Alaskan_Son

Not too shabby Richard!

Although I'm sure this was posted with the best of intentions and although I'm sure you know what you meant to convey, this statement is still fraught with errors and I think it needs to be clarified. CAD Blocks can be used and stored anywhere in your plan or layout. This could be in Plan View, in a CAD Detail, in an Elevation View, on a Layout Page, etc. They will always be available in CAD Block Management though if they exist anywhere in the plan. This should not be confused with CAD Detail Management. Robert was referring specifically to CAD Block Management. Not only does CAD Block Management give you access to each and every CAD Block currently being used in that file, it will also give you access to every CAD Block that has EVER been used in the plan unless those CAD Blocks have either been manually purged or automatically purged by checking Automatically Purge CAD Blocks. I have seen this particular item cause MASSIVE file bloat in plans where people use the old "Save As Method" for a long time. I personally recommend keeping Automatically Purge CAD Blocks checked unless you really know what you're doing and why you're doing it.

There does seem to be some sort of limit. I've seen this behavior manifest itself with minimum sizing but this is the first time I've seen it with maximum sizing. The problem isn't actually triggered by moving the object. It's triggered by opening the Fixture Specification dialog and doing anything except hitting Cancel. You just have to move it without using Open Object. Use either Transform Replicate or Move in an elevation. You should also report to Tech Support.

good to know. I believe that’s the first time I actually posted a pre-formatted macro like that. I just won’t do it anymore.

I suggest one slight adjustment that saves tons of time...Explode, Make Architectural Block while still selected, an then change any colors you want.

You bet. Not sure if you are or not, but don't be to intimidated by the task. It's really not that difficult to set up. Just shoot me over an email if you need help.

CAD was my first thought too, but ultimately, I see the Referenced Plan as being way faster and far less error prone. If you make any changes to the Plan... With the CAD method you have to delete the old CAD, switch Layer Set, create new CAD Detail, switch Layer Set back, copy and Paste CAD, and Delete extra CAD Detail. With the second plan method all you have to do is Save As 2 times and you're done. Of course you have to change the Plan Display back and forth for both methods.

I place appliances independently of cabinets almost exclusively.

Alan, Ruby would be all but useless for that, however, it’s something you could totally accomplish with a simple macro recorder. I recommend Macro Recorder by JitBit... https://www.jitbit.com/macro-recorder/ You essentially just record key strokes and/or mouse clicks and assign to a hotkey. In fact, a lot of gaming mice and keyboard come with built in macro recording software so you might already have something similar.

I agree with Joe. This is probably the most efficient solution. Just add a quick Save As to part of your workflow before printing your layouts.

That's certainly a good reason for showing parallel. I do wonder though, how you do you communicate where the joists sizes or spacing are supposed to change using that system?

I guess I should have further qualified my statement. I've met folks here on ChiefTalk who do it that way. Don't believe I've met anyone in person who does though or outside of Chief for that matter. Even so, here are my quick thoughts on why I prefer perpendicular... If you're showing the joists in your plan, the direction arrow becomes entirely redundant if it's running parallel. With the label running perpendicular, it can much more effectively communicate the extent of the specified joists (i.e. which sizes should be used at what spacing and where). Running parallel can really only give a size, redundant direction, and has no way of effectively communicating which joists it is referring to. In addition, parallel labels blend into the joists a whole lot easier making them harder to pick out.

I'm suspecting you posted this in the wrong thread.

If you draw a Floor Ceiling Beam, a Roof Beam, a Post, a General Framing Member, or just about any other Framing Object for that matter, they all have the Option on the General Panel to by drawn as a "Steel-I" Type.

I'm assuming you have an invisible wall here... ...just change it to a Gable Wall

I use manual joist direction lines for a different reason entirely...I run my joist labels perpendicular to the joist direction and always have. In fact, I don't think I personally know any designers or architects who label them parallel and I don't recall having ever built off a set of plans where they were labeled that way either. Actually, I don't like Chief's automated label text either.

Ah, I see.

That just shifts the problem elsewhere if you ask me, and for whatever its worth, you can get the same results by adjusting the bearing line over on the left. In fact, delete that Joist Direction Line and the bearing line on the left and you're right back at square one. Bottom line is that Chief definitely treat this scenario in unexpected ways. Again, it's very easy to reproduce with a blank plan using no joist direction lines at all.

Ya, I was pretty sure it required exactly 5 repetitions, but I wasn't 100% positive so I said 5 or 6 and kept it less specific just in case. I think it's one of those things I was trying to force at one point be trying various things (Time, Speed, etc.). At one point, it finally stuck, so I knew it was possible and just stayed persistent till I figured out why. I'm not sure I would have ever figured it out, except that I'm relatively certain we used to only have to tell Chief 3 times (which was a lot easier to discover by accident). Before I answered your question, I tested it again and 3 times didn't work, but since I knew it used to work I just kept trying. It seems Chief has become a bit more hard headed over the years. P.S. Probably worth reporting to tech support if its a feature you want to hold onto and make easier to use.

Sorry bud, this isn't a view specific setting. It's all one way or all the other.

No. I don't believe it does. The issue you're showing is very easy to reproduce in about 30 seconds starting with a blank plan. Report it to tech support.

This may change things a bit with regard to what gets deleted since the program doesn't have a chance to finish running through it's normal order of operations. Chief has changed the undo system over the years to speed things up. I believe at one point they did essentially save the entire plan. I believe the system now though only records the information necessary to reverse the last command. This would explain why some Undo files are very small and others are quite large.

You should rotate it back to zero. If you want the house oriented 90 degrees off what it is at zero, then do that by using Edit Area (All Floors).

Here's one quick way: Orthographic Floor Overview (Shift+G) 3D>View Direction>Top View 3D>Rendering Techniques>Line Drawing OPTIONALLY 3D>Toggle Patterns to turn off excessive linework caused by pattern display.

This would probably be good. We all kinda feel like what we're doing is pretty standard, but I find very few systems are actually the same. More often than not, there's some specific detail that's entirely unlike anything anyone else is doing...or we're just talking about 2 different things. So ya, an example would be helpful just to make sure we're on the same page.