soffit settings, your roof overhangs, and/or your deck wall settings...maybe all the above...and maybe even more than that. All the issues can be fixed by changing the correct settings though.

No no no. This idea is not that crazy. I don't feel the need to use it for very many things, but for a handful of items like light fixtures the library is just a huge hassle to search through. Only a couple clicks to open a light fixture plan and create an overview where you could quickly and easily see all the various options and compare/contrast.

Wow Johnny. That is a super cool idea in my book. The mask most people use could become the CAD block for the symbol. I see no reason why that wouldn't work. You could even make symbols for various components or layers. Not sure I would personally ever use the idea but very creative thinking nonetheless and could potentially result in some pretty stinkin cool presentations.

Check your ROOM's material settings. Make sure it's set to use default material.

Build your terrain, make the skirt taller and place your cameras outside the terrian. Or, use a CAD mask.

This sounds like a very interesting plan. I'm curious to see who cares enough to participate. I'm liking the warehouse plan idea though. Very cool idea.

As long as you are actually moving the LABEL and not the symbol, the label should move independently for the various camera views. I definitely agree that using the automated schedule method for elevation notes is a bit more difficult. Not bad at all if you can get used to the process but nowhere near as easy as using the system for notes in plan view.

Although our suggested methods are similar, my opinion differs from Joey's in that I don't think there is any problem at all using Chief for remodels.

There have been countless threads on this subject. Search "demolition" or "as built mask" and you'll probably come up with several. Don't have a lot of time to get into it right now, but three quick notes... 1. Using layers for this sort of thing in Chief doesn't work very well IMO and you can only have two walls occupy the same space at any given time. The key to getting this method to sort of work is to set one of the walls to "no room definition". 2. What most people do is draw up the as built, use that to create a CAD mask, and then overlay that mask onto the proposed plan to represent demolition walls. 3. What I personally do is draw up the as built, do a save as, use that to draw up the demolition plan, do another save as, then use that to draw up the proposed. I just send views from all three plans to layout as necessary.

Here's my method Scott, and you'll have to bear with me a bit... I leave them in the folders Chief provided.

Here you go. Took a few minutes to make a quick video...

Try Edit>Preferences>Reset Options>Reset Side Windows

Absolutely agree. I would probably be tempted to save a copy of the original solid too though just in case you decide you need to modify it in the future. Symbols are great as finished products but not so great when you want to add or modify something (other than basic sizing or material changes).

Gotcha. Your method was very similar to mine except that instead of making the frame really shallow I just removed it entirely. Same basic idea though.

Quick follow up. I was away from my computer when I made that last post. I tested that idea out when I got back to the office though. It definitely works but its also definitely a bit of a PITA. Not worth it IMO. Having said that, I still think its the fastest option we currently have. I believe every other option would require even more work.

All you should need for that one is 3 polyline solids and 2 truncated pyramids. I'll try to make a video if I have a few spare minutes a little later. You shouldn't actually need to use any faces (I honestly don't think I've ever actually needed them for anything as there's almost...if not always...another way). I touched on them very briefly in this video though. In this instance they were only the faces resulting from an exploded solid, but the face tool gives you essentially the same thing without starting with a solid.

I think the best you're gonna be able to do is this...copy paste in place a second set of dimensions. Specify one as having only blank segments (new option in X8) and set the other to have no extensions at all. Assign different line styles to each.

I'm guessing it's the same technique mentioned in the first part of post #20

Only have a couple minutes before I head into a meeting, but real quick... I could be misunderstanding you, but if you place the wall breaks like I suggested, Chief should automatically add studs at all those breaks.

Very nice Joe.

I don't think I understand. Is this a question or a comment? And can you clarify what you mean?

Check out post #32 to see if that gives you any useful answers. The 3 biggest things are... 1. The plant labels layer needs to be on (as well as the plants or notes layer...or whatever layer you have them on). 2. The symbol needs to be placed between your camera and the nearest object (i.e. so that the camera can actually "see" it) 3. The symbol needs to be rotated properly as noted in the aforementioned post