Alaskan_Son

^^^^This

Alan, I may be misunderstanding, by instead of room.ceiling_insulation.area.round(3), why not use room.ceiling_insulation.area.round(2)? Then your numbers should match.

This^^^^^

No need to even create a text box. The Copy and Paste operation will automatically create a Rich Text box anyway.

Kevin, I sent you a PM.

The options we have for controlling exactly what gets calculated by the Material List and how those items get calculated are some of the most robust controls for anything we have in Chief. I really don’t have the time to type it all up, but everything you’ve been asking about with regard to the Material List is totally doable. I sent you a PM, but give me a quick call when you’re in front of the computer and I’ll give you a few pointers on-the-house.

There should be no reason to check Bearing Wall for the scenario being discussed. All that should be necessary is Create Wall/Footing Below. Also, I would definitely recommend against checking either of those settings across the board. It should done for the walls where you specifically want a foundation wall and not anywhere else, simply selecting all railing walls or changing the default are both just asking for problems.

Don’t forget that there are commonly plumbing, gas/fuel, and mechanical codes that also govern many of these things and that almost always override anything you might find in the general building code.

Not sure when Chief implemented this, but I just recently found that Chief started allowing us to execute single lines of code right inside any data entry field where macros are accepted. Not sure if this happened with the initial X12 release or in the latest update. It's pretty cool though so I figured I'd throw it out there...

When I need to do things like I simply open both walls, check Retain Framing, open Wall Detail 1, Select All, Cut, open Wall Detail 2, Paste Hold Position, and manually adjust framing as necessary.

To me this is just evidence of how much more complex this is than it seems on the surface. For example: 1. You’ve just hypothetically created the ONLY dialog in Chief that actually REQUIRES interaction with the preview and with no textual feedback as to what the selected item is. Not helping the intuitive case if you ask me. 2. You’re giving no clear way of changing the basic default for the entire unit. Again, not very intuitive. I think my suggested solution of 2 data entry fields would help with the latter, but it becomes super messy having setting for doors and drawers available when you could be selecting one, the other, or neither. In addition, you would essentially be required to de-select items to make certain changes as well. I just think you’re asking for trouble.

That's a tricky one. I think Chief just sees that area as needing a roof plane for some odd reason. So it builds an extra little plane which cuts your wall off. You may have checked both Retain Manually Drawn Roof Planes and Retained Edited Automatic Roof Planes, but that is neither an edited auto roof nor a manually drawn plane. Chief simply sees it as a missing plane. I say just delete the extra little roof plane or draw the entry roof manually. I would personally just do the latter.

Right off the bat we have a major problem. There's currently nothing in that dialog that allows for selection of all face items even with the face items dropdown Anyway, if you really want to see these changes then you'll need to suggest it. My suggestion to you would still be to show how this might look. Even a rough sketch. Everything you've talked about sound nice but as soon as you try to put it all in a single tab I suspect you'll start to see some of the challenges. I still like it exactly as it is. Very easy and intuitive to set up generic stuff and just use the deeper and more powerful controls for custom stuff.

Possible, yes, but in my experience, its more likely that you did something slightly different upon opening the plan again. There are a lot of possible little variables such as.... How the material list was generated (all floors, materials list polyline, selected object(s), etc.) What layer set you were using and whether or not the layer was set to report to the material list Whether the components were edited only in a default or in the actual object(s) in the plan Whether the desired accessory category was actually set to report to the materials list Whether or not the parent object category was set to report to the material list Whether or not the desired categories are being displayed in the materials list Whether or not you may have simply overlooked that the items actually were being reported (this is very easy to do in a long, busy material list) Whether or not an actual material is defined properly to actually report to the materials list ..... Anyway, there are certainly a handful of problems that can be solved by closing the plan and/or closing and restarting the program, but I tend to think that closing/reopening gets a bit more credit for fixing things than it really should and that super commonly all it really does is give us a fresh go at it where we don't make the same mistake we did before. I obviously can't say for certain not having witnessed exactly what you did though.

I get the basic idea you’re after and it sounds nice on the surface. The reason I asked that you “show us” how it might look though is because I think if you try drawing it up you’ll see there are some pretty notable issues to contend with such as how and where you set the panel and hardware “defaults” for that particular cabinet and how/where you situate all the extra controls in a way that doesn’t add its own confusion. I suppose part of the solution might be 2 data entry fields...1 for “Object Default” and another for “Selected Item”.

That could be mostly automated with a custom macro...especially easy if you're almost always using round numbers for your decks.

Can you show us how this might look and where it might go? I personally think its pretty reasonable right where it is.

That should really be the entire purpose of this forum if you ask me.

That fascia alignment issue is always a bit of a problem. If you want accuracy, then those fascia's need to be modeled manually. What I typically do is something like this... Set up an elevation camera that faces the problem fasica Create a CAD Detail From View Trace the fascia to create a closed polyline that is the the desired profile Cut that polyine Paste Hold Position that polyline back in your elevation view. Convert that polyline to a polyline solid and position it appropriately in plan view. Depending on the roof, I either turn the actual fascia off completely or reduce its height to nearly zero

Yes. The items generated by any given object can be edited, deleted, or even added to in the Components tab. Just edit your default foundation wall to remove that particular line item.

This was fixed in the latest update. Thanks for the quick fix Chief!!

Not sure who this was directed at, but I personally have not and I most likely won't. It's not something that has ever affected my workflow and I currently don't see an reason it ever would.

For the purposes of the discussion they’re definitely still dimensions and not “CAD lines and numbers”.

I wouldn’t overthink this one. Super easy to reproduce. Just needs to be reported if you hope to see it fixed. Try the workaround I mentioned previously too. Seriously only takes a matter of seconds and your problems are solved.

Almost all door manufacturers make those 3 lite doors. ThermaTru has several. Here's one... https://www.thermatru.com/explore-doors/door-style/CCA230XJ-SDL The closest in the Therma-Tru Manufacturer library available to us in Chief though is the "Villager" that Robert already mentioned. You just have to paint the glass a standard glass color is all. In addition, we have the one in the Core Catalog JJohnson mentioned. Here it is with the dentil shelf removed... 3-lite door.calibz