Joe_Carrick

They aren't doing something the way we are. Maybe they're just testing to see if selecting a region on the Aerial View causes a zoom to the corresponding location on the Layout Page. The problem for me is that the Aerial View doesn't update when the Page is changed. I suspect that they are not checking that condition. Also, if all their layout pages are identical then they wouldn't notice that the aerial view wasn't being updated.

Maybe we need to get them on a GoToMeeting so we can show them. If not that then I can just call and try to explain what's happening.

Lew, I only use such details for those things that need to be revised and should be revised based on the latest practices. I always keep a set of as built plans for reference (prints) but any time I'm doing a new project based on an older set of plans - then I want the latest details according to current codes and practice. This sort of thing is something that I as a user am resposible for.

The difference between a Layout and a Plan is basically just that the Views in the Plan are named Floor 1, Floor 2, etc. and in the Layout they are named Page 1, Page 2, etc. My guess is that the software is checking for Floor to force the Aerial View update. Should be an easy fix to add or Page to the code.

I see what you mean..... It works fine for the Plan, updating to showing the current floor. In Layout, it only get's updated to the current page when the Layout is reloaded. IOW, switch from Layout to another view and then back to Layout. But if the Layout has been placed on another monitor then you have to actually delete the Aerial View and add it back. This is a bug.... CA needs to fix it - report it.

Perry, I believe the Aerial View only applies to the Plan File, not the Layout.

Curt, That pic is almost exactly what I did on our Cabin at Big Bear Lake. I modeled in in Chief almost exactly like your pic. Then I ordered a kit from Amish Country Gazebos and built it.

Doug, The advantages / benefits of using Plan Files (located in a common folder) with CAD Details: 1. Universal updates to all Layouts when the CAD Detail is edited. 2. Ease of editing - not having to retrieve from the Library, unblock, edit, block, put back in Library - then update all affected Layouts. 3. Discrete set of Plan Files can act just like folders in the Library 4. Named CAD Details automatically name Details in the Layout using %view.name% macro 5. New details can be quickly created by copying existing details to a new CAD Detail and modifying that. 6. The details in the Layout are dynamic and provide for quick navigation to the CAD Detail in the Plan File(s) IMO, there are so many of the above that are just the opposite when using the Library method that I simply don't use the Library for CAD objects except those that are discrete and work well as Blocks, just needing to be placed and maybe resized and/or rotated. For any detail that's totally unique to a particular project I create a CAD Detail in that Plan File itself. This also serves as a source for similar details in other projects. Generally those are Wall Sections @ 1/2" scale rather than larger scale details. I sometimes use the CAD Block Details tin the Library which Chief provides as a starting point for a Detail but I'm putting the finished Detail in a CAD Block just so I can take advantage of the benefits listed above.

I'm sorry Glenn, I was trying to help by suggesting that keeping the Browsers docked was a viable way of avoiding the problem of the Library Browser getting lost. I realize that not everyone might want to do it my way but it does eliminate the problem. I believe that the problem is a result of having the Library Browser undocked and located on a secondary monitor and that at some point Chief loses track of where it's supposed to be. So my suggestion is to use the extra monitor real estate for views of the model and keep the Browsers docked on the main app window on the main screen. I actually think that this is one of those spaghetti code things that is going to be almost impossible to untangle. There are so many possibilities for various child or sibling windows to be left open or closed in the wrong order that Chief can easily lose track of what's supposed to be. I think that CA has done a wonderful job of implementing multiple monitor support, but making it absolutely perfect might just never happen. Most likely at som point Chief get's closed before the Library Browser and there's no record of where it was at that time - but that might not be the case either.

Amazing Poll results...... Method 2 is so obviously superior but over 50% use something else. Almost 50% use method 1 - which I can understand since Chief provided details in the Library. The problem is that most of those details don't really fit most jobs.

Don't know. But why would I need to do that? My layout works perfectly with my hardware so I have no need to undock anything.

I'm just trying to get to the point that my CD's are as fast or faster than dsh's. I'll probably never catch up to him for the overall project because I spend too much time on the design - for which I almost never get fully compensated. That's why I need to make my CD's basically just a matter of printing them.

Bill, I also like the automatic callout features of X6 - and I don't like cad detail from view except in a few cases. I haven't quite gotten to the level of overlaying a CAD Detail into a camera view to get the automatic callout. That will take some studying to figure out - maybe you could do a video

Rod, Taking this one level further - Detail Callouts tied to Schedule Fields. IOW, reference a detail and have that filled in on a column in the Door or Window Schedule (Head, Jamb, Sill) or in the Finish Schedule (Moldings - Crown, Chair Rail, Base), etc. I am already putting those references in the Schedules - always have even when doing manual drafting - but I still have to fill them in manually with Chief. It would be great if I could just pick a Door (either in Plan or Schedule - maybe select a Schedule field) and then click on the Layout Detail to fill in the Schedule data.

