Alaskan_Son

Several ways, some of which are a lot more complex, but typically best and easiest to simply use either a text box or a callout with the following macro: %room.schedule_number%

I already tested today and it works fine.

Yes. If you're talking about a system properly overclocked from the factory then we're no longer comparing apples to apples. As you've stated, you essentially just have a higher base clock speed. For all other overclocking, Dell's own recommendations state it well... "Alienware supports overclocking only when you order the system overclocked from factory. Please refer to your invoice or go to dell.com/support to check if your system was factory overclocked . Important: Altering clock frequency or voltage may damage or reduce the useful life of the processor and other system components, and may reduce system stability and performance. Product warranties may not apply if the processor is operated beyond its specifications."

It has worked that way as far back as I know Mark. It's automatically decompressed during the download process. I have always just clicked Save File and then double clicked to load it into Chief after its downloaded. Easy peasy.

Depending on your specific needs, the macros or object attributes you may be looking for are: hinge_side hinge_side_name swing_side swing_side_name

Its similar to mine. I feel like you are simultaneously oversimplifying the concept of boost speeds and overestimated the number of users who will (or even should) be overclocking, and that you're kinda intermingling the 2 when you should probably focus on one or the other. First off, I'd venture to guess that less than 1% of Chief users truly overclock their systems and even those that do are more than likely reducing the lifespan of their processor, so that concept should hardly be worth even mentioning. More specifically with regard to OOB boost speeds though, it should be stressed and stressed heavily that those speeds are only ever attained under just the right circumstances (when there's enough available power, when the temperature is low enough, and when the system feels the "need" is great enough), for short time periods, and for all intents and purposes only truly apply to a single core. A dusty air cooled machine in a warm room may never see the computer boost at all and even a well maintained liquid cooled machine may see very little benefit during a ray trace that's set to run for several hours on all cores. Plus, I'd argue that just because there isn't a load on the system doesn't mean processes wouldn't benefit from running at a higher base clock speed...a speed that can be maintained by design and OOB 100% of the time as opposed to the aforementioned boost speeds that are very situationally dependent. There are obviously many other factors to consider as well but the boost speed should be considered with a grain of salt for sure...kinda like comparing an engine with nitrous to one without. Yes the nitrous will provide more horsepower at the top end, but when, for how long, and at what cost?

Good theory but unfortunately it seems to create a bunch of other issues the way chief is currently set up. I feel like you guys should really qualify your statements with some context and reason. You’re doing a real disservice by discouraging the use of a very effective tool based on some very marginal use cases where it should rightly be avoided. In Joey’s example, using a thin “paint” layer on the ceiling is all well and good but as Chopsaw shows can have some notable issues when used on walls. Besides, painting that “paint” layer on the ceiling surface using the Material Painter is no different than changing it through the Room’s Material tab. And copying and changing the drywall material type could be done just as well using the Material Painter except that using the Material Painter you could also take advantage of the various Modes. In Chopsaw’s example, there’s a legitimate issue being shown but it has nothing to do with the ceiling finish issue being asked about and also has nothing to do with using the Material Painter. It’s just illustrating why it’s a bad practice to use a thin “paint” layer in your wall definition. And in Shane’s example, there’s no context or reason whatsoever. The truth is that the Material Painter is very commonly the best and most effective way of changing materials with only a small handful of exceptions. I have attached a link to a quick write up I did on the subject, but the short of it is that the vast majority of problems are simply caused by inadvertently painting with “Blend Colors with Materials” toggled on and when using on Exterior Walls (which by the way is also extremely easy to fix). Almost all other scenarios are problem free. In fact, using on Interior Wall surfaces can be the single MOST efficient and effective method. Anyway, Instead of using such broad and generic statements, why not learn and teach more specifically how the tools actually work. And if you’re going to discourage their use, how about using a little more detail and perhaps some relevant examples of when and why to avoid them.

How so?

It depends on how complex your Room Finish Schedule is, but one thing I really like to do for a good handful of situations is to use a Note Schedule along with Custom Object Fields. It offers a lot more control and flexibility, not only with regard to exactly what is displayed in the schedule but also with how the schedule is numbered, and organized, and how the rooms are labeled in the plan. If you were to go that route, you could simply use a Note with the %room.ceiling.finish.name% macro in one of your Custom Object Fields. Very quick, down and dirty example using Chief's "Modern Bungalow" plan... Modern Bungalow.zip

Still think there are more issues I'm forgetting but I remembered a coupe more... Similar to the Attic Wall issue, walls that are placed onto a non-default layer will also fail to automatically change layers when switched to Invisible or No Locate. Not as a big of a deal as the attic wall issue, but another thing to consider.

