Joe_Carrick

That's correct but it's what I assumed would be in that data. Apparently they only provide it for material take-off. There are times when I provide an insulated wall even though the space is not going to be conditioned initially. The attribute should be a part of the Wall Type regardless of where it's located in the plan. BTW, R-value is much more important than the thickness. You could have a very different R-values depending on the material so thickness without the R-value is worthless.

Here's what's reported when the wall is part of a conditioned room: > owner.upper_insulation => #<NVPublisherOwner:0x0001f445f1e678 @names=["area", "width", "depth", "length", "formatted_size", "num_batts", "owner"]> > owner.upper_insulation.formatted_size => "6x16x93\" batts" But the actual cavity R-value is 21.0 In any event, why shouldn't the data be a part of the wall even if it is just a short segment in a wall legend?

Hi Larry, Just trying to give you a simple way to accomplish what you are asking for.

I found 2 attributes that are not getting any data. lower_insulation upper_insulation I reported this and asked that the oversight be fixed. The data is available in the Wall Type dbx but it just isn't being picked up in the wall attributes.

I like the new Wall Schedule in X11 - but I usually want more than just the simple description that provides. So, I created a custom macro that utilizes the wall layers attributes that are new in X11. In addition, I used the Wall display Layer Name to show the Type (Exterior/Interior) and the insulation value. There's a lot of new information available this way.

Larry, Just utilize the "Saved Plan Views". Each "Saved Plan View" will have it's own Reference Set.

I know - but I was referring to the fact that a Framing Member specified as a Steel I Beam (I would probably be using W Shapes and sizes) could be reported correctly. Unfortunately they appear in different areas of the Materials List than Lumber Framing.

This is another reason for having the OIP for Framing Objects. Then we could use OIP fields for annotation and the Material List.

If you are using a pre-fab "Bay Window" then it would need to be modeled as a "Window Symbol" complete with the floor and top and inserted in a "Pass-Thru Window". You would also need to model the floor and roof of the Bay Window Chief doesn't create this type of Bay Window automatically - and Chief doesn't have any predefined symbols for them. There are a couple of "Protruding Window Symbols" in the Library that may help you understand what needs to be modeled. Look specifically at the "Oriel" window Symbol as it's the closest to what you are trying to do. I made a request several years ago regarding this type of Custom Window Symbol. It appears that CA may have incorporated some of my requests but I'm not 100% sure. IAE, you will definitely have to create the symbol rather than trying to use Chief's Window Tool.

That's correct. Change the name of the view in the Plan(s) Project Browser. That name will then be the default Layout Box Label.

I do the same thing that Michael does. 3D Moldings (basically 1" strips of wire shelf repeated at 1" intervals) 3D Moldings for vertical pieces, etc repeated at appropriate intervals. a Molding Polyline for each shelf length

Steve, I've been using the "Detail Plan" system for a long time. I in fact have Annosets and Layer Sets (including Text Styles) as you suggest. It's just easier when sending to Layout so that everything is consistent. Most of my Text in the details is 1/10" rather than 1/4" but that's just my preference. I do use some custom text where appropriate but mostly it's controlled by the Layer Set.

True. I in fact use the ability to write and even over-write files and folders to accomplish certain tasks. Since I know what I'm doing and I am not malicious it's actually beneficial - but it would be fairly easy to create a macro that could erase files and even entire directories. That's why CA set the default to level 2 but it is in fact a handcuff.

I always have Ruby set to Safe Level 1. I don't think it's necessary for reading files - but it definitely is for writing files or creating directories. I've been doing this for years without any problems. It could be a problem if you get a macro from someone else who is unscrupulous but otherwise you can even set the Safe Level to "0"

A DAE File is just a 3D model - usually used for small objects (furniture, fixtures, etc). It can be imported into Chief as a Symbol. It's not able to be imported as a Plan file.

Does anyone have a symbol of that fixture?

Scott, Try using a "Framing Schedule" instead of the "Material List"

No, but I've made all sorts of other things, including a Jeep.

There's not much that can't be made from a cabinet. This is something I noted several years ago.

Anyone sharing that catalog with you would be violating the license agreement with Chief Architect. Best bet would be to purchase SSA. Then you would have legal access.

Please ask questions in the Q&A Forum - not Tips & Techniques.

Edward, I create the details at a scale of 1"=1'-0" using Level 1 of the Detail Plan(s). Then I create a "CAD Detail from View" in a new "CAD Detail Window". Each Detail is then in it's own named CAD Detail Window and has no 3D data. It's just pure 2D CAD. That means that when I send those Details to Layout there's very little degradation in performance. Also, all of my Details share the same Scale, Layer Set & Annoset. I don't know for sure which of these commonalities are most responsible for maintaining higher performance levels but it works for me.

Basically because in Elevation the arrow is selecting the "Exterior Room", not the "Window". The only way I know of to get that in an Elevation View is by putting the macro in the Window Label and making the macro "Owner Object". It's more complicated though because then the macro would also be displayed in the Plan View. That means you have to have the macro display a different result in Plan View than in Elevation View and the macro has to have a way of knowing what the Current View is. I can do it but it's a bit complicated.

That's 100% correct.

Try not including the "