Perry, What's too many? I typically might have 120 Details in a Layout but only about 20 CAD Details in any single Plan File. I rarely open the Plan Files with the CAD Details in them other than to specifically add / modify / or send to layout. Once I'm thru with them I close the Plan File. I have the following Detail Plan Files: ..Door ..Window ..Roof ..Foundation ..Framing ..Roof ..Railings None of these has more than 20 CAD Details except Framing and it has about 35 CAD Details. I basically violate one of Chief's recommendations because these Detail Plan Files are not in the Project Folder. They are all in a separate common Folder so that they can be used on any and all projects. As soon as I open a layout file, the latest version of all the details is accessed.

While on the subject of Layout Layersets: Assume that I have many details to send to layout and I've created them all with the same Layerset in a single Plan File. Is there any advantage in "Copy Current Layerset" or is it just a way to clutter my Plan File with multiple Layersets? Wouldn't it be better in that case to uncheck that box so that all details have the same line weights, line styles and colors. Then if that Layerset is modified in the Plan File, the changes will be to all the details rather than having to edit multiple (20 +/-) layersets?

So here's my basic CAD Detail Plan. The Text above the line contains a macro that gets updated when the CAD Detail is named. I use the Plan (Floor 1) as the place to create a new detail. Then I copy it to a new CAD Detail which I name. The number or letter in the circle has to be manually edited - which I do after I send the detail to layout. If I need to create a new detail similar to an existing, I can simply copy paste into the Plan (Floor 1), modify that and copy it to a new CAD Detail. I use "Paste-Hold Position" a lot. BTW, the Framing members are CAD Blocks that can be sized for whatever lumber size I need. The perimeter is a heavier line than the cross lines and the box has a solid fill.

True enough. I might do that for some layout pages that will be standard sheets in the default layout, but it means setting each CAD Detail to the appropriate scale. With specific Detail Plan Files I just set that Plan to the scale I want and all new CAD Details inherit that scale.

I don't do it that way because I prefer to work to scale (most of my details are 1"=1'-0") and then I send to layout at the scale of the drawing.

FWIW, I have my screens setup as follows: Main Screen - 30" Hi Res: UL - Aerial View - Docked LL - Project Browser - Docked UR - Library Browser - Docked Center - Floor Plan Left Screen - 24" Monitor Perspective Views Right Screen - 24" Monitor Orthographic Views (Elevations, Details, etc.) I never have a problem with anything disappearing with this scheme. However, I find it disconcerting to have the dbx appear on a different screen than where I selected the object to open. I need to experiment with the settings to see if I can get them to appear on the same screen as the selected object. If that doesn't work then I'll submit a ticket to support.

Rod, I'm not sure what you are asking for. Do you want the name of the Layerset associated with a specific Layout Box? If you're looking for something like the attached pic, right click on the Layout Box, select "Layout Box Layers..." and use snippit to create a pic that you can save and then display with your favorite jpg viewer.

Let me try to explain. Layout Files reference to the Plan(s) based on relative location on Disk. If the Layout and Project Plan are in the same folder it's simple. OTOH, if a Plan such as a Detail Plan is located in the X5 path and the Layout and Project Plan are moved to the X6 path then the relative position is violated and things can get messy. The Layout doesn't know where to find the Detail Plan. That might not be the exact situation, but it's very likely something similar tht CA is trying to avoid.

I'm not sure that's really true. The problem is more likely one of the users not always copying everything when systems are upgraded.

I am tending to favor using CAD Details in separate Plan File(s) since they can be named. The Plan File can be set up at the desired Scale and with appropriate Anno and Layersets. That way I won't have to Block the Details and I can easily edit the CAD Detail to update any Layout with detail revisions. By having a set of secondary Plans, I can segregate the details (Door, Window, Foundation, Framing, etc) and AFAIK, there's no limit on the number of CAD Details in a Plan File. Using Floors to store details seems to be a problem because we can only have 30 floors and there's no way to name the Details something other than Floor 1, Floor 2, Floor 3, etc. So I'm voting for CAD Details in separate Plan Files. I used to work on much larger commercial projects and needed a Spec Book and a Detail Book. Since most of my projects are now fairly small, I'm going to just put the details on the standard layout pages. Initially, I was thinking the Library but making revisions is too cumbersome. Standard Details can obviously be in the Default Layout but they still need to be created someplace and sent to layout, so CAD Details seems to make sense at least as a starting point and as a way of being able to make revisions easily.

I'm planning on revising my detail management. What's your preference for handling details? There are obvious pros and cons to various methods and I'm trying to decide which system works best. If you have some other method that you like better than any of the poll choices - please explain what you do and why. Thanks