Joe_Carrick

Scott, If you recall the exercise using a Window Symbol as a Wall Niche or as a Bookcase recessed into a wall - that's one of the prime uses. But it's not just a Symbol that Hangs on the Wall - it's any Symbol that is stopped by a wall (which of course is almost anything at all unless you use the control key or Transform/Replicate).

I'm pretty sure your use of this "feature" is unique. That said, it could be solved by a simple check box or default providing for the 2D and 3D origins to be matched or not matched. Furniture is probably the only item that I can think of that you might not want them to match. Consider this: If you create a Toilet Fixture you would normally want this fixture to be 1" away from the finished wall surface in both 2D and 3D. Figure out how to make that happen. It's the same problem for fixtures recessed into walls, etc.

That should work fine as long as the edge of the deck (2" high point) provides a way for the water to get out if a drain gets plugged. I would opt for one of the high end membrane deck systems and make sure the bond between the drains and the membrane is positive so that any standing water can't get thru into the structure.

As someone who designed my own home 25 years ago with a "Flat Roof System" I can say that it's not that big of a problem. My method was to have a Rafter System with a 1/4" per ft slope to internal roof drains and overflows. The Ceiling joist wer then scabbed on to the sides of the rafters perfectly level. The waterproof membrane is the key element. Generally, a good torch-down 2 ply system is good for at least 20 years. Even better would be a decking system which will probably last for at least 30-40 years. I designed my home with just a 6" curb around the perimeter and sloped the roof to the center where the drains were located. As far as modeling it in Chief - I just use a floor with short solid railing walls for the parapets. The actual slope & drainage are handled with details and notes. Modeling it as perfectly flat isn really a problem -it's close enough and the actual construction isn't that difficult for the builder.

Larry, For Back Clipped Cross Sections it's not very effective since the clipping distance is usually small (1-2 ft.) But for general Sections it just clips the framing members but leaves the room elevations beyond visible. If set to "0" (Default OOB) then all framing is displayed from the camera position to infinity. I have it set to 24" so that I get at least 1 (parallel) truss or set of joists beyond the camera position. Naturally, all the framing members intersected by the cutting plane are shown. Basically this eliminates a bunch of extraneous framing from being shown and as Bill indicated it saves a ton of manual editing and masking to get a decent Cross Section view.

Bill absolutely nailed it - that's the advantage of this setting and pretty much all the extra work that it eliminates. I was thinking that it would be good for it to be on an individual basis (per section view) but after thinking about it some more..... It's fine as a Default Setting. I have it set to 24" and I love it. That's exactly the way Framing should be shown in Section Views.

Maybe Doug is hinting that we may be getting Cross Sections that can be offset. IOW, not just on a single plane across the width of the structure( stepped or even at 2 different angles. Something that we've been asking for since..................... I can understand how the "Framing Clip" could interfere with such an implementation. Maybe while they're at it they can figure a way to limit a cross section to a single floor and a way to make interior elevations span more that one floor and more than one room - other than using a cross section. I seem to recall that there's supposed to be a way to make "Room Dividers" not end a room elevation - but I can't find that setting so maybe it's a figment of my imagination.

The only reason it wasn't used previously is that it was so poorly documented that we didn't know it existed. Maybe you should explain what proposed feature would be in X7 that would require this to be eliminated. Also, since so few of the Chief users post on these forums it might not be valid to assume that it isn't used by many more than have responded.

OK Chief Armstrong................. You opened this up and now several of us want to use it.

Gerry, I can understand that. Is it only the "Comments" field that gets erased if you change something such as the width of a Door? I have to have my basic Door in the Library in order to bring in the values of custom Sub Categories. What if I then replace one of my Doors which has the Sub Categories that I've added with another Library Door. It would really be nice if Chief would allow us to edit the Default Components and not have to go thru the Song and Dance with each object. Hmmmm...... I need to do some experimenting.

Gerry, I don't have a that problem. I simply store each door size in the Library. That way, I place a 2668 Existing Door or a 3068 Existing Door or ..... OTOH, I have added Sub Categories for HEAD, JAMB & SILL Details in my Default Plan which includes a CAD Window for each Schedule Type.

OK, so here's the trick: 1. Place a Door in a Plan 2. Select it and open the Components Dialog 3. In the Comments Field enter (Existing to Remain) or whatever information you want. 4. Add the Door to your Library and Name it so you can recognize it Any time you place that door in a Plan, that comment will come along and be a part of the Schedule information.

Zowie, Sorry, I misunderstood what you were wanting "(E) = existing". I sometimes use different Schedules for Interior vs exterior doors but there's no real designation in the Schedule of Existing vs New so I either suppress the Labels and/or Exclude the existing from the Schedule. Perhaps a comment could be added in the components of a door stored in the library.

Kevin, It's a little different - it only clips thraming members so you still get all the architectural stuff beyond but no framing members beyond the clip distance.

Since I didn't know it was there, I hadn't used it. Thanks for pointing this out to me - now I will definitely use it. It's a great way to eliminate a lot of annoying detail in Cross Sections. I like a setting of about 24 so that I pick up just 1 set of framing members from the Camera location. Now that I know about it - don't you dare take it away.

Edit the information in the Schedule dbx - even better, set it all up in the Shedule Defaults and in the Door Defaults.

Pretty simple. Just delete the perimeter walls that Chief created for the new floor of the existing house. You will still have the "Floor", but the Roof will be where it was. It works the same way if you have a 2 story house and a 1 story detached garage or guest house.

Barton, I reported this to Tech Support and also to Scott Harris and others at KBIS/IBIS last February. I think I also reported it during Beta to Brian and I'm pretty sure I got a confirmation from him. Unfortunately, confirmation from Tech Support doesn't always mean that it'll get fixed.

Post the Plan

Larry, Try snipping a bit of the Siding (without the lap lines) and save that as a texture. Then apply that to the trim. It should be pretty close.

Most Likely you have two Door Schedules and two Window Schedules in your Plan. The other possibility is that each schedule has both Doors and Windows included.

Sorry Guys, you miss the point. Generating a new 2D Block doesn't solve the problem of matching the x/y 3D origin and hte x/y origin of the 2D Block. Try this simple exercise: 1. Create a 12"x12"x12" cube 2. Convert it to a Symbol (fixture, hangs on wall) and set the 3D origin to y=-6 3. Create a Room and place the Symbol against one of the walls In 3D the symbol will be 6" away from the wall, but in Plan View, the 2D Block will be right up against the wall. Generating a new 2D Block will not change that and I've not been able to find anything that will. Even editing the 2D Block and modifying it's x/y values doesn't make any difference.

No problem Scott - I love you too

If you are using X6..... It's real easy.

Kirk, I LOVE YOU!!!!!!