Alaskan_Son

Just to be clear, what you're showing has nothing to do with the truss. It's a limitation with framing members. I do agree that it would be nice if we could edit framing members more freely though. In the meantime we have to trim them with other framing members to get the desired shapes.

It is controlled by the layer color. You just won't see it change if the camera is open. Send to layout or close the camera and you'll see the line color change.

If you ever want to share symbols with people using older versions, just open a 3D view and Export as 3DS.

Make sure to Open SYMBOL, not Open Object.

To expand on what Robert is showing, I would recommend: Dropping symbol into a blank plan Open Symbol and turn Smoothing Angle up to 180 Use Delete Surface tool to delete unwanted surfaces one at a time (turning Smoothing Angle up makes this much quicker) Click Tools>Symbol>Convert To Symbol

Sorry Doug, just got back to my actual computer and realized that I was being sloppy again and misread your code earlier. What you did was just fine. My bad . I should have waited till I was able to focus a little better. I'd love to help you if I can find the time. In the meantime, here's a quick little lesson on the house. Chief stores the height and width for your door as a Measurement in inches in Imperial plans (millimeters in Metric plans). In my original, sloppy, uncorrected version of %(width/12).round%, I was taking the width (in inches), dividing by 12, and rounding it to the nearest whole unit. So, for a 16'-1"(193") wide door, The actual result would have been 193"/12 (16.08333") rounded to the nearest whole unit (16"). The result would have been displayed simply as 16 (no unit indicator) if a person were to uncheck Use Default Formatting in the Label panel, but it would still be stored as inches, which is exactly the bad practice I was telling Doug to avoid. My corrected version of %(width/12).to_f.round% took the value (in inches), divided by 12, converted to a float (essentially a number that includes fractional values in decimal form), and then rounded that value to the nearest whole number. Note that a float is NOT a Measurement but a completely unit-less number. So the result would be 193"/12 or 16.08333" converted to a float (16.08333), rounded to the nearest whole number (16). Doug's correction of %(width/12.inch).round% took the value (in inches), divided it by a specific number (also in inches) and the result was a unit-less Measurement value. This is completely fine for this particular use case, but it should be noted that the result is being stored in a somewhat funky state because it's still a Measurement but has no unit. This is particularly weird if you try to add it to another Linear Measurement with a specified unit in which case you would get an error. In addition, you wouldn't be able to even assign a unit without first converting the result to a float. All this is a non-issue with your particular use case, but it’s something to think about while you’re learning the syntax and developing your own personal methods. I think a more logical, more correct, and more useful method might simply be %width.to_ft.round% which would simultaneously convert the inches to feet (no math necessary on our part) and convert that to a float. Using this same logic approach, a person could easily convert their door sizes to meters without needing to know the conversion with something like like %width.to_m% Anyway, there's a lot more to the Measurement class but it's really quite useful and can make very quick and easy work of otherwise complex calculations. Quick example: a = 1.ft + 1.m +1.in ----> 52.370079 in b = a.to_m ----> 1.3302 ...very quick and easy conversions. I could spend all day digging deeper, but those are a few of the very basic basics as they relate to this particular topic at hand.

Still away from my computer, but try this %12.in+12.ft% and see what you get.

Sorry, I just quickly tapped that out on my phone. Not at the computer. I wouldn’t recommend your solution as a general rule since the results technically store the information as inches (a very small garage door ) and getting into that habit could result in some incorrect values when used in calculations. There are other ways of storing an accurate value using .to_ft and there are tons of other approaches I could have taken, but using the original method I listed above, the safer syntax (and what I corrected my original post to say) is... %(width.to_f/12).round% x %(height.to_f/12).round% GARAGE DOOR

%(width.to_f/12).round% x %(height.to_f/12).round% GARAGE DOOR

It sounds like the OP is using HD but they’re showing a screenshot they found online. I’m away from my computer and don’t actually remember, but the HD product line may not even have the Centerline option. Best to post the question over in the HomeTalk forum... https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com/

I typically just take a single camera, paint all visible elements with the appropriate colors, export image, paint with next scheme, export image, paint with next scheme, export image, etc. You may want to use multiple cameras to provide different vantage points but the basic idea remains the same. Cameras remain in fixed position. It’s easy enough to change colors once the client decides what they want. The problem with multiple files is that it’s a lot more problematic if you start wanting to change or fix little things since it would necessitate that you make the same changes to all versions of the plan.