You have to follow the instructions all the way through to the end...

There are a few different ways to deal with this. Windows 10 has a built in feature though. Try this... Go to Settings>System>Display, go down to the bottom of that page and click on Graphics Settings. Under "Choose an app to set preferences", select Desktop App and then click Browse. Go to Program Files>Chief Architect>Chief Architect Premier X12 and scroll down to Chief Architect Premier X12.exe. Select that .exe file and click Add. Now click Options and select High Performance.

As usual, a great solution. Never thought of this before..... Just bear in mind that this method can cause some issues with attic walls. Automatically generated attic walls end up getting placed on the non-default layer to match the layer of the walls below instead of the "Walls, Attic" layer that they're normally placed on. This can make them a little tricky to manage in some scenarios...particularly if they are being generated on the same floor as other normal walls. If you want to turn them off for example, you have to place them onto a different layer, and when you do that, the wall is no longer automatically regenerated. It also makes troubleshooting attic walls a lot more difficult for the same general reason...they're not being placed onto the "Walls, Attic" layer. I'm pretty sure there are some other issues I'm not remembering too but the attic walls problems alone are worth considering.

Like the other guys said, you can use the Control or Command key to override all snaps but you could also probably just turn off Grid Snaps along with the Object Snaps that you're already turning off. With both Object Snaps and Grid Snaps turned off my Tape Measure tool won't snap to anything.

Isn't a direct answer to the question and it's not a perfect solution for all scenarios, but sometimes I just use the "Roofs, Overhang Area" layer and turn the walls off completely.

It may be something they've since fixed (this thread was from back in X11 days) because as Robert stated above, it seems to work in X12.

On a side note, are you aware that you can control all your Edge Lines simply using your layer settings? Pattern Lines are a different story, but you can handle at least 1 of the 2 more dynamically than you currently are.

Unfortunately, there is no single default for those. They must be set individually just like you’re doing now.

This isn’t good—that you’re unsure and have to make guesses. You should KNOW where these are being stored. If you don’t, you should check your settings. And if they’re nit saving to the appropriate folder, you should report to Chief.

A couple of my own observations. 1. The Archives can be tough to read. Sometimes I think I’ve lost a backup until I sort the files By Date and then start reading the names a lot more carefully. 2. The little pop-up message you get when first opening your file after a program crash or unexpected shutdown can be super helpful. When Chief tells you that it has a newer file than the one you saved, may be in your best interest to check it out.

It’s one of the side effects of Chief’s room based modeling paradigm. It’s not only a problem with the walls that need to extend below the room definition but also a problem with the outside corner that lands above the roof where the roof cuts those 2 exterior walls down. Aside from patching with Polyline Solids, the only other solution I can think of is to insert a short floor and use an Open Below room.

There are a few methods Steve. You can manually modify the truss polyline, you can manually modify the truss members, or you can use the required calculations to make it happen automatically. For the latter, you can either take the necessary measurements in an elevation view and adjust the roof plane accordingly, or you can input the required numbers directly into the Build Roof dialog. Amongst other things, the required formula depends on whether you want to use a specific overhang or a specific heel height. I posted some macros to help speed up these calculations in another thread. See if this helps at all... ...as Michael alluded to above though, the numbers need to be set just so. I wouldn’t say it’s hit and miss, but it can definitely seem that way if your measurements and calculations aren’t precise.

As Eric has already alluded to, try to really take advantage of the resources Chief has provided. Particularly, I would recommend learning to take advantage of The Help files. The tab Eric shows above will take you to some very good information in those files. Even better in my opinion is to very carefully read through the options in the various dialogs, and any time you have a questions as to what the setting is for, click the little Help button down in the corner. In this case, clicking Help and reading through the various options should ultimately lead you here... ...to the Upper Pitch setting...which is what I believe you are after.

Do you get a new dog for each project?

My thoughts: Using the %box_scale% macro in your Plan View name muddles up the Plan View list, you still have to open the Layout Box Specification dialog every time and check Specify Label if you want to get the intended benefits, and if you change the Layout Box to use a different Plan View, you have to remember to go back to the Label tab and actually change the label manually. Plus, you can't use multiple Text Styles for your label. If you want to use the %box_scale% macro, my suggestion is to simply use a Text Box with an Arrow. Just copy and paste as necessary for other layout boxes. Total Control over text style(s), automatic changes if you change referenced Plan View, and no muddling up your Plan View naming. Just place the lines with arrows onto a unique layer that can be toggled on and off as necessary.