Joe_Carrick

Only partly - when the dialog doesn't show what is available, confusion abounds. Note that I said "It seems ……" You think maybe?

I'm really looing for Simpson CC86 (8" post and 6" wide beam) with bolts. There's one in the 3D Warehouse but it's CC66 and ECC66 as a single symbol. I've tried deleting surfaces but am unable to get rid of all of them and consequently the resulting symbol doesn't stretch properly - even with stretch planes.

I'm working on a project where I have some Heavy Timber Posts and Beams. I would like to use Black Iron Post Caps, etc. Does anyone have such 3D Symbols?

No, it seems CA has limited those dimensions to 1/16" increments. It would require a programming change - so you could submit a suggestion but I am doubtful that it would ever get implemented even though is should be easy to do.

You just need to set the "Opens with" setting in the properties for that type of file. In Windows: Open the File Browser Select a "calibz" file and open the "Properties Panel" "Opens with:" CHANGE Select "Chief Architect X11" -or- Step (1): First of all, open Control Panel in Windows 10 PC and then go to Programs. Step (2): On Programs window, click on " Make a file type always open in a specific program " option... Step (3): Now, the Set Associations tool will start loading. Step (4): Select the file extension whose application you want to change and then select the APP you want it to open with. On a MAC it will be something similar. We have to do this with each new version of Chief.

Shane, Have you upgraded to version X11? Your signature still shows only X10. BTW, I think those defaults (Carpet, etc) are now controlled on a "Room Type" basis. Show you would need to change the Room Type definitions.

I know for a fact that version 9.5 used a USB Hasp. I've never heard of Chief having a Serial Port Hasp but I suppose it could have.

Doesn't your new computer have a USB Port?

That's actually 8"R/9"T with a 1" nosing. It was allowable for private stairs in the UBC and for existing homes that would generally be grandfathered with the current IRC - but only for existing stairs.

I've always use the same rule but with a range of 24"-28". The problem however is that with 7-3/4" risers the formula would allow 9" treads. Fortunately the code requires 10" minimum treads but even that can result in a pretty steep stairway. A lot of condo builders use 7-3/4" / 10" which I find uncomfortably steep.

Yes Michael, I also used that method in X10 but with X11 we have access to the "room" attributes of the "Level Line Markers". This works much better since the Markers have 2 labels and are the appropriate object to display elevations.

I've figured out a solution using custom macros in conjunction with "Level Line Markers". A macro attached to a marker in the Site Plan - that gets the Pad Elevation and stores it as a Ruby Global Variable $Pad_Elev Another macro that is attached to markers located in rooms - that adds the marker.height, the marker.room.floor_elevation and the $Pad _Elev The second marker can be copied to anyplace in the Floor Plan(s) to display the absolute elevation value at that location. This was not possible prior to X11.

How do you show the absolute floor elevation in you plan views? Example: Building Rough Pad Elevation is 4,893.00 ft. I want the elevation of Level 0 to be 1.75' above that. What should I set the Terrain Offset as if Level 0 is -10 feet. -or- What should I set Level 1 elevation at if the Terrain Offset is -4,891.25 I just want Chief Room Macro to report absolute elevations corresponding to the terrain contours. Will either of the above result in problems since the model would possibly be almost 5000 ft above z=0.00

When you open the Schedule dbx do you not have an option to "Include Items only from Rooms:" ?

You should be able to limit the Schedule(s) to specific Rooms. This will make your Schedule(s) shorter - but you will need multiple Schedules. ps: Training is pretty much a requirement for a program of this complexity.

It would appear that the dimension is showing to the "Bottom of the Soffit" rather than to the "Top of the Cabinet". IOW, there's a discrepancy in the model.

Many times I use a Text Box with a macro and an Arrow to connect to the object the macro is supposed to reference. But sometimes it will connect to a Cross Section Line or another object in the same location. This is because of the "Draw Order" of the Objects. Here's an example: Stairway on Drawing Group 22 Camera on Drawing Group 7 Even with the Camera Layer "Locked", the Arrow will connect to the Camera line(s). However, if you move the Camera to Drawing Group 23 or above the Arrow will connect to the Stairway. Actually, I don't think CA should allow a Text Arrow to connect to a Camera at all - but since they do this is the best way to ensure it's connecting to the right object.

My builders almost always use 5/8" drywall exclusively. 1/2" is just too flimsy.

I just checked the 2016 CRC and it's 7-3/4" also. #*&^! small print.

The "2016 California Residential Code, Section R.311.7" requires a maximum 7-1/4" riser height and a minimum 10" tread depth. I've seen some recent plans with steeper stairs. What are the code requirements for your location?

We've requested in the past that CA provide the ability to use a "Molding Profile" for the Door Jamb (AKA Frame). It's still on the development team's "Back Burner".

Sorry, but you are doing everything possible to make it run slower. Chief isn't designed to be a "Game" creation tool. There are other programs that do that. The 3D in Chief can be used to create pretty good renderings but Chief Architect is really a program to create buildings in 3D with the additional ability to quickly produce Construction Documents. If this wasn't the case, most of us wouldn't be using it and CA would be out of business fairly quickly.

I would look first at the 3D Layer Set and make sure you don't have the Framing Layers displayed. In fact, you don't want anything displayed that's not needed for the 3D view. Also stay away from 3D Plants and other high Poly Count objects.

I think its extremely import to recognize the following: The GPU handles almost all of the 3D View processing for "PBR", "Standard" and "Vector" Renders. The speed of this is dependent on the face counts, GPU speed, etc. The CPU handles all the rest of the graphics. IOW, 2D CAD (Lines, Arcs, 2D Blocks, Text, Rich Text and Macros). Optimization of 2D CAD can be done by limiting what's processed during Pan/Zoom as well as what Hardware is available (CPU, RAM, etc.) and how the software utilizes that hardware. IMO, any discussion of performance needs to be relative to 2D vs 3D - they are not the same.

Alan, You'll have to deal with that in custom Layer Sets - both 3D View Layer Sets and Plan View Layer Sets. Notice that the 3D Framing Overview uses a Layer Set that doesn't display any Exterior or Interior Walls. You might want to study what Layers are not displayed in that compared to the Full 3D Camera.