By the way, just to be clear, I have no problem with exploring other software. On the contrary, I have used many programs in my workflow as do plenty of other users just like me. My statements were more geared toward our primary design software(s). Failing to stay current means not only that you're missing out on the latest tools but also that you're falling behind on the learning curve.

If I had the time or desire to do so? Yes. Do I have the time or desire? No. I can't even find time for paying customers these days much less finding time to donate. Besides, I would really need to spend time exploring your unique needs and workflow. Each user has different needs, but it has been my experience that the vast majority of users simply don't recognize all the areas where they're missing out or just doing things inefficiently. That's a funny statement. It's exactly this aversion to dedication that keeps anyone from ever mastering or fully realizing just about anything.

I don't even know where to start...honestly, I can't find the mental energy to even begin to break it down because there are so many little intricacies that come into play, but from the perspective of a professional kitchen and bath designer, a long time CA user, and a professional trainer, I can tell you this: If you can't see any reason to upgrade then 95% of the time it's because you're either not learning the tools very well or you're not using them very efficiently. When I'm hired to train, coach, or act as a consultant for a person or company using a Home Designer product line or an older version, I find myself almost constantly having to side note that there are much better ways to do this or that in X12 or that certain operations aren't even possible with their current version. If you do this for a living, I really think you're missing out by not staying current.

I could spend hours going over all the various intricacies and I have neither the time or inclination to do so; however you can totally accomplish what you're after with the various tools Chief has given us. Just to name a few things to get you started (some of which have already been mentioned): Using Layers, Layer Sets, and Layer settings to limit what is reported. Specifically, checking or unchecking Material List for any given layer tells Chief whether to include items on that layer in the Materials List or not. Using the Components tab. This tab controls exactly what any given item is going to report to the Materials List. Use the Add/Remove Line Item tools and adjust the Formula field for any given row to set exactly what you want reported. Using one or more Materials List Polylines. This can further isolate what exactly gets reported and from where.

Thanks Doug. It's not the greatest. It wasn't edited, included some unnecessary steps for that particular scenario, and I skipped over perfecting some things I otherwise would have taken a moment to deal with, but I think it gets the general idea across.

Here's one of them...

Just be careful going down this road, because there are a number of notable issues that arise when you do it WITHOUT a wall too.

Eric gave good advice for future projects. For the current project, you can always just send to layout from your other plan if you want too. Just Save As and name it something like Temporary Detail Warehouse and send from that plan.

For what its worth, the OOB shortcut for Pan is simply P

I refer to that as click-release-click vs. click-drag-release. The method I use to force the behavior in Chief is: 1. Click and drag to start operation 2. Shift+Z (Zoom) during drag 3. Press either Center Mouse Wheel (Pan) or optionally the Escape key 4. Pan and zoom as desired (NOTE: If you’re panning anyway, which you likely are if you’re employing the trick, then the step above isn't even necessary) 5. Click again to finish You can customize your hotkeys to make the operation pretty easy but for me, the OOB ones actually work just fine.

Its not hiding anything. It just moved down to floor zero.

Those fills are used for section views and are only created if you use the Auto Detail tool. If you want a fill to show up in your room in plan view, add that fill to your actual room using the Fill Style tab (not the Structure tab).

I really wish Chief would allow us to use Notes in Layout. This is another example of many where notes and a note schedule would make a lot of sense.