Alaskan_Son

You can also simply drop a Wall Schedule into the plan, select the row corresponding to the Wall Type in question, and then click Find in Plan.

Try using End to End Dimensions instead of Point to Point.

Please submit a bug report if you want to see this fixed.

There's 2 big things to think about here: Chief measure the baseline height from the top of the framing (NOT the top of fascia). This means you may need to take both sheathing thickness and fascia thickness into account. When dealing with multiple pitches and assuming the same size lumber if used for the corresponding components on each roof, you can only ever align ONE component horizontally. You can align top of rafter, you can align bottom of rafter, you can align top of sheathing, you can align bottom of sheathing, you can align fascia, or you can align subfascia. You can only pick one though. Something has to give. In the real world, in order to get pitches like this to line up we have to use different sized sub-fascia, shifted sub-fascia, clipped tails, etc.

Not automatic, but you can speed up the process using the following: Select the desired object(s) Convert Selected to Symbol>Show Advanced Options Use the Rotation settings to rotate the symbol so that its flat Drop the symbol into the plan Cross Section the symbol

3D views: Pattern tab, Horizontal and Vertical Offsets. Plan views: Fill Style tab, Horizontal and Vertical Offsets.

Can you expand on this?

I'm curious if Revit can actually do this either. This set of Revit drawings I have here on my desk for a current project has the callouts out of order and missing numbers in the sequence.

Attributes>Margins>Top and/or Bottom

If I understand correctly what you're saying, it isn't a Normal Map that you need. What you need is a proper Pattern. Patterns are used to create the lines on any vector based views (Vector, Technical Illustration, and Line Drawing). Textures are used for all other views.

Using triangular roof sections just like you've shown in this picture is how I've done complex roofs like this in the past. Its tedious. You have to map out the fascia shape and then use that information to set your baseline angles and roof pitches. Its doable but time consuming for certain. You can also cheat it with just a single roof plane (curved, pitched, and baseline tilted) but its not as accurate..

Who forced you to upgrade your video card?

Not sure if this answers your question or not, but Rooms will automatically report using the Schedule Category matching their Room Type. This means YOU could automate the process by defining and assigning the room types to each room as you draw them so that they are always reporting to the correct schedule(s). The key is to make sure that your schedules are set to report the correct room type(s) from the appropriate floor(s).

Can you expand on what you mean by this?

Unless Chief added some hidden functionality recently that I haven't found yet, this still has to be done manually. If you only have one room schedule that the object is reporting to though, it can be as simple as dropping a callout into the plan with %room.schedule_number% in the label and just copying and pasting that around.

I personally use custom macros and regularly teach that system to users as a for-hire consultant; however, we can also use custom schedules and custom schedule categories for this purpose as well. I recently spelled out the basics in another thread here... Here's an example more specific to this question though using Chief's Nashville plan as a basis... Nashville Areas.zip

If I was you, I think I would be putting both of upper level floor platforms on the same level and that I would simply create the opening with an Open to Below room type.

No, not necessarily. I think using the data file as a starting point is a great method that can save lots of time. As you've discovered, sometimes you just need to replace some of the data points with more appropriate objects. A couple of the more common things we run into are more elevation lines/points than are necessary (just delete some) and overly segmented terrain elevation polylines (replace with lines or simplified polylines). No matter what though, we can certainly use the imported data as a starting point...it just typically needs a bit of cleanup is all.

You should start another thread when you have new questions, but yes, there are multiple ways. Here are a few: Select Terrain, Open Object, check Hide Terrain Intersected by Building Select Terrain and click Make Terrain Hole(s) around Building(s) Use the Terrain Hole tool to manually draw your hole in the terrain

Not sure you quite followed. You can use separate schedules for each unit. Here's a quick example plan: Test.plan Also, just a side note, but I would suggest you abandon your "contained rooms" train of thought. The concept very quickly comes crashing down when: the overall footprint of the unit doesn't actually "contain" one of its rooms there is no overriding large room or when there are adjacent rooms of equal size when a the largest room is broken up into smaller rooms using room dividers when there are rooms inside of rooms inside of rooms when the largest room is surrounded by smaller rooms etc.

There are several ways, many of which have already been mentioned directly or alluded to. One that hasn't been mentioned though is to simply use a Custom Schedule. Just make sure all rooms in any given unit are set to report to a Schedule using a Custom Schedule Category and then set your schedule to report only that one Category. Make sure your schedules for each unit are set to report a Totals Row and there you have it. In fact, if you set your Schedule to Swap Rows/Columns and then Right justify the schedule text then your total will always remain in the exact same location so that you can simply use a cropped layout box or you could even mask it. This approach can be used to tabulate all sorts of things. The 2 key elements though are: Having your objects report to the appropriate Category/Categories Having your schedule only report the appropriate Category/Categories The tip regarding swapping rows/columns and right justifying isn't necessary, but it will help you not have to reposition your schedule after any changes to the plan have been made.

Ironic, because that's how we've been showing topography on just about every map and drawing produced for the last 100 years. I think the general method you decided to try out was a really good one (the idea of simply copying automatically produced elevation data that you're happy with). I would however suggest that you can simply trace over the elevation data before deleting your points instead of using a picture. You could also optionally create a CAD Detail From View and then use that for reference.

That just tells me that you're probably: A. Working with too many data points and/or... B. Giving Chief conflicting information You're only going to get little humps or depressions like that if you've defined the terrain in the adjacent areas incorrectly. Like I said, less is more. Start simple and then add data as necessary to refine.

Curious where you got that number from.

I could be misunderstanding having not seen the lot, but I disagree. Typically less is more with terrain elevation data. It could take as little as 2 pieces of elevation data; 2 points, or a flat region and a single point maybe...