Joe_Carrick

I would actually love to have some framing options for openings: Option to move header up to plates if < 1.5" (no cripples) Option to add plates or increase header size automatically up to 4" Option to move/reduce the top of opening to maintain minimum header size.

I always use "Saved Plan Views" but in conjunction with Annosets and Layer Sets.

When a Header is created by Chief it generally will be according to the size required by the opening width. However, if the wall is too short to provide the required depth between the top plates and the top of the opening then Chief reduces the Header depth. IMO the software should instead do one of the following: Show an error condition so that the user could take appropriate action (Preferred Option) Lower the "Top of the Opening" by whatever distance is needed to provide the correct header depth. Either of the above would be IMO preferable to just reducing the Header depth. What do you think should be done by the software?

Are you using a "Saved Plan View"? If so, be sure to create a "New Saved Plan View" before sending to Layout. When you edit a "Saved Plan View", all instances of that will be the same in the Layout. Floor Layer Set Defaults Zoom Factor Scale Can all be problematical unless you use separate "Saved Plan Views".

You can use the comments in the Object Information Panel (OIP).

"Help" button is an excellent source. You might consider that an excellent substitute for a Sawzall button and a hammer button

Countertops are automatic on base cabinets or you can use a custom countertop. Search Help for "Counter"

Just make a copy of the existing wall type and change the line styles, fills, etc. You can rename the copy "demo wall" or whatever you want. Then select the existing wall and change it to your new wall type. It would also be a good idea to save your new wall types to the library so you can use them in other plans in the future.

The trial version of Chief should be able to be printed to a PDF at full size if using Adobe PDF or Nuance PDF or any other generic PDF Printer.

If you have a PDF Printer installed you should be able to "Print the Layout to PDF".

Definitely not what I want - and it doesn't work anyway.

Normally, the F5 and/or F6 keys only cause the current floor to be refreshed - at least for the purpose of causing macros in labels, etc to be executed. I sometimes need the referenced floors to also be refreshed so that their macros will be executed. That essentially requires a double tap of those keys. I really don't like that, so I programmed one of my G keys (Logitech G510s Keyboard) to perform a <F5><F5> in rapid sequence. That works but I wish that Chief's <F5> Hotkey would do it. IOW, allow a Hotkey to perform an operation twice in succession.

Brad, I think you'll find that metric countries generally don't use our dimensions for lumber, etc. Their sizes are rounded to more even mm and the products are manufactured to those sizes. Glenn could give you examples of their standard stud and plywood sizes.

Brad, Most metric users don't use cm at all. It's almost always mm except for very large distances and areas where they use m. For Architectural mm would be used for distances and m2 for areas. Once you are familiar with metric it's really pretty easy. It's just a matter of becoming comfortable with the numbers. There are no conversion factors to make for various units of measurement.

Rachael, Once you have the taller balustrades positioned "on the stairs" vs "next to them" you need to display in elevation and edit the bottom up to the stairs. That will give you what Eric shows. It's just a matter of editing the Polyline created by the 3D wall editor.

Rachael, Probably the best way to do this is to create a full height "Railing Wall" in the plan (adjacent to the stairs) consisting of the vertical members (balusters) and make it "No Room Def" and "No Locate". Then move it into position. After that, select it in a Section/Elevation View and edit the shape to follow the stairs.

I was taught that 2R+T = 25" for best comfort. Actually a range of 24"-26" is acceptable 6" R & 13" T 6.5" R & 12" T 7" R & 11" T 7.5" R & 10" T This formula pretty much always works. For metric you would just substitute 600 mm or a range of 575-625 mm

I think you meant "unnecessary". But of course if you want to perform calculations it makes it easier to understand if you assign the value to a variable.

Hi Michael, I do notice a bit of jerkiness when panning in Elevation Views. I find it advantageous to use the "Marque Zoom Tool" instead of the mouse. Also, if you zoom to extents and save the active camera then you may have less pan and zoom to do.

That would indicate something specific to the elevation. It could be: Annotations Dimensions Auto Update / Live Elevations Try turning off the Annotation and Dimension Layers. Also try turning off Live Elevations, etc. Depending on the text styles the system may have to regenerate the text, etc as you pan/zoom.

Actually it's easy to go from one sheet size to another - if you have your Layout Template, Annosets & Layer Sets properly defined. That said, it takes some work to get it all coordinated. I'm pretty sure Scott knows what I'm talking about.

Vector is only slightly slower than Standard. But there is a difference. I'm not sure if this is being handled by the Graphics processor or not - but there's a little more involved in creating the vectors than just displaying the surfaces.

Another thing to consider is what Render Mode are your elevations? Standard & Physically Based will be fast. --- Graphics Card Vector, Line Drawing, Technical Illustration will be slower --- CPU (software) The difference is what hardware is being used. Graphics cards are fast. Software depends on the CPU performing calculations and sending data to the display.

Michael, What do your elevation annotations consist of? Text Rich Text Macros It makes a difference. Evaluated macros drastically slow down pan & zoom because they are evaluated repeatedly during the pan/zoom operations. I've reported this several months ago - maybe it will be fixed in X12. We can hope.

I don't have a mac, but here's a couple of things that you should consider: Pan & Zoom performance is Video Card dependent Video Card may not be configured correctly. More information needed. High numbers of surfaces (3D plants, etc) will be much slower. Ray Trace is CPU and RAM dependent and have nothing to do with general performance of Chief. Excessive use of macros and schedules in Plan Views and/or Elevations will slow performance. It's best to keep those things in CAD Detail Windows. If you could post a typical Project that you consider slow, it would be much easier to determine what the problem might be.